None | Newsletter
2016
Bridging the Gap: Using Action Plans to Facilitate Evaluation Use
NSF requires evaluation, in part, because it is an essential tool for project improvement. Yet all too often, evaluation results are not...
Showing 116 Results
None | Newsletter
2016
Project Spotlight: Geospatial Technology Advantage Project
Mike Rudibaugh is principal investigator for the Geospatial Technology Advantage Project at Kaskaskia College. The project’s external evaluator is Elaine Craft of...
None | Newsletter
2016
2016 Spring
This is the pdf version of our Spring 2016 Newsletter. This issue is focused on evaluation use. File: Click Here Type: Newsletter...
None | Newsletter
2016
Revisiting Intellectual Merit and Broader Impact
If you have ever written a proposal to the National Science Foundation (NSF) or participated in a proposal review panel for NSF,...
None | Newsletter
2016
Survey Says Winter 2016
On the 2015 ATE survey, 65 of 230 principal investigators (28%) reported spending some portion of their annual budgets on research. Six...
None | Newsletter
2016
Transformative
NSF identifies five questions that proposal reviewers should consider in relation to the NSF merit criteria of Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts.1...
None | Newsletter
2016
How can PIs demonstrate that their projects have “advanced knowledge”?
NSF’s Intellectual Merit criterion is about advancing knowledge and understanding within a given field or across fields. Publication in peer-reviewed journals provides...
None | Newsletter
2016
Communicating Results from Prior NSF Support
ATE proposal season is many months away in early October, but if you are submitting for new funding this year, now is...
None | Newsletter
2016
Project Spotlight: PATHTECH Successful Academic & Employment Pathways in Advanced Technologies
Will Tyson is PI for Path Tech, an ATE targeted research project. He is an associate professor of sociology at the University...
EvaluATE is supported by the National Science Foundation under grant number 1841783. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed on this site are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.