Smaller universities including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), Minority Serving Institutions (MSI), Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI) and American Indian Serving Engineering Institutions (AISEI) often lack resources required to prepare faculty for highly competitive and critically important STEM education research. As a result, many of the faculty are handicapped when they attempt to acquire funding to investigate and implement new educational ideas. Furthermore, this makes the adoption of modern pedagogy and new STEM education ideas difficult at these institutions. Ultimately, it is the students who suffer because they may not receive the benefits of the newest STEM education discoveries.
This project is assisting critical schools to develop their STEM faculty so they are better able to compete with larger, resource richer institutions. Stronger STEM faculty will translate to stronger universities and to more and stronger STEM graduates. The project builds on prior research and incorporates previously successful faculty development activities. The work is also informed by an elite group of university deans who provided input to the project design. Outcomes are being assessed using an external evaluator and will be widely disseminated.
The U.S. minority serving institutions (MSIs) with accredited engineering and computer science programs encourage their faculty to compete for grant research programs through the sollication process promulgated by the National Science Foundation (NSF). Institutions with an abundance of research experience, funding, and writing resources are able to win a disproportionate number of grants while MSIs that lack of resources are not able to provide adequate levels of training to faculty on the art of writing. In an effort to write more competitive proposals for NSF grants, one(1) NSF "Grant Writing Sponsored Workshop" was held for faculty from accredited engineeirng and computer science programs at minority serving institutions (MSIs) on November 19-20, 2012. The participants completed a follow-up survey six months after the workshop to assess the outcomes. Each group answwered a series of questions related to grant writing and funding opportunities. They also provided feedback on strategies to improve the quality and quantity of proposals submitted to NSF. Approximately, eighty (80) of the participants were overall very satisfied with the workshop. They were able to meet with DUE program directors to discuss strategies for enhancing the quality of their proposal. Based on the follow-up survey six months after the completion of the workshop, the participants were able to improve the quality and to increase the quantity of proposals resubmitted. Approximately, thirthy five percent of the proposals submitted after the workshop have been successfully funded through notification.
