CBE Award for Excellence in Research Supervision


  1. Nominees must have been engaged in a supervisory role in the ANU College of Business and Economics for at least 3 years (non-sequential) immediately preceding the closing date for nominations.
  2. Nominations must predominantly relate to research supervision at the ANU.
  3. Both individual and team nominations are encouraged.
  4. Previously unsuccessful nominees are eligible for renomination.
  5. Recipients of CBE or VC Awards for Excellence in Supervision are ineligible for renomination within 3 years unless they are a member of a team and not the lead applicant, and the team nomination does not substantially replicate the original award.

Early Career category

  1. Nominees with no more than 5 years' experience teaching in higher education institutions may apply for an Early Career (EC) category of the Award for Excellence in Supervision. The 5 years can be non-sequential and must be counted on a semester basis. The Awards Committee will consider the career stage of nominees when assessing assessment criteria.
  2. Nominees for the Early Career category must have been employed and engaged in a supervisory roles in CBE for at least 1 year.
  3. Recipients of a CBE or VC Award for Excellence in Supervision (Early Career) are ineligible for renomination within 3 years after receiving the EC award.

Selection Criteria

The core element of an application is a written statement in which nominees describe their supervisory practices and achievements, highlighting that which is unique, distinctive and outstanding, and specifically addresses each of the five assessment criteria.

1.  Advancing students as researchers through developing their intellectual rigour and disciplinary expertise, and instilling ethical and responsible research practices.

Evidence supporting Criterion 1 may include:

  • development of a research program that attracts and maintains high quality candidates, while appropriately reflecting equity and diversity concerns,
  • a record of students attending, and being involved in, disciplinary seminars and other relevant activities,
  • encouraging and assisting candidates with publication during their period of study,
  • development of independent, ethical researchers, as evidenced by an outstanding record of research practice that demonstrates strong adherence to the highest ethical standards,
  • ensuring that students access appropriate research education opportunities ranging from workshops on the concept of research, through to using data sources.

While many of these features might be expected of all research supervisions, the focus in the submission should be on evidence-based appraisal of this area that is consistent with outstanding performance.

2.  An outstanding sustained record of supervisory practices that have resulted in successful completions, significant research outputs and excellent graduation outcomes for students.

Evidence supporting Criterion 2 may include:

  • evidence of outcomes of research supervision at a minimum including numbers of supervisions (of each kind) supplemented by a record of achievement using examples from the points below (sheer number of completions is not sufficient on its own),
  • completion rates, timely completions or completions in spite of difficulties arising within the degree, meeting of milestones,
  • progression to academic or research careers for completed students,
  • other employment outcomes for completed students,
  • external measures of successful research outcomes from the supervised research (e.g. publications, quality of journal, published books, conference presentations/invitations, competitive research funding, funded Fellowships)
  • specific examples of: students who have progressed particularly well after completion,
  • students with whom fruitful research collaborations have continued, and objective measures of success for those research collaborations (e.g. journal quality, citations, invitations to major conferences, etc.)

While there is a “data gathering” element to this criterion in terms of listing notable evidence of supervision outcomes, reflection on these outcomes is also useful. Note that accumulation of successful completions does not, on its own, warrant strong consideration for award – evidence of outstanding practice leading to positive outcomes is what is needed.

3.  Outstanding modelling of the research process for students, including supporting students in choosing a research topic; setting and maintaining clear mutual expectations between student and supervisor; providing timely, constructive, clear and actionable feedback; and nurturing progress through research milestones including processes of completion, publication and research dissemination.

Evidence supporting Criterion 3 may include:

  • provision of resources, necessary coursework if required, and research plan design,
  • developing students’ theoretical, analytical and methodological skills appropriate to the discipline,
  • assisting candidates in the development of research, writing and communication skills, particularly through providing appropriate resources/access to relevant training opportunities,
  • monitoring student progress e.g. through regular meetings, annual reviews and plans, with particular focus to the meeting of “milestone” events during a student’s candidature,
  • constructive and timely comment on written work e.g. chapter drafts, early literature work, papers,
  • journal manuscripts and structure of the dissertation including specific advice where required,
  • constructive and timely feedback on candidate presentations e.g. proposal seminar, conference papers,
  • selection of appropriate examiners and support for students during and following the examination process,
  • particularly useful are testimonials from past students related to the broad engagement of supervision that reflects the diverse needs of students.

Also included in this criterion is a focus on respect for research students as individuals, evidence for which may include:

  • clear setting and clarification of mutual expectations within the supervisor-student relationship,
  • engagement with supervision panels to provide broad-based advice to students,
  • flexible approaches to supervision that reflect sensitivity to the diverse needs of students, including those from equity groups,
  • effective mentoring of students on career development and enhancement.

4.  Providing and supporting engagement between students and broad scholarly communities through networking and research dissemination opportunities.

Evidence supporting Criterion 4 may include:

  • evidence of modelling a scholarly approach to research in a global context which recognises the complexity and challenges research candidature in contemporary academic contexts;
  • encouragement and support for students to access a range of research scholars and projects nationally and internationally, providing opportunities for students to work within an international context through exchanges, meetings, and collaborative work;
  • facilitation of student networking with other national and international researcher colleagues, appropriately evidenced by student engagement at conferences and other networking opportunities;
  • provision of career support and opportunities at a national and international level, leadership of, or contribution to, an effective supervisory panel;
  • facilitating the construction of a well-balanced panel, including working effectively with other panel members;
  • encouragement to students to effectively utilise supervisory panel members including encouraging students to take advantage of the particular strengths of other members of the panel;
  • specific research outcomes for the student involved, such as invited presentations at international conferences;
  • publications in high-quality, peer-reviewed journals;
  • academic reputation/position of past completed students.

5.  A systematic and scholarly approach to professional development of supervisory academic practice and skills in disciplinary or interdisciplinary settings, including evidence-informed evaluation of professional practice in supervision, and leadership in supervision practice.

Evidence supporting Criterion 5 may include:

  • evidence of advanced skills in evaluation and reflective practice;
  • participating in and contributing to professional activities related to research supervision;
  • coordination, management and leadership roles in relation to research supervisions;
  • conducting and publishing research related to research supervision;
  • leadership through activities that have broad influence on the profession, department, school and research candidates;
  • contribution to relevant policy development at College, University, or even sector level.


Nominations can be submitted here. Nominations close 9am Tuesday 31 October 2023.


In assessing nominations against the five criteria, the assessment panel will take into account:

  • The extent of creativity, imagination or innovation, irrespective of whether the approach involves traditional learning environments or technology-based developments;
  • The information contained in evaluations, references and the description of supervisory practice submitted by the nominee; (The Committee may contact nominees and/or referees for clarification or further information)
  • A sustained contribution to Supervision in CBE of at least three years duration. Contributions are assessed relative to the period of contribution, so duration is not a criterion, per se, provided it is a minimum of three years. (One year for the Early Career category.)


Awardees will each receive A$1,000 to use in funding their university activities or professional development. Funds will be available for use until the end of 2024.

Application portfolio


Applications are to be submitted to edtech.cbe@anu.edu.au by: 5pm, 31 January 2024 . 

Application components

Application portfolio


Applications are to be submitted to edtech.cbe@anu.edu.au by: 5pm, 31 January 2024 . 

Application components

1. Application cover sheet
2. Written statement: Synopsis, Overview, Statement addressing assessment criteria (4-6 pages).  Do not include a contents page 
3. Curriculum vitae: 3 pages maximum
4. Supporting materials: student evaluations (if available), testimonials from students, website, media files, or teaching material (maximum 10 pages)