Adjudication Process

The Adjudication Committee (Committee) is comprised of a minimum of five individuals, including one current student, one bilingual (English and French) member, one member of 3M Canada, and one member who has expertise with how to address disadvantage and marginalization of historical groups in selection processes. Committee membership shall represent diverse institutional types. In composing the Committee, we strive for diverse regional representations, representation from past award winners, a balance of gender, and a variety of academic disciplines. All are current STLHE members. None of the members of the selection committee are current directors on the STLHE Board nor serve on another STLHE award committee in the same year. Committee members have a three-year term with up to one-year renewal at the discretion of the STLHE Board. Student members are currently enrolled as a student for the duration of the adjudication process. Adjudication Committee Members declare any potentially perceived and real conflicts of interest, and do not participate in reviewing, submitting rubrics, or discussing that nomination.

In recognition of the systemic conditions of disadvantage in higher education and society, we are committed to an adjudication process that considers context when reviewing packages from members of groups that have been historically disadvantaged and marginalized, including First Nations, Metis, and Inuit peoples, Indigenous peoples of North America, racialized persons, persons with disabilities, and those who identify as women and/or 2SLGBTQI.

Copies of the assigned nomination materials are circulated electronically to members of the Committee. Members evaluate each dossier against the published criteria. This award aims to ensure that at least five nominees come from disciplines involving Science, Technology, Engineering or Math (STEM). After privately reviewing the files and submitting completed rubrics, consensus is used to select no more than ten nominees. The adjudication process will aim to support equitable distribution of the awards across all post-secondary sectors.

The adjudication committee considers an applicant’s nomination as a unified whole, not simply an assemblage of compartments. Each section of the package should reinforce its overall unity. Narrative flow unfolds and reveals the nominee’s character and achievements, and each section adds substance and evidence, constructing a compelling nomination.

Because this is an educational leadership award, the package’s greatest challenge is defining and demonstrating leadership, which goes beyond transcripts, lists of committees, and clubs and/or groups joined. The individual will have to be “brought to life” through concrete evidence, examples, quotes, compelling anecdotes, persuasive support letters, and the inspiring believability of the nominee’s own words. Applicants tell their stories as learners, thought-provokers, visionaries, and community members in action. Applicants use clear and authentic narrative style and need not rely extensively on disciplinary or academic jargon.

The adjudication committee is interested in applications reflecting the applicant’s creativity and distinctiveness, shedding light on an exceptional leadership profile. The nominator (see below) is encouraged to “make a case” for the applicant’s leadership profile by connecting the material within the package to show how the applicant is deserving of this Fellowship. See the additional material “What Adjudicators are Looking For: Tips for Students and Nominators” for more about what adjudicators are looking for when they read each file.