CEECS Postdoctoral Fellows Compete in Research Symposium

CEECS post docs

CEECS post docs L-R: Helena Mawdsley, Tia N. Barnes, Tiffany McMonigle, Feihong Wang, Crystal Crowe Bishop, and Salih Rakap

The UF Office of Postdoctoral Affairs will hold its second annual Posdoctoral Research Symposium on Monday, April 21, 2014 at Emerson Alumni Hall from 8am – 3pm. The theme for this year’s symposium is Communicating Your Research. Postdocs in both oral and poster presentations will be judged on how well they can convey their research to an educated lay audience. Communication Skills is one of the six Core Competencies the National Postdoctoral Association promotes as critical to postdoc success.

Postdoctoral Fellows in the COE Center for Excellence in Early Childhood Studies (CEECS) have completed the following research:

Characterizing Transition Practice Intensity in Early Childhood
Helena Mawdsley, Patricia Snyder, and Beth Rous

This poster presents findings from a systemic review of the literature on early childhood transition practices. The review characterizes practices described in the transition literature with respect to “who,” “when,” “what,” and “how” to explicate further which intensity of transition practices are used with which children and families and under what circumstances. Article criteria were (a) include children from birth through age 5 years; (b) include transition practices data either from national surveys or from empirical studies transition practices. Data bases searched: EBSCO, PsychInfo, ERIC, and Medline.  Articles were screened to verify they meet inclusion criteria. The final set of articles were coded using investigator-defined variables and associated coding categories that permit characterizations of the intensity of the practices and the “who,” “when,” “what,” and “how” of early childhood (EC) transition practices. Variables and coding categories associated with the “who” category characterized the type of children (i.e., with a disability or without disability) with whom the transition practices were used. The “when” variables and coding categories characterized the transition time point. The “what” variables and coding categories characterized the transition practices used and their intensity. The “how” variables and coding categories characterized the strategies used to implement the practice. Descriptive statistics for each coding variable were generated. A majority of articles included children with disabilities. Preschool into kindergarten was the most frequently studied time point. Five high intensity practices with 11 corresponding strategies and 3 low intensity practices with 9 corresponding strategies appeared to be most common among the articles.

The Influence of Student Demographics on CBI Effectiveness
Tia N. Barnes, Stephen Smith, and Ann Daunic

Problem behavior can have a negative effect on the overall school environment. Among the possible causes of problem behaviors are cognitive processing deficits and distortions that can be addressed by school personnel through the use of cognitive behavioral interventions (CBI).  In recent years, CBI research has moved from the determination of efficacy to extension and refinement of CBIs to better meet the needs of a diverse school population.  There are limitations in the current school-based CBI literature including a lack of focus on the effectiveness of CBI for culturally diverse and low income students.  This study addressed this limitation by examining whether student socio-economic status (SES) and ethnicity were associated with how Tools for Getting Along (TFGA), a universally delivered CBI for 4th and 5th grades, affected socio-emotional outcomes. Using extant data, we conducted mediation and moderation analyses using structural equation modeling (SEM; Preacher et al., 2011) to investigate the effects of demographic variables on the efficacy of TFGA for increasing positive social problem solving and reducing negative social problem solving, externalizing behavior, and aggression. The analysis revealed that TFGA participants qualifying for low SES had more externalizing behavior (β = -0.076, p < .05) but less reactive aggression (β = 0.069, p < .05) than control participants. Student race did not moderate the effect of TFGA on the outcome variables of interest. This presentation will include a discussion of possible intervention refinements to improve CBI effectiveness with certain student populations and propose future research directions.

Preschool Teacher-Child Relationships: Influences on Social and Behavioral Skills of Young Children with or At-risk for Emotional/Behavioral Disabilities
Tiffany McMonigle and Patricia Snyder

When children form positive relationships with teachers, they are more likely to self- regulate their behavior and have meaningful social interactions with others (Williford, Whittaker, Vitiello, & Downer, 2013). Children are more apt to view school in a positive way and establish friendships, when they have a close relationship with their teacher (Hamre & Pianta, 2006). Most studies examining teacher-child relationships have been conducted with children who are typically developing (Eisenhower, et al., 2007). The purpose of this descriptive systematic review was to examine the empirical research regarding how preschool teacher-child relationships affect social skills and challenging behavior for young children with or at-risk for emotional/behavioral disabilities. Restricting the search to peer-reviewed journal publications in English, six databases were searched using the following search string: “At Risk” AND Preschoo* OR Early Child* AND Teacher-child Relationships AND Social Skills OR Intervention.* In all 6,039 publications were identified for screening. Both a primary and secondary screener identified articles that met a more in depth inclusion criteria. A total of six sources were identified for coding. Coding categories and operational definitions for each coding category were refined within the coding protocol and agreed upon by the authors. All identified sources were double coded by the secondary coder. Across the six sources, preschool teacher-child relationships had positive associations with behavioral adjustment, emotion knowledge, peer interactions, and frustration tolerance. The limited number of sources found, included homogenous risk factors suggesting the need for continued research incorporating additional risk factors.

Using Qualitative Rating Methodology and Latent Class Analysis to Identify Young Rural Children with Vulnerabilities and Strengths
Feihong Wang, James Algina, Patricia Snyder, University of Florida; Martha Cox, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; The Family Life Project Key Investigators

Individual differences in attention, interests, persistence, and mastery pleasure have significant implications for school readiness and success (e.g., Wigfield, Eccles, Schiefele, Roeser, & Davis-Kean, 2006). A person-oriented approach to analyzing child variables may help identify categories of behavior patterns in children that may be amenable to prevention or interventions (Chazan-Cohen, Halle, Barton, & Winsler, 2012).  We first examined patterns of children’s affect and behavior (N=1125) during challenging problem solving puzzle task at 24 and 35 months. We next examined children’s membership shifts in different patterns from 24 to 35 months in order to identify children who may be vulnerable or resilient for school challenges. Latent class analysis for 2- to 5-class models was conducted using 6 child codes to explore patterns of children’s affect and behavior at both 24 and 35 months. AIC, BIC, entropy indexes and interpretability of classes were compared across models to select optimal and parsimonious models. Finally, a latent transition analysis was conducted to examine shifts in children’s membership in different patterns over time. We found four consistent patterns of child affect and behavior at 24 and 35 months: a positive-motivated pattern, a negative-disengaged pattern, a content-compliant and an emotional-mixed pattern. There were also substantial shifts in children’s memberships in the different patterns from 24 to 35 months. These findings suggest there are different levels of strengths and vulnerabilities in children’s task oriented behaviors. Early intervention services may need to tailor their approaches to support strengths and address vulnerabilities in young children.

Exploring Measurement Invariance for the ECERS-R and the Arnett Caregiver Interaction Scale: Findings from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort
Crystal Crowe Bishop, Patricia A. Snyder, and James Algina

Quality in early care and education (ECE) is a national priority. The Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R; Harms, Clifford, & Cryer, 1998, 2005) and the Arnett Caregiver Interaction Scale (CIS; Arnett, 1989) are two instruments used widely to characterize different dimensions of quality in ECE. Although studies have been conducted to gather validity evidence about these instruments (Colwell et al., 2012; Gordon et al., 2013), there is limited evidence regarding whether scores from these instruments ECE are valid for making inferences about the quality of ECE provided across different types of ECE classrooms. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which scores from the ECERS-R and the CIS were comparable across preschool classrooms in which children with special needs were enrolled (i.e., inclusive preschool classrooms) and preschool classrooms in which no children with special needs were enrolled. This study involved secondary analyses of cross-sectional data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study—Birth Cohort. Multiple group confirmatory factor analyses (Jöreskog, 1971) were conducted to examine whether each instrument measured the same latent variables and the extent to which scores from each instrument were comparable across the two types of classrooms observed. Findings from this study suggested strong evidence of measurement invariance for both instruments across the two types of classroom studied, providing preliminary evidence to suggest scores from each instrument can be used to make inferences about the quality of ECE provided in both types of classroom.

Evaluating Treatment Effect in Single-Subject Experimental Research: A Comparison of Five Nonoverlap Methods
Salih Rakap and Patricia Snyder

Visual analysis has been the primary method for evaluating treatment effect in single-subject experimental research (SSER). Several organizations and funding agencies have suggested use of quantitative methods (e.g., nonparametric nonoverlap methods) as additional result interpretation aides for evaluating treatment effect in SSER. Discussions about how to analyze data obtained from SSER continues. In this study, five nonoverlap methods were compared using 222 A-B graphs obtained from 36 studies of naturalistic instructional approaches. Results showed that IRD and Tau-U were superior to other methods in discriminability and agreement with visual analysts’ judgments. Presenters discuss implications for research and practice.

NCER and IES Hold Annual Summer Research Training Institute: Cluster-Randomized Trials

The National Center for Education Research (NCER) within the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) has announced its eighth Summer Research Training Institute on Cluster-Randomized Trials. This training institute is conducted to increase the capacity of researchers to develop and conduct rigorous evaluations of the impact of education interventions.

When: July 7-17, 2014
Where: Northwestern University, Evanston, IL

Application materials should be submitted online at:

All applications must be received no later than Monday, April 21, 2014 at 8:00 pm ET. Applications will be reviewed and applicants will be notified of placement by Wednesday, May 7, via e-mail.

If you have questions about the summer institute, please contact Valerie Lyne at v-lyne@northwestern.edu.

If you have questions about this training project, please contact Dr. Meredith Larson, at (202) 219-2025 or Meredith.Larson@ed.gov.

Call for Participation: Third Annual Learning Science Workshop

LearnLab, an NSF Science of Learning Center, will hold its third annual Learning Science Workshop Research and Innovation for Enhancing Achievement and Equity on June 14 – 15, 2014 at Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh PA. Applications are due May 15, 2014. The workshop is targeted to senior graduate students, post-docs, and early career faculty. This free professional development workshop will include keynote speakers Dr. Tawanna Dillahunt and Dr. Charles Isbell.

Applicants should email their CV, this demographic form, a proposed presentation title and abstract, and a brief statement describing their research interests to Jo Bodnar (jobodnar@cs.cmu.edu) by May 15, 2014. Please use the subject Application for LearnLab Summer Workshop 2014. Upon acceptance, you will be notified if you have been selected for a talk or poster presentation.

There is no registration fee for this workshop.  However, attendance is limited so early applications are encouraged.  Scholarships for travel are available.  Scholarships will be awarded based on your application, including your research interests, future plans, and optional recommendation letter.

For more information, contact Michael Bett, LearnLab Managing Director, at (412) 268-8616 or mbett@cs.cmu.edu

Important Dates

  • May 15 Application Deadline
  • May 29 Notification of Acceptance
  • June 14-15 Workshop held at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh

This exciting summer research opportunity is available to early career researchers in the fields of psychology, education, computer science, human-computer interfaces, and language technologies. The workshop seeks broad participation, especially by members of underrepresented groups who may be considering a research or faculty position in the learning sciences.

This year’s workshop Research and Innovation for Enhancing Achievement and Equity will include five areas:

The substantive focus of the workshop is the use of current research and innovations to enhance achievement and equity at all levels of learning. Activities will include demonstrations of the diverse set of ongoing learning sciences research projects at LearnLab, and poster presentations or talks by participants. Participants will also meet with LearnLab faculty in research groups and various informal settings. Information will be provided about becoming a part of the Carnegie Mellon or University of Pittsburgh learning science community.

In addition to these substantive themes, the workshop will provide participants with opportunities for professional development and the chance to gain a better understanding of the academic career ladder. These include mentoring that focuses on skills, strategies and “insider information” for career paths. Sessions will include keynote speakers and LearnLab senior faculty discussing professional development topics of interest to the attendees. These may include the tenure and promotion process, launching a research program, professionalism, proposal writing, among other topics.

The workshop will have two distinguished keynote speakers:

Dr. Tawanna Dillahunt is a Presidential Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Michigan’s School of Information. Her research interests are in the areas of human-computer interaction, ubiquitous computing, and social computing. She is primarily interested in identifying needs and opportunities to further explore how theories from the social sciences can be used to design technologies that have a positive impact on group and individual behavior. With the narrowing of the digital divide, the ubiquity of smart devices and mobile hotspots in common places in the U.S. (e.g., libraries, community centers, and even McDonald’s) she sees an urgent need to explore the use of these technologies for those that stand the most to gain from these resources. Therefore, her research targets the use of these technologies among people in disadvantaged communities. Results from her past studies in the environmental sustainability domain suggest that improved communication provides individual community members with access to new information and helps to resolve common problems. Dr. Dillahunt plans to continue to apply her past research techniques to clarify and potentially meet the needs of disadvantaged, and often understudied communities in environmental and economic sustainability, and in other domains such as education and health. Her goal is to design and enhance innovative technologies to solve real-world problems.

She holds a M.S. and Ph.D. in Human-Computer Interaction from Carnegie Mellon University, a M.S. in Computer Science from the Oregon Graduate Institute School of Science and Engineering (now a part of the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, OR), and a B.S. in Computer Engineering from North Carolina State University. She was also a software engineer at Intel Corporation for several years.

Dr. Charles Isbell is a Senior Associate Dean and Professor in the School of Interactive Computing in the College of Computing at Georgia Institute of Technology. Dr. Isbell’s research passion is artificial intelligence. In particular, he focuses on applying statistical machine learning to building autonomous agents that must live and interact with large numbers of other intelligent agents, some of whom may be human.

Lately, Dr. Isbell has turned his energies toward adaptive modeling, especially activity discovery (as distinct from activity recognition); scalable coordination; and development environments that support the rapid prototyping of adaptive agents. As a result he has begun developing adaptive programming languages, worrying about issues of software engineering, and trying to understand what it means to bring machine learning tools to non-expert authors, designers, and developers.

Dr. Isbell earned his M.S. and Ph.D. from MIT and his B.S. in Computer Science from Georgia Tech in 1990.

University of Florida Fulbright Day

UF will hold a Fulbright Day on Wednesday, April 16, 2014 in Smathers Library, Room 100 (formerly 1A) from 9:00 am – 3:30 pm.

Workshops will be provided for faculty and students:

  • Learn about available funding opportunities.
  • Hear about the application process.
  • Listen to past Fulbright scholars and students share about their experiences abroad.
  • Learn about responsibilities and benefits of hosting Fulbright students and scholars.
  • Receive individual consultations.

For more information, contact mcardec@ufic.ufl.edu or visit: http://my.research.ufl.edu/ProgramDevelopment/FundingOpportunities/ArticleDetail.aspx?id=36117

Awarded Projects for March 2014

College of Education – Awarded Projects – March 2014
Principal Investigator: Michelina MacDonald (P.K. Yonge)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: National Education Association Foundation
Project Title: Exploring Genetics Through Questions of Race
Project Period: 2/14/2014 – 2/13/2015
Award Amount: $4,500.00
Principal Investigator: M. David Miller (SHDOSE)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: US Department of Veterans Affairs
Project Title: IPA for David Miller
Project Period: 2/1/2014 – 1/31/2016
Award Amount: $23,752.05
Principal Investigator: Donald Pemberton (Lastinger Center for Learning)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Alachua County School Board
Project Title: Alachua County Professional Development
Project Period: 7/1/2014 – 6/30/2017
Award Amount: $65,000.00
Principal Investigator: Philip Poekert (Lastinger Center for Learning)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Early Learning Coalition of Miami-Dade/Monroe, Inc.
Project Title: Professional Services Agreement PSA 13-126
Project Period: 12/14/2013 – 6/30/2014
Award Amount: $31,000.00

Submitted Projects for March 2014

College of Education – Submitted Projects – March 2014
Principal Investigator: Lynda Hayes  (P.K. Yonge)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: National Institute of Standards and Technology
Proposal Title: Measuring up through NIST Summer Institute Program
Requested Amount: $4,000.00
Principal Investigator: Marisa Stukey (P.K. Yonge)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Developmental Studies Center
Proposal Title: The Collaborative Classroom
Requested Amount: $12,000.00
Principal Investigator: Ivan Mutis (Rinker School of Construction Management)
Co-PI: R. Raymond Issa (Rinker School of Construction Management), Pavlo Antonenko (School of Teaching and Learning)
Funding Agency: National Science Foundation
Proposal Title: EXP: Cyber-ART: Augmented Reality Technology to Enhance Spatio-Temporal Cognitive Ability in Construction Engineering and Management Learning
Requested Amount: $122,489

The Grand Challenges Core: Transforming UF’s General Education Program

The UF Office of the Provost is inviting undergraduate-degree-granting colleges to submit proposals for general education courses in the natural and social sciences areas for the Grand Challenges Core.

The Preeminence Bill SB 1076 allows UF to require 9 – 12 credits of general education undergraduate coursework that is unique to UF and cannot be replaced by any accelerated mechanism or from courses from other postsecondary institutions. In response to this bill, UF is developing a distinctive General Education Program (GEP) with a core set of courses focusing on multidisciplinary “Grand Challenges.” This Grand Challenges Core will transform UF’s GEP into one of the highest quality, reflecting the institutional focus on research and creative works, knowledge creation, and the mission of educating people from diverse backgrounds to address the grand challenges of the world’s societies.

President Machen will make the awards by late April 2014 and colleges are expected to develop the courses during Summer 2014. The courses must be piloted in small sections in the 2014-15 academic year. Experience gained from the pilot program should be used to improve the courses to make them suitable for offering in 2015-16.

The College of Education

The COE is currently collaborating with numerous colleges across campus, including CALS, CFA, CHHP, CJC, and CLAS, to develop proposals for the Grand Challenges Core.

COE Internal Deadlines:

Please submit draft proposals by email to Thomasenia Adams at tla@coe.ufl.edu.

Draft 1 is due Monday, March 10, 2014. We will provide helpful context and editorial feedback and submit this feedback to the course development team.

Draft 2 is due Monday, March 24, 2014. We will give another careful review to each proposal, communicate with the point person as needed, and finalize each proposal for submission by the March 31, 2014 deadline.

Complete information is available at http://gened.aa.ufl.edu/uf-core.aspx

Grant Writing Workshop: Writing Successful Grants

The UF Office of Research recently hosted a two-day grant writing workshop presented by Dr. Robert Porter of GrantWinners Seminars. This article summarizes the topic of “Writing Successful Grants.”

Most grant reviewers make a decision about a proposal after reading the first page. In general, the writing style of a successful grant consists of about 80% academic (i.e., formal expository writing) and 20% grant writing style (i.e., persuasive writing). Grant writing style focuses on the sponsor and the service you plan to provide. The language is accessible to a broad audience and sells the reader. You want to emphasize what is interesting to the grant reviewer and what the sponsor wants to accomplish.

Specifically, reviewers are looking for the following:

  • Significance
  • Creativity (uniqueness)
  • Clearly delineated project
  • Research plan (methodology)
  • Outcomes (evaluation)
  • Clear, concise writing

Writing successful grants is a 12-step program. First admit you could use some help. Then follow the strategies provided below.

Here are some common pitfalls and strategies to avoid them:

1. Poor Fit

  • Develop your funding search skills.
  • Study program goals and eligibility.
  • Make contact with the program officer before starting the proposal.

2. Poor Organization

  • Always follow the guidelines and requirements provided by the sponsor.
  • Be sure your proposal is in the specified format.

3. Weak Argument

  • Prove the importance of your project.
  • State your purpose and case for need up front.
  • Build a compelling argument.
  • Cite authoritative sources.
  • Start with the pitch.
  • Layout the problem and solution.
  • Create a vision.

4. Gyrating Jargon

  • Assume an uninformed but intelligent reader.
  • Use clear, accessible language.
  • Stick with direct statements and active voice.
  • Avoid insider jargon and undefined acronyms.

5. Murky Goals and Objectives

  • Provide a goal statement (i.e., a general statement of the project’s overall purpose).
  • Formulate specific measurable objectives (i.e., a specific, measurable outcome or milepost).

6. Unclear Project Description and Work Plan

  • Visualize the overall project with a drawing (e.g., logic model).
  • Specify major tasks and timelines (e.g., Gantt charts, flow charts, calendars).

7. Deviating from Guidelines

  • Follow the application instructions exactly.
  • Submit before the deadline.
  • Be sure you meet the required page limits.
  • Follow all formatting requirements (i.e., fonts, margins, spacing)
  • Check that you have included all required sections.
  • Be sure you have the required signatures.

8. Ignoring the Review Criteria

  • Pay attention to all review criteria.
  • Read the evaluation standards carefully. Then reference them in the project narrative.
  • Touch all the bases—not just the ones you are comfortable with.
  • Remember reviewers will use the criteria to “score” your proposal.

9. Weak Abstract

  • Polish the abstract.
  • Write the abstract last.
  • The abstract must
    1. be intriguing;
    2. reflect the entire scope of the project;
    3. be concise and complete;
    4. summarize the project purpose and method;
    5. convey (a) what you intend to do, (b) why it is important, (c) what are the expected outcomes, (d) how the work will be accomplished.
  • The abstract may be the only narrative that some reviewers will read.

10. Writing Solo

  • Ask seasoned colleagues for comments and suggestions.
  • They should be qualified to critique proposal content.
  • Check your ego at the door.
  • Allow time for rewrites.

11. Document Errors

  • Find an eagle-eyed perfectionist.
  • Proofreaders read for form not content.
  • Must be someone who has no stake in the project.
  • Learn to love what he or she will do for you.
  • Zero tolerance—no error is too small to correct.
  • Root out inconsistencies in format as well as typos, misspellings, and grammar.

12. Insufficient Editing

  • Write, rewrite, and rewrite.
  • Most winning proposals have been polished repeatedly.
  • Let it rest in between; sleep on every rewrite.
  • Fight the evil pride of authorship.
  • Must allow sufficient time.

And finally, here are some additional tips for success:

  • Fit research and grant writing into your job.
  • Find a mentor(s).
  • Read successful grants and attend workshops.
  • Find collaborators; network.
  • Serve on a review panel.
  • Sign up for funding alerts; conduct your own searches regularly.
  • Think big, think small, think different.
  • Submit, revise, and resubmit.

Please look for additional summaries of workshop topics in upcoming issues of the Research Bulletin.

Session recordings are available online. Those who require copies of the handouts for any/all sessions may request them by emailing Jenn Hubbs at hubbsj@ufl.edu with their name, on-campus PO Box, and session(s) of interest.

Submitted Projects for February 2014

College of Education – Submitted Projects – February 2014
Principal Investigator: Kevin Jones – Materials Science and Engineering
Co-PI: M. David Miller – SHDOSE, Mirka Koro-Ljungberg – SHDOSE
Funding Agency: National Science Foundation
Proposal Title: Increasing the Social and Technical Literacy of Freshman through an Integrated Course on the Impact of Materials on Society
Requested Amount: $25,848
Principal Investigator: Richard Lind – Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
Co-PI: Pavlo Antonenko – STL
Funding Agency: National Science Foundation
Proposal Title: STRATEGIES: Augmenting Hands-On STEM Education with Model-Based Approaches for Predictive Design of Systems
Requested Amount: $231,556
Principal Investigator: Kent Crippen – STL
Co-PI: Margaret Kamman – SESPECS
Funding Agency: National Science Foundation
Proposal Title: Collaborative Research: Strategies: AGILE: Accessing Game-based Inquiry Science through Leveraging WISE Elements
Requested Amount: $599,568
Principal Investigator: Albert Ritzhaupt – STL
Co-PI: Kara Dawson – STL, Lisa Anthony – Computer and Information Science and Engineering
Funding Agency: National Science Foundation
Proposal Title: Strategies: Florida Computing Camp for Kids: An Informal Computing Learning Curriculum for Summer Camps for Upper Elementary Students
Requested Amount: $1,057,074
Principal Investigator: Pavlo Antonenko – STL
Co-PI: Kent Crippen – STL, Lynda Hayes – P.K. Yonge, Gregory Kiker – Agricultural and Biological Engineering
Funding Agency: National Science Foundation
Proposal Title: STRATEGIES: Arguing to Learn with Technology (ALT): An Innovative Strategy to Stimulate Interest in Water Sustainability Practices and Careers
Requested Amount: $996,231
Principal Investigator: Mary Brownell – SESPECS
Co-PI: Paul Sindelar – SESPECS, Erica McCray – SESPECS
Funding Agency: US Department of Education/OSEP
Proposal Title: Project STEEP: Studying Teacher Effectiveness, Education, and Policy
Requested Amount: $1,250,000
Principal Investigator: Cynthia Griffin – SESPECS
Co-PI: Joseph Gagnon – SESPECS, Kara Dawson – STL, Albert Ritzhaupt – STL
Funding Agency: US Department of Education/OSEP
Proposal Title: Project SEMTECH: Special Education, Mathematics Instruction, and Educational Technology
Requested Amount: $1,241,808
Principal Investigator: Diana Joyce – SESPECS
Co-PI: Nancy Waldron – SESPECS
Funding Agency: US Department of Education/OSEP
Proposal Title: Project PRIME: Preparing Researchers in Intensive Interventions and Multi-tiered Educational Systems
Requested Amount: $1,250,000
Principal Investigator: Holly Lane – SESPECS
Co-PI: Nicholas Gage – SESPECS
Funding Agency: US Department of Education/OSEP
Proposal Title: Project ExSELERaTE: Exceptional Special Education Leaders in Experimental Research and Teacher Education
Requested Amount: $1,248,895
Principal Investigator: Diane Ryndak – SESPECS
Co-PI: Hazel Jones – SESPECS, Kristen Kemple – SESPECS, Tina Smith-Bonahue – SESPECS
Funding Agency: US Department of Education/OSEP
Proposal Title: Project PIECE: Prevention and Intervention in Early Childhood Environments
Requested Amount: $1,249,479
Principal Investigator: Thomasenia Lott Adams – OER
Co-PI: Carolyn E. Mitten – STL
Funding Agency: Mathematical Association of America
Proposal Title: Preparing School Counselors to Encourage Young Women in Mathematics
Requested Amount: $6,000
Principal Investigator: Philip Poekert – Lastinger Center for Learning
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Early Learning Coalition of Miami-Dade/Monroe, Inc.
Proposal Title: Professional Services Agreement PSA 13-126
Requested Amount: $31,000
Principal Investigator: Donald Pemberton – Lastinger Center for Learning
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Alachua County School Board
Proposal Title: Alachua County Professional Development
Requested Amount: $65,000

NAEP Releases The Nation’s Report Card

The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has released The Nation’s Report Card results of the 2013 Trial Urban District Assessment, measuring the educational progress of fourth- and eighth-graders within 21 urban districts around the United States.

According to the report, significant progress has been made in closing gaps in achievement in urban districts:

  • Black, Hispanic, and white students in Los Angeles scored higher in 2013 than in 2011 in math at grade 4.
  • Black, Hispanic, and white students in the District of Columbia scored higher in 2013 than in 2011 in reading at grade 8.
  • Students who are eligible for free or reduced-price lunches increased their average scores from 2011 to 2013 in at least one subject and grade combination in eight districts (Atlanta, Baltimore City, Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas, District of Columbia, Fresno, and Los Angeles).

In addition to providing detailed information about academic achievement, the NAEP offers valuable Resources for Researchers to assist with research activities and grant proposal preparation including the following:

  • The NAEP Data Explorer helps build custom tables using years of available assessment data on students’ academic performance.
  • A technical documentation section provides information about the technical procedures and methods of the NAEP organized by topic area from Instruments through Analysis and Scaling.
  • Research support includes training, seminars, and conferences for users of NAEP information and data.
  • The NAEP e-Library serves as a centralized archive of available reports, working papers, and assessment history, among other resources.

The NAEP conducts periodic assessments and publishes The Nation’s Report Card to inform the public about the academic achievement of elementary and secondary students in the United States. The NAEP is a congressionally authorized project of the National Center for Education Statistics within the Institute of Education Sciences of the U.S. Department of Education.

NSF Issues New Guidelines

The National Science Foundation has issued a new version of the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG), (NSF 14-1) effective for proposals due on or after February 24, 2014. The PAPPG consists of (a) the Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) for guidance on the preparation and submission of proposals to NSF and (b) the Award and Administration Guide (AAG) to guide, manage, and monitor the award and administration of grants and cooperative agreements made by NSF.

A summary of the significant changes by chapter to the GPG and to the AAG is available at the beginning of each document to assist with identifying the changes.

MyinvestiGator Phase II Deployed on January 27

Phase II of myinvestiGator went live on January 27, 2014 introducing several new features to enhance the functionality of the application, along with a new “look and feel.” All of the features and functionality of Phase I remain intact.  Some of the newly added features in Phase II are as follows:

  • New, more responsive interface
  • Expanded search functionality
  • Enhanced payroll and job information to better see who is getting paid on your grants
  • Effort commitment data for increased compliance and monitoring
  • Graphical analysis displaying burn rates and expense trending to more easily track your grant spending

Navigation to myinvestiGator is through myUFL > Main Menu > myinvestiGator, or via direct access at https://myinvestigator.erp.ufl.edu. More information about the myinvestiGator features is available in the IT Service Catalog. Help is available in myuflToolkits under the Training header. Staff needing assistance with data in myinvestiGator should contact their research administrator in Contracts and Grants at (352) 392-1235.

The Division of Sponsored Programs, Contracts and Grants, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, and UFIT partnered to build myinvestiGator designed to increase accountability, transparency, and efficiency in UF’s sponsored activities.

Research Event in February

Faculty and doctoral students are cordially invited to attend:

American Universities and Teacher Preparation:  A Long and Uneasy Relationship
Professor Chris Ogren, University of Iowa

Monday, February 10, 2013
12:00 pm – 1:00 pm
Terrace Room

Bring your lunch. Refreshments and cookies will be served.

In this brown-bag lecture, Professor Chris Ogren will discuss the evolution of approaches to preparing teachers, as well as who enrolls and how their characteristics and broader societal issues affect teacher education. Dr. Ogren will also explain how a better understanding of the history of teacher education is essential for understanding more broadly the history of underrepresented groups of students in higher education.

The nation’s foremost authority on the history of teacher education in the United States, Christine (Chris) A. Ogren is Associate Professor in the Department of Educational Policy and Leadership Studies at the University of Iowa.

Awarded Projects for January 2014

College of Education – Awarded Projects – January 2014
Principal Investigator: Suzanne Colvin (STL)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Greater Cincinnati Foundation (Procter & Gamble Fund)
Project Title: Transforming Higher Education Teaching and Learning for the 21st Century
Project Period: 1/1/2014 – 12/31/2014
Award Amount: $9,350.00
Principal Investigator: Lynda Hayes (P.K. Yonge)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Florida Department of Education
Project Title: Technology Transformation for Rural School Districts
Project Period: 10/1/2013 – 6/30/2014
Award Amount: $43,315.00
Principal Investigator: Patricia Snyder (CEECS/SESPECS)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Mathematica Policy Research
Project Title: Evaluation of Preschool Special Education Practices
Project Period: 11/23/2013 – 11/22/2017
Award Amount: $222,859.00

Submitted Projects for January 2014

College of Education – Submitted Projects – January 2014
Principal Investigator: Nicholas Gage (SSESPECS)
Co-PI: Ashley MacSuga-Gage (SSESPECS), Timothy Vollmer (Department of Psychology)
Funding Agency: UF Office of Research
Proposal Title: Project ENGAGE: Evaluating the Relationship Between Classroom Management and Student Engagement
Requested Amount: $99,814.00
Principal Investigator: M. David Miller (SHDOSE)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: Veterans Administration
Proposal Title: IPA for David Miller
Requested Amount: $23,752.02
Principal Investigator: Rose Pringle (STL)
Co-PI: Andrew Thoron (Dept. of Agricultural Education & Communication), Kate Fogarty (Dept. of Family, Youth, & Community Sciences), Heidi Radunovich (Dept. of Family, Youth, & Community Sciences), Julia Graber (Department of Psychology), Glenn Israel (Dept. of Agricultural Education & Communication), Katie Sofer (Dept. of Agricultural Education & Communication)
Funding Agency: UF Office of Research
Proposal Title:Examining and Mobilizing the Underlying Factors that Shape High School Students’ STEM, Educational, and Career Aspirations – A Holistic Approach
Requested Amount: $99,620.00
Principal Investigator: Albert Ritzhaupt (STL)
Co-PI: Pavlo Antonenko (STL), Linda Lombardino (SESPECS), Kara Dawson (STL), Andreas Keil (Department of Psychology)
Funding Agency: UF Office of Research
Proposal Title: Converging Behavioral and Psychophysiological Measures: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Multimedia Learning Conditions with Dyslexic Learners
Requested Amount: $98,206.25
Principal Investigator: Albert Ritzhaupt (STL)
Co-PI: N/A
Funding Agency: University of North Florida (NSF Subcontract)
Proposal Title: Supporting iGeneration Teaching and Learning in Prekindergarten Classrooms
Requested Amount: $52,489.00