Welcome to the Student
Spotlight & Awards section
of the WAS Student web site. We are developing this section to provide a
periodic glimpse into the activities of WAS student-members and showcase
Student Awards winners from past WAS conferences: including the best presentation awards and pre-conference awards winners.
WAS Student Awards
WAS encourages student participation at annual conferences and recognizes that WAS Student Members work very hard every year to present their research at WAS annual conferences, by submitting abstracts for acceptance in either poster or oral presentation formats. WAS also knows that students represent the future leaders of WAS, the aquaculture industry, and those who serve it! Therefore, WAS has set up Student Awards as a means of encouraging globally diverse student attendance at WAS annual conferences to financially assist students in having the opportunity to attend conferences, network with established aquaculture representatives (including academia, production, development, and other exciting sectors of our industry), and obtain recognition for their hard work and dedication to the aquaculture industry! Student abstracts and presentations are getting better each year and drawing more attention and recognition from the aquaculture community; therefore, competition is getting tougher for the awards, but how wonderful to see students reaching a new and higher standard of excellence!! To see the past winners of WAS Student Awards and judging criteria please see the links below.
Pre-conference abstract
(travel) Awards
Best Oral Presentation
Awards
Best Poster Presentation Awards
Pre-Conference travel
(abstract) Awards
Under
Construction
Judging Criteria
Best Oral Presentation
Awards
Under Construction
Judging Criteria
Best Poster Presentation
Awards
Under
Construction
Judging Criteria
Judging Criteria
WAS Pre-Conference
Student Abstract Award
The award program for best student abstract is intended to encourage greater numbers and diversity of students presenting at the WAS annual conference. To be eligible for an award, an abstract for either a paper or poster must meet the following requirements:
1. Must be submitted by the abstract deadline.
2. Author or co-author must be a member of WAS and have student status.
3. The presentation may not be a re-write of data published elsewhere, except as a portion of an annual report, federal or state assistance project, etc.
Judges will be drawn from the WAS member pool and will represent a wide spectrum of workers such as culturists, fishery managers, administrators, researchers, and teachers. Judges are officially appointed by the Honors & Awards Committee Chair, the WAS Vice-President, or other member appointed by the President. The Honors & Awards Committee Chair will supply each judge with score sheets and titles of the abstracts to be judged. At least three judges will mark each presentation.
The Pre-Conference Award consists of a letter from the president and a check for $300 to the first and second place abstracts.
WAS Pre-Conference Student
Abstract Award Criteria
Format (15 points)
Is the abstract formatted properly and camera ready with 1" margins, proper font size & type, capitalization, paragraph separation (see attached sample)? Is the print quality of the abstract legible?
Abstract title (5 points)
Does the title accurately and concisely describe the subject?
Abstract content (15 points)
Is the abstract well organized and interesting? Does it provide a description of the project, the results, and a discussion of their relevance?
Scientific and research value
(20 points)
How much effort was involved (2 weeks, 6 months, 2 years)? Is the study innovative? Is there evidence of careful planning and conduct of the study?
Application potential (20
points)
Do the results constitute new or original knowledge? Are the conclusions important? Can findings be applied to maintain or improve current production or harvest practices?
Scope (10 points)
Are findings of general interest to the broad aquaculture community as opposed to findings relating to a special situation and relevant only to a limited locality?
Clarity (10 points)
Can the abstract be understood by those not engaged in the particular specialty and by those without competence in narrow fields such as genetics, physiology, or higher mathematics?
Other (5 points)
This criterion is extra and should not be automatically awarded. Is there a unique feature of the article that does not fit the other criteria but which warrants consideration (e.g., utility of figures and tables)?
WAS Best
Student Presentation Awards
The award program for best student presentation is intended to encourage more effective presentations of high interest and value to members attending the annual conference. One award is made for the best oral presentation and one for the best poster. To be eligible for an award, a paper or poster must meet the following requirements:
1 Must be presented by author or co-author (only the individual making the presentation can receive the award).
2 Author or co-author must be a member of WAS and have student status.
3 The presentation may not be a re-write of data published elsewhere, except as a portion of an annual report, federal or state assistance project, etc.
4 Author must have met established deadlines.
Judges will be drawn from the WAS (USC) member pool and will represent a wide spectrum of workers such as culturists, fishery managers, administrators, researchers, and teachers. Judges are officially appointed by the Honors & Awards Committee Chair, the WAS Vice-President, or other member appointed by the President. The Honors & Awards Committee Chair will supply each judge with score sheets and titles of the papers to be judged. At least three judges will mark each presentation.
Each Best Presentation Award consists of
· a letter from the president
· an engraved plaque
· a check for $200
to the first place paper and first place poster presenters.
WAS Best Student Paper /
Poster Award Criteria
Scientific and research value
(20 points)
How much effort was involved (2 weeks, 6 months, 2 years)? Was the study innovative? Is there evidence of careful planning and conduct of the study?
Management value and application potential (20 points)
Do the results constitute new or original knowledge? Are the conclusions important? Can findings be applied to maintain or improve current production or harvest practices?
Scope (10 points)
Are findings of general interest to the broad aquaculture community as opposed to findings relating to a special situation and relevant only to a limited locality?
Verbal presentation (papers only-15
points)
Did the author speak clearly and stick to making their point or did they "hem, haw, and digress"? Did s/he keep the audience interested or were they bored? Was s/he at ease or uptight? Did s/he stick to the time schedule?
Audio-visual presentation (for
papers-15 points; for posters-combine w/ item 4 to total 25 points)
Did s/he use slides and other visual aids effectively? Could the graphs and tables be readily understood or did it take considerable scruitny to figure out what they meant? Could visuals be seen from afar (e.g., from the back of the room)?
Clarity and conciseness (10 points)
Can the presentation be understood by those not engaged in the particular specialty and by those without competence in narrow fields such as genetics, physiology, or higher mathematics?
Stimulated intelligent discussion (5 points)
Did the presentation evoke questions and discussion? Judge audience reaction.
Abstract and title (5 points)
Do the abstract and title accurately and concisely describe the subject?
Other considerations (5 points)
This criterion is extra and should not be automatically awarded. Is there a unique feature of the presentation that does not fit the other criteria but warrants consideration (e.g., such as the timely use of humor or utility of figures and tables)? These 5 points should be considered as extra and not automatically awarded.
Student Spotlight
We hope this section will become a useful medium for highlighting the work and accomplishments of our student members. We encourage you to utilize this section to learn more about your fellow students in the field of aquaculture.
1) Nominations for WAS Student Spotlight will be solicited in World Aquaculture magazine and posted on this web page.
2) All nominations must be accompanied by letters of recommendation from two full members of the World aquaculture Society.
3) Undergraduate student members of WAS are eligible: although we hope to focus on the nomination of graduate students (M.S. and Ph.D).
4) No more than 3 students may be nominated per institution per year.
5) Nominees can be in the initial or final stages of research; however, it is recommended that graduate nominees have completed their research proposal or at least one year of study.
6) A complete application includes: 1) two signed letters of recommendation by full WAS members; 2) a 3.5" PC diskette with a summary of the student's research and general activities relating to aquaculture (<=500 words in Microsoft WORD or WordPerfect); and 3) up to four scanned images (GIF or TIFF format). All submissions are subject to review for content by WAS.
7) Applications may be submitted to the address below:
WAS Student Spotlight, c/o
Heidi S. Erickson
University of Arizona, Dept. Vet. Sci./ Micro.; Aquaculture Pathology
1117 E. Lowell, Bldg. 90
Tucson, Arizona 85718 USA
Phone: 520-621-4438, Fax: 520-621-4899
E-mail: heidiserickson@hotmail.com
Featured Students - Spring 1998
Bradford J. Miller Louisiana State University
Please direct site comments to: Heidi S. Erickson
Please direct WAS questions to: WAS
Home Office
This page was last updated on: 5/3/2001
