Provost’s Research Excellence Award

Competition Deadline: 4:30 p.m. Thursday, November 15, 2007 – Please note new deadline

To: Members of the University Faculty, Storrs and Regional Campuses

From: Peter J. Nicholls
Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs

Date: September 5, 2007

Subject: Provost’s Research Excellence Award
(Competition Deadline: 4:30 p.m. Thursday, November 15, 2007 – Please note new deadline)

I am pleased to continue the Provost’s Research Excellence Awards, recognizing excellence in research at the Storrs and regional campuses. Eligible faculty members include those in tenured positions who hold the following titles: University Professor, Professor, and Associate Professor. The Program is open to faculty in all disciplines, from physical and life sciences, engineering, social sciences, to humanities and the fine arts. Up to four awards are made and each will be accompanied by a Research Excellence designation and by a stipend of $2,500 to be used at the awardees’ discretion in support of the awardees’ program of research.

New Deadline for nominations. The new deadline for nominations for the 2008 awards is 4:30 p.m. Thursday, November 15, 2007. The nomination packet should be sent electronically (.pdf format preferred) to larisa.hull@uconn.edu.

Evaluation of requests. The Office of the Vice Provost for Research and Graduate Education is handling peer review for the Provost’s Research Excellence Competition. The Vice Provost will appoint a review committee that will review and rank all applications, and choose ad hoc reviewers for additional expertise when needed. The peer review committee will be comprised of faculty members from a wide variety of research areas.

Nomination format. Each nomination packet must include the following components:

  1. Letter of nomination by a colleague or group of colleagues at the University, which describes the contributions to research the nominee has made. The awards will recognize a broad range of scholarly endeavors, including seminal work that may either be one contribution or a continuous series of contributions over many years (i.e., life’s body of work) regardless of prior academic affiliation. In addition, be sure to specifically address each Factor of Consideration (see next page). The nomination letter must be written in lay terms.
  2. A description of the nominee’s work (five pages maximum). Seminal work is defined as benchmark work that has had an international impact in its field; such work can be either a new contribution that is recognized as having an immediate impact, or a pioneering contribution from the past that has become important.
  3. Letters of support (1 letter maximum from each representative department) from members of the University community (e.g. faculty, students, alumni) and letters of support (6 letters maximum) from members external to the University. The majority of the letters should be from outstanding academic researchers in the candidate’s field. Mentors, community or business leaders may also be asked to submit letters of support.
  4. Evidence of the significance of the research (15 pages maximum), e.g., news article describing nomination for and/or award of a major prize; news articles featuring the nominee’s work and its significance; journal citations of the nominees work, published external reviews of work, invitations to international conferences or publications in international journals. Do not include PTR file letters; they are written for a different purpose.
  5. Curriculum Vitae of the nominee. Rather than an entire career length publication list, include a list of the nominee’s ten most significant publications with a summary of the total numbers of books, chapters, articles, etc.

Nominations that do not comply with the required format and guidelines will be rejected and returned to the nominator.

Factors of consideration. The review committee will consider the following factors when evaluating the nominations.

  • Is the research seminal, influential? Has the work had an important impact on a field of research enough to open up new avenues and approaches? Is the research novel, is the concept unique?
  • What is the impact of the research in a global context? Has the research had a national or international impact, versus a more narrow impact on a narrower audience? Can this wider impact be determined from the supporting documents included with the nomination?
  • What influence has the nominee had on the promotion of research at the University of Connecticut, such as mentoring students and colleagues?

Announcement of the awards will be made by the Provost’s Office in February 2008.

Note: To assist nominators in the preparation of the packet, a checklist has been prepared. The checklist is available on the Research Foundation web site http://research.uconn.edu/ips/