Fellowship Programme 2023 Selection Criteria

Scoring of Candidates

The Online Selection Day is a full day of group activities where candidates will be assessed on how they contribute to a session (collaboration and communication skills), and what they contribute to a session (discussion or event planning contributions), which will be scored on a scale from POOR (1 point) to EXCELLENT (5 points). The scores and their associated points (including intermediate points) are:

Discussion Session (35%)

During the Discussion Session, candidates will be assigned into breakout groups and asked to decide on a topic for discussion, have the discussion, and then compose a short summary and skeleton of a speed blog post based on their discussion (they are not expected to write a full blog post during the session). During this session, reviewers will assess candidates on A) collaboration and communication and B) discussion contributions on a scale from POOR (1 point) to EXCELLENT (5 points), where:

A. Collaboration and communication

(How they contribute to the session)

• EXCELLENT (5 points) = they demonstrate excellent collaboration and communication skills, for example they
  • Demonstrate inclusive leadership and help find ways for everyone to contribute. 
    • If they are the Chair, they should be leading this and inspiring group work. 
    • If they are the Scribe, they should ensure that they are still an active participant of the conversation and not solely listening and taking notes.
  • Encourage and support others in the group.
  • Are patient and active listeners, and do not repeatedly interrupt, speak over others, or dominate the conversation.
  • Are welcome and respectful of different ideas, experiences and points of view.
  • Are careful with the use of jargon and explain their ideas in ways that others can understand.
  • Are highly motivated and enthusiastic about working and collaborating with others.
  • Demonstrate awareness of the power dynamics/privilege and contribute their fair share to the discussion (i.e. if there are 5 people in the group, they contribute to roughly ⅕ of the discussion). 
     
• POOR (1 point) = they demonstrate poor collaboration and communication skills, for example they 
  • Do not demonstrate inclusive leadership because they do not help to find ways for everyone to contribute.
    • If they are the Chair, they do not actively encourage contributions from everyone.
    • If they are the Scribe, they do not actively participate in the conversation because they are solely listening and taking notes.
  • They do not actively encourage or support others in the group.
  • Are a poor listener, and repeatedly interrupt or speak over others.
  • Are not respectful of different ideas, experiences and points of view.
  • Use a lot of jargon and do not explain their ideas in ways that others can understand.
  • Contribute significantly more or less than their fair share to the discussion, i.e. they
    • Are unaware of the power dynamics/privilege and dominate the discussion, OR 
    • Do not seem interested in working or collaborating with the others in the group, are disengaged/distracted, or do not make many contributions to the conversation.

B. Discussion contributions

(What they contribute to the session)

• EXCELLENT (5 points) = they make excellent contributions to the discussion, for example they 
  • Demonstrate an understanding of the bigger picture and vision for improving computational practice through their participation in the discussion.
  • Make key contributions towards selecting and/or defining the discussion topic. 
  • Make key contributions to the discussion through exploration of the topic, sharing their views on the topic, or asking questions if it is not a topic they are very familiar with.
  • Help produce the summary and/or skeleton of the speed blog.
     
• POOR (1 point) = they make poor contributions to the discussion, for example they 
  • Do not demonstrate an understanding of the bigger picture or vision for improving computational practice through their participation in the discussion.
  • Do not contribute towards selecting and/or defining the discussion topic. 
  • Do not contribute to the discussion through exploration of the topic, sharing their views on the topic, or asking questions if it is not a topic they are very familiar with.
  • Do not help produce the summary and/or skeleton of the speed blog.

Event Planning Session (35%)

During the Event Planning Session, candidates will be assigned into breakout groups and asked to plan a half-day event, including defining the goals, target audience, and activities of the event and producing some resources such as an agenda, event advertisement, and statement on what happens next. During this session, reviewers will assess candidates on C) collaboration and communication and D) event planning skills on a scale from POOR (1 point) to EXCELLENT (5 points), where:

C. Collaboration and communication

(How they contribute to the session - same criteria as in the Discussion Session, copied here for convenience)

• EXCELLENT (5 points) = they demonstrate excellent collaboration and communication skills, for example they
  • Demonstrate inclusive leadership and help find ways for everyone to contribute. 
    • If they are the Chair, they should be leading this and inspiring group work. 
    • If they are the Scribe, they should ensure that they are still an active participant of the conversation and not solely listening and taking notes.
  • Encourage and support others in the group.
  • Are patient and active listeners, and do not repeatedly interrupt, speak over others, or dominate the conversation.
  • Are welcome and respectful of different ideas, experiences and points of view.
  • Are careful with the use of jargon and explain their ideas in ways that others can understand.
  • Are highly motivated and enthusiastic about working and collaborating with others.
  • Demonstrate awareness of the power dynamics/privilege and contribute their fair share to the discussion (i.e. if there are 5 people in the group, they contribute to roughly ⅕ of the discussion). 
     
• POOR (1 point) = they demonstrate poor collaboration and communication skills, for example they 
  • Do not demonstrate inclusive leadership because they do not help to find ways for everyone to contribute.
    • If they are the Chair, they do not actively encourage contributions from everyone.
    • If they are the Scribe, they do not actively participate in the conversation because they are solely listening and taking notes.
  • They do not actively encourage or support others in the group.
  • Are a poor listener, and repeatedly interrupt or speak over others.
  • Are not respectful of different ideas, experiences and points of view.
  • Use a lot of jargon and do not explain their ideas in ways that others can understand.
  • Contribute significantly more or less than their fair share to the discussion, i.e. they
    • Are unaware of the power dynamics/privilege and dominate the discussion, OR 
    • Do not seem interested in working or collaborating with the others in the group, are disengaged/distracted, or do not make many contributions to the conversation.

D. Event planning skills

(What they contribute to the session)

• EXCELLENT (5 points) = they demonstrate excellent event planning skills, for example they 
  • Demonstrate an understanding of the bigger picture and vision for improving computational practice through the event.
  • Make key contributions towards defining the goals and target audience of the event. 
  • Make key contributions towards the design of the event (such as the sessions/activities, agenda, format, etc.).
  • Make key contributions towards the accessibility and inclusivity of the event (such as suggesting a code of conduct, transcription/captioning, financial assistance, diversity of speakers, etc.). 
  • Help produce the requested resources (such as helping to write up the agenda, workshop advertisement, or statement on what happens next).
     
• POOR (1 point) = they demonstrate poor event planning skills, for example they 
  • Do not demonstrate an understanding of the bigger picture or vision for improving computational practice through the event.
  • Do not contribute towards defining the target audience and goals of the event. 
  • Do not contribute towards the design of the event (such as the sessions/activities, agenda, format, etc.).
  • Do not contribute towards the accessibility and inclusivity of the event (such as suggesting a code of conduct, transcription/captioning, financial assistance, diversity of speakers, etc.). 
  • Do not help produce the requested resources (such as helping to write up the agenda, workshop advertisement, or statement on what happens next).

Fellowship Plans (30%)

The remaining 30% of the candidate’s Selection Score will come from their Fellowship Plans score during Shortlisting.

Back to the Apply to the Fellowship Programme 2023 page