CIHE Award for Significant Research on International Higher Education

About the Award

The Award for Significant Research on International Higher Education will recognize a highly significant research outcome in the field of international higher education. Unlike a lifetime achievement award, or an award that focuses on a particular form of research, the CIHE Research Award is focused on state-of-the-art knowledge and scholarship, whether it is manifested in a journal article, book, edited volume, research initiative, or other top-quality contribution which significantly changed the existing thinking on a topic in the field.

---

Eligibility for the Award

Nomination Evaluation Criteria

1. Relevance: The nominated scholarship builds on issues of interest in the field of comparative and/or international higher education.

• Exceptional (5 points): An exceptional submission is on a highly timely topic and the connections are clearly visible to the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The submission ties extremely well into and clearly builds on previous literature in the field.
• Strong-Exceptional (4 points): A strong-exceptional submission is on a highly timely topic and the connections are not quite clearly visible to the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The submission ties well into and builds on previous literature in the field.
• Strong (3 points): A strong, but less exceptional submission, is on a timely topic in the field of comparative and/or international higher education, but might have minor issues in how clearly it comes through in the writing. The submission might have slight problems in how it ties into or builds on the literature in the field.
• Strong-Good (2 points): A strong-good submission is on a timely topic and the connections are not quite visible to the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The submission has not clearly built on previous literature in the field.
• Good (1 point): A good, but less strong submission has some difficulties conveying how it is on a timely topic to the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The submission may also have missing elements on how it ties into or builds on the literature in the field.

2. Significance: The nominated scholarship demonstrates evidence of impact on the research, practice, policy, and/or theory in the field of comparative and/or international higher education. Alternatively, the nominated scholarship holds great potential to serve as a model for future research, opens up new ways to conduct research, or addresses topics/contexts that have been relatively absent from the scholarly discourse.

• Exceptional (5 points): An exceptional submission clearly demonstrates how it advances the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The nominated work moves the field forward by providing notable findings (evidence) and/or opens new lines of inquiry and thinking for the field.
• Strong-Exceptional (4 points): A strong-exceptional submission demonstrates how it advances the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The nominated work provides new ways of addressing the field forward by providing findings (evidence) and/or opens new lines of inquiry and thinking for the field.
• Strong (3 points): A strong, but less exceptional submission, advances the field of comparative and/or international higher education, but has some minor issues in how clearly it does. The submission might have some minor issues in demonstrating the impact of scholarship or creating new lines of inquiry for the field.
• Strong-Good (2 points): A strong-good submission weakly demonstrates how it advances the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The nominated work does not clearly show how the work will move the field forward. The submission has weak notable findings (evidence) and/or opens new lines of inquiry and thinking for the field.
• Good (1 point): A good, but less strong submission has some difficulties conveying how it advances the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The submission has missing details on how it demonstrates its impact or expands inquiry for the field.

• Exceptional (5 points): An exceptional submission clearly demonstrates its comprehensiveness, thoroughness, and clarity of its research design, findings, and discussion. A very high level of rigor and execution of the proposed research is clearly visible in the scholarship. The research design includes a clear and detailed documentation of the methodology, methods, and data employed for the study.
• Strong-Exceptional (4 points): A strong-exceptional submission demonstrates its comprehensiveness, thoroughness, and clarity of its research design, findings, and discussion. It presents a good level of rigor and execution of the proposed research is clearly visible in the scholarship. The research design includes a clear and detailed documentation of the methodology, methods, and data employed for the study.
• Strong (3 points): A strong, but less exceptional submission has some minor issues demonstrating its comprehensiveness, thoroughness, and clarity of its research design, findings, and discussion. A high level of rigor and execution of the proposed research is visible in the scholarship. The research design has some minor issues in the clarity and documentation of the methodology, methods, and data employed for the study.
• Strong-Good (2 points): A strong-good submission does not clearly demonstrate its comprehensiveness, thoroughness, and clarity of its research design, findings, and discussion. The submission has a good level of rigor and execution of the proposed research is clearly visible in the scholarship. The research design includes a less clear and detailed documentation of the methodology, methods, and data employed for the study.
• Good (1 point): A good, but less strong submission has some challenges demonstrating its comprehensiveness, thoroughness, and clarity of its research design, findings, and discussion. An average level of rigor and execution of the proposed research is visible in the scholarship. The research design has issues in the clarity and documentation of the methodology, methods, and data employed for the study.

• Exceptional (3 points): An exceptional submission clearly demonstrates its uniqueness and originality through one or more ways, including but not limited to, featuring a unique and innovative methodological approach, addressing a previously under-investigated aspect of a topic, population, and/or region/country or addressing a topic of compelling contemporary or historical relevance.
• Strong (2 points): A strong, but less exceptional submission has some minor issues demonstrating its uniqueness and originality through one or more ways, including by limited to, featuring a unique and innovative methodological approach, addressing a previously under-investigated aspect of a topic and/or population, and/or addressing a topic of compelling contemporary or historical relevance.
• Good (1 point): A good, but less strong submission has some challenges demonstrating its uniqueness and originality through one or more ways, including by limited to, featuring a unique and innovative methodological approach, addressing a previously under-investigated aspect of a topic and/or population, and/or addressing a topic of compelling contemporary or historical relevance.

• Exceptional (3 points): An exceptional submission demonstrates a clear understanding of the context of its contribution to the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The implications and findings align extremely well to the setting (environment) of the research.
• Strong (2 points): A strong, but less exceptional submission demonstrates with minor issues a good understanding of the context of its contribution to the field of comparative and/or international higher education. The implications and findings align well to the setting (environment) of the research.
• Good (1 point): A good, but less strong submission demonstrates a good understanding of the context of its contribution to the field of comparative and/or international higher education, but there are issues in how clearly it does this. The implications and findings align to the setting (environment) of the research, but is not as clear as it could be.

Evaluation Process

• The basis of evaluation of the nominated scholarship is on the submitted nomination form only;
• The criteria (rubric) of evaluation is on the five (5) categories of relevance, significance, quality, innovation, and attention to context (as detailed above);
• The maximum points awarded in a review is 21 per reviewee (CIHE awards committee member);
• All CIHE awards committee members will supply a review of each nominated scholarship;
• The review scores for each nominated scholarship are combined from all reviewers to provide a total review score;
• The scholarship with the three highest total review scores will move to Step two of the award evaluation.
   

• The basis of evaluation of the nominated scholarship is on the full nominated scholarship’s text (manuscript);
• The criteria (rubric) of evaluation is on the five (5) categories of relevance, significance, quality, innovation, and attention to context (as detailed above);
• The maximum points awarded in a review is 21 per reviewee (CIHE awards committee member);
• All CIHE awards committee members will supply a review of each nominated scholarship;
• The review scores for each nominated scholarship are combined from all reviewers to provide a total review score;
• The scholarship with the highest total review score is the winner of the CIHE award for significant research on International Higher Education;
•  If there is a tie in total review scores, the CIHE awards committee votes to choose a winner among the scholarship with the tied total review scores.

2023 AWARDS TIMELINE

• Nominations will be open in early May 2023 and close in late June 2023. Due to the number of submissions and the review process, no late submissions will be accepted; as such, nominators are encouraged to submit their nominations well in advance of this deadline.
• Nominators and nominees will be informed of decisions in mid-September.
• An announcement of recipients will be sent to the ASHE membership in late September.
• The recipient(s) will be recognized during the ASHE Awards Ceremony during the Annual Conference.

---

To submit a nomination

You'll need:

• ​Name, Title, Position, Institution, Email, and Phone Number of Coordinating Nominator
• Name, Title, Position, Institution, Email, and Phone Number of Nominee
• Information about the Nominated Scholarship:
  • Title
  • Journal name or publisher
  • Citation/reference (APA 7 style):
  • DOI:
  • Author name(s):
  • First author position:
  • First author affiliation:
  • First author email:
  • ​Abstract (text box – 5000 characters ~750 words)
• Please fill in each of the five (5) text boxes on the nomination form. These text boxes align with the five (5) evaluation criteria and are a key element in the CIHE awards committee’s evaluation of the nominated scholarship.
  • Relevance (1500 characters ~225 words)
  • Significance (1500 characters ~225 words)
  • Quality (1500 characters ~225 words)
  • Innovation (1000 characters ~150 words)
  • Attention to context (1000 characters ~150 words)

Due to the increased number of nominations received in recent years, each nominee will be limited to one nomination. In the event multiple nominations are submitted, the committee chair will notify the coordinating nominators requesting they consolidate their nominations.

Self-nominations are highly encouraged, as are contributions by early career scholars. The coordinating nominator, as well as the award nominee(s) (and subsequently recipient(s)), must be current members of ASHE.

Questions about the 2023 award process can be sent to office@ashe.ws.

Nominations for 2023 will open in early May 2023.

Each year, the Council Chair appoints an awards committee, in close consultation with the Executive Committee, to solicit and accept nominations. ASHE awards committee members are not eligible to be nominated during the year in which they serve on the committee.

2023 CIHE Awards Committee:

• Rosalind Raby (Chair), California State University, Northridge
• Katie Koo University of Georgia
• Minghui Hou Old Dominion University
• Brandon Smith Michigan State University

---

2022 CIHE Award for Significant Research on International Higher Education:
"Universities in the knowledge society: The Nexus of National Systems of Innovation and Higher Education" by Drs. Timo Aarrevaara, Martin Finkelstein, Glen Jones, and Jisun Jung

---

2021 CIHE Award for Significant Research on International Higher Education:

"U.S. Power in International Higher Education," Edited by Jenny Lee, University of Arizona

---

2020 CIHE Award for Significant Research on International Higher Education:

Education Abroad: Bridging Scholarship and Practice, edited by Anthony C. Ogden, Bernhard Streitwieser and Christof Van Mol.

---