Honors And Awards

Fellows Task Force Report

1. Should additional Fellows’ nominating bodies be established by ASLA?
2. Should the nomination criteria and /or submittal requirements for Fellow modified in any way?

HIGHLIGHTS

Should additional Fellows’ nominating bodies be established by ASLA?

• The existing system of nomination to Fellow – by a Chapter, by the ExCom of the Council of Fellows, and by the ExCom of ASLA - is  appropriate and sufficient
• The existing system of nomination to Fellow – by a Chapter, by the ExCom of the Council of Fellows, and by the ExCom of ASLA - is  appropriate and sufficient
• More effective dissemination of information on the nomination process was desirable
• Existing nomination criteria and submittal requirements were appropriate, although they recommended that minor modifications be considered
• Efforts should be made to eliminate the perceived prominence of the category under which a nominee is elected; categories are necessary for the evaluation process, but all subsequent aspects related to selection should remain void of any reference to the category of election
• Current nomination process has yielded significant classes annually, hovering in the fifty percent election range.

Task Force concluded that:

• A lack of understanding of the nomination process exists;
• A misunderstanding of the means of nominating candidates for Fellow exists;
• Misconceptions of the complexity of the nomination process exist
• Lack of uniformity in nominating criteria among Chapters adds to the confusion and variability of the process

Recommendations:

• ASLA Chapters and their Members need to be better informed about the process of nominating candidates for Fellow, as established and codified in the ASLA By-Laws.
• More outreach and marketing should be done on the proper process of and criteria for nomination
• Additional criteria at the Chapter level should be eliminated

Should the nomination criteria and/or submittal requirements for Fellow be modified in any way?

• Task Force considered specific concerns put forth by a chapter after the 2005 nomination process that included: lack of balance in, each Class among the nomination categories not reflecting the percentage of landscape architects within each category; process of switching a candidate from one category to another seems capricious and not justifiable; submission package is confusing and difficult to understand; not clear what the contents of the submission package should include or what inclusions would be most beneficial in successfully describing the accomplishments of the candidate to the jury; categories for nomination to Fellow are not all encompassing of the profession; and, feedback to unsuccessful nominees on why the nominationwas not accepted is poor and usually unhelpful to the nominators or the candidate in understanding how to improve future nomination.

Specific actions taken include:

1. The complete streamlining of the Fellows nomination guidelines and submittal instructions from thirty-two, redundant, repetitive and sometimes-contradictory pages, to a concise presentation on the current ASLA webpage.
2. A complete redesign and revamping of the Council of Fellows website, including
   • Listing current Executive Committee officers;
   • Highlighting the Council of Fellows Rules of Conduct, and operations;
   • Examples of successful nomination packages from the previous cycle;
   • Access to downloadable documents and forms of all necessary materials for submission;
   • Establishment of a process for electronic submissions;
   • Posting of names of current Fellows Jurors prominently on the website; and
   • Establishing a Fellows email format that is constantly monitored by staff.
3. Feature articles in LAND Online with immediate email communications labeled “Business Updates to all Fellows from the Council of Fellows Chair”.
4. Personalized letters with specific instructions to those nominees who were not elected, with recommendations for improving their respective submissions.
5. Maintenance of files and records on all unsuccessful submissions, and copies of all communication related thereto.
6. Establishment of an ad hoc advisory panel of past Fellows Jurors to assist with preparation of packets.
7. Detailed research on the standards of parallel design professions (AIA, APA, and AICP) and several engineering organizations in the processes of how these entities nominate and elect their Fellows.
8. Working actively – especially with the ASLA Honors and Awards Committee – in the identification of noteworthy ASLA members that are not active in Chapters, in order to facilitate their nomination.
9. Coding all active and current Fellows on the ASLA database for historical records, identifying year of nomination and election, and to complement the Jot Carpenter biographical database.