Batture Contemporary

Detailed

Selection

Process

All submissions for Batture Contemporary will go through a multi-step selection process:

Step One – Manual Review

Each submission will undergo a review by panelists from a pool of Versipel New Music performers, composers, staff, and Board of Directors. Prior to review, all panelists will be given an orientation and a written reference guide to help with their review. Panelists will independently review each submission emphasizing quality of work and clarity in intent. Panelists will then independently evaluate each application by answering the following questions:

1) How familiar are you with the applicant’s work?

  • I am not familiar with any of their work.
  • I am familiar with some of their work.
  • I am familiar with most or all of their work.

2) Have you performed any of the applicant’s work in the past?

  • I have never performed any of their work.
  • I have performed some of their work.
  • I have performed most or all of their work.

3) Do you know the applicant personally?

  • I do not know the applicant outside of their submission.
  • I have met the applicant but don’t have a relationship with them.
  • I have worked with the applicant before.
  • I have a close personal and/or professional relationship with the applicant.

Selections to question #1-3 have no bearing on whether or not an applicant moves forward. The data helps us assess the degree of familiarity reviewers have with the applicant pool. As reviewers cast votes, we ask them to notice if they tend to recommend that “familiar artists” move forward more often than unfamiliar artists. It could be an indicator of unconscious bias.

4) Do you need to declare a conflict of interest?

  • Yes
  • No

A reviewer is considered to have a “conflict of interest” if they have a relationship with the artistic team as:

  • An employee;
  • A fundraiser or public relations person;
  • An independent contractor who has received fees or payments in the past 12 months;
  • Has had and/or is having a relationship of an intimate nature with the applicant;
  • Will benefit directly or indirectly from the applicant’s work advancing

In the event of conflict of interest with an applicant, the reviewer will not participate in any aspect of the decision-making process in connection with any matter that involves the applicant directly or indirectly. The submission will be assigned to another reviewer and not adversely affected by the declaration of a conflict of interest.

5) Based on my understanding of the mission for Batture Contemporary, this submission:

  • exemplifies and/or expands the mission and spirit of Batture Contemporary
  • satisfies the mission and spirit of Batture Contemporary
  • falls outside of the mission and spirit of Batture Contemporary
  • is not clear enough for me to make an informed assessment

6) Please select one of the following:

  • I vote FOR this submission to move forward.
  • I’m unsure but inclined to vote FOR.
  • I’m unsure but inclined to vote AGAINST.
  • I vote AGAINST this submission moving forward.

This step is not designed to rank or narrow the field to a specific number of submissions but is instead designed to eliminate any submissions that the panel deems of insufficient quality to advance. Applications that pass the threshold of positive consensus will advance to step two.

Step Two – Controlled Lottery Final Selection

Submissions that have advanced will be subjected to a controlled lottery selection via calculations/formulas executed from a Google Sheet. These calculations will automatically and randomly advance submissions to fill the festival concerts dedicated to the Call For Scores with the following criteria:

  • An equal balance of acoustic and electronic/electroacoustic works
  • A preference for one work selected per composer
  • A preference to feature at least five composers per concert

In the rare chance that all randomly selected works represent a single demographic of age, race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation, the calculation will be rerolled.

The decision to apply a lottery system to the final festival selection is inspired by studies and discussions performed by the Map Fund, the Jerwood Institute, and others that have shown that panel reviews can introduce subjective arbitration and both conscious and unconscious favoritism and bias; injecting random selection is intended to provide more equitableness and higher probability of diverse selection.

Step Three – Invitation

After selected works are subjected to a final check by the Board of Directors and staff of Versipel New Music to ensure that all of the prior steps have been executed accurately, selected composers will be invited to participate in the festival with a $100 honorarium.