c. Preparation of selection and evaluation/research materials for jurors

In a moment we will present a model selection methodology. Very roughly, that methodology consists of a combination of (i) individual reading and grading, and (ii) discussion of scenarios in small groups and/or in plenary sessions.
Before getting into the nuts-and-bolts of selecting the winners, we would like to set the stage by discussing a series of documents that you might want to prepare in the run-up to actual deliberations. Reflecting on the content of these documents could help you gain a clearer sense of where you would like to head with the selection process and what precisely you hope to get out of it. The completed documents can be instrumental to the smooth functioning of the process itself and can be of tremendous benefit during follow-up to the selection phase.
IMPORTANT: If you were to give jurors all of the following documents and request their written feedback on many of them, you would surely be overloading the selection process and might even be confusing the jurors. Please take a look at the description of each document and decide whether to:
C include it as part of a presentation to the jurors;
C write it up on a flipchart sheet and post it on the wall of the room where the jury will deliberate;
C circulate it to the jurors for their information/reference;
C circulate it to the jurors with the request that they provide written input, oral feedback, or both;
C or not include it at all in your selection process.

i) General organizational documents, background documents
C Contacts list of jurors. That list, of course, will be invaluable to you as you organize the selection process. Getting a copy into the jurors' hands will help them to stay in touch when the process is over. Early in the selection process, circulate a copy of the list to verify that all the data is correct.
C A concise, updated overview of the entire project. This allows you to be sure that all jurors are familiar with an identical body of current facts about the project at large and that they have a clear sense of the relevance and importance of their work as jurors.
C A copy of the contest leaflet. It is essential that the jurors be able to refer to the same document the participants used when drafting their contributions.
C Proposed agenda and work-plan for the selection process.
ii) Technical documents for the selection process
You may not want to distribute all of these technical documents to your jurors for fear of overwhelming them, but you will certainly want to prepare them as the basis of a presentation. Ideally you would use a flipchart or something similar in your presentation and display this on the wall throughout the selection process as a constant reminder and source of reference.
C A document explaining the selection methodology to be used
C A document designed to provide a framework for a plenary debate on selection criteria OR a document for debate and adoption in which the criteria elaborated by a pre-selection jury are presented.
C A list of the potential difficulties one might encounter during individual grading of scenarios, as well as strategies for overcoming them.
C Photocopies of two or three scenarios that can be used for test-grading.
C Standardized guidelines for presenting a scenario in plenary.
C Photocopies of grading sheets.
iii) Forms for jurors to provide input (oral, written, or both) that could facilitate the selection process
C A form to take note of difficulties encountered during individual reading/grading and methods used to overcome those difficulties.

C A form for jurors to take note of scenarios that are not original works, but rather are comprised largely of passages copied verbatim out of books.
These documents could be distributed and presented at the outset of the proceedings, and then juror input could be discussed at the appropriate time.
iv) Documents for collecting input for subsequent project phases
We discovered that jurors had many invaluable ideas for enriching subsequent research and audio-visual production phases of the project. You might want to distribute and present the following documents at the outset of the proceedings and discuss the jurors' ideas at a forum held at the end of the process.
C A form for jurors to make specific requests for the analysis of data produced by the Scenarios questionnaires. Once data entry is completely, it is possible to make a nearly boundless number of cross-analyses, such as:

How many young men under the age of 18 presently attending school in the city of Manila chose to write on topic number 1 (parent-child dialogue) and said that, to date, they have not discussed HIV/AIDS with anyone in their family?
What percentage of girls between the ages of the 13 and 18 living in peri-urban areas of Dar es Salaam wrote on topic 12 (forced marriage), and how does that percentage compare to that of the same group in the city of Dodoma?
The person or people who subsequently are responsible for data analysis could start the process of cross-analysis by fulfilling the specific requests of jurors and sending them the results, thus accentuating the immediate value and relevance of analysis.

C A similar form for jurors to provide their requests with regard to specific areas of inquiry to be covered during qualitative text analysis to be carried out on groups of scenarios. Topics might include, for example:

How do young participants in Bombay portray the link between drug and alcohol abuse and HIV/AIDS?
How do female participants on the Texas-Mexico border represent peer pressure with regard to sex?
Again, jurors' stated preferred areas of inquiry might be viewed as priority tasks by the teams that later carry out text analysis.

C A document in which jurors are invited to reflect on ways in which they personally or their organizations might make creative use of the archives. Encourage jurors to take the archive materials and run with them (as long as they cite the name of the author and do not use materials in for-profit ventures). Ideas might include: making radio shows based on a few of the excellent scenarios that were not selected as winners; drawing on the archives for ideas for neighborhood theater plays_.
C A form for jurors to make suggestions as to how the final audio-visual products might best be distributed. You might ask them to note down relevant networks of NGO's and CBO's that would make use of the films, networks of health-related video centers, their contacts in national or international television, etc.
C A form for jurors to recommend especially talented young people who submitted their contributions in the form of comics or drawings and could be considered to be hired to draw the storyboards that will later be used for the pre-testing of the films.
C For the winning scenarios: forms for jurors to provide detailed input that might prove valuable both for the specialist who readapts the original contributions into professional scripts ("script-doctor") and for the team that drafts the Users' Guide that will accompany the final compilation video.

Jurors could be asked to take note of things such as: elements (words, actions, names) in the scenario that could prove harmful if included in a film, other recommended changes, specific passages to emphasize, the group or groups for which this particular scenario is particular appropriate, how such a film might be used in the field_.

v) Documents for collecting juror input relevant to the Scenarios evaluation
Jurors' observations on the value and impact of the contest and of the selection process have proven to be very useful in Scenarios from the Sahel. Documents could be distributed and explained to jurors before proceedings commence and then collected and discussed in a forum at the end of the process.
C A document inviting jurors to comment on their perceptions of how well the contest achieved the objectives you set for that project phase.
C A document asking members of the selection committees to describe the value and benefit of the selection process for them personally, as well as their views on whether or not the declared objectives for this process have been achieved.
vi) Documents designed to collect juror input on matters of potential interest to the region's AIDS-prevention community in general
Through days of individual reading, reflection, and group discussion, jurors gain a broad and profound understanding of the content of the young people's scenarios. They are in a unique position to provide invaluable input. You can optimize the opportunity by distributing and discussing in advance one or more questionnaires. Juror comments on these should be debated at length at the end of the selection process. If appropriate, tape-record or film those debates for later analysis.

We recommend that you request that jurors provide written input on these questionnaires and that they debate the issues in plenary. Some people feel most at ease
_Preliminary analysis reveals that young people are well informed on transmission and prevention. Emphasis must be placed on messages that deal with:
C change of behavior;
C the socio-economic consequences of the epidemic;
C family and community support for those living with HIV/AIDS.

_Messages must be characterized by:
C simplicity and precision;
C strong potential to generate emotional responses and profound reflection;
C use of correct, acceptable terminology;
C the pointed, intentional absence of stigmatization and moralizing;
C a spirit of hope rather than one of despair and fatalism.

_Specific issues that must be given more emphasis include:
C the fact that one need not travel abroad or to a big city to be exposed to HIV;
C the link between STDs and HIV;
C the specific nature of non-symptomatic seropositivity;
C the connection between self-respect and the expression of one_s sexuality;
C strategies for young women to fend off pressures to have sexual relations against their will;
C ways for young people to launch discussions with their parents on sexuality and HIV/AIDS._

Excerpt from the observations and recommendations of the Scenarios from the Sahel selection juries

and provide copious input when writing and have little to say in group discussions. Others don't have much patience or interest when it comes to writing down their ideas, but they thrive on discussion and debate.
Once jurors' input on these questionnaires has been analyzed and crystallized, distribute the findings to interested parties in your region and beyond. They might be of particular interest to those who are responsible for creating IEC materials for young people in your area.
C A document inviting jurors to draw on information gleaned from the scenarios and the jury's debates with a view to gaining an understanding of the needs of the AIDS-prevention community in your area:

Judging by the scenarios, where have we been going wrong? With regard to which particular problems have we missed the mark? What specific dangerous errors do the young participants make?
What have we been doing right? What areas have been covered with particular success?

C As a follow-up to the above: a document asking jurors to formulate specific recommendations to the colleagues with regard to priority objectives as revealed by the scenarios and the jurors' deliberations. We asked the question: "Having read a group of scenarios, what recommendations would you like to give your colleagues so that they can improve their strategies for working with young people in the area of HIV/AIDS?" You might want to include additional, specific questions of particular interest, such as: "How should existing educational materials be altered?" or "What often-used terms should be incorporated into educational materials so that a given target group can identify better?"
"Young people are well-informed now. So, now we have to be more and more precise in our messages and provide useful information in simple language. In the scenarios, we see some good things, but other things are bad, and that's our fault. We are the ones who have conveyed certain messages. Sometimes, we have scared people. At present, we have feedback on what we have been saying. Now let's go try to put things in order!"

Dr. Georges Tiéndrébéogo, Burkina Faso, member of the Scenarios from the Sahel Advisory Committee, member of the Senegalese national jury and the final, regional jury