Mock Caldecott 2026 discussion

The voting is over and we have a clear winner for the Mock Caldecott Medal.

The Lion & the Mouse

Honors:
Moonshot: The Flight of Apollo 11

Tsunami!
The Curious Garden
Duck! Rabbit!

I combined the honor polls for the honors because we had so many ties.
Moonshot got a total of 4 votes
Tsunami got 3
The Curious Garden had 3
And Duck! Rabbit! had 3

This is just evidence of my imperfect system. Perhaps we can try another way to decide next year.

They have posted the results of the Caldecott.


http://www.ala.org/ala/newspresscente...

Winner:
The Lion & the Mouse by Jerry Pinkney

Honors:
All the World by Liz Garton Scanlon illustrated by Marla Frazee
Red Sings from Treetops: A Year in Colors by Joyce Sidman illustrated by Pamela Zagarenski

What do you think? Do you agree with their choices?

Absolutely perfect choices!

WHY only 2 honors?

From what I understand from members of previous committees, it is at the discretion of the Caldecott and Newbery committees to choose the number of honor books each year. It depends on how the voting goes and what they decide needs to be honored. I haven't heard that there's a "cap" on the number of honor books chosen, but maybe someone else knows that answer.

Thanks 8383WB. Okay, I get that they get to choose the number -- but there were SO MANY good picture books this year. Did they have like an 8-way tie after "Red Sings" and "All the World"? And so decide to snub all 8 versus fight it down to 4 or 5 honors?

I was just curious if someone knew what kind of bottleneck or deadlock historically blocks worthy books from being honored?

I just don't get or agree with "just two". Seemed like there was some kind of unfortunate snafu there.

You are correct that it is up to each committee to decide how many books can be given "honor" medals. The director of our local library was o this year's committee and also served 10 years ago.

He spoke to our local Mock this year and explained the process a bit. He told us that while there is no "cap" most committees understand that to award too many honors would kind of dilute the presitge of the award.

The most that have been given in any year is five and there have been years when only one was awarded.

I agree. I really think that "Duck! Rabbit!" deserved an honor. That was the most clever book of the year, and the kids love it! So many Newbery winners this year, and so few Caldecotts.

Caren wrote: "I agree. I really think that "Duck! Rabbit!" deserved an honor. That was the most clever book of the year, and the kids love it! So many Newbery winners this year, and so few Caldecotts."

I was hoping to see Moonshot: The Flight of Apollo 11, Down, Down, Down: A Journey to the Bottom of the Sea, and The Curious Garden chosen. I liked Duck Rabbit, and so many others... I think it was a hard year to be on the committee.

When we did our Mock Caldecott, we only selected one honor book. If you follow the Caldecott voting procedure, it is easier to decide. You may not always agree.
Voting. When the list of books has been sufficiently narrowed to allow a vote, the ballots are cast. Each committee member votes for three books, listed in order of preference. Points are assigned to each place vote as follows: 4 points for a first place vote, 3 points for a second place vote, and 2 points for a third place vote. To win, a book must receive at least eight of fifteen first place votes, and have at least an eight point lead over the second place book. (ALSC 20) This point system helps to ensure that any book that receives several third-place votes does not win over one which receives only first or second-place votes, but fewer votes.

Because there is no "formula" to select the winner, our collection specialist uses books that have recieved starred reviews in six library/book journals.
The ones that make our final list have recived at least 3 starred reviews. This narrows the selection to about 40 or 50 titles. It is easier to select the winners from 40-50 books than the thousands that are published each year. While it is not our main goal to select the winner, our Mock Caldecott group has selected the winner in two out of the last three years. We really enjoy seeing the best of the best books pubished the previous year. It helps us in our work with customers and general knowledge of librarianship.

Melissad wrote: "Because there is no "formula" to select the winner, our collection specialist uses books that have recieved starred reviews in six library/book journals.
The ones that make our final list have rec..."

Thank you. That is interesting and it makes sense. I sure wish on goodreads they had a way to have more then one choice on polls. It would have helped this year.

RE: Lisa's comment about not wanting to "dilute" the prestige of the award.

There is only ONE Caldecott Winner. So THAT recognition is dilution safe. And there have often been 4 or 5 honors in a year. Seems to me that what that breadth does (if/when it is warranted) is help more deserving books get to more readers. When the flood of wanting hands comes to the library -- and the Caldecott winner is checked out -- then off go the Honorees in the meantime. (And I'm sure bookstores experience the same phenonmenon. "Here this has a sticker too -- try this.")

And that has got to be at one of the purposes of the award, right? Just think how many people added those 4 Newbery Honors to their or their classroom's reading list. WHY not have the same thing happening for the picture book crowd?

And this was a year when there seemed to be such a strong pack behind Lion & Mouse. So strong that most Mock commitees came up with different Honorees.

Tracking a lot of mock lists around the country, I saw passionate support for: Moonshot, The Dunderheads, The Curious Garden, Higher! Higher!, Once Upon a Twice, Tsunami!, 14 Cows for America, Redwoods, Duck! Rabbit!, Jeremy Draws a Monster, One Beetle Too Many, Robot Zot, The Negro Speaks of Rivers (and still a few others.)

So, while it may have been a wrestling match to reach a field-of-five consensus -- it was a year where the contenders seemed worthy of such a battle. I'm still shocked they stopped at two.

While there is no doubt that receiving this award helps book sales and popularity, neither of those are criteria for selection. I also respectfully disagree with the fact that there seemed to be a strong pack behind Lion & Mouse. The fact that there were so many Mock Caldecott honors, and that the reviewers from the journals were all over the place. The committee has to agree on the honors and perhaps it was the same for them.

Criteria
In identifying a “distinguished American picture book for children,” defined as illustration, committee members need to consider:
Excellence of execution in the artistic technique employed;
Excellence of pictorial interpretation of story, theme, or concept;
Appropriateness of style of illustration to the story, theme or concept;
Delineation of plot, theme, characters, setting, mood or information through the pictures;
Excellence of presentation in recognition of a child audience.
The only limitation to graphic form is that the form must be one which may be used in a picture book. The book must be a self-contained entity, not dependent on other media (i.e., sound, film or computer program) for its enjoyment.
Each book is to be considered as a picture book. The committee is to make its decision primarily on the illustration, but other components of a book are to be considered especially when they make a book less effective as a children’s picture book. Such other components might include the written text, the overall design of the book, etc.
Note: The committee should keep in mind that the award is for distinguished illustrations in a picture book and for excellence of pictorial presentation for children. The award is not for didactic intent or for popularity.

Thanks for the specific criteria list -- it does help see things from the committee's perspective. ( Though it gives me a headache just trying to take it all in. ha! ha!)

Each year we do the Mock Caldecott program I feel like I learn a little more. My supervisor was our speaker last year. She was on the Caldecott committee when Owl Moon won. She talked a lot about the process. This year we had a speaker who is a retired illustrator. He is evidently more analytical than I am. He mentally puts each book on a grid(scale of 0-10). Great pictures on one side and great text(or implied story) on the other. The ones in the upper quandrant of both would be his contenders. It was a diffent way to think about it.