The National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER) in IES

1. The National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER) in IES New Opportunities for Research Edward J. Kame’enui Patricia A. Gonzalez

2. IDEA Reauthorization in 2004 • Amended the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 to establish the National Center for Special Education Research in the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) • Transferred responsibility for special education research and “Studies and Evaluations” (except for the Annual Report) from the Office of Special Education Programs to NCSER.

3. Organizational Structure of IES Office of the Director Grover J. Whitehurst, Director National Board for Education Sciences Robert C. Granger, Chair Sonia Chessen, Executive Director National Center for Education Statistics Mark Schneider, Commissioner National Center for Education Research Lynn Okagaki, Commissioner National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance Phoebe Cottingham, Commissioner National Center for Special Education Research Edward J. Kame’enui, Commissioner

4. Organizational Structure of IES Office of the Director Grover J. Whitehurst, Director National Board for Education Sciences Robert C. Granger, Chair Sonia Chessen, Executive Director Office of Communications and Outreach Mike Bowler, Director of Communications and Outreach Office of Administration and Policy Sue Betka, Deputy Director for Administration and Policy Office of Science Andrew White, Deputy Director for Science Office of Information Technology Gerald Malitz, Chief Information Technology Officer

5. NCSER’s mission “(1) to sponsor research to expand knowledge and understanding of the needs of infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities in order to improve the developmental, educational, and transitional results of such individuals; Reauthorization of IDEA: Public Law 108-446 December 3, 2004

6. NCSER’s mission (2) to sponsor research to improve services provided under, and support the implementation of, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.); (3) to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of IDEA in coordination with the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.” Reauthorization of IDEA: Public Law 108-446 December 3, 2004

7. NCSER’s five organizing principles • The science must come first. • We must invest wisely and strategically. • Research in special education and early intervention is at the heart of NCSER. • Building research capacity is not a “Lone Ranger” endeavor. • Good science is not enough; results must lead to high quality performance and delivery systems.

8. FY 2007 Grant Competitions Close July 27, 2006: • Early Intervention, Early Childhood Special Education, and Assessment for Young Children with Disabilities • Mathematics and Science • Reading, Writing, and Language • Serious Behavior Disorders • Assessment for Accountability

9. FY 2007 Grant Competitions Close November 16, 2006: • Individualized Education Programs and Individualized Family Service Plans • Secondary and Transition Services • Quality of Teacher and Other Service Providers for Students with Disabilities • Autism Spectrum Disorders • Response to Intervention

10. Research Grant Program Goals Goals differ by topic area and include: • Goal 1: Identifying promising practices. • Goal 2: Developing and testing new approaches. • Goal 3: Conducting efficacy and replication trials. • Goal 4: Conducting large scale evaluations. • Goal 5: Developing and validatingassessments. Funding amount varies between $100K to $1.2 M per year for up to five years

11. Purposes of Selected 2007 Grant Competitions • The purpose of the Serious Behavior Disorders Research Grants Program is to contribute to the improvement of the behavioral and social skills and concomitantly, the developmental and academic outcomes of infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities • The purpose of the Autism Grants Program is to develop and evaluate comprehensive school-based interventions intended to address the cognitive, communicative, academic, social, and behavioral needs of children identified withASD in preschool through middle school.

12. Potential Research Questions: Behavior Disorders • What levels of intervention intensity, specificity, or emphasis are necessary to ensure high threshold levels of performance on a range of academic, social, behavioral or developmental measures? • How can functional behavioral assessments be designed, conducted and used to develop and monitor the effectiveness of positive behavioral interventions? • What are appropriate positive behavioral interventions for infants and what are the conditions for their use? • What are the critical social skills that function as mediators or moderators for negative in-school outcomes such as disciplinary actions, restrictive placement decisions, or grade retention?

13. Potential Research Questions: Autism • What levels of intervention intensity, specificity or emphasis are necessary to ensure high threshold levels of performance on a range of cognitive, academic, social, behavioral, or developmental outcome measures? • What child (e.g., developmental age, language skills), family (e.g., perceived support), and/or environmental (e.g., structured, natural) variables mediate and moderate an intervention? • What are the key components or elements of an intervention program in a range of complex but typical settings (e.g., home, school) that are experimentally linked to enhancing, promoting, and sustaining functional and academic outcomes for children with ASD?

14. IES Peer Review Process • Fund research projects that fulfill IES’ mission and address its priorities • Quality • Rigor • Relevance • Provide integrity and support • Growth of the education science community • Respect for funding decisions • Provide feedback that improves the quality of applications

15. Who are the Panel Members? There are Principal, Rotating, and Ad Hoc members • Recruitment • Highly qualified experts • In-depth expertise in research methods and panel topic • Bring diversity on disciplinary, institutional, and other dimensions • Selection • Meet topic and methodology needs of the competitions • Appointments are proposed by the Deputy Director for Science • Approved by the Director

16. Overview of the Application Process • Announcements released (Web, Federal Register, etc.) • Letters of intent are submitted • Applications are submitted (via web) • Applications are screened • Applications are sent to reviewers • Applications triaged • Full panel review • Notification

17. Pre-panel Meeting Process • Application review • 2 or 3 reviewers per application • All reviewers are considered to be primary reviewers • Scoring: • Significance, research plan, personnel, resources • 7-point scale from 1(poor) to 7 (excellent) for each criterion • Overall score • 5-point scale from 5.0 (poor) to 1.0 (outstanding) for each application • Criterion and Overall scores are independent

18. Panel Meeting Process • Plenary session and panel orientations • Nomination of triaged applications • Reviewer scores are recorded • Presentation of application by Reviewer 1, Reviewer 2 (& 3) add comments • Panel discussion

19. Panel Meeting Process-continued • Summary of panel discussion by note taker • Revisiting scores/write-ups of primary reviewers • Confidential scoring by all panel members • Funding Enthusiasm Scores

20. What % of Grants Received are Funded? Data from FY 2006: • Reading & Writing 11% • Early Intervention 15% • Language & Vocabulary 21% • Serious Behavior Disorders 25%

21. 2007 Grant Competitions • Announced in Federal Register for Wednesday, March 22, 2006 • For three centers in IES—NCER, NCSER, NCES • The Request for Applications (RFA) is now available at: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ies/programs.html

22. Timeline for FY 2007 (10/06-9/07) Year 2006 2007 Month J F MA M J J A S O N D J F M A Event 1-- 2 3,4 5 Event Description: 1.   Funding announcement (RFA’s, web, Federal Register) 2. First round submissions due 3. First panel review sessions held 4. Second round submissions due 5. Second panel review sessions held

23. Thank You