Hynes Awards Nomination Form

Nomination Form

Nomination deadline: February 3, 2023 
** NOTE THE NEW DEADLINE**

We welcome nominations for the Hynes Award for New Investigators. The Hynes Award is awarded to a freshwater scientist who was senior author of an outstanding primary publication that appeared in the final print or online format in the last 3 years. The recipient must have received a terminal post-graduate degree within the last five years and cannot currently be enrolled in a degree program. 

Nominations will be judged on the scientific merits and impact of the paper, the nominee’s role in developing the research, and the broader considerations of the nominee as a new investigator and contributor to the SFS community. Toward that end, the nomination process includes submission of the nominee’s CV, a noteworthy recently-published paper that motivates the nomination, and a set of six questions (see below), each of which will be given equal weight in the evaluation process. You will receive an automated reply once your nomination is received.

    Files must be less than 2 MB.
    Allowed file types: pdf doc docx.
    Files must be less than 4 MB.
    Allowed file types: pdf doc docx.
    Files must be less than 4 MB.
    Allowed file types: pdf doc docx.
    Files must be less than 4 MB.
    Allowed file types: pdf doc docx.

    Supporting Evidence: Details

    In a single document, please draft a response to each of the six numbered questions below, then upload in the “Supporting Evidence” field. Each of the six responses should be limited to 200 words or less.

    1. What are the most important contributions of this paper? 
    2. What are the potential broader impacts of this paper, including but not limited to management implications? 
    3. What was the nominee’s role in developing and implementing the overall project (e.g., idea generation, funding, field work, etc.)? 
    4. What was the nominee’s specific contribution to the paper (e.g., writing, data analysis, data interpretation, graphics, etc.)? 
    5. Please summarize the nominee’s other activities as a new investigator (e.g., mentoring students, working with stakeholders, broadening participation in science, public engagement, etc.)?
    6. Are there additional considerations that the evaluation committee should be aware of (e.g., involvement with SFS, unusual challenges overcome by the nominee, etc.)?