Call for Proposals

NRCEN invites you to submit a proposal to present at the 2002 workshop. This workshop will be focusing on issues that are unique to Centers, or challenges that are common within Center education and human resource development activities. The Planning Committee for the 2002 NRCEN workshop has identified questions and issues common to many Centers that should stimulate in-depth discussions and meaningful debate. A major goal for this workshop is to keep the discussions focused on Center issues. The desired outcome of the workshop is to identify a few high priority issues that impact us all and necessitates further action. You are invited to submit a proposal that fits one of the five major themes, in one of four presentation formats.

Dealine for proposals: EXTENDED: August 9, 2002.

The Planning Committee will make the final determination of which proposals are accepted and will send notifications by August 10, 2002.

Workshop Themes
1. Defining NSF Research Centers and their educational missions.
2. Evaluation.
3. Role of Center scientists/engineers as educators and mentors in K-12 education.
4. Impacting Undergraduate and Graduate Education.
5. Early Challenges (optional first day session)

Presentation Formats
1. Panel
2. Roundtable
3. Think Tank
4. Poster

Submit Proposal

WORKSHOP THEMES

There are five major themes that provide the focus of this workshop, including the optional Early Challenges session. Each theme has two organizers from the Planning Committee, as indicated. You may contact either the organizers or the workshop chair with questions regarding these themes.

1. Defining NSF Research Centers and their educational missions.

Organizers:
• Patricia Anders, Wadsworth Center (STC), panders@wadsworth.org
• Robert de Groot, Center for Neuromorphic Systems Engineering (ERC) rdegroot@oxy.edu

Presentations in this theme should address the following questions:
What are the elements or criteria that National Science Foundation Research Centers (NSF RC’s) have in common? How do the goals/missions/priorities of NSF RC’s differ from each other (STC’s vs. ERC’s vs. MRSEC’s)? How do they differ from other educational efforts? How do they differ from NSF EHR? How do Centers support education more effectively than single-investigator grants? What is the "center-mode" or "center mechanism" in the context of education and human resource development? Does it differ from the research context?

2. Evaluation.

Organizers:
• David Haase, NSF STC for Environmentally Responsible Solvents and Processes (STC) david_haase@ncsu.edu
• Anne Donnelly, Engineering Research Center for Particle Science & Technology (ERC) adonnelly@erc.ufl.edu

Presentations in this theme should address the following questions:
How can NSF RC’s evaluate small-scale projects with validity and within the context of NSF Research Centers? What are some examples of educational projects/programs with compelling evidence of positive outcomes (what are our models)? What can the NSF provide to assist us with evaluation?

3. Role of Center scientists/engineers as educators and mentors in K-12 education.

Organizers:
• Marni Goldman, Center on Polymer Interfaces and Macromolecular Assemblies (MRSEC) marni@chemeng.stanford.edu
• Christine Morrow, Ferroelectric Liquid Crystal Materials Research Center (MRSEC) christine.morrow@colorado.edu

Presentations in this theme should address the following questions:
How can NSF Research Center scientists/engineers best contribute to K-12 education? What are good strategies for facilitating productive involvement of scientists/engineers in K-12 projects? How can Center research be integrated into K-12 curriculum without contributing to the "mile wide, inch deep" concerns highlighted in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and post-TIMSS studies? How can NSF Research Centers partner with large systemic efforts without "piggy-backing"?

4. Impacting Undergraduate and Graduate Education.

Organizers:
• Patricia Marsteller, Center for Behavioral Neuroscience (STC) pmars@learnlink.emory.edu
• Lisa Hunter, Center for Adaptive Optics (STC) hunter@ucolick.org.

How can NSF Research Centers positively impact university institutional issues such as:
• Increasing the value of educational activities in faculty reward systems
• Working with undergraduate and graduate admissions and departments to recruit more students from underrepresented groups.
• Broadening the experiences and skills (including involvement in education efforts) of graduate students without increasing time to degree
• Creating undergraduate experiences (courses, etc.) that function as "pumps" rather than "filters."

5. Early Challenges.

(optional day one afternoon for new directors): Assuming there is sufficient interest, we are offering an additional half-day workshop for new directors to help them develop programs, policies and strategic plans early in the Center’s life. Attendees can either propose to lead a session, or request that the planning committee facilitate the development of a session on a desired topic.

Possible topics:
• Defining your focus
• Strategic plans, milestones, roadmaps
• Getting the most out of an advisory committee
• Involvement of education directors in center leadership
• Mechanisms for funding education projects
• Strategies for successful site visits
• Partnering without piggy-backing
• Getting scientists/engineers involved in your projects

PRESENTATION FORMATS

We are inviting presentation proposals that fit the above themes in one of four formats outlined below.

A. PANEL.

60-minute panel presentations will cover a general theme or topic that addresses a challenging issue faced by workshop participants. The abstract should outline how the panelists will offer a coordinated presentation and the general topic to the audience. In addition, the proposal must include a separate abstract for each of the panelists describing his or her presentation (enter all abstracts in the "Abstract" box, with each presenters name and presentation title above his/her abstract). The submitter is responsible for coordinating the presentation in advance and summarizing the session. Panels should be interactive and allow ample time for questions, discussion, and summarizing the session.

B. ROUNDTABLE.

A 60-minute oral presentation and discussion seated around a table in a group setting. The presentation begins with an oral presentation of approximately 15 minutes and is followed by 30 minutes of discussion and feedback, and finally 15 minutes to summarize the session. Roundtable presenters should bring targeted questions to pose to the group in order to learn from and with those attending. Roundtables enable networking, in-depth discussions, and exchanges between novice and more-experienced education directors.

C. THINK TANK.

A 90-minute session focusing on a single issue or question. The session begins with a chairperson orienting the attendees to the issue or question and the relevant context. Then attendees break into small groups to explore the issue or question and finally reconvene to share their enhanced understanding through a discussion facilitated by the chairperson. In the final 15 minutes, the chairperson (or designee) will summarize the session. Proposals for this session should provide an abstract that succinctly identifies the question or issue to be addressed, the relevant contextual factors, and the roles of the individual breakout groups (Will they each address the overall topic or question? A particular facet of the topic or question? Or examine the topic or question from a particular viewpoint?).

D. POSTER.

Posters will consist of formal graphic presentations prepared by the participants. It will be on a selected topic displayed on a 4’ x 4’ panel. The abstract describing the poster should provide information on the selected topic and how it will be addressed. Posters should not be promotional, but rather should correspond to the topics outlined in the call for proposals.