More Like this

1. A New Approach to Collaboration: A Partnership between an NSF-funded Engineering Research Center and a Liberal Arts College

   Roth, M.J.S.; Caslake, L.F. (June 2018, ASEE Annual Conference proceedings)

   In August 2016, the authors, faculty members at Lafayette College, were awarded a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant (Grant No. CMMI-1632963) based on an unsolicited proposal to the NSF’s CMMI Division. Like many faculty at strictly undergraduate institutions, we routinely provide opportunities for students to work on research projects and fund this research in some situations through external grants. An innovation in this particular grant was the creation of a research collaboration between faculty and students at Lafayette and an NSF-funded Engineering Research Center (ERC). As stated on the NSF website, “The goal of the ERC Program is to integrate engineering research and education with technological innovation to transform national prosperity, health, and security.” To accomplish this goal, collaborations between ERCs and other institutions are inherent in the work of an ERC; however, research collaborations between ERCs and small liberal arts colleges are rare and we know of no other collaboration of this type. In our most recent research project, we have developed and implemented a model that successfully provides our students and ourselves with opportunities to collaborate on an interdisciplinary research project with faculty, researchers, and graduate students at the NSF-funded Center for Bio-mediated and Bio-inspired Geotechnics (CBBG). This paper provides a brief overview of the goals of the research project and describes our motivation for establishing the collaboration, the structure of the collaboration, the anticipated broader impacts associated with the work, and the results from the first 18 months of the partnership. A logic model is included to illustrate the connections between the resources, strategies, outcomes, and long-term impacts associated with the collaboration. The goal of this paper is to describe the collaboration between Lafayette College and the ERC from the point of view of the faculty members at Lafayette, to describe the positive outcomes that have resulted from this collaboration, and to encourage faculty members at other small colleges to consider developing similar collaborations. 

   more » « less
2. Applying Project Management Skills to NSF ATE-funded Grants: A roadmap to success for first-time grantees

   Craft, Elaine; Quinn, Buffy; Silver, Pamela (June 2024, Papers on Engineering Education Repository (PEER))

   The National Science Foundation (NSF) Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program is specifically designed to support workforce development that primarily takes place in technician education programs offered at two-year colleges across the nation. Even so, NSF grant funding is infrequently or never pursued by most two-year colleges even though there is a need for funding to support high-cost, high-impact STEM programs. Since two-year colleges are focused on teaching vs. research, securing grants is seldom, if ever, required or even recognized as important as part of tenure and promotion processes at these institutions. As a result, technical/STEM faculty members typically do not have prior grant experience, nor do they have experience in managing a grant-funded project using industry-standard techniques. Guiding new grantees in applying Project Management skills as they implement NSF ATE-funded grants for the first time holds promise for improving project outcomes, reducing the frustration of a steep learning curve for new PIs, and encouraging follow-on grant proposals to the ATE Program. The first two principles of project management, (1) set clear objectives from the start and (2) create a project plan, are required to receive a first grant from NSF. When a grant award is received, two-year college faculty are invariably faced with working grant-funded activities into their already heavily-scheduled work weeks. Knowing about and employing project management skills can make a positive difference in the experience one has as a PI responsible for grant implementation and outcomes. These skills can help prevent chaos as workloads and competing demands for their time increase. To help new PIs learn and use project management skills within the context of NSF expectations so that they may maximize project outcomes and position themselves for subsequent NSF funding. A new professional development opportunity, PI 101, is providing instruction, mentoring, and technical assistance during the first year of project implementation. Based on PI 101 pilot year experiences and research, this support is being strengthened to specifically include the other three principles of project management: (1) organize and manage resources, (2) assess risks and changes throughout the project, and (3) monitor progress and performance on a regular basis. Mentor-Connect Forward, funded by the NSF ATE Program, added a newly developed component that addresses the critical need for first-time grantees to have instruction and support during their first year of project implementation. This professional development opportunity, called PI 101, is being offered to first-time, two-year college PIs to develop skills and help them build confidence by learning to apply proven strategies that can improve project outcomes so that their initial NSF ATE-funded work will build a worthy foundation for future grant awards and associated program improvements and innovation in technician education. PI 101 provides a collegial cohort environment for new PIs as they address issues such as grants management, budgets, and reporting expectations. New PIs can also get answers and receive direction on communication, building internal and external relationships, and developing industry partnerships. An important component of PI 101 is the introduction of the principles of project management as they apply to grant management. The pilot cohort of PI 101 participants received NSF ATE awards in 2023. The impact on the people involved, project progress, and outcomes are being monitored to inform improvements to PI 101 and future research questions. This paper explores the challenges and lessons learned in assisting a cohort of 15 two-year colleges so that they may effectively incorporate principles of project management and other grantsmanship strategies as they implement their first NSF ATE projects. 

   more » « less
3. Design and Development: NSF Engineering Research Centers Unite: Developing and Testing a Suite of Instruments to Enhance Overall Education Program Evaluation

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--36906  

   Zhao, Zhen; Carberry, Adam; Larson, Jean; Jordan, Michelle; Savenye, Wilhelmina; Eustice, Kristi; Godwin, Allison; Roehrig, Gillian; Barr, Christopher; Farnsworth, Kimberly (January 2021, American Society for Engineering Education)

   National Science Foundation (NSF) funded Engineering Research Centers (ERC) must complement their technical research with various education and outreach opportunities to: 1) improve and promote engineering education, both within the center and to the local community; 2) encourage and include the underrepresented populations to participate in Engineering activities; and 3) advocate communication and collaboration between industry and academia. ERCs ought to perform an adequate evaluation of their educational and outreach programs to ensure that beneficial goals are met. Each ERC has complete autonomy in conducting and reporting such evaluation. Evaluation tools used by individual ERCs are quite similar, but each ERC has designed their evaluation processes in isolation, including evaluation tools such as survey instruments, interview protocols, focus group protocols, and/or observation protocols. These isolated efforts resulted in redundant resources spent and lacking outcome comparability across ERCs. Leaders from three different ERCs led and initiated a collaborative effort to address the above issue by building a suite of common evaluation instruments that all current and future ERCs can use. This leading group consists of education directors and external evaluators from all three partners ERCs and engineering education researchers, who have worked together for two years. The project intends to address the four ERC program clusters: Broadening Participation in Engineering, Centers and Networks, Engineering Education, and Engineering Workforce Development. The instruments developed will pay attention to culture of inclusion, outreach activities, mentoring experience, and sustained interest in engineering. The project will deliver best practices in education program evaluation, which will not only support existing ERCs, but will also serve as immediate tools for brand new ERCs and similar large-scale research centers. Expanding the research beyond TEEC and sharing the developed instruments with NSF as well as other ERCs will also promote and encourage continual cross-ERC collaboration and research. Further, the joint evaluation will increase the evaluation consistency across all ERC education programs. Embedded instrumental feedback loops will lead to continual improvement to ERC education performance and support the growth of an inclusive and innovative engineering workforce. Four major deliveries are planned. First, develop a common quantitative assessment instrument, named Multi-ERC Instrument Inventory (MERCII). Second, develop a set of qualitative instruments to complement MERCII. Third, create a web-based evaluation platform for MERCII. Fourth, update the NSF ERC education program evaluation best practice manual. These deliveries together will become part of and supplemented by an ERC evaluator toolbox. This project strives to significantly impact how ERCs evaluate their educational and outreach programs. Single ERC based studies lack the sample size to truly test the validity of any evaluation instruments or measures. A common suite of instruments across ERCs would provide an opportunity for a large scale assessment study. The online platform will further provide an easy-to-use tool for all ERCs to facilitate evaluation, share data, and reporting impacts. 

   more » « less
4. Introducing the NSF-ATE InnovATEBIO National Biotechnology Education Center

   Smith T, Bock H (August 2020, Journal of biomolecular techniques)

   Community colleges play a vital role in preparing the highly skilled technical workforce needed to support the biotechnology industry. Community colleges offer students hands-on practical experience, certificates, and technical degrees. Students include high-school graduates, individuals changing careers, college graduates, and even PhD holders. As these colleges support the many facets of the biotechnology industry, their laboratories are equipped to teach modern techniques, including DNA sequencing, mass spectrometry, microscopy, chromatography, immunoassays, and bioinformatics. Many programs are also developing education skill standards and curriculum to support the latest biotechnology manufacturing that includes CRISPR-based gene therapies, CAR-T, immuno-therapeutics, and patient derived tissues. Some programs have established contract service organizations and business incubators to catalyze regional economic development and provide internships for students entering the workforce. These college-run organizations share many similarities with ABRF core facilities. Over the last 20+ years, community college biotechnology programs have come together to share experiences and learning through the Bio-Link network. Bio-Link was funded by the NSF-ATE (National Science Foundation Advanced Technological Education) program until the fall of 2018. In the fall of 2019, InnovATEBIO, a new national center for biotechnology education, was initiated through a five-year NSF-ATE award. InnovATEBIO will build on the Bio-Link foundation to further advance connections between high schools, community colleges, and the biotechnology industry to increase the number of highly trained biotechnology technicians in the United States. InnovATEBIO will support activities designed to increase authentic research and work-based experiences and seeks to develop collaborations with ABRF members supporting course development and partner on projects that could be funded by NSF or others. 

   more » « less
5. Developing common qualitative tools for cross ERC education program evaluation

   Zhao, Zhen; O'Donnell, Megan; Jordan, Michelle; Savenye, Wilhelminia C. (January 2022, American Society for Engineering Education)

   National Science Foundation (NSF) funded Engineering Research Centers (ERC) are required to develop and implement education and outreach opportunities related to their core technical research topics to broaden participation in engineering and create partnerships between industry and academia. Additionally, ERCs must include an independent evaluation of their education and outreach programming to assess their performance and impacts. To date, each ERC’s evaluation team designs its instruments/tools and protocols for evaluation, resulting in idiosyncratic and redundant efforts. Nonetheless, there is much overlap among the evaluation topics, concepts, and practices, suggesting that the ERC evaluation and assessment community might benefit from having a common set of instruments and protocols. ERCs’ efforts could then be better spent developing more specific, sophisticated, and time-intensive evaluation tools to deepen and enrich the overall ERC evaluation efforts. The implementation of such a suite of instruments would further allow each ERC to compare its efforts to those across other ERCs as one data point for assessing its effectiveness and informing its improvement efforts. Members of a multi-ERC collaborative team, funded by the NSF, have been leading a project developing a suite of common instruments and protocols which contains both quantitative and qualitative tools. This paper reports on the development of a set of qualitative instruments that, to date, includes the following: (a) a set of interview/focus group protocols intended for various groups of ERC personnel, centered around five common topics/areas, and (b) rubrics for summer program participants' verbal poster/presentations and their written poster/slide deck presentation artifacts. The development process is described sequentially, beginning with a review of relevant literature and existing instruments, followed by the creation of an initial set of interview questions and rubric criteria. The initial versions of the tools were then pilot-tested with multiple ERCs. Feedback sessions with education/evaluation leaders of those piloting ERCs were then conducted, through which further revision efforts were made. 

   more » « less