AJET Distinguished Reviewer Award
The AJET (Australiasian Journal of Educational Technology) Distinguished Reviewer Award is awarded in recognition of a candidate’s outstanding work as an AJET reviewer. The winner is selected from among the journal reviewers by the AJET Management Committee and the Lead Editors. This award was introduced in 2017.
- 2020 Award Winner: Professor Jorge Luis Bacca (Fundación Universitaria Konrad Lorenz, Colombia). Jorge has reviewed for AJET since 2019. He has consistently provided reviews of highest quality and responded within the time frames set by AJET. Feedback on his reviews include comments such as “insightful, helpful to authors, thorough, compassionate, contextual, professional, thoughtful and constructive”.
- 2019 Award Winner: Dr Rachael Adlington (University of New England). Rachael Adlington is an academic in the School of Education (UNE) where she works with Education students to become proficient users of Information and Communication Technologies to enhance teaching and learning.
- 2018 Award Winner: Dr Nauman Saeed, is an Academic Developer at La Trobe University, Melbourne. Dr Saeed works on key strategic projects on blended and fully online learning, providing expert advice and practical assistance to academics on projects and professional development that focus on inter-campus curriculum design, flexible and online teaching, assessment, and learning, evaluation and other strategic issues. His reviews are very constructive and his recommendations are well considered. He has a keen eye when reviewing while offering in-depth reviews.
- 2017 Award Winner: Professor Kian-Sam Hong, Retired, Faculty of Cognitive Science and Human Development, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak. In 2017, Prof Kian-Sam Hong completed 15 reviews with an average rating of 5.0 (out of 5) and an average completion time of 18.6 days. Over the years he has completed 49 expert reviews for AJET. Professor Hong is a strong statistician and prolific scholar. His reviews are always detailed and constructive. His recommendations are well considered and balanced. He has a very critical eye when reviewing and provides an in-depth and coherent review with constructive comments on how the paper can be clearer/strengthened.