Under the strand of Contextual Research Topics (part B), two sections from the former solicitation, Policy Studies and Evaluation Studies, have been combined and renamed Education Policy Studies and Research on National Initiatives in STEM. The text of this section provides further detail, as well as specific examples that demonstrate the type of research problems the program would welcome. The solicitation now includes a new proposal type, Pathways, which provides opportunities for exploratory work to pilot new research questions and approaches and to conduct feasibility studies prior to submitting a full proposal. The maximum award sizes for Empirical and Large Empirical projects have been increased to $1,500,000 and $2,500,000, respectively. Please be advised that the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) includes revised guidelines to implement the mentoring provisions of the America COMPETES Act (ACA) (Pub. 9, 2007.) As specified in the ACA, each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals.

1. Nsf Grfp Program Solicitation

COVER SHEET FOR PROPOSAL TO THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION. /if not in response to a program announcement/solicitation enter NSF. REESE 0723926 NSF 06.

Proposals that do not comply with this requirement will be returned without review (see the PAPP Guide Part I: Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II for further information about the implementation of this new requirement) As announced on May 21, 2009, proposers must prepare and submit proposals to the National Science Foundation (NSF) using the NSF FastLane system at This approach is being taken to support efficient Grants.gov operations during this busy workload period and in response to OMB direction guidance issued March 9, 2009. NSF will continue to post information about available funding opportunities to Grants.gov FIND and will continue to collaborate with institutions who have invested in system-to-system submission functionality as their preferred proposal submission method. NSF remains committed to the long-standing goal of streamlined grants processing and plans to provide a web services interface for those institutions that want to use their existing grants management systems to directly submit proposals to NSF. SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS General Information Program Title. The Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE) program seeks to advance research at the frontiers of STEM learning, education, and evaluation, and to provide the foundational knowledge necessary to improve STEM teaching and learning at all educational levels and in all settings. This solicitation calls for four types of proposals—Pathways, Knowledge Diffusion, Empirical Research, and Large Empirical Research.

The goals of the REESE program are: (1) to catalyze discovery and innovation at the frontiers of STEM learning, education, and evaluation; (2) to stimulate the field to produce high quality and robust research results through the progress of theory, method, and human resources; and (3) to coordinate and transform advances in education, learning research, and evaluation. REESE pursues its mission by developing an interdisciplinary research portfolio focusing on core scientific questions about STEM learning in current and emerging learning contexts, both formal and informal, from childhood through adulthood, and from before school through to graduate school and beyond into the workforce. REESE places particular importance upon the involvement of young investigators in the projects, at doctoral, postdoctoral, and early career stages, as well as the involvement of STEM disciplinary experts.

In addition, research questions related to educational research methodology and evaluation are central to the REESE activity. Cognizant Program Officer(s):.

Address questions to REESE program officers, telephone: (703)292-8650, email: Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):. 47.076 - Education and Human Resources Award Information Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 30 to 50 awards for the competition in FY 2010, pending availability of funds. Approximately 5-10 Pathways, 5-10 Knowledge Diffusion, 10-15 Empirical, and 5-10 Large Empirical awards will be funded, depending upon availability of funds.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $27,000,000 for awards in FY 2010, pending availability of funds. The maximum award for Pathways projects is $250,000 with duration of up to two years. The maximum award for Knowledge Diffusion projects is $250,000 with duration of up to two years. The maximum award for Empirical Research projects is $1,500,000 with duration of up to three years. The maximum award for Large Empirical Research projects is $2,500,000 with duration of up to five years. Eligibility Information Organization Limit: None Specified PI Limit: None Specified Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: None Specified Limit on Number of Proposals per PI: None Specified Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions A. Proposal Preparation Instructions.

Letters of Intent: Not Applicable. Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not Applicable. Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: This solicitation contains information that supplements the standard NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) proposal preparation guidelines. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information B. Budgetary Information. Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is not required under this solicitation. Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable.

Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable C. Due Dates.

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. Proposer's local time): November 12, 2009 Proposal Review Information Criteria Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria apply.

Award Administration Information Award Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply. Reporting Requirements: Additional reporting requirements apply.

Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

I. About the National Science Foundation and the Directorate for Education and Human Resources The National Science Foundation (NSF) is charged with promoting the vitality of the nation's science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) research and education enterprises. As part of this mission, the Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR) has primary responsibility for providing national and research-based leadership in STEM education.

EHR emphasizes six themes in fulfilling this responsibility:. Furthering public understanding of science and advancing STEM literacy;. Broadening participation to improve workforce development;.

Promoting learning through research and evaluation;. Promoting cyberlearning strategies to enhance STEM education;. Enriching the education of STEM teachers; and. Preparing scientists and engineers for tomorrow. To address these themes, the Directorate sponsors programs in the Divisions of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (DRL), Undergraduate Education (DUE), Graduate Education (DGE), and Human Resource Development (HRD). The REESE program is managed in DRL.

About the Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings DRL invests in projects to enhance STEM learning for people of all ages. It promotes innovative and transformative research, development, and evaluation of learning and teaching in all STEM disciplines. The Division seeks to support both early work on promising innovations and large-scale testing and implementation of proven educational innovations. In doing so, it challenges the field to create the ideas, resources, and human capacity to bring about needed transformation of STEM education for the 21st century. Integration of cutting-edge STEM content and the engagement of STEM researchers are encouraged in all DRL initiatives.

In the larger context of Federal support for education research and evaluation, DRL's role is to be a catalyst for change—advancing theory, method, measurement, development, evaluation, and application in STEM education. The Division's programs offer a set of complementary approaches for advancing research, development, and field-based improvements. The Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE) program advances research at the frontiers of STEM learning, education, and evaluation, and provides foundational knowledge to improve STEM teaching and learning at all educational levels and in all settings. The Discovery Research K-12 (DR K-12) program enables significant advances in K-12 student and teacher learning of the STEM disciplines through development and study of innovative resources, models, and technologies for use by students, teachers, administrators and policy-makers. The Informal Science Education (ISE) program invests in projects that promote lifelong learning of STEM by the public, advance the knowledge and practice of informal STEM education, and expand professional capacity to improve informal STEM education. The Innovative Technology Experiences for Students and Teachers (ITEST) program invests in projects designed to enhance participation in the U.S.

STEM workforce through the design, implementation, scale-up, and testing of technology-intensive educational experiences for students and teachers, and through research studies about issues related to STEM workforce participation. Each of these programs is intended to improve the national capacity for STEM teaching and learning. They are central to NSF's strategic goals of Learning and Discovery, helping to cultivate a world-class and broadly inclusive STEM workforce, expanding the scientific literacy of all citizens, and promoting research that advances the frontiers of knowledge. All research and development activities within DRL aim at generating knowledge and transforming practice in STEM education.

DRL's programs are designed to complement each other within a cycle of research and development (see Figure 1) that forms the conceptual framework for its programs (adapted from RAND, 2003, American Statistical Association, 2007, NSF, 2005). All DRL programs are concerned with all five components of the cycle. Work in each part of the cycle forms a vital and compelling foundation for transition to the next part of the cycle. The major distinction between the DR K-12 and REESE programs is that DR K-12 projects focus on development and study of specific resources, models and technologies designed to improve STEM education in PreK-12 schools, while REESE projects focus primarily on building theory and knowledge about STEM education across learning contexts and ages. The outcomes of DR K-12 projects will be STEM education innovations and design principles that are informed by research and tested in practice. The primary outcomes of REESE projects will be research findings, methods, and theoretical perspectives about STEM education. Proposers who are in doubt about the appropriate program for funding of their work should consult an NSF Program Officer with either program.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION. The goals of the REESE program are: (1) to catalyze discovery and innovation at the frontiers of STEM learning, education, and evaluation; (2) to stimulate the field to produce high quality and robust research results through the progress of theory, method, and human resources; and (3) to coordinate and transform advances in education, learning research, and evaluation efforts. REESE pursues its mission by developing an interdisciplinary research portfolio focusing on core scientific questions of STEM learning in current and emerging learning contexts, both formal and informal, from childhood through adulthofod, and from before school through to graduate school and beyond into the workforce. REESE places particular importance upon the involvement of young investigators in the projects, at doctoral, postdoctoral, and early career stages, as well as the involvement of STEM disciplinary experts. In addition, research questions related to educational research methodology and evaluation are central to the REESE activity. This solicitation calls for four types of proposals: Pathways, Knowledge Diffusion, Empirical, and Large Empirical. All REESE proposals, regardless of their type, must be responsive to one of two broad topical strands, Emerging Research or Contextual Research, as described below.

Research on Emerging Topics in STEM Education Emerging research that broadens knowledge in the field often challenges existing assumptions about learning and teaching within or across STEM disciplines. The REESE program is committed to supporting transformative education research in STEM education through novel answers to foundational questions about what STEM concepts can be learned, by whom, at what age, and how and where that can happen. REESE seeks proposals that have the potential to transform existing fields of STEM learning and education through pioneering research that defies disciplinary boundaries in pursuit of emerging knowledge in STEM learning. Through Emerging Research projects, REESE challenges scholarly communities to put forward groundbreaking ideas, concepts, theories, modes of research and development, and the measurement and methodological technologies needed to understand and measure the impact of the proposed innovations. Emerging research is by nature uncertain, so high-risk/high-gain proposals and potentially transformative ideas are encouraged. Emerging Research proposals will seek to contribute to far-reaching and longer-term developments in knowledge and theory. They may be especially oriented toward the design, develop, and test components of the cycle shown in Figure 1. Emerging Research proposals are limited to one or more of the following areas of inquiry:.

Neural basis of STEM learning Fundamental aspects of STEM learning are beginning to be understood in terms of neural processes and biological context. Discoveries in these and other areas are influencing our understanding of behavior, cognition, and the nature of human learning. In order to gain traction on fundamental questions of mind and brain as related to STEM learning, REESE supports innovative combinations of theory, empirical techniques, and levels of analysis from a wide range of disciplines. An important aspect of these activities is to build capacity in neuroscience related to complex human learning and education, and to identify trajectories by which multidisciplinary research anchored in the biological basis of human learning can inform STEM educational practice. The involvement of researchers familiar with STEM educational practice will be of benefit both in helping to set the cognitive and neuroscientific research agendas in learning as well as in helping to disseminate relevant literatures across disciplines.

It is incumbent upon those submitting proposals to make explicit the implications their work has for current theories of learning and instructional methods, however long-term and indirect they may be. For example, neuroscientific studies of attention or inhibition could constrain theories about the learning of specific STEM content or help explain why some misconceptions are robust and difficult to overcome. They could similarly inform the creation of principles of design for the development of instructional materials, informal learning opportunities, or the education of teachers in the STEM fields. Cognitive processes underlying STEM learning and teaching The REESE program encourages proposals that push the boundaries of existing knowledge about the cognitive processes underlying the learning and teaching of complex STEM content, at all age levels and in all learning contexts. The program seeks to foster interdisciplinary collaboration among cognitive scientists, educational researchers, and STEM disciplinary educators, bringing their respective literatures into more systematic and productive contact. For the REESE Program, interdisciplinarity means a combination of expertise across disciplines both in and out of traditional education programs, such as STEM education researchers, educational psychologists, cognitive scientists, and ethnographers (this list should not be considered exhaustive).

To that end, investigators must make a clear case for how the proposed research has the potential to lead to significant advancements in our understanding of STEM learning and teaching, even if such advancement is by no means assured. In particular, studies must identify the STEM content of focus and argue for its importance. Similarly, assumptions, whether implicit or explicit, about STEM learning must engage relevant theoretical developments and empirical findings, whether in the cognitive science, education research, and/or STEM education literatures. This is a call for researchers to attempt to make substantial progress on fundamental intellectual and scientific questions about the nature of learning, teaching, and knowing, at all education levels, that bear upon developing expertise in STEM fields. For example, investigators might pursue questions about the role of students' goals and beliefs about STEM learning as they relate to STEM performance, or they could take advantage of recent developments at the intersection of mathematics and cognitive science that seek to create probabilistic models of reasoning, memory, language, categorization, and learning in complex STEM domains.

They might address such problems as whether and which aspects of knowledge of the natural world have early-arising conceptual biases that influence the course of learning throughout the life span, affecting which STEM concepts appear to be commonsense and which seem counterintuitive. By contrast, investigators might address claims about which aspects of understandings of the natural world are relevant to a particular social or linguistic context and how they arise, or how prior opportunities to learn relate to what is developmentally appropriate. Note that, unlike the Developmental and Learning Sciences (DLS) Program in the Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE), submissions to the REESE Program must have explicit connection to the teaching or learning of STEM content, though the direct applications may be distal.

Measurement, modeling, and methods for research and evaluation The REESE program is committed to advancing the state of the art in STEM education research and evaluation by supporting proposals to improve or develop new qualitative and quantitative methods, measures, tools and analytic techniques. Investigators studying problems in this area must make a clear case for the technical, analytic, methodological, or measurement problem to be addressed, and plans for how the proposed methods will be developed. An argument should be included about why the particular methodological advance will be applicable in one or more specific STEM education content areas. For instance, some methodologists are experimenting with hybrid forms of qualitative and quantitative techniques based in game and risk theory within more traditional experimental designs, for application to STEM education problems. Further, continued work is needed in methods of combining and aggregating different forms of evidence within a single design or across multiple studies through such methods as meta-analytic or synthetic techniques, mixed qualitative-quantitative techniques, and modeling data derived from qualitatively diverse perspectives in causal logic.

In addition, the STEM education research and evaluation communities remain in need of appropriate and robust ways to measure and model constructs at higher programmatic and organizational levels and within nested logic structures. Research is encouraged that seeks ways that measurement and modeling techniques can become more intellectually responsive to education and learning theory and more robust to modeling assumptions, so that they can be applied to STEM learning and education questions. In the area of modeling and related developments for data mining, sharing, and manipulation, some fields of science and engineering are tapping creative solutions to representation. These solutions emerge from large-scale, distributed data and other authentic resources now becoming available due to advances in computing power, pattern recognition, graphical imagining and representation, and other web-based venues and technologies. Techniques such as these might be extended and adapted for use in modeling learning trajectories, making inferences about particular large-scale interventions, or in diffusion of innovations at various levels educational or informal learning systems. REESE is interested in proposals to adapt and advance these techniques for application to STEM learning settings.

Cyberlearning and teaching Ongoing investments by the NSF to advance our nation's cyberinfrastructure have provided the foundation from which to re-conceptualize traditional models of teaching and learning in school-based and informal learning environments. The re-conceptualization of how, when, and where learning can take place has strong implications for how to effectively educate 21st century learners who are already digital natives.

Cyberlearning can be defined as learning that is mediated by networked computing and communications technologies. Cyberlearning is learning that occurs through one or more types of cyber-enabled networks and communications technologies, and may comprise an entire learning experience (NSF Task Force on Cyberlearning, 2008). Cyberlearning is potentially transformative in that it may provide learning experiences that may highly motivate STEM learning or enable the learning of new STEM content, or allow for teaching that reaches new levels of effectiveness. As a result, cyberlearning has the potential to enhance and enrich the learning process throughout the school years and into adulthood, as a lifelong chronicle-potentially improving the effectiveness with which knowledge is gained over an entire life span.

REESE invites proposals for research to test claims that cyberlearning promotes significantly different ways of learning STEM content, or allows for the learning of different STEM content. Research is needed that will enable the potentially transformational promise of technology to be realized as a means to improve educational opportunity. Accordingly, REESE welcomes proposals that study learning across the entire cyberlearning landscape. Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds. NSF expects to make standard or continuing grant awards. The estimated number of awards will be 30 to 50 for the competition in FY 2010, pending availability of funds. It is anticipated that about 5-10 Pathways, 5-10 Knowledge Diffusion, 10-15 Empirical, and 5-10 Large Empirical awards will be made.

The anticipated funding amount is $27,000,000 for the FY 2010 competition, pending availability of funds. The maximum award for Pathways projects is $250,000 with duration of up to two years. The maximum award for Knowledge Diffusion projects is $250,000 with duration of up to two years. The maximum award for Empirical research projects is $1,500,000 with duration of up to three years. The maximum award for Large Empirical research projects is $2,500,000 with duration of up to five years. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the, Chapter I, Section E.

Organization Limit: None Specified PI Limit: None Specified Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: None Specified Limit on Number of Proposals per PI: None Specified V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS A. Proposal Preparation Instructions Full Proposal Instructions: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the guidelines specified in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at:. Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-PUBS (7827) or by e-mail from. The proposal type and its research strand must be specified in the project title and in the first sentence of the project summary.

In the project title, use the following format at the beginning of the title: Strand-Award Type- (for example, Emerging Research-Pathways-An Exploration of NSF's Proposal-Review Processes). Proposals requesting support for postdoctoral positions should take special note of the requirement for a mentoring plan for postdoctoral appointees. Proposals that request support for a postdoctoral position and do not have a mentoring plan will be returned without review. Please refer to the updated GPG for specific requirements. The REESE program has four additional proposal preparation requirements that each proposal must address: (1) Research design and methodology; (2) project personnel and management; (3) dissemination; and (4) project evaluation. Research design and methodology: REESE expects investigators to propose rigorous and replicable research methods that are well-justified, are suited to the particular research questions being studied, and that have the likelihood of yielding significant knowledge in pursuit of core problems in STEM education and learning.

Nsf Grfp Program Solicitation

Each supported project must meet the following basic requirements:. The proposed topics, questions, methodologies, and research settings must be consistent with the overall goals of the REESE program. Investigators should pose research problems of compelling national importance deeply rooted in one or more STEM fields. Research questions must be clear and specific and must be answerable through the means proposed. The investigators must demonstrate how the proposed research program builds upon existing evidence obtained from relevant prior research. All proposals must draw on the existing educational and learning literatures and on the education-related literature in one or more other domains such as the physical and biological sciences, engineering, cognitive science, neuroscience, statistics, mathematics, or information science. The investigators must explicitly describe the research design, including the methods, sample selected for study, instruments, and all means of data collection.

Information must also be provided on the reliability, validity, and appropriateness of proposed measures and instruments. If the reliability and validity of the instruments are initially unknown, the applicant must include specific plans for establishing these measurement properties. The investigators must provide a specific data analysis plan, including procedures to code and (if necessary) reduce qualitative data, details on how potential threats to internal and external validity will be addressed, power analyses (when appropriate) demonstrating the adequacy of proposed cell sizes, and plans for estimating effect sizes as appropriate. Proposals are strengthened by the reporting of pilot results. Project personnel and management: The research and management roles of each of the senior personnel on the project must be described in brief within the project description. Collaborative teams representing multiple disciplines are typical in REESE projects. In addition, at least one of the senior personnel must be designated as the methodology and measurement leader of the project.

In single-investigator projects, this person will necessarily be the principal investigator. In multi-investigator projects, this person must be listed among senior personnel and may or may not be the principal or a co-investigator. All projects should address the role to be played by STEM disciplinary experts, as appropriate. Where projects request time for students and other trainees, specific plans must be discussed for how any postdoctoral associates, graduate students, undergraduates, or others will benefit in their education and training in connection to the proposed research.

Involvement of students is encouraged as a means of building capacity in STEM education research. REESE does not necessarily expect the same team of investigators to conduct research across all components of the cycle of research and development. However, investigators are expected to conduct research so that relevant models, frameworks, data and measures are well-documented, replicable, and usable by other research teams wishing to work on similar problems from other vantage points or by using other research designs. It is the intention of the REESE program to encourage investigative teams to work simultaneously, as part of a larger knowledge community, on a given problem of national importance. See the Large Empirical proposal discussion under Eligible Project Types for related information. Dissemination: All REESE projects are expected to accumulate and communicate knowledge to the relevant research, policy, and practitioner communities. As part of DRL's strong and unwavering commitment to the broader impacts of funded research, reports from successful REESE projects must be published in peer-reviewed professional or scholarly journals, and findings (positive or negative) must be disseminated through appropriate means to audiences relevant to the goals of the project.

Projects are encouraged to seek out appropriate audiences across disciplinary boundaries. Projects will also be expected to share research designs, findings, and overall project information with policymakers and the REESE Diffusion and Evaluation Network, the Center for Advancing Research and Communication (ARC) at the University of Chicago, and report annually to an on-line data system. Project Evaluation: All projects must have an evaluation plan that includes measures that the project team intends to use in assessing its success and meeting its milestones and objectives. It is critical that all projects have a substantive external expert review mechanism that provides regular feedback on the project's research methods and progress, analysis procedures, interpretation of data into findings, and dissemination activities. Proposals must make a clear argument for what steps will be taken to ensure that the proposed evaluation is distant from the project and is objective, and must describe how evaluation input will be used to shape the project.

Proposers are reminded to identify the program solicitation number (NSF 09-601) in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing. Budgetary Information Cost Sharing: Cost sharing is not required under this solicitation. Udget Preparation Instructions: A careful and realistic budget in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG), consistent with the proposed activities, and including a request for funds to cover the cost of attendance of the PI at each year's annual awardee meeting in Arlington, VA should be submitted with the proposal. Due Dates. Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m.

Proposer's local time): November 12, 2009 D. FastLane Requirements Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this program solicitation through use of the NSF FastLane system. Detailed instructions regarding the technical aspects of proposal preparation and submission via FastLane are available at:.

For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail. The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity. Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets. The Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the proposal Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal certifications (see Chapter II, Section C of the for a listing of the certifications).

The AOR must provide the required electronic certifications within five working days following the electronic submission of the proposal. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website at:. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program where they will be reviewed if they meet NSF proposal preparation requirements.

All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional.

Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. NSF Merit Review Criteria All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board (NSB)-approved merit review criteria: intellectual merit and the broader impacts of the proposed effort. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities. The two NSB-approved merit review criteria are listed below.

Prodad software. Mercalli V3 SAL Windows® employs 3D video stabilization, which independently stabilizes the X, Y, and Z camera axis, delivering very good video stabilization results. Mercalli also employs some unique dynamic camera options that lets you precisely control the level of stabilization so the character of the video is retained.

The criteria include considerations that help define them. These considerations are suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. While proposers must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address only those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being considered and for which the reviewer is qualified to make judgements. What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?

How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of the prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity?

Is there sufficient access to resources? What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity? How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning?

How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships?

Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society? Examples illustrating activities likely to demonstrate broader impacts are available electronically on the NSF website at:.

Mentoring activities provided to postdoctoral researchers supported on the project, as described in a one-page supplementary document, will be evaluated under the Broader Impacts criterion. NSF staff also will give careful consideration to the following in making funding decisions. Integration of Research and Education One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the diversity of learning perspectives.

Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens - women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities - is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

Review and Selection Process Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review. Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation. After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF is striving to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months.

The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer.

In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding. In all cases, after programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications and the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION A. Notification of the Award Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements.

Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. For additional information on the review process.) B.