writing effective proposals i components of a good proposal

7/28/2019 Writing Effective Proposals I Components of a Good Proposal

1/23

Proposal Preparation WorkshopJuly 19-22, 2011 Reno, NV

Writing More Effective

Proposals I

Components of a Good Proposal

Proposal Review Criteria


2/23


Overview of What Makes a

Good Proposal


3/23


1. A well defined problem

**Aligns with TUES solicitation**

Based on your local experience andknowledge

Offers potential for significant impact


4/23


2. A set of clear goals, objectives, and

outcomes

Goals: Big picture how will it

change things? Why is it important?

Objectives: What are you going to

do/what are your strategies?

Outcomes: What can you measure?


5/23


3. A Rationale for Your Approach

Local data to support and justify theproblem

Evidence that you know what others

have done

Justification for your approach

Evidence/argument for impact locally, broadly


6/23


4. A well designed evaluation plan

Conducted by a credible/objectiveevaluator

Clearly tied to project objectives and

outcomes

Includes both formative and

summative components

Uses appropriate

methods/instruments


7/23


5. A detailed project management plan

Timeline for major project activities

Description of responsibilities of

project personnel

Evidence of expertise of project

personnel to carry out proposed work


8/23


6. A means of sustaining and

disseminating the project

Evidence of institutional commitment

Details on which activities will be

sustained

How will you share results/promote

dissemination?


9/23


Proposal Strengths

andWeaknesses


10/23


Studied Panel Summaries for 471CCLI proposals

Identified the most common

strengths and weaknesses

What do you think are the top

strengths and weaknesses?List 3-5 strengths and 3-5

weaknesses (5 min.)

Internal NSF Proposal Analysis


11/23


Topic is important and timely, introducingnew material; or it is responsive to industryor a community need

PIs were experienced, strong, andtechnically sound

Proposed collaboration with otherorganizations (diverse 4-year schools,2YCs, K-12, etc.) is detailed and believable

Proposal has good potential to involveminorities or women

Dissemination plan is excellent and willcontribute to STEM education knowledgebase.

Proposed ideas are likely to have a largeimpact (Number of students, broadness ofidea, etc.)

Proposed ideas build on prior workorexisting products

Evaluation plan is excellent, outstanding,

Top Ten Strengths


12/23


Most Common Strengths

Strengths Cited in More Than 20 % of the Panel Summaries

Important, timely, orresponsive

PI's strong

Collaboration details

Potential for

involving W&M

Dissemination,

contribution to KB

Large impact

Build on prior work

or products

Evaluation plan

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percent


13/23


Proposed activities are not described in sufficientdetail with clear plans

Evaluation plan is missing or incomplete Proposed activities are not doable or they will not

result in expected outcomes

Dissemination plan is inadequate and will notcontribute to STEM education knowledge base

Proposal does not has good potential for involvingminorities or women

Proposed ideas do not build on prior workor existingproducts

Proposed ideas are not novel, innovative orpotentially transformative

Proposed ideas are not likely to have a large impact(Number of students, broadness of idea, etc.)

Proposed collaboration with other organizations

(diverse 4-year schools, community colleges, K-12,etc.) is not detailed or believable

Top Ten Weaknesses


14/23


Most Common Weaknesses

Weaknesses Cited in More Than 20 % of the Panel Summaries

Collaboration details

Large impact

Innovative or novel

Build on prior work or

products

Potential for involvingW&M

Dissemination &

contribution to KB

Activities doable &

related to outcomes

Evaluation plan

Sufficient detail and

clear plans

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percent


15/23


NSF Review Criteria


16/23


All proposals are evaluated using the

NSB-approved merit review criteria

Intellectual merit

Broader impact

NSF-wide criteria

TUES-specific criteria


17/23


NSF-wide Suggested Questions for

Intellectual Merit

Will the project:

Include activities important in advancing

knowledge? Involve qualified proposer(s)?

Contain creative, original, and

transformative concepts?

Have a well conceived and organized plan?

Include sufficient access to resources?


18/23


NSF-wide Suggested Questions for

Broader Impacts

Will the project:

Advance discovery -- promote teaching &

learning?

Broaden participation of underrepresented

groups?

Enhance the infrastructure?

Include broad dissemination?

Benefit society?


19/23


Components of a TUES Project(found on page 5 of the TUES Program Solicitation)

Creating Learning Materials and Strategies

Implementing New Instructional Strategies

Developing Faculty Expertise

Assessing and Evaluating Student Achievement

Conducting Research on Undergraduate STEM Education


20/23


Examples of Type 1 Projects(paraphrased from page 6 of the TUES Program Solicitation)

A project that develops materials that use a new instructional approach.

A project that integrates new instrumentation or equipment into

undergraduate laboratories or field work.

A collaborative project between faculty from two-year and four-year

schools that leads to seamless transfer in an efficient way.

A pilot project that explores the practical aspects of using remotelaboratories or instruction among several institutions.

A pilot project that integrates current science and pedagogy into the

teacher preparation curriculum.

A pilot study to explore Internet-based approachesfor facultyprofessional development.

A project that develops an instrument to assess students knowledge in a

particular area, their abilities with certain processes, or their attitude

about some aspect of STEM.


21/23


TUES-specific Suggested Questions for

Intellectual Merit

Will the project: Produce

Exemplary materials, processes, or models?

Important assessment or research findings?

Build on STEM education knowledge base?

Have explicit and appropriate measurable

outcomes integrated into the evaluation?

Generate useful evaluation information?


22/23


Will the project:

Contribute to the understanding of STEM education?

Help build and diversity the STEM educationcommunity?

Have a broad impact on STEM education in an area

of recognized need or opportunity?

Have the potential to contribute to transformative

change in undergraduate STEM education?

TUES-specific Suggested Questions for

Broader Impacts


23/23

Proposal Preparation WorkshopJuly 19 22 2011 Reno NV

Questions and Answers

writing effective proposals i components of a good proposal

Documents