The Medalist Critiques are available to members as part of the Regular Membership.
To help student print or online media improve their final product the Association offers its Medalist Critiques. Each year, student newspapers, magazines, yearbooks or online media are invited to submit issues or hyperlinks to the Association's experienced adviser-judges.
The Critique contains a written set of standards developed by the Association to itemize the best practices for student media. The adviser-judge reads the print or online publication and analyzes its strengths and weakness as described by the Critique. The judge writes out comments and makes constructive suggestions for building on current strengths and correcting deficiencies noted in the Critique.
A note about online sites: To be critiqued/evaluated as an online publication and/or site, your Web site must include material adding Web features. Sites offering only PDFs of the existing print publications do not qualify for online news site critique consideration.
The point of the Medalist Critiques is to offer specific instruction on how to improve student work. Staffs are free to accept or discard the specific suggestion of the adviser-judge since the Association is a voluntary membership program, not an accrediting body. However, the suggestions are made to help the staff make better use of its time, energy and money in reaching its readers or viewers.
The CSPA offered annual prizes for the best student newspapers and magazines in 1925 as part of its first activities. Yearbooks were added in 1935 and online media in 2005. By 1930, these early top prizes had given way to broad placings (First, Second Third and Fourth Place). Each publication that entered the annual competition was sorted into one of these placings by the judges, based on its achievement according to the Critique standards. Thus every publication received one of the placings with written suggestions for improvement. Beginning in 1932, the very best of First Places were chosen in a second round of judging as Medalists and limited to the top ten percent of annual entries.
With the creation of Crown Awards as CSPA's new highest recognition in 1982, the Medalist distinction changed in significance. In 1995 Gold Medalist, Silver Medalist and Bronze Medalist placings replaced the earlier designations of First, Second and Third Place.
Critique Appeal Process
Gold Medalists are given for total scores from 800 to 1,000 points; Silver Medalists, from 600 through 799 points; and Bronze Medalists, 599 points and below. In addition to Medalist ratings, All Columbian Honors are given within a scorebook section when the sectional total reaches 95% or more of the possible points.
Please read your Critique thoroughly to understand all that the adviser-judge has tried to explain.
The Association recruits experienced adviser-judges from across the United States. Each adviser-judge works independently, following common instructions, using the Critiques provided by the CSPA. As a general rule, to prevent conflicts of interest, we do not assign publications to adviser-judges in the same state. Upon return from the adviser-judge, each Critique is checked by the CSPA staff for completion and accuracy.
Should you spot an error in your Critique, please bring it to our attention within thirty (30) days after we have sent it to you. Just write out, clearly but simply stated, your objections or questions. For fastest results, please include a copy of the publication with your appeal. There is no extra fee for an appeal.
Send anything related to critiques and appeals to this special email address: cspa-critiques at Columbia dot edu.
We process appeals in the order they are received and as quickly as adviser-judges are available. Results will be emailed to you.
Crown Awards will be judged separately and reported on in mid-December. Critique results have NO bearing on judging for Crown Awards.
Please let us know if you have any questions or suggestions as we continue improving the Critique process.