“Funding Opportunities for Community Colleges: NSF - DUE” 183rd Two-year College Chemistry Consortium Conference Eun-Woo Chang [email protected]
Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation November 21, 2008 1
Purpose of this session To share information about several specific NSF programs from which you may wish to seek funding
Caution Most of the information presented in this workshop represents the opinions of the individual program officers and is not an official NSF position.
NATI ONAL SCI ENCE FOUNDATI ON
DI VI SI ON OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATI ON ( DUE)
“EHR’s Mission is to promote the development of a diverse and well-prepared workforce of scientists, engineers, mathematicians, educators, and technicians and a well informed citizenry who have access to the ideas and tools of science and engineering.”
The Role of Community Colleges in the Education of Recent Science and Engineering Graduates
44% of all S & E 1999 and 2000 graduates with a bachelor’s or master’s degree attended a community college (more than 50% of the bachelors and 35% of the masters)
51% of Hispanic bachelor’s and masters graduates and 18% of the Hispanic Ph.D.s attended a community college
The Role of Community Colleges in the Education of Recent Science and Engineering Graduates
62% of female graduates and 51% of male graduates who had children attended a community college
42% of the graduates who had a GPA between 3.75 and 4.00 attended a community college
Education and Human Resources (EHR): FY 2009 (Requested) $709 Million
Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE): FY 2007 (Actual) $204.96 Million FY 2008 (Estimate) $211.05 Million FY 2009 (Requested) $219.83 Million *Note: Extra $75 million from H-1B visa fees employers pay to obtain a visa for a foreign high-tech worker to fund the S-STEM program.
Selected Programs in DUE
ATE CCLI STEP S-STEM NOYCE
$50.58 $51.62 $51.62 $37.78 $37.50 $39.21 $28.90 $29.70 $29.70 ~ $75 /year from H1B visa fee $10.30 $10.80 (55) $11.60 (55)
* (in Million)
NSF support for two-year college projects FY 2006-2008 FY2006
Program Award # ($)
Award # ($)
Award # ($)
Total DUE Total NSF
The Unconventional Way of Repairing
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI)
Excellent STEM education for all undergraduate students. Goal
Stimulate, disseminate, and institutionalize innovative developments in STEM education through the production of knowledge and the improvement of practice. *Most comprehensive program
CCLI “The program supports efforts to create, adapt, and disseminate new learning materials and teaching strategies, develop faculty expertise, implement educational innovations, assess learning and evaluate innovations, and conduct research on STEM teaching and learning.”
CCLI Cyclic Model New Materials and Strategies
Research on Teaching and Learning
Assess And Evaluate
Increase Faculty Expertise
Exploratory Projects “Phase 1 projects typically will address one program component and involve a limited number of faculty members at one academic institution. However, larger scale projects can be proposed provided they can be done within the Phase 1 budget limitations….” - 90 to 100 awards expected, each with a total budget up to $150,000 ($200,000 when four-year colleges and universities collaborate with twoyear colleges) for 1 to 3 years.
Expansion Projects “Phase 2 projects build on smaller-scale projects that have produced promising results, such as those produced by successful Phase 1 projects, and refine and test these with diverse users in several settings. Projects may address single or multiple components….” - 25 to 35 awards expected, each with a total budget up to $500,000 for 2 to 4 years.
Comprehensive Projects “Phase 3 projects are intended to support large scale efforts and may focus on a single or multiple components. These projects might be focused on faculty professional development, transformative curriculum projects with national impact, or educational assessment or research projects addressing significant questions in undergraduate education. …..” - 4 to 7 awards expected, each with a total budget up to $2,000,000 for 3 to 5 years.
Deadlines Phase 1 : May ??, 2009 (not posted) - Be alert for a new solicitation. Phase 2 & 3 : January 12, 2009 - Current solicitation, 08-546, applies.
Advanced Technological Education (ATE)
Goal: Educate technicians for the hightech fields that drive our nation’s economy
Sample activities: Curriculum development Faculty professional development Building career pathways
ATE ATE is in its 16th year of funding community colleges, having started with the Science and Advanced Technology Act of 1992 (SATA). FY2008 Preliminary Proposals Formal Proposals
April 23, 2009 Oct. 15, 2009
ATE Institution Requirements Focus is on two-year colleges All proposals are expected to include one or more two-year colleges in leadership roles A consortium of institutions may also apply
Program improvement Professional development for educators Curriculum and educational materials development Teacher preparation Small grants to new awardees
Focus on community colleges that have little or no previous ATE grant experience
Designed to stimulate implementation, adaptation, and innovation in tech. education
ATE Centers National Centers of Excellence Regional Centers of Excellence Resource Centers
Targeted research on technician education
ATE awards (FY2008)
Typical award sizes: Projects: $200K/year for 3 years (45 new awards) Small Grants: $75K/year for 2 years (15 new awards) National Centers: $1.2M/year for 4 years (2 new awards)
ATE Professional Development Opportunities
Go to www.TeachingTechnicians.org
Now over 100 professional development opportunities
Number of Awards per State in ATE’s 15 Year History Total number of Awards (865) 30 WASHINGTO N
16 NEW MEXICO
16 PENNSYLVANI A
1 R.I. 16 N.J. 2 DEL. 26 MD. 20 D.C.
ATE Centers of Excellence (36)
National Center Regional Center Resource Center
Millions of Dollars
ATE Program Budget
$55 $51 M
Foci of ATE Awards FY
Chemical Technology/Pulp & Paper/Environmental
Other Engineering Technology
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Talent Expansion Program (STEP)
Goal: increase the number of students receiving associate or baccalaureate degrees in STEM
Type 1: Implement strategies that will increase the number of students obtaining STEM degrees.
Type 2: Conduct research on factors affecting associate or baccalaureate degree attainment in STEM 37
STEP Type 1
Possible project activities: Focus directly on student learning Incorporate current technology Develop interdisciplinary approaches Offer bridge programs
Increases in a particular field must not be at the expense of other fields! 38
Submission & Funding Trends Fiscal Year
Submitted Awarded Submitted Awarded 2005
STEP awards (FY2008)
Maximum award sizes Type 1 (15-20 awards anticipated) $100K/year for 5 years for SFTE <5000 $200K/year for 5 years for 5000<SFTE<15000 $400K/year for 5 years for 15000<SFTE
Type 2: $500K/year for 3 years (2 awards anticipated) 40
Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S-STEM) 41
Goal: Provides institutions funds to provide scholarships to academically talented, but financial needy, students. Students can be pursuing associate, baccalaureate, or graduate degrees.
Letter of Intent: July 10, 2008 Full Proposal: August 12, 2008
S-STEM - Eligible disciplines extended to include biology, physical and mathematical sciences, computer and information sciences, geosciences, and engineering - Maximum scholarships $10,000 (based on financial need) - Grant size: up to $600,000 - One proposal per constituent school or college - About $50-$70 million available 43
S-STEM Special Program Features Has a faculty member in a STEM discipline as the PI. Involves cohorts of students. Provides student support structures. Includes optional enhancements such as research opportunities, tutoring, internships, etc. Enrolls students full time. 44
Information about funded proposals
NSF Chemistry Division - Undergraduate Research Collaboratives (URC): Initiated in 2004 - Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU)
How to Write Good Proposals?
NSF Proposal Review and Decision Process Mail Reviews
Award (Via DGA)
The Proposal: Criteria for Evaluation
What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?
What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?
Addresses a major challenge Supported by capable faculty and others Improved student learning Rationale and vision clearly articulated Informed by other projects Effective evaluation and dissemination Adequate facilities, resources, and commitment Institutional and departmental commitment
Integrated into the institution’s academic programs Contributes to knowledge base and useful to other institutions Widely used products which can be disseminated through commercial and other channels Improved content and pedagogy for faculty and teachers Increased participation by women, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities Ensures high quality STEM education for people pursuing careers in STEM fields or as teachers or technicians
General tips •
At the DUE Web Site • http://www.nsf.gov/div/index.jsp?div=DUE • Create a personalized alert service
Get copies of previously funded proposals Directly from the PI From Leslie Jensen ([email protected]
Contact a program officer (PO) and offer to review proposals 57
Making the Project Better based on Review Criteria 10 Helpful Hints (What do you think they are?)
Helpful Hints: 1. Read the Program Announcement
Helpful Hints: 2. Care About the Project
3. Build on What Others Have Done
4. Think Global, Act Local and Global
5. Have Measurable Goals and Objectives
Helpful Hints: 6. Think Teamwork
Helpful Hints: 7. Use Good Management Skills
8. Evaluation Includes Impact and Effectiveness
9. Spread the Word
10. Pay It Back
Top Ten Ways To Write a Good Proposal… That Won’t Get Funded
Flaws 10. Inflate the budget to allow for negotiations.
9. Provide a template letter of commitment for your (genuine) supporters to use. (They will!)
8. Assume your past accomplishments are well known.
Flaws 7. Assume a project website is sufficient for dissemination.
6. Assert: “Evaluation will be ongoing and consist of a variety of methods.”
5. Assume the program guidelines have not changed; or better yet, ignore them!
Flaws 4. Don’t check your speeling, nor you’re grammer.
3. Substitute flowery rhetoric for good examples.
2. Assume page limits and font size restrictions are not enforced.
1. Assume deadlines are not enforced.
WAYS TO PARTICIPATE ON A GRANT
Principal Investigator Member of Project Team Member of a coalition Member of an Advisory Board Test Site
User of Products Participant in Workshops and Symposium Reviewer of Proposals
But Most Important!