The Australian Awards for University Teaching (AAUT) were established in 1997 by the Australian Government to celebrate and reward excellence in university teaching. Since then, with an honour roll that includes many highly respected and celebrated members of the sector, the Australian Awards for University Teaching have become a valued form of recognition for university educators Australia wide.
The AAUT Awards recognise the impact that educators have on the learning and teaching experiences and outcomes of university students. They celebrate and reward programs that support students and enhance learning. They promote excellence in learning and teaching in all aspects of higher education. Recipients, with the support of their institutions, contribute to systemic change in learning and teaching through the ongoing sharing and dissemination of knowledge.
The AAUT Awards for Teaching Excellence recognise Australia’s most outstanding university teachers who have demonstrated excellent leadership through sustained commitment to innovation, delivery of quality teaching and sustained dedication to improving the student experience and learning outcomes in higher education.
See videos of our previous AAUT award recipients and applicants talking about their teaching.
Read about our AAUT award recipients
All nominations must relate to teaching activities in higher education and must be supported by the nominating institution. Nomination is open to individuals and teams with current teaching or teaching/research appointments (full-time or fractional, continuing or contract).
Team nominations can only include members with a contribution of 10 per cent or higher. This means the maximum number of team members is 10 either from the same institution or collaborating institutions. All members of the team must be employed by an eligible institution.
Past recipients of a Teaching or Program Award (including Carrick Award, ALTC Award or OLT Award) can only renominate if they form part of a team nomination and are not the lead nominee. The new nomination should not substantially replicate the original nomination.Early Career Teaching Award recipients are eligible for renomination in a different category five years after receiving the Early Career Award.
Nomination or receipt of a Citation does not affect eligibility for a Teaching Award.
ANU may nominate a maximum of three individuals or teams for the AAUT Teaching Awards.
The ANU Promoting Excellence team will nominate individuals or teams from the recipients and applicants for the Vice-Chancellor's Awards for Excellence in Education.
Nominees may be included in only one Teaching Award nomination in any year, except if a nominee forms part of a team nomination and is not the lead nominee.
Teaching Award categories
Nominees must select the relevant program category below. The seven categories for the AAUT Awards for Teaching Excellence are:
1. Biological sciences, Health and related studies
2. Early Career
3. Humanities and the Arts
4. Law, Economics, Business and related studies
5. Neville Bonner Award for Indigenous Education
6. Physical Sciences and related studies
7. Social and Behavioural
Preparing an application
1. Teaching Award Nomination Form
The Nomination Form reports administrative information, includes a declaration from the nominee and institution and acts as a cover sheet for the nomination.
The completed nomination must have all boxes ticked and be signed by the following:
2. Claims against Assessment Criteria
8 pages max.
This component describes the nominee’s teaching activities and achievements and must address all four assessment criteria, providing evidence to support claims. It is to be comprised of the following elements:
All nominations will be assessed on the evidence provided in response to the following four criteria which will be given equal consideration by the assessors:
1. Approaches to teaching and the support of learning that influence, motivate and inspire students to learn.
This may include:
2. Development of curricula, resources or services that reflect a command of the field.
This may include
3. Evaluation practices that bring about improvements in teaching and learning.
Evaluation comprises making judgements about the quality of programs and activities that are part of the academic, cultural and social experience of higher education. For the purposes of the AAUT application, evaluation practices so not include student assessment.
This may include:
4. Innovation, leadership or scholarship that has influenced and enhanced learning and teaching and/or the student experience.
This may include:
3. Curriculum Vitae (CV)
The curriculum vitae should outline the nominee’s educational qualifications, employment history, teaching positions and teaching experience.
For individual nominations the curriculum vitae should be no longer than three A4 pages.
For team nominations:
4. Statement of contribution
1 page max,. teams only
Team nominations must complete one A4 page that consists of the following:
Team nomination requirements are as follows:
5. Letters of reference
1 page each
Two letters of reference, of no more than one A4 page each, are to be provided by referees able to comment on the contribution to student learning against the assessment criteria. References should demonstrate familiarity with the contribution and context, providing endorsement of the claims and additional evidence relating to context, merit and impact on students. Where possible, at least one referee should be qualified to comment on the broader impact of program’s contribution based on relevant professional or personal expertise and standing.
6. Supporting materials
Supporting materials should illustrate and provide evidence of claims made against the selection criteria. Please do not include any additional information or use as an extension of the page limit.
Nominees can choose to submit up to two of the following supporting materials:
The relevance of all material must be made clear in the statement addressing the selection criteria. Supporting materials should be clearly titled and are the last component of the combined nomination file. Supporting materials (including websites) should remain accessible throughout the assessment process, beyond the submission date. Supporting materials should not require a login and password to access the material.
An up-to-date, formal digital photograph of the individual nominee or team (group photo) must be submitted with each nomination, in line with the following specifications:
If the nomination is successful, the submitted digital photographs will be used for publication purposes, including awards booklets, the Universities Australia website and other promotional materials. The photographs should therefore be of the best possible quality and include all members of a team nomination within the one photo.
Applications will be submitted to the Awards Portal by the AAUT Institutional Contact Officer between 2 - 13 September 2019.
Claims against Assessment Criteria
In addressing the four criteria, applicants are required to make a case that they have:
- Impacted on student learning, student engagement or the overall student experience for a period of no less than three years (two years for early career), not including time taken for development or trial of any activity.
- Gained recognition from colleagues, the institution, and/or the broader community.
- Shown creativity, imagination or innovation, irrespective of whether the approach involves traditional learning environments or technology-based developments.
- Drawn on the scholarly literature on teaching and learning to inform the development of initiatives, programs and/or practice.
This case needs to be strongly supported by a wide range of evidence in the form of qualitative and quantitative data. This may include: Formal and informal evaluation, student data, institutional student surveys, references and selected teaching materials. Refer to the Assessment Matrix below for how the evidence will be assessed.The AAUT assesses against these four criteria, scoring from 1 (poor) to 5 (outstanding) for each criteria.
This Assessment Matrix can be downloaded from the Documents panel.
ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE
A. Impact on student learning, student engagement or the overall student experience for a period of no less than three years
|1 Poor||Nomination does not demonstrate impact, or impact has not been sustained for three years or more.|
|2 Not Recommended||Influence is hard to ascertain from the limited evidence provided. A range of activities may be described but the impact on student learning is not clear. Application focuses on career longevity rather than sustainability of impact. Evaluation has been done but appears to have been ad-hoc. Reflection on evaluation results is minimal.|
|3 Recommended||Some connections drawn between activities and student outcomes. Evidence from several sources is provided to support claims of impact. Evaluation has been conducted regularly and several forms of evidence (e.g. both qualitative and quantitative) from more than one stakeholder group has been provided. Changes have been implemented as a result of evaluations.|
|4 Highly Recommended||Multiple forms of evidence from a range of sources and stakeholder groups is provided that clearly demonstrates impact on student learning. Evaluation has been done systematically. Multiple forms evidence has been provided from several stakeholder groups. Evaluation is reflected upon and changes implemented as a result are included in the nomination.|
|5 Outstanding||Outstanding connections drawn between the work and its influence on student learning. These are backed up by evidence from a wide range of sources that illustrate high levels of impact on student experiences, learning and graduate outcomes. Evaluation is clearly highly valued and an integral part of the nominee’s work and has been sustained over time. Evaluation is reflected upon and changes implemented as a result are a substantial feature of the nomination.|
ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE
B. Recognition gained from colleagues, the institution, and/or the broader community
|1 Poor||The nomination provides no evidence that the nominee has gained recognition.|
|2 Not Recommended||The nomination provides unreliable or weak evidence that the nominee has gained recognition.|
|3 Recommended||The nomination provides evidence from multiple stakeholders. Initiatives or has gained recognition from peers. Program or initiative may have been adopted by others within the department.|
|4 Highly Recommended||The nomination provides multiple forms of evidence that the program has gained widespread recognition throughout their institution and the local community. Program or initiative has been adopted across the institution|
|5 Outstanding||The nomination provides multiple forms of evidence from a range of stakeholders to back up claims of widespread recognition throughout the institution and the community across the state or nationally. Program or initiative has been adopted nationally or internationally|
ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE
C. Shown creativity, imagination or innovation.
|1 Poor||No evidence is provided that the nominee is doing anything different to others in their field|
|2 Not Recommended||Weak or unreliable evidence to show that the nominee implements new initiatives. Context is not explicitly considered|
|3 Recommended||A range of evidence to show that the nominee trials and implements new initiatives or combines existing approaches in different ways. The innovations are generally appropriate for the context in which they are being applied|
|4 Highly Recommended||Broad range of evidence to show that the nominee has trialled and implemented new initiatives or combined existing approaches in different ways. The innovations are appropriate for the context in which they are being applied.|
|5 Outstanding||Very broad range of evidence to show that the nominee has trialled and implemented new initiatives or combined existing approaches in different ways. The innovations are appropriate for, and novel to, the context in which they are being applied. A wide range of evidence is provided to illustrate impact on student learning.|
ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE
D. Drawn on the scholarly literature on teaching and learning to inform the development of initiatives, programs and/or practice.
|1 Poor||Nomination does not refer to scholarly literature of teaching and learning|
|2 Not Recommended||Nomination refers to some scholarly literature of teaching and learning but it is limited and not well connected to practice|
|3 Recommended||Nomination refers to a range of scholarly literature. Connections are articulated to the applicant’s philosophy and practice|
|4 Highly Recommended||Nomination refers to a broad range of scholarly literature of teaching and learning. Connections to the applicant’s philosophy and practice are clearly articulated.|
|5 Outstanding||Nomination shows deep understanding of a broad range of scholarly literature of teaching and learning. Connections to the applicant’s philosophy and practice are clearly articulated. Applicant actively contributes to the scholarship of teaching and learning|
The Award monies are granted and disbursed to the recipient’s institution to be spent within three years to:
- provide resources to support the award recipient’s teaching or activities related to the award
- assist the individual or team to disseminate and embed good practice in learning and teaching within their institution and across the sector more broadly.
The award money is intended to be used to build on the success of the work that the recipient has been recognised for. The expenditure should contribute to improving the teaching and learning outcomes in Australian higher education.