Costello Brown

ATBNSF-41

NSF MERIT REVIEWCRITERIAROBERT S. Noyce Teacher ScholarshipProgram WorkshopJanuary 29-30, 2010Costello L. Brown

Proposal Review Components– Intellectual Merit• Strengths and Weaknesses– Broader Impacts• Strengths and Weaknesses– Evaluation of results of prior NSF support– Summary Statement• Clarifies strengths and weaknesses of proposal

Ratings Possible ratings that your NSFproposal can receive:– Excellent– Very Good– Good– Fair– Poor

Intellectual Merit Does the project advance knowledge? Are PI and personnel well-qualified? Is activity creative, original, innovative? Is activity well-conceived and wellorganized? Is there sufficient access to resources?

Intellectual Merit Does the project advanceknowledge?– Use references to support your proposedinitiatives and activities.– Use any relevant preliminary data that may beavailable to support your project.– Discuss what will be learned that may helpother STEM projects, as a result ofimplementing your proposed project.

Intellectual Merit Is activity creative, original, innovative?– More appropriate questions for Noyceproposals: Is the activity feasible? Does itmake sense?– Do the proposed activities fit well with yourunique environment and your type ofstudents?– Caution: Avoid too much creativity andoriginality…statements you do not wish toreceive from reviewers “this will never work”or “ is this PI from another planet?”.

Intellectual Merit Are PI and Personnel Well-Qualified?– Provide a brief overview of the qualifications ofkey personnel highlighting any uniquequalifications in the narrative of your proposal– Provide a rationale or explanation for anyunusual circumstance concerning personnel (aprofessor of English Literature in charge ofimproving student math scores)

Intellectual Merit Is there sufficient access to resources?– Provide assurances to the reviewers that thenecessary resources, including space, labs,equipment, computers or any resourcesunique to your project are available.– Provide assurances that students and facultywill have appropriate access to theseresources for your proposed activities.

Intellectual Merit Is activity well-conceived and well-organized?– Provide a succinct, logical and easy to followdescription of the activity.– Use legible graphs and tables when needed withappropriate legends and titles.– Avoid superfluous information.– Well organized proposals tend to “Keep theReviewers Happy” That should be your goal.

Broader Impacts How well does the project advance discoveryand understanding while promoting teaching,training and learning? Does activity broaden participation ofunderrepresented groups? Will activity enhance research and educationinfrastructure? Will results be disseminated broadly? What may be the activity’s benefits tosociety?

Broader Impacts Does activity broaden participation ofunderrepresented groups?– Provide a description of the underrepresentedgroup(s) and succinctly explain to thereviewers how your proposed project willbroaden their participation in STEMdisciplines/careers.– Provide an explanation for any unusual orunique circumstances (only 0.5% of yourstudents are from URM groups.)

Broader Impacts Will results be disseminated broadly?– Provide a clear description of the mechanismsthat will be used to disseminate the strategiesthat were used to produce the glowingsuccess of your project– Try to include a little more than 1) publicationsand 2) presentations at regional and nationalconferences and symposia.

Noyce-Additional Review CriteriaPhase I Capacity and ability of the institution toeffectively conduct the program Number and quality of students that will beserved by the program Justification for number of students servedand amount of stipend and scholarshipsupport Ability of the program to recruit STEM majorswho would not otherwise pursue a career inteaching

Noyce-Additional Review CriteriaPhase I Quality and feasibility of recruitment and marketingstrategies Quality of the preservice educational program Extent to which STEM faculty and education facultyare collaborating in developing and implementing theprogram Quality of the preservice student-support and newteacher-support infrastructure Extent to which the proposed strategies reflecteffective practices based on research

Noyce-Additional Review CriteriaPhase I Degree to which the proposed programming willenable scholarship or stipend recipients to becomesuccessful mathematics and science teachers Feasibility and completeness of an evaluation planthat will measure the effectiveness of the proposedstrategies and add to knowledge base about STEMteacher preparation Institutional support for the program and the extent towhich the institution is committed to making theprogram a central organizational focus

Noyce-Additional Review CriteriaTF/MTF Proposals Capacity and ability of the institution to effectivelyconduct the program Number and quality of Fellows that will be served bythe program Justification for number of Fellows served andamount of stipend and salary supplements For NSF Teaching Fellows: Ability of the program torecruit individuals who would not otherwise pursue acareer in teaching and to recruit underrepresentedgroups Quality and feasibility of recruitment and marketingstrategies

Noyce-Additional Review CriteriaTF/MTF Proposals Quality of the Master's degree program leading toteacher certification for NSF Teaching Fellows For NSF Teaching Fellows: Quality of the preservicestudent support and new teacher supportinfrastructure For NSF Master Teaching Fellows: Quality of theprofessional development that will be provided Extent to which the proposed strategies reflecteffective practices based on research Evidence of cost sharing commitments

Noyce-Additional Review CriteriaTF/MTF Proposals Extent to which STEM faculty and education facultyare collaborating in developing and implementing aprogram with curriculum based on the specializedpedagogy needed to enable teachers to effectivelyteach math and science and to assume leadershiproles in their schools. Degree to which the proposed programming willenable the participants to become successfulmathematics and science teachers or MasterTeachers.

Noyce-Additional Review CriteriaTF/MTF Proposals Feasibility and completeness of an objectiveevaluation plan that will measure the effectiveness ofthe proposed strategies Institutional support for the program and the extent towhich the institution is committed to making theprogram a central organizational focus Plans for sustainability beyond the period of NSFfunding

Proposal Weaknesses Fatal weaknesses: proposal cannot befunded: poor concept, unqualifiedpersonnel Negotiable weaknesses: may be fixedin negotiations with the Program Officer:over budget, lack of detail

Thank youNSF-42