Hi Kristin et al.,

I’m confused/fuzzy on the nomination process for the Wright Award. I know that students are eligible for this after they’ve completed their 4^th practicum. But given that these are senior students shouldn’t the nominations come from external practicum supervisors?

Re the Walker award, I’m happy to review papers and I agree that a new evaluation approach is needed. The criteria you outlined below look great, although the problem with the rating out of 5 is that there is normally very little variance with scores typically ranging from 4-5. One solution to this would be to use a rating scale with meaningful rating points, such as this SSHRC system:

Another option, that I think we should consider because it’s the easiest logistically, would be to have a subset of us (or all faculty members in our area?) read and rank order all of the papers based on the criteria you’ve outlined, with the award going to the student with the lowest averaged rank. We normally only have a handful of papers, so this shouldn’t take long to do.

Take care,

Corey

From: Kristin Reynolds <Kristin.Reynolds@umanitoba.ca>
Date: Wednesday, April 30, 2025 at 8:00 AM
To: arts-psych-clinical-academics@lists.umanitoba.ca <arts-psych-clinical-academics@lists.umanitoba.ca>
Subject: [Arts-Psych-Clinical-Academics] Clinical Awards

Dear Clinical Colleagues:

I am writing to gently nudge the May 2^nd deadline for the John R. Walker Research Award and the Marion & Morgan Wright Clinical Award. Please encourage your students to apply for the research award, and please consider nominating a student for the clinical award.

I am wondering if there are any volunteers to review applications for the John R. Walker Research Award. So far, we have received 1 application, but there is lots of time, it is only April 30^th 🙂.

In past years, we have had 2 faculty members review each application and score according to the attached framework.

Last year, during our deliberation meeting for the Walker Award, we decided that a more open approach, and one focused on the quality of the paper submitted, would be more fruitful and appropriate given the range of methodologies that students are applying in their work.

As such, I wonder about using the following for the 2025 evaluation:

(a) scientific achievement (first authorship on a peer reviewed journal article, book chapter, or conference presentation) in the previous calendar year (2024) /5

(b) original/innovative/significant to the field of clinical psychology /5

(d) quality of writing /5

(e) evidence of scholarly achievement (a minimum GPA of 3.5) /5

Comments: (space to document considerations regarding the submission)

Total /25

Please let me know what you think of the revised framework for evaluation presented above, as well as your interest in volunteering to evaluate.

Thank you for considering, and all the best,

Kristin

Kristin Reynolds, Ph.D., C. Psych.

Pronouns: She/Her

Associate Professor and Director of Clinical Training, Department of Psychology

Adjunct Professor, Department of Psychiatry

Research Affiliate, Centre on Aging

Scientist, Children's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba

Director, Health Information Exchange Lab: https://healthinfoexchangelab.ca/

P516 Duff Roblin Building, 190 Dysart Road

University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, R3T 2N2

Email: Kristin.Reynolds@umanitoba.ca

Phone: (204) 474-8260

The University of Manitoba campuses are located on original lands of Anishinaabeg, Ininewuk, Anisininewuk, Dakota Oyate and Denesuline, and on the National Homeland of the Red River Métis.

We respect the Treaties that were made on these territories, we acknowledge the harms and mistakes of the past, and we dedicate ourselves to move forward in partnership with Indigenous communities in a spirit of Reconciliation and collaboration.