1 / 37

Discovery Research K-12 (DR K-12) Program

Discovery Research K-12 (DR K-12) Program. Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings Program Solicitation: NSF 10-610. Important Dates. Letter of Intent (required) November 5, 2010 Full Proposals January 6, 2011. Cycle of Innovation.

giona
Download Presentation

Discovery Research K-12 (DR K-12) Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Discovery Research K-12(DR K-12) Program Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings Program Solicitation: NSF 10-610

  2. Important Dates Letter of Intent (required) November 5, 2010 Full Proposals January 6, 2011

  3. Cycle of Innovation • Implement, Study Efficacy, and Improve • Scale Up and Study Effectiveness • Synthesize and Theorize • Explore, Hypothesize, and Clarify • Design, Develop, Test

  4. Goal of the DR K-12 Program Develop, implement, and study resources,models, and technologies that: • Enable significant advances in preK-12 student and teacher learning • Support new ways of STEM teaching and learning

  5. DR K-12 Challenges • Improve assessment • Assure all students the opportunityto learn • Enhance the ability of teachers • Implement, scale, and sustain innovations cost-effectively • Transform student learning and enhance ability and interest through next generation cyber-enabled learning

  6. Challenge OneHow can enhanced assessments of student knowledge and skills advance preK-12 STEM teaching and learning? • Formative assessment of student progress learning STEM concepts and processes • Summative assessment of student and teacher content knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, motivation, aptitudes, creativity, and other STEM education objectives • Strategies for using information from assessments to enhance teaching and learning • Strategies for using cyberlearning tools in assessment

  7. Challenge TwoHow can all studentsbe assured the opportunity to learn significant STEM content? • Prepare students for understanding increasingly complex content and concepts • Develop big ideas needed to understand interdisciplinary subjects • Provide opportunities to students to learn practices, modes of inquiry, and engineering design through hands-on and virtual lab experiences • Design resources, models, and technologies to serve diverse learners • Develop RMTs to address education needs of career and technical education students

  8. Challenge ThreeHow can we enhance the ability of teachersto provide STEM education for all students? • Innovative models to support learning by preK-12 teachers at all career points • Models for sharing teaching expertise within and across schools and districts • Technology-enhanced RMTs such as • Just-in-time online courses and ways of using web resources • Models for teacher networking and collaboration tools • Multi-dimensional diagnostic information about students • Teacher self-assessment tools • Models of teacher education that impact student STEM learning

  9. Challenge FourHow are effective innovations successfully implemented, scaled, and sustainedin schools and districts in a cost effective manner? • Studies of Impact at Large scale • Do promising results from small efficacy studies hold when the interventions are brought to scale? • Require a design that allows for attribution of results • Experimental and longitudinal studies are encouraged • Need sufficient sample size and appropriate assessments • Studies of organization and scale • What is needed to implement, institutionalize, or sustain an innovation? • What factors are involved: teacher PD, financial support, policy changes? • Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods may be appropriate

  10. Challenge FiveHow can next-generation, cyber-enabled learning materials radically transform students’ STEM learning experiences and enhance their abilities and interests in STEM fields? • Design, develop, and test the next generation of STEM learning materials • Develop and study models for comprehensive STEM learning environments • Research projects studying the consequences of such innovations • Not for incremental advancements that could be supported under one or more of the other four challenges • May be exploratory or full research and development

  11. Proposal Types • Full Research and Development Projects: defined deliverables with attention to design and evaluation • Exploratory Projects: clarify constructs, assemble theoretical foundations, or perform preparatory work • Synthesis Projects: survey and analysis of existing knowledge on a topic of critical importance • Conference Proposals: related to the work of DR K-12

  12. Number of Awards Anticipated number of awards: 53 to 75 Anticipated funds: $55,000,000 for new awards • Full R&D projects – normally up to $3,500,000, max 5 years (20–25 awards) • Exploratory projects – up to $450,000, max 3 years (20–25 awards) • Scale up projects – up to $5,000,000, max 5 years (3–5 awards) • Synthesis projects – up to $250,000, max 2 years (5–10 awards) • Conferences and Workshops – normally up to $100,000, max 2 years (5–10 awards)

  13. Proposal Preparation • DR K-12 Solicitation: NSF 10-610 (Section V. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions) • Proposals must be prepared in accordance with the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) (For proposals submitted or due on or after January 18, 2011, the guidelines in GPG 11-1 apply)

  14. DR K-12 Proposal Essentials Goals and Purposes • Why is this project important? • How will the project improve STEM education and advance knowledge? • How might the products or findings be useful on a broader scale?

  15. What Do You Want To Do? • Goals tied to challenges • How project improves STEM education for students and/or teachers? • Who is impacted? • How project advances knowledge?

  16. What Have You and Others Done? • What is the theoretical basis upon which the project is based? • How does this project build on your prior work and the work of others? • Provide evidence that your prior work has been effective and had impact

  17. How Are You Going To Do It? • State hypothesis about how some aspect of STEM education is to be improved • Describe plan for developing an innovative resource, model, or technology • Study its effectiveness • Describe the work plan and the research methodology

  18. How Do You Know You Are Doing Well? (1) • Theory of action guides activities • Evaluation depends upon the size of project • Formative evaluation • Ensures quality of products • Determines likelihood that activities result in attainment of goals • provides timely feedback

  19. How Do You Know You Are Doing Well? (2) • Summative evaluation • Substantiates that project collected credible evidence to test hypothesis • Done by capable evaluator external to the project • Must be submitted as part of the final report

  20. How Will Others Learn About The Project? • Dissemination to researchers, policy makers, and practitioners • Share design, findings, and products with the DR K-12 Resource Network, (CADRE)

  21. Who Does The Work? • Describe the expertise needed • Educational researchers • Teachers • Content experts • Develop new personnel • Name personnel with appropriate expertise and experience

  22. Summary of Evaluation • Formative and Summative • Discuss the evaluation questions, data to be gathered, data analysis plans, and expertise of the investigators • Distinguish between evaluation and research efforts • The type and extent of evaluation will vary by scope and type of project • Advisory Committee: not required, but can be important

  23. Project Summary of Full Proposal • First Sentence • Type of Proposal – exploratory, full R&D, synthesis • Main challenge addressed • Second Sentence • Discipline(s) represented • Audience Used to place proposal into panel Address two NSB criteria in separate statements

  24. Return Without Review • Failure to follow formatting rules of the Grant Proposal Guide • Inclusion of Appendices that might extend the content of the 15 pages • Failure to have a post doc plan if post docs are included • Failure to be responsive to the solicitation

  25. Budget • Should be consistent with level of work – do not have to request the maximum! • 1/6th rule: In general, no more than two months of salary for senior personnel with academic positions • More may be requested if justified • Rarely support senior personnel at 100% • Indirect cost rates are set by the institution and auditors, not us • Direct costs for items like secretary, supplies, etc., are usually not allowed • No cost sharing • Budgets will be negotiated

  26. Content of Letter of IntentDue November 5, 2010 • Challenge addressed • Project Title • PIs and Organizations • Stem Discipline(s) addressed • Audience addressed • Fewer than 350 words • Letters of Intent must be submitted through Fastlane.gov (not grants.gov)

  27. For Further Information • Call 703-292-8620 • Email: DRLDRK12@nsf.gov • Contact a DR K-12 Program Director

  28. Program Directors • The emails and phone numbers of DR K-12 PDs are listed in the announcement • Please write to one at a time • The following list is designed to help you select which PD might be most related to your topic or area of interest • A PD might refer you to someone else after talking with you

  29. Content Expertise • Mathematics Education: Spud Bradley, Jinfa Cai, Patricia Wilson • Science Education – Physical, Chemical: Hannah Sevian, Joe Reed, Gerhard Salinger, Bob Gibbs, Julia Clark • Science Education – Biology: Julia Clark, Jim Hamos, David Campbell, Nafeesa Owens, Julio Lopez-Ferrao • Social Science Education: Elizabeth VanderPutten • Engineering and Technology Education: Darryl Williams, Gerhard Salinger, Janet Kolodner, Sharon Tettegah • Environmental/Climate: Dave Campbell, Hannah Sevian

  30. Challenge Areas • Challenge 1: (assessment), Jinfa Cai, Elizabeth VanderPutten, Julio Lopez-Ferrao • Challenge 2: (students), Julio Lopez-Ferrao, Gerhard Salinger, Joe Reed, Bob Gibbs, Spud Bradley, Sharon Tettegah, Julia Clark • Challenge 3: (teachers) Pat Wilson, Hannah Sevian, Nafeesa Owens, Bob Gibbs, Elizabeth VanderPutten, Julia Clark, Julia Clark, Spud Bradley • Challenge 4: (Scale)  Jinfa Cai, Elizabeth VanderPutten, Jim Hamos • Challenge 5: (next generation) Mike Haney, Janet Kolodner, Hannah Sevian; Sharon Tettegah

  31. For Information About Current Awards See Community for Advancing Discovery Research in Education www.CADREK12.org The Community for Advancing Discovery Research in Education (CADRE) is the NSF-supported learning resource network to support DR K‑12 grantees.

  32. Selected EHR Funding Opportunities • Cyberlearning: Transforming Education (Cyberlearning)10-620Letter of Intent: May 14, 2011 Full Proposal: July 14, 2011 • Computing Education for the 21st Century (CE21)10-619 • Full Proposal: February 22, 2011 Full Proposal: April 27, 2011 • Promoting Research and Innovation in Methodologies for Evaluation (PRIME)10-615 • Full Proposal:January 5, 2011 • Transforming STEM Learning (TSL)10-602 • Full Proposal: March 11, 2011

  33. Transforming Stem Learning(TSL)10-602 TSL is an opportunity to explore the challenges implied by innovative visions of the future for STEM learning.  This cross-program solicitation combines Discovery Research K-12 (DR K-12), Informal Science Education (ISE), Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE), and Innovative Technology Experiences for Students and Teachers (ITEST). TSL proposals must have a scope that extends well beyond any of those programs individually. The work will need interdisciplinary teams of STEM content specialists, experts in relevant technologies, STEM formal and informal education specialists, learning science researchers, and specialists in education research and evaluation methods.

  34. Transforming STEM Learning (TSL) • Challenge 1: Studying Existing Examples of Innovative Models for STEM Education • Descriptive and analytic research projects that study promising innovations to determine how and what students are learning, the essential features of successful programs, and why various practices are or are not effective • Approximately 5 awards at up to $2,000,000 each for four years

  35. Transforming STEM Learning (TSL) • Challenge 2: Design, Develop, and Study New Structural Models for STEM Learning Environments • Phase 1 pilots: • Bold experiments that challenge traditional patterns of STEM education that cannot occur easily within current structures for teaching and learning • Aim is to develop and study potentially transformative models for STEM learning environments that produce learners with understandings, skills, habits of mind, and dispositions to engage in scientific, engineering, technical, and mathematical thinking and practices • Approximately 10 awards up to $500,000 each for up to 2 years

  36. Cyberlearning: Transforming Education • Use technology to amplify, expand, and transform opportunities and motivation for learning • Integrate advances in technology with advances in how people learn to • Better understand how people learn technology and how technology can help people learn • Better use technology for collecting, analyzing, sharing, and managing data to shed light on learning • Design new technologies and advance understanding of how to use these technologies and integrate them into learning environments • Cultivate a citizenry that • Engages productively in learning • Has knowledge and capabilities for informed decision making about problems ranging from personal and local to global

  37. Cyberlearning • Three types of projects: • Exploratory, 2–3 yrs, up to $550,000 • Development and Implementation, 3–5 yrs, up to $1,350,000 • Implementation and Deployment, 5 yrs, up to $2,500,000 • Any learning population, any learning environment; must be potentially transformational • Projects must make two important contributions: • Add to the literature on how people learn (with technology) • Through iterative refinement of the design, development, or way of deploying innovative technology, yield a model technology product from which others can learn • Research must be done in the real-world contexts for which the technology is designed and in which it will be used • Three types of data collection: for assessing learning, for informing refinement of the innovation, for answering research questions

More Related