CISE New Action for Broadening Participation (BP) of Underrepresented Groups (UGs) in Computing

1. CISE New Action for Broadening Participation (BP) of Underrepresented Groups (UGs) in Computing Janice Cuny Timothy Pinkston October 19, 2007 CISE AC Meeting

2. Motivation for New Action • Broadening participation is not well addressed by CISE PIs in proposals and projects • NSF Strategic Plan (06-48): “Expand efforts to broaden participation from UGs and diverse institutions in all NSF [funded] activities” • CEOSE 2005-06 Biennial Report to Congress: “NSF should continue to design and employ new policy levers that focus the attention of PIs and their institutions on diversity aspects of the Broader Impacts criterion…”

3. CISE BP WG • Formed on June 19th, 2007 • WG Members: • Janice Cuny (CNS), Anita LaSalle (CNS), Mary Lou Maher (IIS), Timothy M. Pinkston (CCF), Sylvia Spengler (IIS), Joseph Urban (CCF) • Charged with • Exploring the merits of including a departmental plan for BP in proposals submitted to CISE • Developing an Action Plan designed to seek input on this and other related approaches to broadening participation of UGs in computing • WG Recommendations • New Policy: Include departmental plan for BP • CISE Strategic Plan

4. Proposed New Policy • Policy:“A departmental plan for BP of UG to be included in the Supplementary Documentation section of proposals submitted to CISE” • Can outline strategies and activities for BP of UG • Can address outreach, mentoring, assessment, training, recruitment, admission, yield, retention, graduation, hiring, promotion, leadership, … • Can complement institution’s own diversity plan • Sanctioned by departments, attested to by Chair • Plans will not be assessed in the review process • Intended to aid PIs in proposing BP activities that advance/complement departmental objectives

5. Merits of Proposed New Policy • Department plan provides a “framework” for PIs to incorporate BP activities in proposed projects • Leverage resources, relationships, goals • BP responsive to departmental context • Raises awareness and instills ownership of BP • Individually by faculty members • Institutionally by departments • Collectively as a community • Creates opportunities for leadership • CISE Strategic Plan for BP can be modeled • Showcase a diverse set of departmental plans

6. WG Recommendations • If implemented, the WG recommends that CISE • Should be clear about what new policy requires • Departmental plan or statement of “no plan” • Needed by departments of all PIs and co-PIs • Should engage the community • Inform through “Dear Colleague” letter, FAQs, website, outreach talks (Snowbird), CRN article, professional societies/orgs, other such outlets • Sponsor workshop(s) on BP for chairs and PIs • Should roll-out in time schedule to facilitate buy-in • Pilot in FY’08 CRI program? FY’09 Expeditions? • Adopt CISE-wide in FY’09 or Jan. 2009? • Should assess impact of the new policy over time • WG requests comments/suggestions from AC

7. CISE Strategic Planning for BP: Scope • BP within CISE education and research communities • BP within CISE internal activities

8. CISE Strategic Planning for BP: Outcomes • Identify emerging needs and opportunities in education and research • Develop goals and standards for increased participation and assessment • Recommend future directions and funding priorities • Produce public report

9. CISE Strategic Planning for BP: Committee • Internal Committee: Jan Cuny, Anita LaSalle, Mary Lou Maher, Timothy Pinkston, Sylvia Spengler, Joseph Urban • Internal Committee Advisors: Deborah Crawford, Haym Hirsh • External Committee (AC members): Richard Ladner, Jose Díaz-Herrera, Melissa O’Neill • External Committee: TBA