Student Awards Offered by the Parasitology Section

The Parasitology Section offers awards to encourage and recognize outstanding student research in the discipline of parasitology, and the communication of that research at the Annual Meeting.

The Murray Fallis Prize is a $300 prize awarded for an outstanding student presentation at the annual meeting. It is funded through the Murray Fallis Fund of the Zoological Education Trust.


  1. The individual must be a student (i.e. registered in an undergraduate or graduate degree program) at the time the abstract is submitted.
  2. The student should indicate at the time they submit their abstract that they want to be considered for a Parasitology Section Student Award, although the judges may at their discretion decide to evaluate all presentations they identify dealing with parasitology.
  3. The student must present an oral paper at the Annual Meeting describing research conducted on any aspect of Parasitology.
  4. Under some circumstances, poster presentations may also be considered.
  5. Presentations of what are, essentially, research proposals will not be eligible for awards.
  6. The student (or major professor) must be a member of the Canadian Society of Zoologists and is encouraged, but not required, to be a member of the Parasitology Section.

Selection of Prize Recipients

  1. Presentations are evaluated and ranked by a panel of judges (judging criteria are indicated below).
  2. The Murray Fallis Prize is normally awarded for the top-ranked oral presentation. The judges may at their discretion elect to include poster presentations in the competition, depending on the number of presentations submitted to a particular annual meeting.
  3. Under some circumstances, other prizes may be available, and awarded either to the second ranked oral presentation or top-ranked poster presentation at the discretion of Parasitology Section Council. Regardless, the Fallis Prize shall be considered the top award of the Section.
  4. The decision of the judges is final.

Judging Criteria

Judges will evaluate the scientific content, originality and quality of the research being presented, as follows:

  1. Was the written abstract comprehensive and did it reflect the actual presentation?
  2. Did the topic of the presentation have scientific merit and was it placed in perspective, with clearly outlined objectives?
  3. Was the methodology appropriate for the objectives, and was it explained appropriately for oral or poster presentation?
  4. Were the results clearly presented and were they relevant to the stated objectives?
  5. Were the results interpreted and discussed in a manner appropriate to oral or poster presentation, and were the discussion and conclusions relevant to the stated objectives?
  6. Was the student able to respond reasonably to questions?

Judges will also evaluate the quality of the presentation itself. For oral presentations, the organization, clarity, quality of visual aids, professionalism, time limit, pace and audibility will be considered. For poster presentations, organization, clarity, visual impact and professionalism will be considered.