1. 1 Jill Singer Division of Undergraduate Education Directorate for Education & Human Resources National Science Foundation Email: jksinger@nsf.gov SCCUR Cal Poly Pomona November 22, 2008 NSF Programs That Support Undergraduate Research and Some Proposal Writing Tips

2. Applying what you learn during this workshop can make the proposal process easier

3. 3 Outline of Talk  Programs in DUE  Programs in NSF  Advice and Resources  What Happens to Your Proposal?

4. 4 NSF web site (www.nsf.gov)

5. 5 Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR)

6. 6 Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) DUE’s broadest, most innovative program  Purpose of the Program  To improve the quality of STEM education for all students by targeting activities affecting learning environments, course content, curricula, and educational practices  Supports projects at all levels of undergraduate education  Supports activities in the classroom, laboratory, and field settings  Three scales of projects (budget and scope) Note: CCLI Program Solicitation is being re-written - there may be some significant changes so read the solicitation carefully

7. 77 Write CCLI Proposal to Answer Reviewers’ Questions What are you trying to accomplish? What will be the outcomes? Why do you believe that you have a good idea? Why is the problem important? Why is your approach promising? How will you manage the project to ensure success? How will you know if you succeed? How will others find out about your work? How will you interest them? } } Goals etc. } } Rationale } } Evaluation } } Dissemination

8. 8 Important CCLI Project Components  Quality, Relevance, and Impact  Student Focus  Use of and Contribution to Knowledge about STEM Education  STEM Education Community-Building  Expected Measurable Outcomes  knowledge base, and community building  Project Evaluation

9. 99 Program Director’s Notes (1)  Read the program solicitation  Determine how your ideas match the solicitation and how you can improve the match  Articulate goals, objectives, & outcomes  Outcomes should include improved student learning  Build on existing knowledge base  Review the literature  Present evidence that the proposed project is doable; will enhance learning; is the best approach  Explore potential collaborations (industry, business, academic)  Use data to document existing shortcomings in student learning

10. 10 Program Director’s Notes (2)  Describe management plan  Provide tasks, team responsibilities, timeline  Provide clear examples of the approach  Integrate the evaluation effort early  Build assessment tools around defined objectives and expected outcomes  Connect with independent evaluation experts  Identify strategies for dissemination  Define a plan to contribute to knowledge base  Address broader impacts  Collaborate, form partnerships (build community)

11. 11 Program Director’s Notes (3)  What does the knowledge base say about the approach?  What have others done that is related  What have been the problems/challenges  Why is this problem important?  Is it a global or local problem  What are potential broader impacts  How will it improve quality of learning  What is the evidence that the approach will solve the problem?  Address and achieve the defined outcomes and student learning  What are alternative approaches?

12. 12 Ways CCLI Can Support UGR Activities  Acquisition of research quality equipment and its integration into undergraduate courses.  Labs can be constructed that integrate advanced equipment, prepare students for research, and draw on faculty research expertise.  Incorporation of inquiry-based projects into laboratory courses.  Partnerships with local research and informal education institutions.  Service learning can provide relevant problems while addressing the needs of the local community.

13. 13 STEP - STEM Talent Expansion Program  Goal: To increase the number of students receiving associate or baccalaureate degrees in established or emerging fields within STEM  Bridge programs that enable additional preparation for students  Programs that focus on the quality of student learning  high-caliber teaching in smaller classes  new pedagogical approaches  training of teaching assistants  Programs to encourage undergraduate research - especially early undergraduate research experiences

14. 14 Major Research Instrumentation (MRI)  Is designed to increase access to scientific and engineering equipment for research and research training in our Nation's organizations of higher education, research museums and non-profit research organizations  It provides instrumentation for research-intensive learning environments  The MRI program encourages the development and acquisition of research instrumentation for shared inter- and/or intra-organizational use and in concert with private sector partners

15. 15 Characteristics of a Strong MRI Proposal (1)  Well-Planned, Well-Written Proposal  Cohesive research and training plan  Appropriate Justification for the Requested Budget  Solid, Well-Defined Research and Training Goals  Not a Laundry List of Items  Not Requesting More Than Needed  Limited Salary Requests  Collaborations, if appropriate

16. 16 Characteristics of a Strong MRI Proposal (2)  Strong Research and Training Record of Principal Investigators and His/Her Team  Well-Developed Management Plan  Facilities  People  Commitment  Clearly Addressed NSF Review Criteria  Intellectual Merit  Broader Impacts

17. 17 Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU)  Supports active research participation by undergraduate students in any of the areas of research funded by NSF  REU projects involve students in meaningful ways in ongoing research programs or in research projects specifically designed for the REU program  Undergraduate student participants in either Sites or Supplements must be citizens or permanent residents of the United States or its possessions

18. 18 REU Awards REU Sites  Independent proposals to initiate and conduct projects that engage a number of students in research  Based in a single discipline or academic department, or on interdisciplinary or multi-department research opportunities with a coherent intellectual theme  Proposals with an international dimension are welcome REU Supplements  May be requested for ongoing NSF-funded research projects  May be included within a proposal for a new or renewal NSF grant or cooperative agreement or as a supplement to an ongoing NSF-funded project  An REU Supplement request is handled by the NSF program officer for the underlying research grant

19. OISE – IRES (Office of International Science and Engineering - International Research Experiences for Students)  Component of the Developing Global Scientists and Engineers Program  Supports groups of U.S. undergraduate (or graduate) students conducting research abroad in collaboration with foreign researchers at an international site  Proposals must have a unifying research theme that provides a cohort experience for participating students  Proposals should describe the research focus of the proposed activity; the intellectual collaboration with the foreign team; and the plan for enhancement of students’ professional network and details on mentoring (refer to solicitation for details about proposal preparation) 19

20. 20 Research in Undergraduate Institutions (RUI)  Principal difference between RUI proposals and “regular” NSF proposals is the additional requirement the RUI proposals must include an RUI Impact Statement that describes the expected effects of the proposed research on the research and educational environment of the institution  No funds specifically set aside for funding RUI proposals; success rates for RUI proposals similar to the overall success rate for all kinds of proposals reviewed by NSF  Inclusion of undergraduate research assistants, while not a requirement, is usually expected  RUI is fully integrated into the regular disciplinary programs of the Foundation, and proposals are evaluated and funded by NSF programs in the disciplinary areas of the proposed research

21. 21 RUI Impact Statement  Describe institution, opportunities and/or established programs supporting undergraduate research  Identify infrastructure and institutional support for undergraduate research, including faculty support  Describe how undergraduate research fits into the department’s curriculum and provide evidence that undergraduate research experiences help students prepare for successful careers, graduate school, or professional programs  Document the impact of undergraduate research on development of effective communication and other skills  Identify equipment available to students and provide examples of research projects undertaken by students

22. 22 Writing the Proposal: Steps to Success Preparing to Write  Start EARLY  Outline what you want to do  Review the literature and descriptions of funded projects. Know what is being done in your field and how your project is similar/different http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/)  Use NSF Awards Search (http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/)  Read program solicitations to find the program that best meets your needs  If you still need clarification, contact (e-mail is best) the appropriate program officer to discuss your idea.  This may cause you to refine your idea and may prevent you from applying to the wrong program  Give yourself and your grants’ office enough time to complete the process and submit the proposal

23. 23 NSF Awards Search: http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/

24. 24 Writing the Proposal: Steps to Success Writing  Organize the proposal - use proposal guidelines  Make it easy for reviewers to find key items in your proposal by using such aids as bullets and an outline format  Be sure you clearly describe what you want to do and how you will do it as well as the problem you want to solve (goals and objectives)  For programs such as CCLI, describe how you will follow the progress of your project, determine whether it is successful and how you will disseminate the results  Consider the research potential of the project. Could the results add to the knowledge we have about what works and why in STEM education? If appropriate, relate your efforts to current research about what works and why.  Be sure the budget and budget explanation ‘match’ and that the budget reflects the size of the project team and the level of commitment for each member of the project team. Instrumentation, participant support, and/or travel requests should be clearly explained and justified.

25. 25 One of the ways to confuse the reviewers…

26. 26 Fatal Flaws Fatal Flaw #1 “My ideas are so great I’m certain NSF won’t care whether they fit the program guideline.”  Read the solicitation completely and carefully  Write proposal and address each area outlined in the solicitation  Check each program solicitation carefully for: Additional Criteria (for example) Fatal Flaw #2 “Trust us, we know what we’re doing.”  Formulate your idea(s); clearly state what you want to do  Identify the audience(s) you want to work with  Identify specific tasks and a timeline for completing activities  Give background information; cite literature-demonstrate that you are aware of similar efforts/prior work  Address broader impacts; if diversity is one of your goals, how will you recruit and support students? Fatal Flaw #3 “I’m sure they don’t actually count the pages. No one will notice I’m over the page limit. Maybe I should just use a smaller font.”  Follow page and font-size limits  Consult the program solicitation and the GPG (Grant Proposal Guide)

27. 27 Fatal Flaws Fatal Flaw #4 “NSF should know what I’ve done in the past without my having to tell them. After all, they paid for it.”  Provide results from prior funding  Include a dissemination plan in your current proposal Fatal Flaw #5 “Evaluation will be ongoing and consist of a variety of methods.”  Plan for formative and summative evaluation  Include evaluation plan with timelines and benchmarks Fatal Flaw #6 “I’ll inflate my budget because NSF always ends up cutting it anyways”  Budget should directly reflect workplan  Provide biographical sketches for all key personnel.

28. 28 Some Common Reasons for Proposal Decline  Lack of evidence the PI is aware of the relevant literature and is building upon it  Diffuse, superficial and unfocused plan  Lack of sufficient detail  Apparent lack of the requisite expertise or experience by the proposers  Lack of a clear plan to document and evaluate activities and outcomes and to disseminate the results  Evaluation plans that are mainly surveys to determine user satisfaction with no clear mechanism for documenting changes in student learning, faculty approaches to presenting material, and/or approach to education (at the disciplinary, department or institutional level)  Proposals that do not explicitly address both Intellectual Merit and Broader Impact and exceed the page limit are returned without review

29. 29 One of the fastest paths to a rating of ‘Poor’

30. 30 What Happens to your Proposal?  Submission of proposal via FastLane  Proposals are reviewed by mail and/or panels of faculty within the discipline(s)  A minimum of three persons outside NSF review each proposal  For proposals reviewed by a panel, individual reviews and a panel summary are prepared for each proposal  NSF program staff member attends the panel discussion  The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal’s review considers the advice of reviewers and formulates a recommendation  Negotiations may be necessary to address reviewers’ comments, budget issues, and other concerns

31. 31 What Happens to Your Proposal (2)  NSF is striving to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, is provided to the PI.  Proposals recommended for funding are forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review. Only Grants and Agreements Officers may make awards.  Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a DGA Officer.

32. 32 Information and Inquiries  Emailundergrad@nsf.gov  Phone703-292-8670  Fax703-292-9015  DUE Web Site http://www.nsf.gov/div/index.jsp?div=DUE  Jill Singer703-292-5323 jksinger@nsf.gov