SRUCSA Awards 2022 Report
Nominations for the 2021 SRUCSA Awards were open Monday 18th April to Sunday 1st May via Microsoft Forms. Students were invited to take part by email and the awards were also promoted via social media channels.
The awards categories were as follows:
- Staff Member of the Year x6 (one award per campus)
- Student of the Year x6 (one award per campus)
- Supervisor of the Year x1 (SRUC wide)
- Club/Society/Student Group of the Year x1 (SRUC wide)
- Innovative Teaching x1 (SRUC wide – new for this year!)
- SRUCSA Recognition Award x1 (SRUC wide – new for this year!)
A total of 120 student submissions were made across the categories. This is a huge increase from the previous year where we had 28 student submissions.
The results were collated and the final results were decided by the following:
- Judging Panel consisting of 1 staff member and 1 student from each faculty
- Staff Member of the Year x6 (one award per campus)
- Student of the Year x6 (one award per campus)
- Class Representatives
- Club/Society/Student Group of the Year x1 (SRUC wide)
- Innovative Teaching x1 (SRUC wide – new for this year!)
- SRUCSA Team
- SRUCSA Recognition Award
- Supervisor of the Year (this was originally to be decided the judging panel, however, an error was made in sending the information to the panel which meant it wasn’t included, therefore, SRUCSA decided the winner for this award)
Those involved in judging were provided with an “Awards Pack” containing nominee names, the number of nominations they received, whether they had been nominated for more than 1 award, and supporting comments from students for each category. Taking this into consideration, judges were asked to “rank” the nominees in their order of preference, again, using Microsoft Forms.
The staff member invited to judge was as non-staff-facing as possible and 11 Class Reps took part in the voting.
Thank you very much to Bridgit, Liam, Davina and Madeleine (our judging panel), and the 11 Class Reps, for taking on the very difficult task of narrowing down the nominees to winners.
All nominees and award winners will be sent their certificates and student comments via email, and were offered to have a printed version delivered to their preferred address. Thank you very much to Cathi for helping with the admin of sending staff and students their digital certificates.
Results
Below are the results for each award category. Staff members with * marked next to their name were also nominated for the Online Teaching Excellence award. Winners are highlighted in yellow.
| Staff Member of the Year | Number of nominees | Winner |
| Edinburgh | 10 | Ruth Vichos |
| Oatridge | 7 | Grant Skillen |
| Ayr | 2 | William MacKay |
| Barony | 15 | Hazel Highet |
| Aberdeen | 14 | Fiona Rock |
| Elmwood | 5 | Jane More |
| Student of the Year | ||
| Edinburgh | 6 | Sarah Powell |
| Oatridge | 3 | Emma Veitch |
| Ayr | 2 | Deborah Dawkins |
| Barony | 13 | Holly Forsyth |
| Aberdeen | 7 | Liam Beveridge |
| Elmwood | 1 | Charlie Dixon |
| Distance Learning | 1 | Claire Williams |
| Club/Society/Student Group of the Year | 4 | Lend a Paw |
| Innovative Teaching | 21 | Jane More |
| Supervisor of the Year | 7 | Anna Sinclair |
Staff Member of the Year
Edinburgh
Total number of nominees: 10
| Staff Member Name | Number of Nominations |
| Carol Thompson | 2 |
| Christine Harris | 1 |
| Andrew Innes | 1 |
| Ruth Vichos** (WINNER) | 5 |
| Craig Davidson** | 2 |
| Louise Mitchell* | 1 |
| Les Ashley* | 2 |
| Laura McGowan | 1 |
| Gerhard Griesel | 1 |
| Sheila Davidson | 1 |
Oatridge
Total number of nominees: 7
| Staff Member Name | Number of Nominations |
| Helen Heggie | 1 |
| Lana Barclay | 1 |
| Janet Hiddleston | 1 |
| Ignacio Sepulveda* | 1 |
| Isla Brown | 1 |
| Grant Skillen (WINNER) | 2 |
| Nicola Forrest* | 1 |
Ayr
Total number of nominees: 2
| Staff Member Name | Number of Nominations |
| Joy Kendal* | 2 |
| William MacKay** (WINNER) | 3 |
Barony
Total number of nominees: 15
| Staff Member Name | Number of Nominations |
| Lindsey Ferguson* | 1 |
| Claire Hodgkins | 1 |
| Wallace Currie* | 2 |
| Marianne Moore | 2 |
| Hazel Highet* (WINNER) | 6 |
| Nicola Porter | 5 |
| Mia Aitchison | 1 |
| Lucy Thornton | 1 |
| Abbie Barnes | 2 |
| Suzanne Kelly* | 5 |
| Karen Gray | 1 |
| Sharron Perkins | 1 |
| Gemma Higgins | 1 |
| Caroline Whitfield | 1 |
| Ruth Tudor | 1 |
Aberdeen
Total number of nominees: 14
| Staff Member Name | Number of Nominations |
| Brenda Nicol | 5 |
| Colin Hardacre | 2 |
| Phil Wrigglesworth | 1 |
| Hannah Scorgie | 1 |
| Katie Rudd* | 3 |
| Anna Sinclair* | 1 |
| Fiona Rock* (WINNER) | 5 |
| Nick Littlewood | 2 |
| Kate Wrigglesworth* | 1 |
| Amy Ronald | 1 |
| Janet Litten | 3 |
| Amy Gray* | 1 |
| Amy Duncan | 2 |
| Andrew Martin | 1 |
Elmwood
Total number of nominees: 5
| Staff Member Name | Number of Nominations |
| Jane More*(WINNER) | 5 |
| Carol Abbott | 1 |
| Fraser Hutchison | 1 |
| Thomas Malone | 1 |
| Andrew O’Hara | 1 |
Student of the Year
Edinburgh
Total number of nominees: 6
| Student Name | Number of Nominations |
| Angus Weir | 3 |
| Ashley Cockin | 1 |
| Liam Thorpe | 3 |
| Jamie McCulloch | 1 |
| Hannah Edgar | 1 |
| Sarah Powell (WINNER) | 1 |
Oatridge
Total number of nominees: 3
| Student Name | Number of Nominations |
| Emma Fenton | 1 |
| Emma Veitch (WINNER) | 1 |
| Marc MacPhadraig | 1 |
Ayr
Total number of nominees: 2
| Student Name | Number of Nominations |
| Kenneth Millar | 1 |
| Deborah Dawkins (WINNER) | 1 |
Barony
Total number of nominees: 13
| Student Name | Number of Nominations |
| Nelli Kuzina | 1 |
| Natalie Day | 1 |
| Emma Clark | 1 |
| Katie Smithers | 1 |
| Lindsay Waugh | 1 |
| Sophie McKain | 1 |
| Emma Mackay | 1 |
| Amy Colliar | 1 |
| Tanee Manousos | 1 |
| Sian Whitton | 1 |
| Holly Forsyth (WINNER) | 1 |
| Erin Johnstone | 1 |
| Katie Paas | 1 |
Aberdeen
Total number of nominees: 7
| Student | Number of Nominations |
| Charlotte Tomlinson | 1 |
| Liam Beveridge (WINNER) |
2 |
| Megan Jiggens | 1 |
| Nadia Bailey | 1 |
| Emma Clark | 1 |
| Helen Cowie | 1 |
| Emma Thomson | 1 |
Elmwood
Total number of nominees: 1
| Student | Number of Nominations |
| Charlie Dixon (WINNER) | 2 |
Distance Learning
Total number of nominees: 1
| Student | Number of Nominations |
| Claire Williams (WINNER) | 1 |
Innovative Teaching
Total number of nominations: 21
| Teaching Staff Member | Number of Nominations |
| Naomi Fox | 1 |
| Wallace Currie* | 1 |
| Leanne Lindsay | 1 |
| William MacKay** | 1 |
| Katie Rudd* | 1 |
| Jane More* (WINNER) | 1 |
| Louise Mitchell* | 2 |
| Ruth Vichos** | 5 |
| Nicola Forrest* | 1 |
| Lindsey Ferguson* | 1 |
| Suzanne Kelly* | 1 |
| Craig Davidson** | 1 |
| Hazel Highet* | 1 |
| Ignacio Sepulveda* | 1 |
| Amy Gray* | 2 |
| Fiona Rock* | 1 |
| Kate Wrigglesworth* | 1 |
| Les Ashley* | 1 |
| Graeme Macdowell | 1 |
| Joy Kendal* | 1 |
| David Nasseri | 1 |
Student Group of the Year
Total number of nominees: 4
| Club/Society | Number of Nominations | Captain/Pres/Chair |
| Lend a Paw (WINNER) | 5 | Lynn McLachlan (Oatridge)
Aimee Stephen (Aberdeen) Charlie Dixon (Elmwood) Leah Greave (DL/Barony) Zoe Bruce (Barony) |
| Get Active | 1 | Kenny Millar |
| ORCS | 3 | Andrew Beverley |
| Suture Self | 1 | Sian Whitton, Katie-Marie Paas |
SRUCSA Recognition Award
3 Staff Groups nominated
| Staff group | Reasons for nominating |
| Campus and Estates Team (WINNER) | For support, encouragement and co-operation in SRUCSA’s Gender Based Violence project 2021-2022 |
| Jamie Newbold and Wayne Powell | For continued commitment to supporting the work of SRUCSA, hearing and actioning the student voice, and for valuing the SRUCSA-SRUC relationship |
| Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Committee | For supporting SRUCSA’s Gender Based Violence project 2021-2022 |
3 Students nominated
| Student | Reasons for nominating |
| Andrew Beverley (WINNER) | For outstanding commitment and efforts to create and sustain a student-led group, Oatridge Rangers and Countryside Stewards, which sought to fill a gap in the educational experience of students at SRUC, particularly those aiming for a career in conversation whereby volunteering skills are often required to get started in the industry |
| Fi Brown | For promoting mental health awareness through the SRUCSA Green Health Week project 2021-2022 and for engaging as SRUCSA’s
Students with Disabilities Liberation Officer 2021-2022 |
| Damson Ellen | For engaging in the work of SRUCSA in the 2021-2022 Academic Year |
Ways to improve for future
SRUCSA are always looking to improve our ways of working and projects. Below are some suggestions we received from staff and students, and our own reflections on how to run the awards even better for 2023.
Overall planning
- We factored in “wiggle room” this year so that we could move the awards slightly later if we needed.
- The Awards was “sandwiched” between two other major projects which affected the time that could be dedicated to it – the elections and Green Health Week. This impacted the judging and resulting periods in particular. The team have since reflected and feel May (in general) should be a quieter month for SRUCSA as it is the month that precedes the new team joining SRUCSA, the handover period, the SRUCSA AGM and is when the current Co-Presidents will be spending time wrapping up their projects.
- We approached one round of panel judges but didn’t hear back. Although we had a list of staff and students we wanted to invite, we could have approached the second round of judges sooner.
- The turnaround of the Awards was also affected by staffing changes – one of the co-presidents leading on the awards moved to part-time (due to transitioning into a new role within SRUC). This impacted the time available to work on the Awards.
Survey platform/judging
- We used Microsoft Forms for students to both submit nominations and for judges/reps to decide winners. Microsoft forms is attractive and allows for personalising the survey. We previously used Survey Monkey, however, the subscription plans for this service changed and we could no longer justify the subscription required as we don’t use Survey Monkey often.
- A drawback of Microsoft Forms was our ability to “rank” the nominees when judging. This was limited to 10 nominees, where some categories had much more (e.g. Innovative Teaching which had 22 nominees). This required the SRUCSA team short-listing the larger categories to 10 nominees. We should reconsider how we ask judges to vote for next year.
- We also made an error and didn’t send the information to the judges for one category. Triple checking would have avoided this, but the team was already under lots of pressure for other projects.
Awarding nominees
- We often get staff/students wondering if it they received the nominee email in an error and its maybe the way we format/send the emails. All the nominees are for each category are sent the same email (so not addressed by name) and bcc’d in (so you don’t see the other recipients) and it’s really just to avoid “reply all” which tends to happen every now and then. We’re always keen to improve on our projects so maybe we will add a wee statement next year to say the email is intended
- Asking nominees to submit their address via Microsoft Form (rather than email) meant we missed out on some of the responses we got in the previous year (lots of nominees responded with lovely messages in response to the news alongside their address). This was significantly less this year.
- Asking nominees to submit their address via Microsoft Form made collating addresses much easier as it did not require trolling through lots of email threads.
- Populating 120 individual certificates takes a lot of time that could be spent on other things. Finding a way to automate this would be really helpful.
- As with sending digital copies of certificates. Getting some support with this from Cathi at CELT really helped with this. We considered asking nominees to download their certificate from a dropbox but we felt this was too impersonal.
- Approximately 50 nominees requested physical certificates. This meant additional time spent sending the certificates for printing and then packaging. It is a really nice thing to be able to offer nominees and winners, however, we may consider not offering this in future due to the time burden associated.
Post-awards
- We would really love to be able to do more of a social media campaign around the lead up to and after the awards. Due to the reasons listed above (mostly time constraints) this hasn’t been possible. Automating some of the Awards processes and reducing admin burden would help with this.
- It would also be wonderful to host an Awards Night – this is something that could be considered for the future as a way of recognising both the award nominees and winners and the students/staff/class reps who work with SRUCSA all year round.