Related Pages
Education Award Committee
2008–2010 term
Chair
Larry Braile, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
Members
Susan Buhr, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado
Maria Pilar Llanes Estrada, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Mioara Mandea, GFZ Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
Parker Pennington, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Staff Liaison
Laura Skoff
Danica Williams
Committee Charge (to be updated by 30 August)
This Committee is charged with selecting the recipient of the Excellence in Geophysical Education Award; the final decision is subject to the approval of the Executive Committee. The Education Award acknowledges a sustained commitment to excellence in geophysical education by a team, individual, or group. Those who are eligible for the award are educators who have had a major impact on geophysical education at any level (kindergarten to post-graduate), who have been outstanding teachers and trainers for a number of years, or who have made long-lasting, positive impacts on geophysical education through professional service. The Education Award is given not more often than annually.
In evaluating individuals, the Committee should remember that not only does the award bring honor to the recipient but the choice of the recipients defines the nature and the stature of the award and reflects on AGU itself. All candidates whose contributions reach the appropriate level of distinction should be given equal consideration. The Committee is asked to be especially mindful of the diversity of the community of individuals encompassed by the Education Award.
Any AGU member may propose a candidate for the Education Award. Members of the Committee should not, however, depend solely on unsolicited nominations but should be proactive by encouraging nominations through their own contacts. Of course, members of the Committee are ineligible for consideration for the award during their terms and must not participate in discussions or deliberations where they have a conflict of interest. Similarly, members of the Executive Committee are ineligible during their terms. If at least three nominations of viable candidates are not available, the Committee is not expected to recommend a recipient.
As part of their final recommendation to the Executive Committee, the Committee must state the number of candidates they considered, how many of these were holdovers and how many were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively encouraged by the Committee. The Committee is also expected to describe the process used for reaching the decision. The role of the Executive Committee is to accept or reject the recommendation of the Committee on the basis of its evaluation of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Whereas the Executive Committee may not substitute for the choice, it can ask for further clarification or additional deliberation.
All deliberations and recommendations of all AGU award committees must remain strictly confidential. Within this framework of confidentiality, the chair may provide feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nomination packages could be improved.
–October 2006