Broader Impacts

In preparation for tomorrow’s webinar on the evaluation of Broader Impacts, I thought I’d post some online resources related to evaluation. If you have specific questions about the evaluation of Broader Impacts, join us at 10 a.m. PDT/1 p.m EDT. Websites Online Evaluation Resource Library (OERL) http://www.oerl.sri.com/ My Environmental Education…[Read more]

Hi Jennifer, Britt and Janice have already posted some great ideas and resources, so perhaps it’s best not to send you off in too many directions. I’ll encourage you to be a little careful about how much you propose to do in terms of non-research activities. You probably noticed this statement in the solicitation: “As […]

The bootcamp idea sounds interesting — especially since it’s potentially integrable with your research. Can you demonstrate a need for your students to have these techniques? And what about an exchange — getting some molecular biologists out into the field?

Have you contacted the diversity center? I suggest reaching out to them.

Hi Janice and Britt, Thanks so much for your fast responses! Your ideas are very helpful. Thanks for that brochure, Janice. I hadn’t seen that before. Along the lines of what Britt was suggesting, another idea that we had been tossed around was a molecular biology “bootcamp” for geologists to learn biological techniques that I […]

Hi Jennifer – I am sure Sharon will have specific partner ideas for you but I will chime in anyway. I am not sure if you have seen this – http://outreach.caltech.edu/documents/EO_brochure.pdf. It has a pretty long list of programs offered by Caltech outreach oriented. I apologise if you have already seen this. In addition to […]

Well, it would be kind of silly for me to answer this question, since Sharon Franks is at UCSD! 😉 But let me say something, anyway: Of course you want to visit geologically relevant sites; but I took a geology class in college, and we went out in the field — so it doesn’t seem […]

P.S. I’ve been told that Oak Crest Institute of Science might be a good partner.

Hi Britt, I’m applying for an NSF Earth Sciences Postdoctoral Fellowship (well, planning to, assuming that NSF Ocean Sciences is willing to co-review it). As with all NSF fellowships, the NSF EAR-PF program requires a broader impacts section. I’ve attached the solicitation here. I’m trying to come up with ideas for broader impacts and have […]

If you’re proposing on an education project such as this it’s helpful to think in terms of SMAART project objectives. SMAART objectives are Specific, Measurable, Audience-directed, Ambitious, Realistic and Time-bound. This BIC sounds ambitious and should be applauded for that. What about the other SMAART criteria?

Yes, definitely, teaming with someone who knows what they’re doing and knows more than you is a big help. To add, if you’re really interested in pursuing education/training as part of your broader impact, here are some current National Academies Press and other publications that’ll give you grounding in formal education, informal education and…[Read more]

OK, no one is being brave; so I went to the NSF website and looked at awards made under the Physical Oceanography program. The first award, which is Award # 0962054, doesn’t explicitly mention BI in the abstract, or maybe it does …. Here’s the ostensible BIC paragraph: “The project aims to optimize the utility […]

It’s interesting, also, to note Chris’ claim: “This statement could be much stronger if grounded in the ed literature regarding how well what’s proposed fits with what the ed research says works.” Well, I don’t know about you other non-ed specialists, but one reaction I have to this statement is: Hey, how am I supposed […]

It’s really interesting to me to read Sharon’s comments, which are both helpful and critical. If only all reviewers were so demanding! We certainly would have much better responses to BIC. In general, however, it is not the case that most reviewers are so demanding. In fact, most reviewers don’t know what to do with […]

Chris makes a great point, I think — and I wonder whether we all agree on terminology here — about the difference between outputs and outcomes. Essentially, I would suggest there are 4 major stages of the research process, looked at from the outside, as it were, from a performance assessment sort of angle: (1) […]

First, I’m not clear if the audience is students or teachers, or both. This statement could be much stronger if grounded in the ed literature regarding how well what’s proposed fits with what the ed research says works. Is this the way to promote critical thinking and analytic skills? Plus, what are your plans for […]

I agree that there’s no target audience, which make the proposed activities difficult to assess. But the main issue I have with this is that it lists only outputs (what it is the researcher will do). It does not list outcomes (what it is the audience will gain). How will the audience be changed by […]