Outstanding Academic Advising Award
Description
The Kent State EHHS Outstanding Academic Advising Award celebrates sustained excellence and innovation in academic advising. The Award recognizes those who spend a significant portion of their time providing exemplary direct delivery of academic advising services to EHHS students and who have exhibited exceptional leadership in advancing academic advising.
Eligibility
- Current EHHS non-teaching personnel who are employed full-time; individual may not hold rank or tenure.
- Nominee to have academic advising as their primary role.
- Worked continuously in EHHS for a minimum of two years.
- Significant record of direct delivery of academic advising services and have demonstrated exceptional leadership in promoting high quality academic advising in EHHS.
Nomination Procedure
Unit heads are encouraged to cooperate with any faculty or staff member seeking evidence in support of a nomination. In addition, unit heads are encouraged to coordinate the nomination of a staff member who is nominated by two or more colleagues in order to reduce the possibility of duplicate nominations being sent to the Committee.
Nominations may be submitted by students, staff, faculty, and administrators. Self-nominations are permitted.
The nominator should:
- Complete Nomination Form (PDF)
- Include a 1-page (maximum) summary highlighting clear specific examples of noteworthy accomplishments, outstanding work or service, and characteristics that support the nomination. Note: If application is self-nominated, the applicant should secure an additional nomination letter from a student, staff, faculty, and/or administrator.
- If nominator is not nominee’s immediate supervisor, the nominator should obtain a signature approval from that individual.
Nominations and supplementary materials become the property of the Honors and Awards Committee. All nomination materials will be kept confidential.
The Committee’s decision on award recipients will be made on the basis of the above materials only.
Rubric for Award:
|
Criterion |
Meets Expectations |
Exceeds Expectations |
Far Exceeds Expectations |
|
Clarity |
Advising quality and/or activity is described. |
Advising quality and/or activity is clearly described and supported. |
Advising quality and/or activity is clearly described and illustrated by multiple examples. |
|
Advising Impacts |
Advising activities have had some impact on student recruitment and/or retention at KSU. |
Advising activities have had a strong impact on student recruitment and/or retention at KSU. |
Advising activities have had a strong impact on student recruitment and/or retention at KSU and a LASTING impact on the quality of KSU programs |
|
Innovation |
Innovation(s) to advising involve slight modification(s) to an existing practice. |
Innovations to advising involve robust modifications of an existing practice. |
Innovations to advising are entirely original and represent a new approach to practice within the nominee’s field. |
|
Student Feedback |
Letters of Support are positive regarding the quality of advising.
|
Letters of Support are positive regarding the quality of advising and include additional positive comments regarding the advisor (e.g., rapport).
|
Letters of Support are positive and provide explicit statements regarding advising, rapport with students, and the impact on professional trajectory.
|