Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation FY’06 Institute Partnerships  Focus on:  Development of school-based intellectual leaders and.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
National Science Foundation Innovation Through Institutional Integration (I 3 ) Kathleen Bergin Program Director Directorate for Education and Human Resources.
Advertisements

Project Manager: Eilene Cross (CCST) Principle Investigator: Susan Elrod (Cal Poly) Researcher: Michael Masterson (CCST/Cal Poly) A Qualitative Examination.
The Common Core State Standards: Opportunities and Challenges for the Mathematical Education of Teachers.
MSP and Scoring Rubric T ITLE II, P ART B M ATHEMATICS AND S CIENCE P ARTNERSHIPS (MSP) P ROGRAM M ATHEMATICS S CIENCE T ITLE II, P ART B MSP P ARTNERSHIPS.
DIScovery SciEnce through Computational Thinking (DISSECT) Enrico Pontelli.
Research and Impact The WaterBotics ® evaluation and research studies include two synergistic, but distinct, domains: educational impact and scale-up/sustainability.
Update and 2009 Grant Process. What is ITQ? Part of Federal No Child Left Behind $$ focused on increasing the number of “highly qualified” teachers in.
A Systemic Approach February, Two important changes in the Perkins Act of 2006 A requirement for the establishment of Programs of Study A new approach.
Broader Impacts: Meaningful Links between Research and Societal Benefits October 23, 2014 Martin Storksdieck I Center for Research on Lifelong STEM Learning.
Sunflower blank National Science Foundation Dan Maki Kathleen Bergin Math and Science Partnership Education and Human Resources Directorate Division of.
Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) in Engineering Program Engineering Education NSF Awardees Conference-Sept , 2007 Mary Poats, Program Manager-RET.
“NSF’s Division of Undergraduate Education: Funding Opportunities for Community Colleges” CUR November 18, 2011 Eun-Woo Chang Montgomery College.
Barbara Miller Education Development Center Implementing a Teacher Leadership Program with Sustainability as a Goal: Lessons from Math/Science Partnerships.
An Excellent Proposal is a Good Idea, Well Expressed, With A Clear Indication of Methods for Pursuing the Idea, Evaluating the Findings, and Making Them.
Proposal Writing Workshop Features of Effective Proposals: Fellowship Track Washington, DC January 9, 2014.
1 Exploring NSF Funding Opportunities in DUE Tim Fossum Division of Undergraduate Education Vermont EPSCoR NSF Research Day May 6, 2008.
Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006.
NSF Funding Opportunities. Noyce Scholarship Program Teacher Professional Continuum Math and Science Partnership Advanced Technological Education (ATE)
National Science Foundation: Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (TUES)
2011 Proposal Writing Workshop Part II: Features of Effective Proposals.
Evaluation of Math-Science Partnership Projects (or how to find out if you’re really getting your money’s worth)
DRAFT Building Our Future 2017 Fulton County Schools Strategic Plan Name of Meeting Date.
Aerospace Education Services Project (AESP) William S. Carlsen, Director Pennsylvania State University.
Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation Math and Science Partnership (MSP) Program A Research and Development Effort James E. Hamos Division.
2012 Proposal Writing Workshop Co-sponsored by the: National Science Foundation & American Association for the Advancement of Science.
 NSF Merit Review Criteria Intellectual Merit Broader Impacts  Additional Considerations Integration of Research & Education Integrating Diversity into.
Proposal Writing Workshop Features of Effective Proposals.
Outreach to Districts and Schools ?Is there a drop down menu with three items, or does it go to a page on outreach, or both?
Innovation through Institutional Integration (I 3 ) National Science Foundation Directorate for Education and Human Resources.
Title II, Part B Mathematics and Science Partnerships Equitable Services to Private Schools: Program Specifics.
National Science Foundation 1 Evaluating the EHR Portfolio Judith A. Ramaley Assistant Director Education and Human Resources.
The Common Core State Standards Initiative Alisa Chapman, University of North Carolina October 24, 2013.
Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation Math and Science Partnership (MSP) Program A Research and Development Effort Joyce B. Evans Senior.
Research Indicators for Sustaining and Institutionalizing Change CaMSP Network Meeting April 4 & 5, 2011 Sacramento, CA Mikala L. Rahn, PhD Public Works,
Next-Generation Standards and Accountability Terry Holliday, Ph.D. Kentucky Education Commissioner Quality New Mexico June 9, 2011.
U.S. Department of Education Reform Agenda Overview April 2010.
National Science Foundation Math and Science Partnership (MSP) Program A Research and Development Effort Joan Prival Division of Undergraduate Education.
The Improving Teacher Quality State Grants Program California Postsecondary Education Commission California Mathematics & Science Partnership 2011 Spring.
NSF IGERT proposals Yang Zhao Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Wayne State University.
No Child Left Behind Math and Science Partnerships Title II Part B.
Mathematics and Science Partnerships, Title II, Part B, NCLB.
Integrating Broader Impacts into your Research Proposal
WHO Global Standards. 5 Key Areas for Global Standards Program graduates Program graduates Program development and revision Program development and revision.
Mathematics and Science Partnerships: Summary of the Performance Period 2008 Annual Reports U.S. Department of Education.
Faculty Engagement in Partnership Work Nancy S. Shapiro University System of Maryland AACU 2007.
PRIMES Partnerships and Research Investigations with Mathematicians, Engineers, and Scientists Professional Development Model MSP Regional Meeting February.
 NSF Merit Review Criteria Intellectual Merit Broader Impacts  Additional Considerations Integration of Research & Education Broadening Participation.
Integrating Broader Impacts into your Research Proposal Delta Program in Research, Teaching, and Learning Trina McMahon Associate Professor of Civil and.
Proposal Writing Workshop Features of Effective Proposals.
Proposal Writing Workshop Features of Effective Proposals.
Innovation through Institutional Integration (I 3 ) National Science Foundation Directorate for Education and Human Resources National Science Foundation.
Math and Science Partnership (MSP) Program A Research and Development Effort in K-16 Teaching and Learning James E. Hamos Directorate for Education & Human.
Mathematics and Science Partnerships: Summary of the Performance Period 2008 Annual Reports U.S. Department of Education.
Innovation through Institutional Integration (I 3 ) Jody Chase, Tribal Colleges and Universities Program Sylvia James, Innovative Technology Experiences.
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics PROGRAM.
Mathematics and Science Partnerships Grant RFP Informational Session April 5, 2010.
Carpe Diem Phase II Making the Case. Jot down 3 questions that you have related to Phase II (the one’s that you carried into the room today)
Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation MSP Project Description FY’06 Institute Partnerships  Vision, Goals and Outcomes  Vision, Goals.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction California Mathematics and Science Partnership (CaMSP) Grant.
HLC Criterion Three Primer: Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support Thursday, September 24, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
Sustaining and Increasing the Impact of an Alliance: CAHSI-SACNAS Partnership Ann Q. Gates The University of Texas at El Paso NSF CNS
Stimulating Research and Innovation for Preservice Education of STEM Teachers in High-Need Schools W. James Lewis Deputy Assistant Director, Education.
Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements August 2016
Broadening Participation through K-12 and Community Partnerships
Teachers Teach Teachers:
Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements August 2018
Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements August 2017
NC Mathematics and Science Partnership Program
S-STEM (NSF ) NSF Scholarships for Science, Technology, Engineering, & Mathematics Information Materials 6 Welcome! This is the seventh in a series.
Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements August 2019
Presentation transcript:

Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation FY’06 Institute Partnerships  Focus on:  Development of school-based intellectual leaders and master teachers  Teachers of the secondary science disciplines and on elementary specialists for science, although innovative proposals for all STEM domains are welcome  Participants will be experienced teachers who wish to deepen content knowledge and build leadership skills

Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation FY’06 Institute Partnerships  Institutes will be multi-year programs of coherent study within particular discipline  K-12 core partners are:  Districts from which participants are selected, and  Required to grant sufficient non- classroom time for participants to carry out responsibilities

Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation FY’06 Institute Partnerships CORE partners CORE partners share responsibility for accountability and must provide evidence of their commitment to undergo the coordinated institutional changes necessary to sustain the partnership effort CORE partners CORE partners must include: At least one higher education institution – mathematicians, scientists and engineers of these institutions must participate significantly At least one K-12 school district

Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation FY’06 Institute Partnerships CORE partners CORE partners may include other stakeholders who are also expected to participate in the coordinated institutional changes SUPPORTING partners SUPPORTING partners include entities that are important contributors but are not required to commit to institutional change

Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation FY’06 Institute Partnerships   The PI of each Institute Partnership must be a mathematics, science or engineering faculty member in a higher education core partner.   One or more co-Principal Investigators must be representative(s) from the K-12 core partner organization(s).

Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation Institutes at a Glance   To date, overall more focus on mathematics than the sciences   Greater focus on secondary grade levels but interesting examples for elementary specialists also   Substantive, in-depth experiences that deepen subject matter knowledge in mathematics or the sciences, PLUS leadership development

Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation Institutes at a Glance (cont.)   Mixed venues for delivery: on-campus courses, distance learning and other innovative modes   Added credential (e.g., master’s degree, advanced certificate) or licensure that increases credibility of Institute graduates   New leadership responsibilities for graduates, with clear statements of responsibilities from schools/districts and concrete support from administrators

Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation Overarching Principles that Provide Guidance Throughout   NSF Merit Review Criteria: Intellectual Merit & Broader Impacts   “Depth and quality of creative, strategic actions that extend beyond commonplace approaches”   Emphasis on evidence-based design and outcomes throughout   Commitment to high quality scholarship in all aspects of proposed work

Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation Evidence-Based Design and Outcomes   Understanding the research literature on science and mathematics education pertinent to partnerships’ data-based needs and goals   Incorporating the research literature into projects in a manner informed by baseline data and developing benchmarks that build from that data   Investigating the factors that contribute to projects’ outcomes to learn more about what works, where it works, and why it works