FAQ for GPER Fellowship Nomination
FAQs for nominators for GPER fellowships at APS:
Who makes up the GPER APS Fellowship committee?
The committee includes the current chair-elect and vice-chair of the GPER Topical Group executive committee. The chair-elect of the topical group serves as the chair of the Fellowship committee in any given year, and will constitute the remainder of the committee in consultation with GPER Exec. Other committee members are typically drawn from recent or past Fellows, as well as at-large members of the GPER Executive Committee. Typically there are at least two Fellows on the committee in any given year and often two or three committee members who are not on the GPER executive committee. Committee members cannot be a nominator in the same year.
What is the process for selecting nominees for fellowship?
After files are submitted, members of the committee review files according to the GPER Fellow guidelines. The Fellowship committee then meets and discusses all nominees at length, considering the extent to which each satisfy the criteria in the guidelines. If a member of the Fellowship committee has a conflict of interest with a nominee (e.g., a close collaborator or former PhD advisor) that member of the committee will step out for that portion of the discussion.
After the committee has reached a tentative consensus, the chair will prepare a letter of summary that serves as the formal report of the committee. This letter is generally signed off by all members of the committee. The report is then sent to APS Honors and reviewed.
What career stage should someone have reached to be considered for nomination?
There is no explicit requirement about career stage. In our experience, it would be difficult to achieve the markers of fellowship (from our guidelines) to be competitive without a significant number of years in the field. The most competitive files have activities and accomplishments in categories across the fellowship guidelines, including both generation of new knowledge and dissemination of knowledge.
Does the committee consider a nominee’s reputation or interpersonal interactions?
In order to have a fair and equitable process, the committee strives to consider only what is in the nomination packet when evaluating the nominees. While this might omit factors in a nominee’s favor, or some that are not, our belief is that it is not appropriate for committee members to bring in personal knowledge or impressions, whether that be for or against a nominee.
Does the committee consider different career trajectories or institutional contexts?
Yes. Several recent fellows have spent significant portions of their careers in roles other than ‘tenure track faculty at a PhD-granting institution.’
Are the Guidelines for APS Fellowship used like a rubric or a coding scheme?
Not exactly. The guidelines are meant to serve as a “menu of options” for ways someone could qualify for Fellowship. While the committee typically does look for each guideline element in the nomination packages, the full discussion does not simply involve tallying the elements.
What can I do as a nominator or letter writer to give a person the best chance of being selected as Fellow?
Read through the guidelines and ensure the nominees contributions related to the guideline elements are explicitly outlined. As above, the committee intentionally will not use personal, insider knowledge about nominees when reviewing the nomination packages, meaning that all relevant contributions to the field should be listed explicitly.
In our experience, small things often get missed, including, for example, clarifying the nominee’s role in collaborative projects and publications or describing the nominee’s role on advisory boards or as external evaluators on projects. In addition, sometimes letters are included from writers who are too close to the nominee (e.g., PhD or postdoc advisors).
My nominee didn’t get selected last year. Should I resubmit this year and how can I get feedback?
Nominators are welcome to resubmit nominations in subsequent years and they are welcome to reach out to Fellowship committee members to discuss the process. Committee members will not be able to divulge the previous discussion of the package, but they can help talk through the process and the guidelines. The Fellowship committee cannot provide advice about how to put together a competitive package. Nominators are encouraged to reach out to former nominators or former committee members. These folks typically make themselves known at the GPER Business Meeting hosted at the Global Physics Summit.
How do I decide if I should nominate my candidate for Fellowship through GPER or through other APS divisions, groups, or fora?
The GPER guidelines describe some ways that fellowship through GPER is unique compared to that through other groups. You are welcome to ask the GPER Exec, or GPER Fellowship committee members, or prior nominators and committee members for clarification. In addition, during the process, if the GPER fellowship committee believes a package would be more competitive for APS Fellowship through another division, they may consult with the other group’s fellowship committee and consider transferring the package. Transferring to another group will only be done in consultation with the nominator.