Outstanding Student Poster and PICO (OSPP) Awards

Some features of www.egu.eu will not appear or function properly if your browser does not have JavaScript enabled, or does not support it.

OSPP Coordinator: Lena Noack (ospp@egu.eu)

The EGU presents a number of special awards, including the Outstanding Student Poster and PICO (OSPP) Awards, to further improve the overall quality of poster and PICO (Presenting Interactive COntent) presentations at the General Assemblies and, most importantly, to foster the excitement of younger colleagues in presenting their work in these formats. The OSPP Awards are presented at the EGU Programme Group level.

Recipients

Nomination Procedure

2 November 2020

Nomination procedures for Union and division awards and medals
Selection of candidates and confidentiality
- Policy for conflict of interest
- Selection procedures
Application procedures for General Assembly awards

Nomination procedures for Union and division awards and medals

A person is eligible to receive one EGU/EUG/EGS medal only once in their lifetime, except for the Union medals, which can be assigned only once to any person, including previous division medal awardees. With regards to ECS, any person is eligible to receive one outstanding ECS award in their lifetime. This can be either the Arne Richter Award for ECS or a Division ECS Award.

All past EGU awardees and medallists are eligible for the Katia and Maurice Krafft Award, provided they have not previously received it. The same applies to the Union Service Award.

Moreover, the following individuals are not eligible to be candidates for awards and/or medals during their terms of service and one year after the term is finished (meaning that the nomination for these individuals cannot be accepted during the year their term ended, but can be accepted the subsequent year):

EGU president;
EGU vice-president;
Council members (not including ex-officio members);
Chairs of EGU committees.

Similarly, members of the awards and medals committees are not eligible for that award/medal in the year they step down as committee members and the following year (term of committee members ends during the General Assembly when the award is conferred). Their nomination can only be accepted from the third nomination period after they leave the committee.

Recipients of EGU (including EUG and EGS) awards, with the exception of the Katia and Maurice Krafft Award, the Union Service Award, and the Angela Croome Award, cannot receive a lower-level recognition afterwards from the EGU (e.g., a recipient of a Union medal cannot receive a division medal).

It is possible to award recognition shared between individuals: in this case, the relevant recognition will not subsequently be awarded for as many years as the number of recipients exceeds one. Any person can be nominated for only one EGU division medal and/or only one EGU Union medal each year. An ECS can be nominated for the division ECS award for one division only per year.

Awards and medals committee members, including ex-officio members, cannot submit nominations or write support letters for the awards or medals for which they are serving.

Nominations for all awards and medals are to be submitted online by the stipulated deadline (usually in June) of each year. Only EGU members can submit nominations for EGU medals and awards except for the Angela Croome Award. Proposals are then forwarded to the chair of the relevant award or medal committee. Nominations for EGU awards and medals are not automatically renewed for the subsequent year. A person can receive only one EGU medal or award each year. Self-nominations are not accepted except for the Angela Croome Award.

For the Angela Croome Award, nominations by both EGU members and non-members are accepted and self-nomination is possible. Past recipients are not eligible.

Nominations should include the following items in PDF format and written in the English language:

Nominations for the Union and division medals

Nomination letter (one page). This must clearly detail why the candidate deserves this recognition, with particular focus on the candidate's scientific contributions to the field, describing the importance, the impact on the discipline, and implications for the future of these contributions. The new views and insights that have been stimulated by the candidate's work are particularly relevant.
Curriculum Vitae (two pages). A summary of the candidate's CV, including the candidate’s name, address, history of employment, degrees, research and teaching/supervising experience, honours, and service to the community, including service to EGU.
Selected bibliography (two pages). A list of selected publications by the candidate that best support the nomination. The candidate’s total number and types of publications and citations should also be briefly stated.
Supporting letters. Between three and five letters of support (maximum one page each) should be submitted. These letters should clearly establish the nominee's recognised contributions to the field.

Nominations for the Katia and Maurice Krafft Award

Nomination letter (one page). This must clearly detail why the candidate deserves this recognition, with particular focus on the candidate's contributions to geoscience outreach and engagement, and the importance and impact of these contributions. The new views and insights that have been stimulated by the candidate's work are particularly relevant.
Curriculum Vitae (one page). A summary of the candidate's CV, including the candidate’s name, address, outreach experience, honours, and service to society.
Supporting letters. Between three and five letters of support (maximum one page each) should be submitted. These letters should clearly establish the nominee's recognised contributions to geoscience outreach and engagement.

Nominations for the Union Service Award

Nomination letter (one page). This must clearly detail why the candidate deserves this recognition, in particular focussing on the candidate's scientific contributions to the Union.
Curriculum Vitae (one page), with particular emphasis on the candidate's activity in the Union.
Supporting letters. One or two letters of support (maximum one page each). These letters should clearly establish the nominee's contributions to the Union.

Nominations for the outstanding ECS awards

Nomination letter (half page), including the division to which the candidate’s research is most applicable.
Curriculum Vitae. A summary of the candidate's CV (one page), including the date when their highest degree qualification was received.
Selected bibliography. A list of selected publications by the candidate that best support the nomination (half page). It should also state briefly the candidate’s total number and types of publications and citations.
The whole nomination package for the award must not exceed two pages.

Nominations for the Angela Croome Award

Nomination letter (one page). This must clearly detail why the candidate deserves this recognition, in particular focussing on the candidate's contributions to Earth, planetary. or space science journalism, including how their work promoted discoveries relevant to Europe or European citizens.
Curriculum Vitae (one page). A summary, in English, of the candidate's CV, including the candidate’s name, address, journalism experience, and honours.
Samples of reporting published within the past five years. Up to three samples of reporting that establish the nominee’s excellent contributions to Earth, planetary, or space science journalism. The samples may be in any language. Each submitted sample must be accompanied by a summary in English (maximum one page) providing a synthesis of the content and information to evaluate the value of the contribution.

Time schedule the Union and division awards and medals

1 January - 15 June	Open for submissions
16 June – 31 August	Survey of all suggestions by the respective award and medal committees. With respect to the Division Outstanding Early Career Scientists Awards / Arne Richters Award for Outstanding Early Career Scientists, the presidents of the divisions will evaluate their proposals, while the Council will select max. four candidates from all suggested by the Divisions.
1 - 30 September	Peer assessment of the nominated candidates by the Union Awards Committee.
October	Final approval of the candidates by the Union Council at its fall meeting.
October/November	Awardees and medallists are informed that they will receive their award/medal at the next General Assembly of the Union.

Selection of candidates and confidentiality

Award and medal committees exclusively discuss and vote on the Union forums, and otherwise by email while keeping the chair of the UAC in carbon copy. If virtual meetings are organised, the minutes must be made available on the forum. The vote of the chair of the individual award or medal committee prevails in case of parity. Award and medal committee chairs and members are expected to keep strict confidentiality on the discussion that leads to the selection of the winners. The outcome of the selection by the award and medal committee is to be kept strictly confidential until Council approves the entire list of winners and the decision has been communicated to the winners.

Policy for conflict of interest

Any EGU award or medal is selected through a rigorous assessment of the candidates and their merits. The EGU Council, the award and medal committee members, and the Union and division officers are committed to soliciting the nomination of deserving individuals by avoiding conflicts of interest. Awards and medals may not be conferred in a given year if high-quality nominations are not received.

Candidates for the Union and division awards and medals are evaluated by the respective awards and medals committees before final approval by the Council.

If only one nomination is received for a Union or division medal, the UAC will assess the merits of the candidate and may seek the help of external peers to ensure that the candidate is high profile and deserving. The EGU reserves the right to not confer the medal when there is only one nomination. The assessment made by the UAC is approved by Council before medals are conferred.

Awards and medals committees must prevent conflicts of interest during the selection procedure. Awards and medals committee members should declare at the beginning of the selection procedure if they have any personal and/or professional relationship with any candidate, including:

Known family relationship as spouse, child, sibling, or parent.
Business or professional partnership.
Past or present association as thesis advisor or thesis student.
Collaboration on a project, a book, article, report, or paper within the last 5 years, and 10 years if a substantial number of co-publications are involved.
Co-editing of a journal, compendium, or conference proceedings within the last 48 months.
Having had substantial collaboration during their professional career.
Current employment at the same institution.
Previous employment at the same institution within the last 12 months.
Being considered for employment at the institution.
Being involved in any office, governing board membership, or relevant committee chairpersonship in the same institution.
Having received an honorarium and/or award from the same institution in the past 24 months.

It is the responsibility of the chair of the award/medal committee to reveal any possible conflict of interest to the chair of the UAC.

The chair of the UAC, after consultation with the chair of the relevant award/medal committee, may decide to exclude an award/medal committee member from the consultation if the personal and/or professional relationship with any nominee is deemed to have a potential impact on the selection of candidates.

Members of awards and medals committees and the chair of the UAC may for other reasons determine that there are potential conflicts that require elimination from service in a committee.

Selection procedures

Awards and medals winners are selected according to the following procedures:

Candidates for medals are evaluated by the respective medal committees and approved by the Council.
Candidates for the Union Service Award are evaluated by the UAC and approved by the Council.
Candidates for the Katia and Maurice Krafft and Angela Croome awards are evaluated by the relevant award committee and approved by the Council.
Candidates for the Division Outstanding ECS Awards are first evaluated by the relevant division committee, which forwards the best candidate to the chair of the UAC. Four candidates are then selected by the Council and awarded at the Union level (Arne Richter Awards for Outstanding ECS). The remaining best candidates are awarded by the relevant division.

The president will then inform the awardees and medallists appropriately and will invite them to the next EGU General Assembly, where the awards and medals will be presented. The EGU office, on behalf of the chair of the EGU Awards and Medal Committee and the EGU president, will take all necessary actions for inviting the Union and division awardees and medallists to give an award/medal lecture at the General Assembly. In parallel, the Programme Committee of the next EGU General Assembly incorporates the corresponding potential award/medal lectures into the overall programme of the meeting, either as stand-alone lectures or as invited contributions in selected sessions.

The Arne Richter Awards for Outstanding ECS, the Union Service Award, and the Union medals are presented by the president during the EGU Awards Ceremony at the General Assembly, while the division medals are presented by the respective division presidents at the beginning of the medal lectures in question. The Union and division medallists, as well as the recipients of the Union Service Award, the Arne Richter Awards for Outstanding ECS, the division ECS, and the Krafft and Croome awards are introduced during the EGU Awards Ceremony. The presentation of the division ECS, the Krafft, and the Croome awards takes place at the beginning of the corresponding award lecture.

Application procedures for General Assembly awards

In relation with its General Assemblies, the Union presents a number of special awards, such as the Outstanding Student Poster and PICO (OSPP) Awards to further improve the overall quality of poster and PICO presentations and, most importantly, to foster the excitement of younger colleagues in presenting their work in the form of a poster and/or PICO. The division OSPP coordinators are nominated by the relevant division president and approved during the annual division meeting. The Council nominates an EGU OSPP award Coordinator to supervise the programme groups OSPP coordinators.

Criteria for application

Eligibility for the Outstanding Student Poster and PICO (OSPP) Awards is limited to participants who:

are first author and personally present the poster or PICO at the conference; and
satisfy one of the following criteria:
are a current undergraduate (e.g., BSc) or postgraduate (e.g., MSc, PhD) student; or
are a recent undergraduate or postgraduate student (conferral of degree after 1 January of the year preceding the conference) who are presenting their thesis work.

Please note that each first author can register only one abstract (poster or PICO) for the OSPP contest at the General Assembly.

Application procedure

Authors may express their interest in participating in the OSPP contest when submitting their abstract. With the letter of schedule, authors are informed about the final form of their presentation: oral, poster, or PICO. In case of poster or PICO, students fulfilling the above criteria can register for OSPP by selecting the respective link in the letter of schedule. In case of more than one poster and/or PICO presentation as a first author, students are asked to decide which presentation should be included in the OSPP contest. The student names are then forwarded to the OSPP coordinators of the respective programme group. Authors receive a confirmation email after the OSPP registration deadline (which is about two weeks after the letter of schedule).

Selection procedure

Candidates for the OSPP award attach the OSPP label (blue SVG, blue PNG, yellow SVG, yellow PNG) to their poster board or include the label in the poster itself. Candidates presenting a PICO contribution add the OSPP label to their PICO presentation header.

The OSPP coordinator of each programme group sends out emails to all (co-)conveners with the list of OSPP abstracts to be judged in their session and asks them to nominate three judges for each presentation before the meeting. The (co-)conveners obtain prior consent from the judges and may choose to do part of the judging themselves. To avoid conflicts of interest, judges should not be involved in the work or supervision of the student. The EGU OSPP award coordinator checks before the meeting that enough judges have been assigned to each participating poster or PICO presentation and may nominate additional judges if necessary.

Evaluation forms for each OSPP presentation will then be made available to all judges via a personal link to the OSPP online system. These forms include a number of criteria to be evaluated by the judges. Criteria include the scientific quality of the presentation, the design, and the student’s ability to answer questions, with marks given from 0 to 10.

The judges evaluate the presentations at the General Assembly during the poster session or the PICO viewing time, respectively. Note that the two-minute presentation of PICOs is not part of the award evaluation. Each judge is expected to speak to the student during the poster/PICO session because this both guarantees some extra attendance for the student and because the student’s ability to describe and defend their work is part of the OSPP evaluation criteria. The judges are asked to work confidentially. The judges then fill in the evaluation forms online.

After the General Assembly, each programme group’s OSPP coordinator proposes a ranking among all the participating posters and PICOs (one combined list) in the programme group based on average marks that are automatically compiled from all evaluation forms. The top presentations of this ranking will get the award. The number of awards in each division should depend on the quality and the number of participating presentations that year. In general, the number of awards should be small to keep the contest competitive and the award a special distinction. The division president ultimately decides on the awards based on the ranking no later than two months after the General Assembly.

More information for coordinators, nominators, and judges is available at the OSPP guidelines page of the General Assembly.

Award presentation

Each awardee is notified by the EGU OSPP award Coordinator. Awardees are asked to submit a short statement on affiliation and research interests (two to three sentences), a portrait photo, and their PICO presentation or a PDF of their poster to the EGU Office. The information is published on the EGU OSPP Awards section of the website. The awardees receive a conference fee waiver for the next EGU General Assembly and are invited to submit a paper (of which the awardee is first author) free of publication costs to one of the EGU journals. At the respective division meeting held at the next General Assembly, each awardee receives an award certificate.

Awards & medals Outstanding Student Poster and PICO (OSPP) Awards