Submitted version: submiited_fullproposal.pdf, deadline was 07/17/2024

• Title: Beyond Boundaries: Harnessing Immersive Environments for Elevated STEM Understanding in Education
• Project Period: 09/01/2025 - 08/31/2028

Our project is Engaged Student Learning (ESL), Level 1 proposal → Lvl 1 and 2 are divided at \$400k.

The proposal is being prepared and to-be submitted at https://www.research.gov/research-web/

• no pagination
• fonts
• 1 inch margin on all sides and no more than 6 lines per inch (set line spacing to 12 pt).
• no embedded URL

• Need to create a biosketch and certify in SciENcv (here is the URL link for my Biosketch in prep: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/sciencv/1221039/)
• Need to create Current and Pending support

• Cover sheet
• Project Summary (1 page)
• Table of Contents (auto-generated)
• Project Description (15 pages)
  • Broader Impacts (as a separate section with the section title)
  • and Intellectual Merits (optional)
  • Results from Prior NSF Support (within 5 years)
• References (inclusion of a website here is optional)
• Budget and Budget Justification (no more than 5 pages)

• Synergistic Activities: Each investigator must provide a document of up to 1-page that includes a list of up to five distinct examples that demonstrates the broader impact of the individual's professional and scholarly activities. Some examples include “innovations in teaching and training; contributions to the science of learning; development and/or refinement of research tools; computation methodologies and algorithms, development of database, broadening the participation of underrepresented groups in STEM; participating in international research collaborations; service to scientific and engineering community outside of the individual's immediate organization”.
• Mentoring Plan: (required for supported graduate students now). Examples of mentoring activities include but are not limited to: career counseling; training in preparation of proposals, publications and presentations; guidance on ways to improve teaching and mentoring skills; guidance on how to effectively collaborate with researchers from diverse backgrounds and disciplinary areas; and training in responsible professional practices.
• Data Management and Sharing Plan:

• Deadline 07/17/2024 for Institutional and Community Transformation (ICT; Level 2) proposals and Engaged Student Learning (ESL; Level 2 and Level 3) proposals
  • Among ICT and ESL, ESL focuses on design, development, and research projects that involve the creation, exploration, or implementation of tools, resources, and models. Projects must show high potential to increase student engagement and learning in STEM. Therefore, our project is a better fit for ESL: (1) Level 1: Early stage or exploratory study up to \$400k, (2) Level 2: support design and development efforts or impact studies6 to improve student learning, including department-wide reform efforts, interdisciplinary or multi-disciplinary collaborations, or partnerships across institutions –> up to \$750k, and (3) Level 3: multi-institutional that involves administrators –> up to \$2M.
• Main Scope: To improve STEM teaching and learning for undergraduate students, including studying what works and for whom and how to transform institutions to adopt successful practices in STEM education

• We need to feed more students to the STEM field, but motivating students to pursue STEM careers has seen limited success (2020, C. o. t. E. o. Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century. (Washington, DC, 2005)). One of the main reasons is the traditional teacher-centered instruction assuming knowledge can be transferred directly from instructor to students. However, modern learning theories suggest knowledge is constructed in a student's socio-historical context through active sense-making processes (i.e., situated cognition; 2020 CotEo, Collins et al. 1992; Jonassen & Land 2012). We need to switch to a student-centered learning environment that promotes student's active learning opportunities.
• There have been recent innovative pedagogical approaches in Physics and Engineering fields by adopting modern technology in instruction (Wieman & Perkins 2005; Wieman 2008; Hake 2008; Wilson 1994; Laws 1997; Belcher 2001; Roy 2003; Redish 2003; Enderle et al. 2013). For example, Wieman et al. and Christian et al. have led the efforts in the development of virtual physics by using interactive computer simulations to illustrate fundamental concepts of physics (e.g., http://phet.colorado.edu and http://webphysics.davidson.edu/Applets/Applets.html) (Wieman & Perkins 2005; Wieman 2008; Belloni & Christian 2003; Wolfgang & Esquembre 2007). Although such simulations can help students visualize physical concepts (and improve their understanding), they do not promote real-world active learning.
• (From IUSE:EDU Synopsis): The nation must promote novel, creative, and transformative approaches to generating and using new knowledge about STEM teaching and learning to improve STEM education for undergraduate students. (Our Project can) educate students to be leaders and innovators in emerging and rapidly changing STEM fields as well as educating a scientifically literate public. We will bring recent advances in STEM knowledge into undergraduate education, that adapt, improve, and incorporate evidence-based practices into STEM teaching and learning. Such efforts will lay the groundwork for institutional improvement in STEM education. By releasing our project results as openly accessible education resources (OERs), we encourage replication of our research studies at different types of institutions and with different student bodies to produce deeper knowledge about the effectiveness and transferability of findings. Our OERs can be useful educational materials, especially for underprivileged communities, and have high potential for broader societal impacts, including improved diversity of students and instructors participating in STEM education, professional development for instructors to ensure the adoption of new and effective pedagogical techniques that meet the changing needs of students, and projects that promote institutional partnerships for collaborative research and development. Our project is an evidence-based and knowledge-generating study to understand and improve STEM learning and learning environments, improve the diversity of STEM students and majors, and prepare STEM majors for the workforce. Our study has impacts beyond the host institution, and our project results add more broadly to our understanding of effective teaching and learning practices.

References

• 2020, C. o. t. E. o. Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century. (Washington, DC, 2005)
• Collins, A., Brown, J. S. & Holum, A. Cognitive Apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educator 15, 6-11, 38-46 (1991)
• Jonassen, D. H. & Land, S. M. Theoretical foundations of learning environments. (Routledge, 2012)
• Wieman, C. & Perkins, H. Transforming physics education. Physics Today 58, 36 (2005).
• Wieman, C. in Forum for the Future of Higher Education 61 (2008).
• Hake, R. R. in Handbook of Design Research Methods in Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education (eds A.E. Kelly, R.A. Lesh, & J.Y. Baek) (Routledge, 2008).
• Wilson, J. M. The CUPLE Physics Studio. Physics Teacher 32, 518-523 (1994).
• Laws, P. W. Millikan Lecture 1996: Promoting active learning based on physics education research in introductory physics courses. . Am J Phys 65, 14-21 (1997).
• Belcher, J. W. Studio Physics at MIT. (2001).
• Roy, H. Studio vs Interactive Lecture Demonstration – Effects on Student Learning. Bioscience 29, 3-6 (2003).
• Redish, E. F. Teaching Physics With the Physics Suite. (John Willey & Sons, 2003).
• Enderle, P. J., Southerland, S. A. & Grooms, J. A. Exploring the context of change: Understanding the kinetics of a studio physics implementation effort. PHYSICAL REVIEW SPECIAL TOPICS - PHYSICS EDUCATION RESEARCH 9, 010114 (2013).
• Belloni, M. & Christian, W. Physlets for Quantum Mechanics. Comput. Sci. Eng. 5, 90 (2003).
• Wolfgang, C. & Esquembre, F. Modeling Physics with Easy Java Simulations. Phys. Teach. 45, 475 (2007).

• budget_justification.pdf
• data_management_plan.pdf
• facilities.pdf
• postdoc_mentoring_plan.pdf
• proposal.pdf
• references_cited.pdf
• summary.pdf

Format of Proposal Documents
The proposal must conform to the following requirements:
Use one of the following fonts identified below: (1) Arial (not Arial Narrow), Courier New, or Palatino Linotype at a font size of 10 points or larger; (2) Times New Roman at a font size of 11 points or larger; or (3) Computer Modern family of fonts at a font size of 11 points or larger.

A font size of less than 10 points may be used for mathematical formulas or equations, figures, tables, or diagram captions and when using a Symbol font to insert Greek letters or special characters. Other fonts not specified above, such as Cambria Math, may be used for mathematical formulas, equations, or when inserting Greek letters or special characters. PIs are cautioned, however, that the text must still be readable.

  No more than six lines of text within a vertical space of one inch.
  Margins, in all directions, must be at least an inch. No proposer-supplied information may appear in the margins.
  Paper size must be no larger than standard letter paper size (8 ½ by 11”). 

These requirements apply to all uploaded sections of a proposal, including supplementary documentation.

Your files should not contain page numbers, as they will be added automatically by the system.

1. Project Summary

  Your file must include three separate section headers: Overview, Intellectual Merit, and Broader Impacts. To be valid, a heading must be on its own line with no other text on that line.
  File cannot exceed one page

1. Project Description

  Your file must include a separate section header for Broader Impacts. To be valid, a heading must be on its own line with no other text on that line.
  File cannot exceed 15 pages. (Please note: Certain solicitations may provide different guidance to follow. In these cases, please follow the solicitation to prepare the proposal)
  Hyperlinks (URLs) must not be used in the Project Description

1. References Cited

  Follow accepted scholarly practices in providing citations for source materials
  References should avoid the use of et al. (except for large consortia papers)

1. Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources

  This section should be narrative in nature and include internal and external resources (both physical and personnel)
  This section should include any senior personnel or postdoctoral researchers for whom no funds are being requested in the budget
  The section must not include any quantifiable financial information

1. Biosketch - all team members

  Users must create Biographical Sketch documents using SciENcv 
  File cannot exceed three pages
  Collaborators and other affiliations should not be included in the Biographical Sketch, as it is now provided as a Single Copy Document for each individual identified as senior personnel

1. Current and Pending Support - all team members

Users must create Current and Pending Support using SciENcv

  Current and Pending Support must include ongoing projects and proposals (including this project), and any subsequent funding in the case of continuing grants

1. Collaborators and Other Affiliations (COA) - all team members

  Use the attached Collaborators and Other Affiliations template and follow the instructions. View Frequently Asked Questions for additional information
  NSF uses the information in this Single Copy Document to manage reviewer selection, and it is not seen by reviewers. For more on potential review conflicts
  see the PAPPG.

1. Data Management Plan

  File cannot exceed two page(s); however, if more space is needed, the Project Description can be used. 
  Proposers are advised that the Data Management Plan must not be used to circumvent the Project  Description page limitation listed in the funding opportunity. 
  Hyperlinks (URLs) must not be used in the Project Description.
  The plan should describe how the proposal will conform to NSF policy on the dissemination and sharing of research results
  A valid Data Management Plan may include only the statement that no detailed plan is needed, as long as the statement is accompanied by a clear justification

1. Project Data Form - complete form within research.gov

  The information on this form is used to direct proposals to appropriate reviewers and to determine the characteristics of projects supported by the Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE). Refer to the solicitation (funding opportunity) for Program Track(s) and Category details along with any other information needed to populate the project data form.

1. List of Suggested Reviewers (OPTIONAL)

  For suggested reviewers, provide the first name, middle initial, last name, e-mail address, and organization affiliation
  In order to avoid suggesting reviewers who may have a conflict of interest with you or your organization, see Potentially Disqualifying Conflicts of Interest (PAPPG), which may be of use in preparation of your list

1. List of Reviewers Not to Include (OPTIONAL)

  For reviewers not to include, provide the first name, middle initial, last name, e-mail address, organization affiliation, and the reason not to include them
  To confirm reviewers who may have a conflict of interest with you or your organization, see Potentially Disqualifying Conflicts of Interest (PAPPG), which may be of use in preparation of your list

1. Supplementary Documentation

  List of project participants: Each IUSE proposal must include, as a supplementary document, a list of the name, institutional affiliation, and role of all project personnel outside of the PI, co-PI(s), and senior personnel. This includes project staff, advisory board members, project evaluators, consultants, collaborators, and any other individuals participating in the project. The list should not include graduate or undergraduate students,or individuals yet to be named.