130 likes | 139 Views
Funding for Education Scholarship Russ Pimmel NSF ASEE Annual Conference June 20, 2006. Initial Consideration. Distinguish scholarly teaching, education development, education research Consider three questions : Do you want to do it? Should you? “R” or “D”?
E N D
Funding for Education ScholarshipRuss PimmelNSFASEE Annual ConferenceJune 20, 2006
Initial Consideration • Distinguish scholarly teaching, education development, education research • Consider three questions: Do you want to do it? Should you? “R” or “D”? • Assess your interest, institution’s culture, local R&D opportunities, funding opportunities Become areviewer
Developing an Idea • Follow model for disciplinary R&D • Learn the literature & funding opportunities • Make connections with community • Match project with program requirements • Talk to program director Read solicitation & GPG
NSF’s Engineering Education Support • NSF funds research and development proposals on engineering education • Two main programs • EHR/DUE -- Course, curriculum and laboratory improvement • Deadline: I/10/07 & probably 5/07 • ENG/EEC -- Engineering education research • Deadline: 8/15/06 • Others – check the website
EHR/DUE’s CCLI Program Vision:Excellent STEM education for all undergraduate students. Goal:Stimulate, disseminate, and institutionalize innovative developments in STEM education through the production of knowledgeand the improvement of practice. Components: • Material & pedagogy development • Faculty development • Implementation • Assessment • Research
ENG/EEC’s Engineering Education Research Program Vision: Basic understanding to enable the transformation undergraduate and graduate engineering education Goal: Deeper understanding of how students learn engineering Research Areas: • Aims and objectives of engineering education • Content and organization of the curriculum • How students learn problem solving, creativity & design • New methods for assessment and evaluation • Attracting a more talented and diverse student body
Developing a Proposal • Establish a project focus & consider all aspects from the start • For “D” – Consider goals & outcomes, rationale, evaluation, & dissemination • For “R” – Consider research questions, rationale, methods, & impact • Get evaluator involved earlyGet theoretical & methodological help early • Start early, share ideas, get advice • Write for the reader • Check on IRB approval
Proposal Submission • Submit through FastLane or grants.gov • Check with your research office & register • Submit before deadline, check uploaded version
Proposal Processing • NSF proposals receive at least 3 reviews -- often more • Panel Review • Individuals read proposals and write reviews • Panel meets to discuss and revise reviews • Mail Review • Individuals read proposals and write reviews • No meeting or discussion • Reviewers • Give rating (E, V, G, F, or P) • Separate comments on intellectual merit & broader impacts
Practical Aspects of Review Process Reviewers have: • Many proposals • Ten or more from several areas • Limited time for your proposal • 20 minutes for first read • Different experiences in review process • Veterans to novices • Different levels of knowledge in proposal area • Experts to outsiders • Discussions of proposals’ merits at panel meeting • Share expertise and experience
Dealing with Practical Aspects • Follow solicitation & GPG • Use good style • Use a readable, “friendly” structure • Pay attention to Project Summary • Prepare credible budget
Dealing with Practical Aspects • Address prior funding when • Sell your ideas – Don’t over promote • Address review criteria • Proofread it • Check uploaded version
Continue Trying When Unsuccessful • Read the reviews • Talk to program director • Revise and resubmit