NSF’s Broader Impacts Criteria Bev Watford, Sue Kemnitzer, Russ Pimmel Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation Session T4B, Thursday.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Outreach Social & participatory practices that support knowing & understanding (National Research Council) Serves both the beneficiaries & purveyors –
Advertisements

Broader Impacts: Meaningful Links between Research and Societal Benefits October 23, 2014 Martin Storksdieck I Center for Research on Lifelong STEM Learning.
Session 5 Intellectual Merit and Broader Significance FISH 521.
 Introductions  Webinar etiquette ◦ Please place your phone on MUTE if you are not asking a question or not responding to the presenters. ◦ If you encounter.
NSF Research Proposal Review Guidelines. Criterion 1: What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? How important is the proposed activity.
Merit Review and Proposal Preparation Mark Courtney Division of Environmental Biology
NSF Merit Review and Proposal Preparation Mark Courtney, Ph.D Adjunct, Department of Biology New Mexico State University 24 September 2008.
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.
NSF Merit Review Criteria Revision Background. Established Spring 2010 Rationale: – More than 13 years since the last in-depth review and revision of.
The Proposal Review Process Matt Germonprez Mutual of Omaha Associate Professor ISQA College of IS&T.
NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grants Improve dissertation research – Provide funds not normally available to graduate students significant data-gathering.
How to Write Grants Version 2009.
Proposal Writing Workshop Features of Effective Proposals: Fellowship Track Washington, DC January 9, 2014.
The IGERT Program Preliminary Proposals June 2008 Carol Van Hartesveldt IGERT Program Director IGERT Program Director.
1 CCLI Proposal Writing Strategies Tim Fossum Program Director Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation Vermont.
National Science Foundation: Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (TUES)
EAS 299 Writing research papers
NSF Office of Integrative Activities Major Research Instrumentation Program November 2007 Major Research Instrumentation EPSCoR PI Meeting November 6-9,
Proposal Strengths and Weakness as Identified by Reviewers Russ Pimmel & Sheryl Sorby FIE Conference Oct 13, 2007.
A guide for Principal Investigators at Tulane University.
WE ARE A COMPLEX LAND. MASLOW’S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS DESIRE TO HELP OTHERS MEANING TO LIFE ESTEEM NEEDS RECOGNITION & APPRECIATION BELONGINGNESS AND LOVE.
Dealing with Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts Criteria
Company LOGO Broader Impacts Sherita Moses-Whitlow 07/09/09.
Funding Opportunities for Chemists at the National Science Foundation Division of Undergraduate Education Pamela Brown, NSF Program Director Division of.
Writing More Effective Proposals Russ Pimmel Abe Nisanci U of Alabama NSF. Share The Future IV March 17, 2003.
 NSF Merit Review Criteria Intellectual Merit Broader Impacts  Additional Considerations Integration of Research & Education Integrating Diversity into.
Proposal Writing Workshop Features of Effective Proposals.
A Roadmap to Success Writing an Effective Research Grant Proposal Bob Miller, PhD Regents Professor Oklahoma State University 2011 Bob Miller, PhD Regents.
Partnerships and Broadening Participation Dr. Nathaniel G. Pitts Director, Office of Integrative Activities May 18, 2004 Center.
A guide for Principal Investigators at Tulane University.
Writing More Effective NSF Proposals Jeanne R. Small Oklahoma City, Oklahoma March 2, 2006 Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE) National Science Foundation.
Tips for NSF GRF Applicants Matt Williams Barry M. Goldwater Scholar ( ) NSF Graduate Research Fellow ( ) October 13, 2010.
Promoting Diversity at the Graduate Level in Mathematics: A National Forum MSRI October 16, 2008 Deborah Lockhart Executive Officer, Division of Mathematical.
 How the knowledge created advances our theoretical understanding of the study topic, so that others interested in similar situations but in a different.
Funding your Dreams Cathy Manduca Director, Science Education Resource Center Iowa State University, 2005.
NSF IGERT proposals Yang Zhao Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Wayne State University.
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.
Workshop for all NSF-funded PIs regarding new NSF policies and requirements. America COMPETES Act contains a number of new requirements for all those funded.
Integrating Broader Impacts into your Research Proposal
Writing a More Effective Proposal Susan Burkett and Stephanie Adams February 9, 2006.
Susanne Hambrusch Department of Computer Science Department Head Increase diversity of faculty, students, and staff Division Director in CISE at NSF The.
ADBC: Background, Broader Impacts and Opportunity Anne Maglia Program Director, Division of Biological Infrastructure National Science Foundation
 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 Professor of Civil and Environmental.
Integrating Broader Impacts into your Research Proposal Delta Program in Research, Teaching, and Learning Trina McMahon Associate Professor of Civil and.
Session B – Broader Impacts: What’s the big idea? J. Britt HolbrookSharon Franks Center for the Study of InterdisciplinarityResearch Proposal Development.
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.
The Conceptual Framework: What It Is and How It Works Linda Bradley, James Madison University Monica Minor, NCATE April 2008.
Integrating Broader Impacts into your Research Proposal Delta Program in Research, Teaching, and Learning Trina McMahon Professor of Civil and Environmental.
1.  Most of the information presented in this workshop represents the presenters’ opinions and not an official NSF position  Local facilitators will.
NSF Peer Review: Panelist Perspective QEM Biology Workshop; 10/21/05 Dr. Mildred Huff Ofosu Asst. Vice President; Sponsored Programs & Research; Morgan.
1Mobile Computing Systems © 2001 Carnegie Mellon University Writing a Successful NSF Proposal November 4, 2003 Website: nsf.gov.
NSF policies and requirements for Implementation of the America COMPETES Act. America COMPETES Act contains a number of new requirements for all those.
Workshop for Faculty from Minority Serving Intuitions ---- Overview ---- Russ Pimmel Workshop for Faculty from Minority Serving Intuitions Feb. 8 –10,
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics PROGRAM.
Tackling the Broader Impacts Challenge: Advice and Resources Nathan Meier Director of Research Strategy Office of Research and Economic Development October.
NSF Office of Integrative Activities Major Research Instrumentation Program September 2007 Major Research Instrumentation QEM Workshop 2007 September 28,
1. October 25, 2011 Louis Everett & John Yu Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation October 26, 2011 Don Millard & John Yu Division.
Improving Research Proposals: Writing Proposals and the Proposal Review Process Heather Macdonald (based on material from Richelle Allen-King, Cathy Manduca,
NSF’s Broader Impacts Criterion Bev Watford and Russ Pimmel Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation Annual ASEE Conference June.
Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements August 2016
CARER Proposal Writing Workshop November 2004
Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements August 2018
Welcome and thanks for coming.
Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements August 2017
Welcome and thanks for coming.
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:

NSF’s Broader Impacts Criteria Bev Watford, Sue Kemnitzer, Russ Pimmel Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation Session T4B, Thursday October 20, 2005, 4:15-6:00 PM FIE 2005 Indianapolis, IN

2 Workshop Format “Working” format –½ to ¾ of time in team activities Limited time to complete activities –Frequently feel you need more time Purpose: identify, consider & discuss ideas –Get you started –No “answers” –No “formulas”

3 Workshop Background NSF Review Criteria NSF proposals evaluated using two review criteria –Intellectual merit –Broader impacts Most proposals –Intellectual merit done fairly well –Broader impacts done poorly

4 Workshop Goal To increase the community’s ability to design projects that respond effectively to NSF’s broader impacts criterion

5 Workshop Background NSF Strategies NSF proposals also evaluated relative to two principal strategies –Integrating research and education –Integrating diversity into NSF programs, projects, and activities Both reflected in the broader impacts criterion

6 Workshop Objective At the end of the workshop, participants should be able to –List categories for broader impacts –List activities for each category –Evaluate a proposed broader impacts plan –Develop an effective broader impacts plan

7 Conceptual Framework for the Workshop – Constructivist Model Learning situations involve prior knowledge –Some knowledge correct –Some knowledge incorrect (i. e., misconceptions) Learning is –Connecting new knowledge to prior knowledge –Correcting misconception Learning requires –Recalling prior knowledge – actively –Altering prior knowledge

8 Constructivist Model and Active-Cooperative Learning Learning activities must encourage learners to: –Recall prior knowledge -- actively, explicitly –Connect new concepts to existing ones –Challenge and alter misconceptions The think-share-report-learn (TSRL) process addresses these steps

9 Participation “Rules” In small group discussion –Be positive, supportive, and cooperative Limit critical or negative comments –Be brief and concise in discussions Avoid lengthy comments, stories or arguments –Stay focused –Get everyone involved In reporting to large group –Rotate reporters –Report group’s views not your own –Be brief and concise in discussions

10 Workshop Approach Information in “Learn” Phase, represents- “official” NSF positions NSF suggestions program officers’ opinions

11 Broader Impacts Categories and Activities

12 Exercise -- Broader Impacts Categories TASK: –Identify the categories of activities responding to NSF broader impacts criterion e, g., Increase participation of underrepresented groups PROCESS: –Think, share, report, learn

13 Statement of Broader Impacts Merit Review Criteria What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity? –How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? –How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? –To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships?

14 Statement of Broader Impacts Merit Review Criteria (cont’d) –Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? –What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?

15 “Relative Ease Quotient” What, in your opinion, is the easiest activity to address in a typical proposal? What is the most difficult?  Discovery and learning  Broadening participation  Infrastructure enhancement  Dissemination  Societal benefits

16 Exercise -- Dissemination Activities TASK: Identify activities that “broadly disseminate results to enhance scientific and technological understanding” PROCESS: –Think, share, report, learn

17 Dissemination -- NSF’s Representative Activities I Partner with museums, nature centers, science centers, and similar institutions to develop exhibits in science, math, and engineering. Involve the public or industry, where possible, in research and education activities. Give science and engineering presentations to the broader community (e.g., at museums and libraries, on radio shows, and in other such venues). Make data available in a timely manner by means of databases, digital libraries, or other venues such as CD- ROMs

18 Dissemination -- NSF’s Representative Activities II Publish in diverse media (e.g., non-technical literature, and websites, CD-ROMs, press kits) to reach broad audiences. Present research and education results in formats useful to policy-makers, members of Congress, industry, and broad audiences. Participate in multi- and interdisciplinary conferences, workshops, and research activities. Integrate research with education activities in order to communicate in a broader context.

19 Converting Activity to Impact I Don’t just list activities –More is not better –Describe the impact of activities Develop a strategy (a plan) Approach with same detail as intellectual content

20 Converting Activity to Impact II Develop a strategy (a plan) –Make coherent and consistent with Institution’s mission and culture PI’s interest and experience –Integrate with Project activities Intellectual merit –Include metrics and evaluation

21 Reviewing and Enhancing a Project’s Broader Impacts

22 Exercise – Review Proposal's Broader Impacts TASK: Write broader impacts section of a review Outline format PROCESS: –Think, share, report, learn

23 Sample Proposal Real proposal –Project Summary –Excerpts from Project Description Assume –CCLI/Phase 1 –$150k (total) for 2 years –Technical merit considered meritorious

24 Program Officers’ Views – Review Comments I Scope of activities –Overall-very inclusive and good –Well done but “standard things" –Did not address the issue of quality –No clear-cut plan –Activities not justified by research base Dissemination –Limited to standard channels –Perfunctory

25 Program Officers’ Views – Review Comments II Industrial advisory committee a strength Collaboration with other higher ed institutions –Institutions appear to be quite diverse but use of diversity not explicit –Interactions not clearly explained –Sends mixed message – raises questions about partnership effectiveness High school outreach –Real commitment not evident –Passive -- not proactive –High school counselors and teachers not involved

26 Program Officers’ Views – Review Comments III Modules are versatile Broader (societal) benefits –Need for materials not well described –Value of the product not explained –Not clear who will benefit and how much Assessment of broader impacts not addressed

27 How would you rate this proposal? Excellent-2 hands up Very Good-1 hand up Good-2 hands on head Fair-1 hand on head Poor-forearms crossed

28 Exercise -- Enhancing Broader Impacts Effort TASK: Identify additional or enhanced broader impacts activities that will strengthen the project PROCESS: –Think, share, report, learn

29 NSF Program Officer’s Suggestions -- Enhancing Broader Impacts Effort I Make activities appropriate to project –Establish a mentoring program for high school students –Use undergraduate students to interact with high school students –Connect to other projects if appropriate

30 NSF Program Officer’s Suggestions -- Enhancing Broader Impacts Effort II Utilize entire PI team in development process Take better advantage of institutional diversity (e.g., assessment of impacts of materials on diversity Improve Dissemination –Add faculty workshops –Prepare exhibit for local museum

31 REFLECTION

32 Exercise -- Characteristics of Broader Impacts Plans TASK: –Identify desirable features of a broader impacts plan or strategy General aspects or characteristics PROCESS: –Think, share, report, learn

33 NSF Program Officer’s Suggestions -- Characteristics of Broader Impacts Plan I Include strategy to achieve impact –Have a well-defined set of outcome objectives –Make results meaningful and valuable –Make consistent with technical project tasks –Have detailed tasks for implementation and evaluation (did it work & why?) –Have a well stated relationship to the audience or audiences

34 NSF Program Officer’s Suggestions -- Characteristics of Broader Impacts Plan II Don’t use “tack on” evaluation and dissemination plans Investigate and discuss other broader impacts plans Include target group(s) in development Be creative!

35 Exercise -- Reflection on Broader Impacts TASK: –Identify the most interesting, important, or surprising idea you encountered in the workshop PROCESS: –Think, share, report, learn

36 WRAP-UP

37 Summary-Broader Impacts I Use and build on NSF suggestions –List of categories in solicitations –Representative activities on website Not a comprehensive checklist Expand on these -- be creative Develop activities to show impact Integrate and align with other project activities

38 Summary-Broader Impacts II Help reviewers (and NSF program officers) –Provide sufficient detail Include objectives, strategy, evaluation –Make broader impacts obvious Easy to find Easy to relate to NSF criterion

39 Summary-Broader Impacts III Make broader impacts credible –Realistic and believable Include appropriate funds in budget –Consistent with Project’s scope and objectives Institution's mission and culture PI’s interest and experience Assure agreement between Project Summary and Project Description

40 REFERENCES Grant Proposal Guide Broader Impacts Activities

41 Thanks for your active participation! Questions?