National Conference 2006: 

Registration Announcement:

Registration for housing and travel for the 2006 National Conference are now open, and the conference program is posted on the National Conference website, www.cur.org/conferences/depauw/cur06natconf.asp. Conference registration closes on June 15th, 2006.  All payments must be received by this date to ensure admission to the conference.  

Conference Highlight: ESRI Workshop

Ann Johnson, of Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), is offering a workshop to introduce educators to the use of GIS in introductory level courses or as a tool for labs in geography, biology, geology, environmental science or other courses needing geospatial thinking.  It will provide educators an introduction to the use of ArcGIS, ArcMap and ArcCatalog, and demonstrate the use of Spatial and 3D Analyst extensions including ArcGlobe with examples from many disciplines.  Experience with ArcGIS is not necessary, but familiarity with Windows OS would be beneficial.  The focus will be hands on use of ArcGIS and the resources available to educators.  Registration for this Workshop will end June 1st, 2006.  The application is available by visiting: http://www.cur.org/conferences/depauw/ESRI%20Registration.pdf

CUR Kids Program:

For children ages 6-12, who wish to participate, DePauw University has an exciting 2 1/2 day program planned.   Run by Karen Hirt, local third grade teacher with more than 15 years experience, this program includes fun and educational activities for children. Weather may dictate the exact schedule of activities but they will include a full day at the world famous Indianapolis Children's Museum, some field science at the DePauw University Nature Park, and a multitude of other activities designed engage students in fun and learning. Parents will be able to drop their children off in time to participate in the first workshop each morning Sunday through Tuesday. Parents will pick their children up after the last session Sunday through Tuesday (approximately 4:45 pm Sunday and Monday; 12:30 pm Tuesday). Questions can be directed to Bridget Gourley, bgourley@depauw.edu, Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry.  

Registration for this program is available by visiting: http://www.cur.org/conferences/depauw/CURKids%202006%20Registration.pdf

Proposal Writing Institute:

The CUR Proposal Writing Institute will be held July 22-26, 2006 at the University of Richmond in Richmond, Virginia.  This Institute will bring together faculty and administrators interested in preparing proposals for submission to external funding agencies.  The four-day institute will consist of one-on-one work with a mentor, small group discussions, writing and critiquing of proposals, and plenary sessions.  The institute has been developed to assist novice to experienced proposal writers in drafting complete proposals for submission.  

Registration is available by visiting: http://www.cur.org/institutes/proposal.html

This CUR Institute will be held July 21-23, 2006 at Bridgewater State College in Bridgewater, Massachusetts.  This workshop will bring together teams of three to five faculty members and administrators engaged in enhancing undergraduate research opportunities at their home institutions, focusing on undergraduate research as faculty development, student-based inquiry and institutional support structure.  The three days will consist of plenary lectures presented by facilitators associated with CUR interspersed with individual team meetings with CUR mentors.  Faculty and administrators from disciplines throughout the social sciences and humanities will spend the weekend discussing models of undergraduate research, mentorship and collaboration; what "research" and "mentorship" mean in different disciplines in the social sciences and humanities; assessing the value of undergraduate research; and means of augmenting funding for undergraduate research internally and externally.

Registration is available by visiting:  http://www.cur.org/institutes/socscihum.html

Posters on the Hill 2006:

On April 25, 2006, 78 students gathered in Washington D.C. to present the results of their research at the Annual CUR Posters on the Hill. CUR partnered with the American Chemical Society (ACS) for the event. ACS presented Public Service Awards to Dr. Arden Bement, Director of the National Science Foundation; Congressman Frank Wolfe, R-VA; and Congressman Ron Kind, D-WI. Congressman Sherwood Boehlert, Chair of the House Science Committee served as master of ceremonies and CUR member and President of ACS, Ann Nalley presented the awards. Students had an opportunity to interact with ACS scientists from corporations and graduate schools as well as several Members of Congress. In addition to the Poster session, students also had the opportunity to tour laboratories at the National Institutes of Health and tour an earth science laboratory and the space craft assembly and testing facility at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

Pictured: Student researcher Angela Grant with her advisor Kathryn Schaefer from Randolph Macon Woman's College.

Washington News:

This is the second column by Washington Partners to appear in CUR E-News. The National Office would appreciate your suggestions for topics that you wish to learn more about and information that you need about federal legislation and funding. Please send comments to nancy@cur.org. Please note the Washington Partners is suggesting that you write to your senators and congressperson in support of the CCLI program.

Washington Partners News:

The NSF and Undergraduate Research

Activities at the National Science Foundation (NSF) are a critical part of the President’s American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI).  This is reflected in the President’s request that for FY2007, the NSF budget be increased by $439 million to $6.02 billion.  This increase will have an impact on all NSF programs including those involved in undergraduate research.

The following is a brief compilation of information on various NSF research departments that report data on the number of undergraduates they serve.  The notes are specific undergraduate priorities the programs have set for FY2007.

	Number of Undergraduates Benefiting From Program
NSF Division	FY2005	FY2006	FY2007	Notes
Biological Sciences	2,291	2,291	2,450	The Division of Environmental Biology will maintain support for its Research Experiences for Undergraduates program.
Computer and Information Science and Engineering	731	731	755	The Research Experiences for Undergraduates program will see a $2.5 million increase, in addition, efforts are planned to launch an "integration-oriented computing curriculum and the cross-campus integration of IT and research.”
Engineering	2,202	2,290	2,427	Research and Education grants are proposed to increase 22.3% over FY2006, one of the goals of the program is to advance undergraduate engineering education.
Geosciences	1,171	1,200	1,300
Mathematical and Physical Sciences	5,616	5,650	5,750	Programs in this area will emphasize activities that "connect undergraduate education with research."  In addition, interdisciplinary undergraduate research programs in this area will be increased from $500,000 to $1.5 million.
Cyberinfrastructure	29	40	50
Office of International Science and Engineering	50	56	90
Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences	645	652	693
Total, Research	12,735	12,910	13,515	This represents a 4.69% increase in the number of undergraduates served over FY2006 and a 6.12% increase relative to FY2005.
Education and Human Resources Directorate	19,000	14,000	15,000	The decrease between FY2005 and FY2006 is a result of declining appropriations.

The coming fiscal year will also see changes in the manner in which the NSF manages its programs.  Across the federal government, there is a vigorous drive for accountability (broadly defined) for all federal programs.  The central theme of the Administration’s accountability push is for all federal programs to be able to provide data on how federal dollars translate into specific outcomes.  The chief agency involved in this process is the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which conducts Program Assessment Ratings Tool (PART) analyses.  The PART examines federal programs to determine if they have clear outcomes, if they are duplicative with other programs and if there is adequate data to support their existence. 

The PART has been controversial because it is composed of a standardized series of questions.  The set of questions used to evaluate a NSF program are the same as the ones used to evaluate a new military combat vehicle.  Many individuals (particularly stakeholders in programs that receive negative PART scores) feel that the standardized questions do not adequately investigate the true worth of programs.  For more information on the PART, visit http://www.expectmore.gov.

Several programs at the NSF have been through the PART and, unlike most programs that have been through the process, have scored quite well.  NSF Director Arden Bement takes great pride in this and wishes to continue the relatively high PART scores.  As a result, the NSF is in the process of implementing a program management system that has three central tenants:

1. Relevance: R&D programs must be able to articulate why this investment is important, relevant and appropriate.
2. Quality: R&D programs must justify how funds will be allocated to ensure quality R&D.
3. Performance: R&D programs must be able to monitor and document how well the investment is performing. 

Also regarding program management, the NSF typically aligns its activities into four areas: 1) ideas, 2) tools, 3) people and 4) organizational excellence.  In terms of ideas and people, the NSF has set several priorities including: 

• Under “Ideas,” the NSF will “encourage collaborative research and education efforts – across organizations, disciplines, sectors and international boundaries.”
• Under “People,” the NSF will “support programs that attract and prepare U.S. students to be highly qualified members of the global [scientific and engineering] workforce, including providing opportunities for international study, collaborations and partnerships.

In terms of how grant applications will be evaluated, the “organizational excellence” section has the following four goals for FY2007: 

• Operate a credible, efficient merit review system;
• Utilize and sustain broad access to new and emerging technologies for business application;
• Develop a diverse, capable, motivated staff that operates with efficiency and integrity; and
• Develop and use performance assessment tools and measures to provide an environment of continuous improvement in NSF’s intellectual investments as well as its management effectiveness. 

For FY2007, the NSF has set the goal of alerting 70 percent of all grant applicants if their application for funding has been accepted or rejected within six months.  This is the same target as in FY2006, but the 70% figure is down from the 76% response rate in FY2005 and 77% rate in FY2004.  

Another area of change at the NSF is the Course, Curriculum and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) Program.  The NSF describes the program as a way to improve “the Nation’s high-quality undergraduate STEM education by supporting research and innovation in undergraduate STEM teaching and learning, new learning materials, faculty expertise, assessment, and evaluation.  It supports the innovative educators who build the STEM workforce.”  The FY2007 budget request is approximately $2.63 million less than FY2006’s $35.93 million. 

Aside from funding, the CCLI program is changing in that it is starting a process of prioritizing new awards.  The goal of CCLI prioritization is to shift to “cyclic” models that emphasize production of academic work and improvements to current practices.  While the program undergoes this prioritization, fewer awards will be made in FY2007. 

The prioritization of the CCLI program is emblematic of the Undergraduate Education (DUE) at the NSF’s Education and Human Resources Directorate (EHR).  EHR is in a greater state of transition as it reorganizes to look at new priorities and awaits Congress to determine what the NSF’s role will be in the larger competitiveness issue. 

The proposed reduction in funding for the CCLI program is not final.  Congress has not written its appropriations bills for the coming fiscal year yet.  Therefore, individuals with strong interests in the CCLI program are encouraged to write their Representatives and Senators, telling them how important funding for the CCLI program is.  The best letters are those that demonstrate the specific impact of either additional or decreased funding.  The impact can be shown with either hard data or personal anecdotes.  Both are equally appropriate.  Letters to Representatives on the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Science, State, Commerce and Justice and the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science are particularly useful.

For information on committee members, senators, or congresspeople please visit: www.senate.gov and www.house.gov