Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship

Program

Proposal Writing Workshop

Features of Effective Proposals:Fellowship Track

Washington, DCJanuary 9, 2014

Use 2 sample proposals to discuss ways to put together effective proposals for: NSF Teaching Fellowship/Master Teaching

Fellowship proposal (1339601) Capacity Building Proposal (1240009)

Features of Effective Proposals

Active “Working” WorkshopSmall and large group interactive discussions(Read )Think Share Report Learn (TSRL)

Consider two types of Noyce proposals (Full and Capacity Building)

Focus on guidelines for Project Description provided in program solicitation

Format for Discussion of Sample Proposals

Key Features of the Project Description

Results from prior NSF support Proposed Fellowship program:

◦ Description of teacher preparation and/or master teacher development program

Recruitment activities Selection process Management and administration Support for new teachers Collaboration and partnerships Monitoring and enforcing compliance Evidence for institutional commitment Evaluation plan

Review Criteria: TF/MTF Proposals

Extent to which the proposed strategies reflect effective practices based on research

Extent to which STEM & education faculty are collaborating in developing & implementing a program with curriculum based on the specialized pedagogy needed to enable teachers to effectively teach math & science & to assume leadership roles in their schools.

Degree to which the proposed programming will enable the participants to become successful mathematics and science teachers or Master Teachers

Review Criteria: TF/MTF Proposals

Capacity & ability of institution to effectively conduct the program

Number & quality of Fellows that will be served by the program

Justification for number of Fellows served & amount of stipend & salary supplements

Quality & feasibility of recruitment & marketing strategies

Review Criteria: TF/MTF Proposals Feasibility & completeness of an objective

evaluation plan that will measure the effectiveness of the proposed strategies

Institutional support for the program & the extent to which the institution is committed to making the program a central organizational focus

Evidence of cost sharing commitments Plans for sustainability beyond the period

of NSF funding

Review Criteria: TF/MTF ProposalsNSF Teaching Fellows only: Ability of the program to recruit individuals who

would not otherwise pursue a career in teaching & to recruit underrepresented groups

Quality of the Master’s degree program leading to teacher certification

Quality of the preservice student support and new teacher support infrastructure

NSF Master Teaching Fellows only: Quality of the professional development that will

be provided

Key Features of the Project Description: Description of Proposed Project

Is there sufficient information about the activities to convince you that this would be a strong project?

In what ways has the PI most effectively documented the quality of the teacher preparation and professional development program?

Is the proposed project likely to enable the Fellowship recipients to become successful teachers or Master Teachers?

Key Features of the Project Description:Recruitment Activities & Selection Process

What aspects of the recruitment plan do you think are the most likely to be effective? (and why?)

For TF: Will this plan be effective in recruiting STEM professionals who might not otherwise consider a career in teaching?

For MTF: Will this plan be effective in recruiting teachers who have the potential to become master teachers?

Will the selection process effectively identify the ‘best’ candidates for the fellowships?

Key Features of the Project Description:Support for New Teachers

Will the planned induction support adequately meet the needs of new teachers?

Key Features of the Project Description:Evaluation Plan

Will this plan provide useful information about important program outcomes?

Four features, divided among the tables:Management & administrationCollaboration & partnerships and evidence of

institutional commitmentMonitoring & enforcing complianceResults from prior NSF support

In your Jigsaw GroupsDiscuss the questionsDecide on main points to report to group

Report out

Jigsaw Activity

Key Features of the Project Description:Management & Administration

What aspects of the administration and management plan did the most to convince you that the project will be well run?

Key Features of the Project Description:Collaboration and Partnerships

Has the PI persuaded you that the collaboration and partnerships are well-functioning?

In a Strong Partnership

Individuals from all institutions have clear roles and communication structures

Management plan includes a description of how communication, meetings, roles, division of responsibilities, and reporting will occur

Distribution of resources is appropriate to the scope of the work

All partners contribute to the work and benefit from it

Letters of commitment are provided

Key Features of the Project Description:Evidence for Institutional Commitment Consider the information about

institutional commitment What other lines of evidence could a PI

use to demonstrate that the sponsoring institution is committed to making the program a central institutional focus?

Key Features of the Project Description:Monitoring & Enforcing Compliance

Consider the monitoring and enforcing compliance strategies outlined in the proposal

Are these plans likely to be effective?

Key Features of the Project Description:Results from Prior NSF Support

Does the proposal adequately address prior support?

Does the new project use infrastructure developed with other support?

Do the various projects synergize to amplify the individual impact of each?

Intellectual Merit and Broader Impact

Consider the descriptions of intellectual merit and broader impact criteria, as well as additional review criteria for the TF/MTF track proposals that align with them (see solicitation), and consider how the sample proposal addresses these criteria.

What could you say about intellectual merit and broader impact for the program for which you are seeking funding?

Strong partnership with school district

Clear description of preservice program for Teaching Fellows

and professional development program for Master Teaching

Fellows

Detailed recruitment and selection plans

Clear vision of Master Teacher roles and responsibilities,

including involvement in preservice programs

Attention to content and pedagogy

Detailed evaluation plans

Matching funds identified

Strong TF/MTF Proposals include:

Insufficient detail for preservice and induction programs for Teaching Fellows and professional development program for Master Teaching Fellows

Vague recruitment plans

Selection plans not according to guidelines

Master Teacher roles and responsibilities not discussed

Matching funds not identified

Role of non-profit organization not clear

School district partnership not strong

Evaluation weak or lacking independence

Weak TF/MTF Proposals may show:

Features of Effective Proposals:

Capacity Building Proposals

Key Features of the Capacity Building Project Description: Is there sufficient information about the proposed

activities to convince you that this would lead to a well-designed project consistent with the requirements of the Noyce Scholarship program?

Are the appropriate players involved? Is there a clear statement of objectives to be completed

and expected outcomes of the project? Will the evaluation plans measure the stated objectives

and outcomes?

Key Features of the Project Description:Results from Prior NSF Support

Does the proposal adequately address prior support?

Capacity Building or Full Implementation Proposal?

What aspects of this capacity building proposal convinced you this was the appropriate category for this proposal?

What differences in emphasis do you see between the two proposals?

At what point would you say a team was prepared to submit a full proposal?