The meeting was opened by chair Rob Mossack (Lipscomb Univ), with a welcome and introduction of Committee members in attendance:

Rob Mossack, Awards Cmte. Chair

Joyce Buck, outgoing Chair of Research Cmte.

Josh Smith, incoming Chair of Research Cmte.

Judy Goetz, NACADA Scholarship Selection Sub-committee Chair

Chuck Haberle, Tech Innov. Selection Sub-committee Chair

Susan Fread, Member at Large

Stephanie Gillian, Member at Large

Brian Glankler, Member at Large

Jayne Drake, Admin. Div. Rep.

Rich Robbins, Admin. Div. Rep.

Leigh Cunningham, Ex Officio- Exec. Office Rep.

Materials were distributed to attendees, including agenda and membership lists.

New committee members were recognized by the Chair (Smith, Roufs, Haberle, Glankler, Earwood, Gillian), and appreciation expressed for those members rotating off of the committee (Buck, Jedele).

Brief discussion regarding 2006 data, with it being noted that said data shows that it is indeed an honor to receive an award and/or certificate of merit. A significant number of nominations are turned down each year.

First point of discussion/decision: revisions

• After some discussion, it was decided that criteria #4 for Outstanding Program Awards would be changed to read, “Programs must have been operational for three years (time frame may include pilot period). Data to substantiate program effective must be included with the submission. Programs lacking data to substantiate at least three years of program effectiveness will not be evaluated.” The committee was unanimous in emphasizing the importance of substantive data being included in the nomination packet.
• Discussion was held regarding the criteria for the Virginia Gordon Award. Committee members were in agreement that many nominations for the award “miss the point” regarding significant contributions to the FIELD of academic advising, reflecting only campus-specific impact. The committee decided that the following wording should be included in materials describing the award:

   A supporting letter from the nominator providing evidence t hat the candidate has made a significant national and/or international impact on the profession of academic advising through:

   *research, publications, and/or presentations at the national and/or international level,

   *leadership in the field of advising as well as related professional areas (i.e. NACADA or other association offices held, program/policy development at the national/international level), and

  *commitment to the importance of academic advising at the national and/or international level (evidence of commitment/advocacy for academic advising over an extended period of time).

• The committee decided that there was a need to revise the nomination form for Outstanding Advising, particularly relating to the line dealing with “advising contacts per year,” and the confusion that line seems to engender. The following revisions were accepted:
  • “Advising contacts per year” will be dropped
  • “Percentage of time assigned to..” line will be changed to simply “Percentage of time”
  • Outstanding Advising and Outstanding New Advisor nomination forms will be split into individual categories (separate forms). This will hopefully help nominators make a better decision as to which category their nominee fits.
  • A “current job description” will be added to criteria #3 on both forms.

Discussion was held regarding how to increase the number of applications for Student Research grants and NACADA Scholarships. Two suggestions were given: involving allied organizations, and creating mailing lists of graduate programs.

The final issue taken up by the committee involved the Awards Reception and who should be invited, since concern had been expressed by some that past award winners and association presidents were not currently given an explicit invitation. After spirited discussion, it was decided that past presidents will be invited to the ceremony/reception.

Issues tabled due to time constraints (to be discussed during the year): Funding issues, particularly the pooling of awards/grants funds into one fund.