Funding Opportunities at the National Science Foundation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 10
About This Presentation
Title:

Funding Opportunities at the National Science Foundation

Description:

Multi User Equipment (MUE) Chemistry Research Infrastructure Funds (CRIF) ... Why were they funded (reviewer perspective) Critical Review: An Exercise ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:36
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 11
Provided by: andrienn
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Funding Opportunities at the National Science Foundation


1
Funding Opportunities at the National Science
Foundation
2005-2006 Workshops
  • Andrienne Friedli (Chemistry/ORSP)
  • Heather Brown (ETIS)
  • Stephen Wright (Biology)

2
Programs at NSF
  • Research
  • Education
  • Workforce
  • Equipment

3
MTSU Research Successes
  • Research at Undergraduate Institutions (RUI)
  • Collaborative RUI (CRUI)
  • MPS (Math)

4
MTSU Instruction Successes
  • Classroom, Course and Laboratory Innovation
    (CCLI, formerly ILI)
  • Meeting support
  • Math

5
MTSU Program/Workforce Successes
  • Partners for Innovation (PFI)
  • STEM Talent Expansion Program (STEP)
  • TN Lewis Stokes Minority Alliance (TLSAMP)
  • Women in Science and Engineering (WISE)

6
MTSU Equipment Successes
  • Major Research Instrumentation (MRI)
  • Classroom, Course and Laboratory Innovation
    (CCLI, formerly ILI)

7
Key Selling Points
  • Strong plan
  • Good productivity record
  • Partnerships
  • Inclusion of students
  • Administrative backing

8
MTSU Future Directions
  • Research - Math, Phys. Sciences, Computer
    Information, Geosciences, Social, Behavioral
    Economic Sciences
  • Multi User Equipment (MUE)
  • Chemistry Research Infrastructure Funds (CRIF)
  • Graduate student support (IGERT / GAANN)
  • Small Business (SBIR/STTR)

9
NSF Prospects
  • Changes Education grants
  • Anecdotal Funding cuts
  • Uncertainty Katrina, Iraq war
  • SBIR/STTR

GET OUR SHARE!
10
Critical Review An Exercise
  • Consider a CCLI proposal submitted 3 times
  • In 3 groups (divide up the reviewers), read
    comments
  • Write down the major good and bad comments
  • List and discuss these in the larger group.
  • Did the PIs address the reviewer comments in
    resubmissions?
  • Did new comments appear?
  • Why were they funded (reviewer perspective)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com