The Nora and Ted Sterling Prize in Support of Controversy recognizes high-quality, ethically sound work that challenges complacency, offers unconventional ways of understanding the world, or contributes meaningfully to the analysis of controversy.

We invite nominations and expressions of interest from SFU faculty members, students, and staff who value intellectual curiosity, freedom of expression, respectful disagreement, and fair consideration of challenging or unconventional work. To support rigorous and balanced deliberations, we particularly welcome individuals representing a range of disciplines, methodological approaches, intellectual traditions, professional backgrounds, and viewpoints.

Committee members review nomination materials, participate in meetings and deliberations, and contribute thoughtfully to selecting the annual Prize recipient. Members must be willing to engage respectfully with perspectives they may not share and to evaluate nominations according to the Prize’s Terms of Reference, irrespective of whether they personally agree with the ideas or conclusions presented.

Most committee activities, including reviewing nomination materials and participating in selection meetings, take place between March and May. Applicants should be available to complete the required work during this period.

The Committee consists of five to seven members, including four faculty members from several disciplines. Faculty members serve staggered two-year terms, while student and staff members serve one-year terms.

For more information about the Sterling Prize and previous award recipients, please visit the website
Please answer Questions 2–5 in no more than 150 words each. Brief responses are sufficient for Questions 6 and 7.

Question Title

1. Your name, title, department, and SFU affiliation

Question Title

2. Why are you interested in serving on the Sterling Prize Committee?

Question Title

3. What disciplinary, intellectual, methodological, or professional perspectives would you bring to the Committee?

Question Title

4. An example of your ability to engage constructively with controversial ideas or perspectives with which you may disagree.

Question Title

5. Your experience evaluating nominations, applications, awards, grants, or similar materials.

Question Title

6. Confirmation that you can attend meetings and review materials within the required timelines.

Question Title

7. Any actual or potential conflicts of interest relevant to this service.

T