Awards

Deadlines

Be sure to meet the following deadlines.

  • ASTE Awards I, II, III – June 1
  • ASTE proposal – June 30
  • SASTE proposal – August 15
  • SASTE elections and awards nominations – September 30

Regional award nominations can be submitted using this form.

John Shrum Award

The John Shrum award is the highest award that SASTE gives. Named in honor of John Shrum, a long-time faculty member at the University of Georgia, the award honors someone with a lifelong commitment to science education and participation and leadership with SASTE. The John Shrum award is typically given to a senior faculty member or late-career science educator.

Nominations for this award should be received by the SASTE President on the nominating person’s official letterhead and judged by the SASTE Executive Committee.

The John Shrum award carries a $300 stipend; the nomination letter will be archived by SASTE.

Deborah Tippins Mentor Award

The Deborah Tippins Mentor award is a special award given to a person who embodies mentoring relationships or who demonstrates exemplary mentoring of junior SASTE members. The award is named after Deborah Tippins, who has an international reputation for mentoring colleagues locally, nationally, and internationally. 

Nominations for this award should be received by the SASTE President on the nominating person’s official letterhead and judged by the Executive Committee. 

The Deborah Tippins Mentor award carries a $100 stipend; the nomination letter will be archived by SASTE.
* SASTE membership is not required to be nominated for this award.*

Rod Nave Award

The Rod Nave award is a special honor for a supporter of the science education community and SASTE. The award is named after Rod Nave, a professor of physics at Georgia State University, who designated special classes for science teachers using the latest technologies and emphasizing the conceptual physics approach. The Rod Nave award is typically given to a person who represents a significant connection between the sciences and the science education community.

Nominations for this award should be received by the SASTE President on the nominating person’s official letterhead and judged by the SASTE Executive Committee.

The Rod Nave award carries a $100 stipend and the nomination letter will be archived by SASTE.
*SASTE membership is not required to be nominated for this award.*

 

Eddie Griffen Memorial Award for Outstanding Graduate Student Position Paper

The Eddie Griffen Memorial Award honors an outstanding position paper submitted by a graduate student.

Outstanding Faculty Position Paper

This award honors an outstanding position paper submitted by a faculty member.

The awards for Outstanding Graduate Student Position Paper and Outstanding Faculty Position Paper are presented at the Annual SASTE Conference. Each award carries a cash stipend of $50.

Guidelines for Submission of the Eddie Griffen Memorial Award and Outstanding Faculty Position Paper

  1. Papers may be submitted by email (doc or Docx, pdf, or rtf) attachment to the current SASTE president.
    Format: word-processed, double-spaced, 12 pt serif font (e.g., Times New Roman), one-inch margins, 8.5 x 11 in. Ten (10) pages maximum, five (pages) minimum, not including the cover sheet.
  2. The cover page should contain the title for the paper, the name(s), title(s), institution(s), and email address(es) of the lead author. The title should be centered at the top of the first page of the text. The author(s) names should NOT be included on the position pages.
  3. The paper should be original and generally follow the format prescribed in the latest Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA).

The recipient(s) of this award will be expected to attend the conference to present a (BRIEF) 4-5 minute synopsis of the position paper. 
In the event of multiple authorship, authors will share the award.

Criteria for Judging the Graduate Student and Faculty Position Papers:

  • How well does the paper communicate a clear position?
  • How relevant is the paper to the conference theme?
  • How relevant is the paper to science education?
  • Does the paper build a unique argument? (not just repeat the arguments of others in the field)
  • Is the position well-supported by research literature, personal experience, or a valid philosophical argument?
  • Does the paper have a potential impact in terms of fostering dialogue among science educators?
  • How well does the paper fully develop the author’s position or perspective?
  • Does the paper conform to the guidelines for submission stated above?