Awards Committee

Chair/Co-chairs: Marah Curtis and Hannah Klusendorf,

2023-2024 Committee Members: Candace Coates, Alice Egan, Jamie Goldberg, Anna Gorman, Jooyoung Kong, Tally Moses, Liz Premo, Aaron Reilly, Weidi Qin, Cindy Waldeck, and Angela Willits 

Spring 2024 Updates 

Objective(s): Evaluate the effectiveness of revised questions to capture diversity effectively. Ascertain whether we are learning what we sought from our revised questions.  Take advantage of the institutional learning across academic settings to compare our questions with other departments and schools to see if they can be refined.  The current question has been effective but may be improved. 

Current & Future Action Steps/Timeframes: 

  • Scan on and off-campus diversity questions for similar processes – (on-going) 
  • Ascertain whether our “Contribution to Diversity” prompt can be improved. 

Progress:  The Awards committee discussed how to ensure the implementation of DEI principles in our Scholarship Reviewer Meeting prior to any applicant evaluations.   The scholarship application includes a question asking students to assess their own contributions to DEI, it is a scored domain of equal weight with all other application criteria.  This question, along with thoughtful reviewing, has yielded a diverse and dynamic group of scholarship recipients who are fantastically qualified and bring varied elements of diversity to our school. The committee discussed how to assess these narratives in ways that are even-handed across applicants and embrace more than a “check mark” around various identities.  The committee retains the question and did feel it added important information to inform our DEI goals.  The question is not “perfect” but it does elicit some thoughtful responses from students needing to grapple with DEI in a personal way.   This grappling is a DEI intervention in and of itself because it makes clear, at the outset, that the School is taking these issues very seriously and will require self-reflection.  The most important “process” piece is that the committee discuss how to use the question and ensure every new group of reviewers has this content as part of the training.  The committee reviewer on-boarding meeting is now recorded, so we can ensure all reviewers have the content to consult as they review. 

What could the School of Social Work do to better support your committee’s DEI goals/objectives?  

  • Provide a student hourly, or other research support, to identify the academic leaders, departments, or centers, across the nation, who are doing innovative work in DEI scholarship space and see what we can learn.  
  • Compile a list of sample questions and outreach methods used in other universities along with the demographics of the school, city and state that the committee can consider piloting or implementing.  Universities, cities, states, and localities vary dramatically in terms of population demographics which will, necessarily, influence the way in which DEI conversations are framed.  UW must recognize that, as a PWI in a relatively racially and ethnically homogenous state can learn from the tools, framing and conversation in more diverse spaces.  

 

 

Strategic Plan Progress Report Out April 2021

Committee Name: Awards Committee

Committee Members: Katherine Magnuson, Latoya Kirton, Laura Dresser, Jooyoung Kong, Yang Xiong, Tally Moses, Lauren Bishop, Cindy Waldeck, Russ Portier, Jaime Goldberg

Strategic Plan Goal: Increase the diversity of our students, faculty, staff, and other governing bodies.

Objective 1: Revise Rosenbaum Scholarship questions to prioritize applicants from historically underrepresented groups, who contribute to the diversity of our community and remove barriers to apply

Progress on goal since February 2021

  1. The Awards Committee discussed changes to the Rosenbaum Application for Summer/Fall 2022 application cycle to prioritize diversity, equity, and inclusion. We will be finalizing these decisions at an upcoming meeting in the Spring 2021 semester. We also plan to include additional questions on the application, including first generation college student status.
  2. For the Full-Time Rosenbaum Scholarship decisions, our 3 awardees are BIPOC women, and all the awardees accepted their offer of admission.

Chair/Co-chairs: Katharine Magnuson

The Awards Committee successfully implemented the revised questions on the Fall Competition and the Rosenbaum Scholarship with considerable success. Award applicants communicated a broader understanding and articulation of diversity than in prior cycles based on the change in the question. The shorter essay requirement also helped to review process move more quickly and resulted in more succinct and direct essays. Adding the ‘Contribution to Diversity’ category to our review rubric also helped strong and diverse applicants rise to the top of the overall scoring. Finally, we added an overall impression score which helped reviewers address any issues in the application materials that we had not captured through the rest of the rubric. The Awards Committee members reported feeling optimistic about the changes and recognized improvement in the overall application and review process. The increased number of committee members helped make the review process more manageable than in prior cycles.  

We continue to prioritize awards for students with various dimensions of diversity. Not only recognizing the diversity of race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and first-generation college students but also prioritizing the representation of LGBTQIA, Neurodivergent, undocumented, and indigenous students and other dimensions of diversity.  

Chair/Co-chairs: Marah Curtis

Fall 2023 Committee Members: Latoya Kirton, Jooyoung Kong, Angela Willits, Tally Moses, Sarah Valencia, Alice Egan, Laura Dresser, Stephanie Van Pay, Helenia Quince & Aaron Reilly

Objective(s): Evaluate the effectiveness of revised questions to capture diversity effectively.  Ascertain whether we are learning what we sought from our revised questions.  Take advantage of the institutional learning across academic settings to compare our questions with other departments and schools to see if they can be refined.  The current question has been effective but may be improved.

Current & Future Action Steps/Timeframes:

  • Scan on and off-campus diversity questions for similar processes.
  • Ascertain whether our “Contribution to Diversity” prompt can be improved.
  • If revised questions are chosen, they will be piloted, and results compared with the existing questions.

Identify the academic leaders, departments, or centers, across the nation, who are doing innovative work in this space and see what we can learn.  Universities, cities, states, and localities vary dramatically in terms of population demographics which will, necessarily, influence the way in which the conversations are framed.  UW must recognize that, as a PWI in a relatively racially and ethnically homogenous state can learn from the tools, framing and conversation in more diverse spaces.