This week's communication from Nelson Heller/QED's EDNet requests nominations for the EdNet 2007 Industry Awards, to be announced at the next EdNet Conference.

Last week the Software and Information Industry Association's Education Division announced the winners of its 2007 Codie Awards. Expect a deluge of press releases.
Your editor belives that awards by peers can add to - or substract from - the credibility of the industry.

Awards recognizing individuals or firms who have contributed to the industry may incentivize "good works." Firms that have worked hard to make their presence known deserve a pat on the back. Top sales people have earned the accolades of their fellows. Great communicators and marketing campaigns ought to be recognized. The industry and the people who buy its products need to identify its leaders. Here, peer recognition is a reasonably reliable indicator of where consumers can find value.

Awards recognizing products, services and programs are an entirely different matter. In the age of No Child Left Behind, there is really only one legitimate indicator of value - results, measured in terms of the contribution to student performance.  Peer review is completely unreliable. Moreover, in the age of scientifically-based research, it is obviously unreliable. And because the anachronism is increasingly apparent to all - educators and providers alike, sticking with it actually undermines industry credbility.

Your editor has no doubt that those judging EdNet's Impact award - Gwen Solomon of TechLearning.com, Ann Flynn of the National School Boards Association, and Rita Ferradino of ARC Capital are competent in their jobs. But they are not competent to judge efficacy for an "Impact" award covering a wide range of "quality educational support and instructional resources " in k-12.

The Codies are judged first by "journalists from industry trade publications, technology writers from mainstream publications, consultants and other industry experts. SIIA member companies voted in the second round of selection."  Again, the judges are surely capable people, but they lack the capacity to make reliable assessments about what is the best classroom management, instructional, curriculum, special needs, student assessment,  mathematics, online instruction, english/reading, science or solcial studies "solution" for educators.  Member companies are even less reliable - and utterly lacking in credibility.

Both EdNet and SIIA serve firms whose future lies with a market driven by the validation of evaluation. That's really the only way any of these companies can compete with the established publishers for a meaningful share of k-12 sales.  This industry needs to take every opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to a marketplace based on program evalation.

And let's not kid ourselves. Both awards are intended as marketing vehicles to signify program quality. When a firm puts these prizes in its press releases, advertising and marketing imaterials, it is doing so to indicate that its prodiucts have been given some kind of special recognition as being "fit for their purpose." Given their basis, sticking with these prizes gives an industry that needs to put on a lab coat (complete with pen protector) the image of a carnival barker's striped jacket and straw boater. It's dated, behind the times, ou of place, and above all counterproductive.

It is time for EdNet to change its Impact Award and for SIIA's Ed Division to change the Codies from prizes based on marketing criteria and personal judgment more than anything else, to ones based on firms' contributions to research and evalation in the same product areas. These prizes would be credible, forward-looking awards. Their marketing value to firms would be real. And the effort would advance a positive perception the industry.

A firm that developed a new evaluation technique, has best practices for incorporating research into product evaluation, offers internships to PhD canfidates in psychometrics, etc., is the kind of firm educators should want as partners. This kind of prize means something.

At least as important, trade groups like SIIA need to demonstrate that they are keeping up with the times. Announcing a change in the Codies to emphasze contributions to scientific evaluation would help the industry, and help SIIA in its efforts to remain the school improvement industry's predominate trade group.