Diversity strengthens the prizes by ensuring the broadest possible pool of candidates is considered for recognition.
The members of the independent Science Prize Committee, Teaching Prize Committee and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Knowledge Systems Committee share responsibility for upholding the Australian Government’s commitment to diversity, equity and representation throughout the assessment.
Excellence and merit
The prizes recognise achievement in scientific research, research-based innovation, the practice of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledge systems and excellence in science teaching.
All nominations will be assessed on merit against the published selection criteria.
Equitable access and diverse participation
The department will seek to minimise barriers to participation and encourage nominations that reflect the breadth and diversity of Australia, helping to ensure all Australians have the opportunity to be recognised and that the prizes celebrate the very best Australian talent, including women and others whose contributions may be underrepresented.
This includes diversity of gender, cultural background, career stage, discipline, sector and geographic location.
Communication and outreach activities by the department will support awareness of the prizes and encourage participation from a broad range of eligible individuals, teams or community groups.
Fair, consistent and evidence-based assessment
Nomination assessment will be conducted fairly, consistently and transparently, with measures in place to support impartial decision-making and minimise bias.
The committee members will:
- assess nominations solely on the evidence and information contained in the nomination
- apply the published assessment criteria consistently across all nominations
- record clear reasons for assessments and recommendations, which are linked to the assessment criteria and supporting evidence, in the documentation provided, and submit them by the specified deadlines
- undertake unconscious bias training and actively consider the influence of bias throughout the assessment.
Committee members are expected to actively manage the influence of unconscious bias throughout the assessment, including by undertaking unconscious bias training. This supports a fair, objective and consistent approach to assessing nominations.
Before starting assessments, the committee, led by the Chair, will establish a shared understanding of the eligibility and assessment criteria set out in the grant opportunity guidelines to support their consistent application throughout the process.
Committee members are expected to remain vigilant to potential biases, including unconscious biases, and actively mitigate their influence to ensure assessment outcomes are fair, evidence-based and aligned with the published criteria.
Diverse assessment perspectives
Committees will include diverse expertise, experience and perspectives to support robust decision-making, ensure consideration of a broad range of achievements, and strengthen confidence in the integrity of committee recommendations.
Where practicable, the department will pursue diversity in committee membership, including diversity of gender, discipline, sector, geographic location, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives, and relevant industry expertise.
Committee deliberations are expected to be inclusive, respectful and evidence based. All committee members share responsibility for:
- the quality and inclusivity of deliberations
- considering differing perspectives
- challenging language or reasoning that could reflect unconscious bias rather than relating to or supporting assessment of the published criteria or evidence
- encouraging contributions from all members regardless of tenure on the committee or organisational position
- supporting balanced and objective discussion.
Respect for diverse career pathways and contributions
Committee members are required to consider each nominee's achievements relative to opportunity, recognising that careers are not always linear and that individual circumstances may affect opportunities. Career interruptions, differing career circumstances, diversity and experience gained outside a nominee’s primary field should not disadvantage a nominee. Achievements must be assessed in the context of the opportunities available to the nominee, taking into account the quality, impact and significance of their contributions within that context.
Committee members are expected to recognise that:
- contributions may be demonstrated in different ways and not always through conventional approaches, and that this does not diminish their significance
- publication rates vary across STEM disciplines and should not be used as a primary measure of merit
- assumptions about cultural norms or communication styles can influence perceptions of a nominee’s suitability or achievement, and should be avoided
- differences in communication style, presentation or self-promotion are not a reliable indicator of the quality or significance of a nominee’s contributions.
Definitions of ‘relative to opportunity and career interruption’ are in the grant opportunity guidelines.
Continuous improvement
The department will regularly review nomination, assessment and participation data, assessment processes and governance documents to identify opportunities to strengthen diversity, equity, representation and accessibility across the prizes, while maintaining excellence and merit as the foundation of assessment process.