Each year the Awards and Advisor Recognition committee reviews nominations submitted to determine the winner of that academic year’s advisor awards. Below is the process by which awards are reviewed.
General criteria and how awards are reviewed:
The selection process:
- Nominations submitted by the deadline are reviewed by the committee to make a shortlist of 2 to 4 people in each category.
- The review committee will categorize the nomination into either the Established or Early Career advisor categories
- The committee makes determinations based on the strength of the evidence provided in the nomination about each of the talking points of the criteria of the award
- Submissions are weighted by whom has submitted the nomination. Student nominations hold more weight than peer or supervisor. Supervisor nominations hold more weight than peer.
- Nominees who make the shortlist are informed that they have done so. Shortlist nominees are given the opportunity to provide the committee with the name of an additional person who can provide further testimony to support the nomination. Shortlist nominees will also provide their resume to the committee. Testimonies are requested and submitted to the review committee by a deadline. These testimonies are not weighed by if they are a student, colleague, or supervisor.
- The committee will utilize this rubric (link coming soon) for the Outstanding Professional Advisor Award while reviewing the original nominations and testimonies to determine the winner of the awards.
- The committee will utilize this rubric (link coming soon) for the Distinguished Service Advising Award while reviewing the original nominations and testimonies to determine the winner of the award.
General information:
- An advisor who has received an ACAA award in the past two academic years is ineligible to receive an award during this academic year.