Looking out over cold snowy mountains from a plane

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN LECTURE COMMITTEE

Committee members

No current members.

Committee Charge

The committee is charged with selecting the recipients of the Benjamin Franklin Lecture. Committee members will abide by AGU’s Honors Conflict of Interest Policy, program policies, procedures and guidelines set by AGU. In partnership with the Honors and Recognition Committee and staff, the committee works to ensure that the program is superior in all respects, recognizes all constituents, and fosters a global network of individuals in the Earth and space sciences who epitomize excellence and cooperation in research, education, and outreach. The members of the Benjamin Franklin Lecture Committee will promote excellence and transparency, allowing broad input and recognition beyond disciplinary awards, promoting diversity and equity so that the Franklin Lecture is sufficiently representative of underrepresented groups.
Abstract illustration space and stars

Key Duties

The Benjamin Franklin Lecture Committee supports the following initiatives and duties and serves a two-year term. Their work is completed primarily through the online submission and review system, and by teleconference and email.
  • 1
    Review data from honors selection processes for the past years to determine if the program is achieving AGU’s relevant goals
  • 2
    Examine and report on program data to determine whether the number and quality of lecture nominations are competitive
  • 3
    Select the Franklin lecturer
  • 4
    Recommend, implement, and evaluate strategies used to increase diversity of nomination
  • 5
    Participate in training, orientations, and workshops on associated Honors and Recognition policies and processes
  • 6
    Understand and commit to AGU’s Conflict of Interest policy and process
  • 7
    Provide input and recommendations to the Honors and Recognition Committee on program improvements
  • 8
    Partner with AGU leaders and staff, as well as other societies to resolve common issues among scientific communities’ recognition programs