The CLT Program Solicitation is basically unchanged from last year.  Changes that have been made in this program solicitation include revising the paragraph on perceived gaps in the portfolio of projects, and disallowing the simultaneous submission of collaborative proposals from different organizations.

Centers for Learning and Teaching (CLT)

The Centers for Learning and Teaching (CLT) program focuses on the advanced preparation of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) educators, as well as the establishment of meaningful partnerships among education stakeholders, especially Ph.D.-granting institutions, school systems, and informal education performers.  Its goals are to renew and diversify the cadre of leaders in STEM education; to increase the number of K-16 educators capable of delivering high-quality STEM instruction and assessment; and to conduct research into STEM education issues of national import (e.g., the nature of learning, teaching strategies, and reform policies and outcomes).

Centers for Learning and Teaching

Centers provide a rich environment that melds research, teacher education, and education practice.  Individual Centers may have specific foci (e.g., K-6 science, large-scale assessments, learning of mathematics).  Each must address the following three equally important components: (1) renewing and diversifying the cadre of leaders in STEM education, particularly the higher education faculty who educate STEM teachers and professionals in leadership positions at state and district-levels and other education organizations; (2) enhancing the content knowledge and pedagogical skills of current and future elementary and secondary teachers; and (3) supporting research into  STEM education issues of national import.  CLT projects should build upon previous activities in the preparation and professional development of teachers and provide opportunities for doctoral and postdoctoral students in the disciplines and in STEM education to acquire the knowledge and skills to educate the next generation of K-12 teachers.

Center proposals must involve partnerships of organizations with a scientific, engineering, and/or educational mission.  Among these are two- and four-year colleges and universities, state and local education agencies, professional societies, research laboratories, business and industry, informal science centers, instructional materials development centers, private foundations, and/or other public and private organizations (whether for profit or nonprofit).  Each Center must have one or more school district partners (or an appropriate group of schools, e.g., specialized schools), as well as a partner that is authorized to award doctoral degrees in an appropriate STEM education area.  

Centers for Learning and Teaching in Nanoscale Science and Engineering

A new funding opportunity, Centers for Learning and Teaching in Nanoscale Science and Engineering (NCLT) has been created.  The NCLT is part of a comprehensive effort related to one of the Foundation’s priority areas.  The description of the NCLT component can be found in the solicitation Nanoscale Science and Engineering Education (NSEE), NSF 03-044.

The Centers for Learning and Teaching (CLT) program is a comprehensive, research-based effort that addresses critical issues and national needs of the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) instructional workforce across the entire spectrum of formal and informal education.  The need to replace a large number of educators who are expected to retire over the next decade is widely understood and recent studies have indicated that many inadequately prepared educators enter the profession each year.  Recent reports also indicate that the doctoral-level professionals needed to educate the K-12 instructional workforce are in short supply.  Replenishing and diversifying the instructional workforce, K-16, and conducting ongoing research related to learning and teaching across the spectrum of these activities are clear national needs.

A growing body of research articulates both the needs of, and possible solutions to, the current state of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education.  What Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future (National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, 1996) indicates that over 50,000 inadequately prepared teachers enter the teaching profession each year. Indeed, a recent report indicates that in grades 7-12, approximately 33% of mathematics teachers and 20% of science teachers have neither a major nor minor in their field; yet these under qualified teachers teach over 26% of mathematics students and over 16% of science students (Ingersoll, 1999).  Moreover, of those teachers who enter with adequate backgrounds, 30% to 50% are likely to leave the profession within five years.  Many of those teachers teach science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

At a time when the K-12 student population is becoming increasingly diverse, the K-12 instructional workforce has not diversified appreciably nor has its ability to provide appropriate instruction for diverse learners increased.  It is anticipated that Centers will use varied approaches to diversify the instructional workforce as well as to prepare teachers and faculty to use instructional techniques that enhance the STEM learning of all students.

Recent studies have identified a positive relationship between the use of teaching practices based on national standards and improved student learning (Cohen & Hill, 1998; Kahle, Meece, & Scantlebury, 2000; Klein, Hamilton, McCaffrey, Stecher, Robyn, & Burroughs, 1999).  Further, the efficacy of combining professional development with standards-based curriculum is becoming evident (Weiss, Montgomery, Ridgway, & Bond, 1998).  There is a need to couple this emerging knowledge base with new and effective ways of preparing future teachers and of providing professional development for current teachers that will produce, as well as retain, effective teachers at the elementary and secondary levels (U.S. Department of Education, 2000).

Program Description Contents

A.  Goals

B.  Project Characteristics

1.  Focus

2.  Coverage

3.  Doctoral, Postdoctoral, and Internship Component

4.  Teacher Education Component 

5.  Research Component

6.  Institutionalization

7.  Evaluation

8.  Dissemination

9.  Relationship to other Projects supported by NSF

_____________________________________________________ 

A.  GOALS

The CLT program calls for a systemic approach to the development and enhancement of the instructional workforce (K through graduate school) where professionals are educated in an environment of research and practice.  For STEM educators, a Center will provide opportunities to enhance their content knowledge, develop teaching strategies that lead to improved student learning, implement high quality instructional materials, incorporate information technology, and develop skills in using various strategies for assessing student learning.  For doctoral and postdoctoral students and interns, a Center will provide study and research opportunities with the goal of improving learning, teaching, and assessment across the educational continuum.  Although Centers develop different models to achieve their objectives, all must address the following equally important goals that are based upon documented national needs:

• Centers are expected to play a significant role in renewing and diversifying the cadre of national leaders in STEM education.  They should provide basic and advanced education for doctoral and postdoctoral students who will specialize in STEM education and who will provide the expertise for large-scale assessment and/or evaluation of educational reform; conduct research on STEM teaching and learning; develop the next generation of curricular materials; become local and state supervisors; and/or will develop future directions in informal science education.

• Centers will increase significantly the numbers of K-12 STEM educators in formal (schools) and/or informal (museums, zoos, botanical gardens, etc.) settings who have up-to-date content knowledge in their disciplinary area and who are prepared to implement standards-based instruction and new assessment strategies.  Further, these educators should be able to use information technology as an aid to student learning. 

• Centers will provide substantive opportunities for research into the nature of learning, strategies of teaching, policies of educational reform, and outcomes of standards-based reform.

The three goals are synergistic and inter-related; that is, a Center's research agenda, teacher education activities, and graduate programs should inform one another and focus on the national need being addressed by the Center.

B.  PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

1. Focus.   In order to meet the overarching purposes of this Solicitation, Centers should address all or an appropriate part of the continuum of teacher education, and prepare STEM education professionals through doctoral programs or through postdoctoral and internship opportunities for individuals drawn either from a STEM discipline or from education.  The teacher education and graduate/postdoctoral components will be developed and carried out through appropriate collaborations between STEM disciplinary and STEM education faculty.  Teacher education is likely to be an ongoing activity of the collaborating institutions.  Undergraduate and graduate students, as well as interns, should have opportunities to develop their expertise through interactions with the teachers participating in those activities.  Each Center should connect teacher education with the education of those who will be prepared to assume national roles in education.  It is anticipated that each Center's efforts will focus on a national need in STEM education and that evidence addressing the scope and urgency of that need will be included in the proposal.  Because the CLT program is addressing a broad range of national needs, proposals should include an explanation detailing the uniqueness of the proposed Center vis-a-vis existing Centers.  Descriptions of existing Centers can be viewed at  www.ehr.nsf.gov/esie.

The following areas represent national needs that have been identified as gaps in the current CLT portfolio:

• Science Education.  Build the foundation for developmentally appropriate sequences in K-12 science curriculum topics that respond to new advances in science; conduct relevant research that guides the design of curriculum aligned with these advances; determine the requisite knowledge of teachers; and suggest the resources needed to support development and implementation of these new and innovative science sequences. 

• Technology and Engineering Education.  Build the national capacity for research in this emerging area of STEM education; identify effective design challenges for K-12 settings; create developmentally appropriate learning sequences; and nurture a cadre of talented leaders to guide the expansion of technology and engineering education in the schools.

• STEM Education Policy.  Enhance the capacity to address policy issues at state and/or district levels and identify new administrative and organizational paradigms, including an examination of specialists' roles, determining the balance of STEM expertise needed, and evaluating the methods and benefits of leveraging appropriate resources.  

• STEM Education Evaluation.  Increase the nation's capacity to evaluate mathematics, science, and technology programs.  Emphases might include new approaches for conducting large-scale evaluations at federal, state, or district levels, or developing innovative approaches to help schools/districts with data collection and analysis as a way to guide practice.

• These areas are intended as examples only.  Proposals that focus on other areas are also welcome.

2.  Coverage.   Centers may address mathematics, science, and/or technology education.  Each proposal must contain a rationale for the grade band (e.g., K-12, K-6, 7-12) chosen for emphasis.  Centers should include educational opportunities for substantial numbers of teachers, administrators, and/or informal science educators, as well as programs of study for doctoral and/or postdoctoral students (including those with discipline-based degrees).  Proposals should be developed cooperatively among several institutions of higher education and should include some combination of state or local education agencies, community colleges, museums, etc.  Such cooperation should leverage the expertise of different institutions.  Collaboration is encouraged also with business and industry and with international institutions.  Doctoral students, postdoctoral students, and interns might complete different parts of their education at different institutions and/or Centers in order to develop special expertise.  Each Center proposal must present a clear plan for recruiting highly qualified candidates into teacher education programs, in-service activities, and graduate and postdoctoral level programs.  Recruitment plans should include strategies for expanding the diversity of the STEM education workforce; these strategies should document and build upon existing effective efforts.

3.  Doctoral, Postdoctoral, and Internship Component.   A critical CLT component is to provide doctoral, postdoctoral, and intern programs for the broad array of professionals who educate and support the K-12 instructional workforce.  These professionals include university scientists, mathematicians, and/or engineers who prepare future teachers either in discipline or education courses; local and state supervisors and curriculum coordinators; informal science educators; education researchers; curriculum developers; assessment and evaluation professionals; and school administrators (e.g., principals).  Programs of study for these professionals should include clearly delineated graduate programs (Ph.D., Ed.D., Master's programs may be included).  Proposals will have clear statements of focus, indicating what backgrounds and experiences will be required for entrance and discuss how the program of study might be adapted for applicants with varying kinds of backgrounds.  New ways to involve each Center's collaborative partners, as well as collaborations across Centers as the CLT program evolves are encouraged.

Innovation in graduate programs and postdoctoral education is encouraged as Centers seek to impact both the scope and quality of the STEM education infrastructure.  One or more of the following activities are envisioned: First, Centers should provide rich opportunities to conduct research and assessment studies in STEM learning and teaching.  Second, doctoral students, postdoctoral students, and interns coming from scientific, mathematics, and engineering disciplines should be given in-depth experiences with K-12 STEM teaching, administration, assessment, and curricula.  Third, doctoral students, postdoctoral students, and interns with education backgrounds should be provided content courses and other learning experiences related to the Center's particular focus.  Centers will provide professionals with opportunities to apply their developing knowledge in realistic settings and provide extensive mentoring to help them develop a broad network of contacts that will provide support after the program of study is complete.  Proposals involving more than one doctoral program should describe the value added to the doctoral and postdoctoral experiences by the Center, as opposed to experiences that would exist at each partner institution.

4.  Teacher Education Component.   Centers may address a wide range of issues in teacher education such as teacher preparation, induction, and internships; teaching out-of-field; licensure programs; alternative certification; master's degree programs; distance education; or some combination of these topics.

Effective pre-service and in-service teacher professional development should enhance the capacity of the K-12 instructional workforce; add to the knowledge base about effective teacher education; and lead to documented improvement in student achievement.   Proposals should describe ways that teachers will be assisted in learning content and pedagogy in cooperation with scientists, mathematicians, and engineers.  Exploring information technology both to enhance instruction for K-12 students and as a means of providing professional development of, and support for, teachers is a high priority for NSF.  Programs addressing teacher professional development, teacher preparation, and/or the induction period for teachers should reflect the research in the pertinent area (e.g., Loucks-Horsley, Hewson, Love, & Stiles, 1998)  and include high quality undergraduate courses in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology that are taught through research-based models (e.g., extended inquiry, problem-solving).  Other topics of high priority for NSF include under-prepared and out-of-field teachers; retention of qualified teachers in the profession; strategies for assisting formal and informal educators to meet the needs of all learners; teachers prepared for varied roles within the instructional workforce (e.g., master teachers, department chairs); and opportunities for collaboration with informal science education, as well as the education of informal science educators.

5.  Research Component.   Centers should articulate an overarching research agenda that defines the Center focus.  The research undertaken by each Center should address a recognized national need and also connect the doctoral education component to the K-12 teacher education component in a symbiotic manner.  The research agenda should be grounded in the K-12 teacher education component and also contribute to that work.  There are well-developed and well-understood means for communicating research results to others in the education research community and these should be used by researchers supported by Centers.  Additionally, Centers should devise ways to make the results of their research available to teachers, school administrators, supervisors, and professional societies in ways that can have an impact on practice.

The research supported by the CLT program is a critical component of the research effort funded by the Directorate for Education and Human Resources.  As a part of that overall effort, researchers at each Center are part of a larger community that contributes to better understanding of learning and teaching of STEM subjects.  Opportunities to collaborate across Centers on areas of common interest are afforded, in order to create a program-wide research agenda and provide avenues for mutual assistance in furthering this agenda.

6.  Institutionalization.   Proposals will include plans for ensuring continuation of critical aspects of the Centers after the period of NSF support.  In particular, the support strategies for teacher education need to be institutionalized and critical aspects of graduate programs should be sustained by the collaborating institutions.

7.  Evaluation.   Evaluation of both the teacher education and graduate, postdoctoral, and internship components that will provide formative and summative feedback to revise and refocus a Center is required.  The evaluation plan must describe the evidence to be used to indicate that the Center's goals are met, the data that will be collected, benchmarks that will be measured, methods that will be used in evaluating the project, and the timeline for the evaluation process.  It is expected that data will be collected that are appropriate to the goals of the Center and of the CLT program.  The evaluation should document the Center's effect on students, teachers, graduate students, faculty, institutional environments, etc.

Each proposed Center must commit to cooperating with an NSF third-party evaluation, including a longitudinal study of impact that will be funded independently by NSF.  As part of this evaluation, Centers will be responsible for providing requested data to multiple program evaluators.

8.  Dissemination.   The proposal must include strategies and plans for communicating the activities and outcomes of the Center to other professionals in the STEM and education communities throughout and after the project.

9.  Relationship to other Projects supported by NSF.  Centers that propose to include partners from an existing or proposed Math and Science Partnership (MSP) or other large-scale project should carefully delineate plans to avoid duplication of effort and should provide strategies for cooperation.  Details should be given for linking the research agenda of the Center to the work of the MSP or other project.  Of particular concern is the need for coherence in goals and effort of work in partner school districts.  Proposals for a Center that would include a partner that is also a partner in an existing or proposed MSP or other large-scale project must provide evidence that all partners have the necessary capacity to carry out the proposed work of both projects, that the goals and approaches of the two projects are aligned, and that management structures are put in place that will further the goals of both projects without inhibiting the attainment of the goals of either. 

References

Brownstein, E.M., & Destino, T.  (1994, April).  Scenes from a science classroom: An enrichment program experience.   Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, New Orleans.  (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.  ED 375 001).

Cohen D.  K., & Hill, H.  C.  (1998).  State policy and classroom performance: Mathematics reform in California (CPRE Policy Brief).  Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

Griffard, P.B., & Wandersee, J.H.  (1998, April).  Challenges to meaningful learning among African-American females at an urban science high school.   Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA.  (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.  ED 417 977).

Ingersoll, R.  M.  (1999, March).  The problem of underqualified teachers in American secondary schools.  Educational Researcher, 28(2), 26-37.

Kahle, J.  B., Meece, J., & Scantlebury, K.  (2000).  Urban African-American middle school science students: Does standards-based teaching make a difference? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 1019-1041.

Klein, S., Hamilton, L., McCaffrey, D., Stecher, B., Robyn, A., & Burroughs, D.  (1999, May).  Teaching practices and student achievement: Report of first-year findings from the "Mosaic" study of systemic initiatives in mathematics and science.   Los Angeles, CA: Rand Corporation.

Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P.  W., Love, N., & Stiles, K.  E.  (1998).  Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics.   Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

National Commission on Teaching and America's Future (1996).  What matters most: Teaching for America's future.   Report of the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.  Woodbridge, VA, 22194-5239.

National Science Board (2000).  Science and Engineering Indicators - 2000.   Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (NSB-00-1).

Teel, K.  M., Debruin-Parecki, A., & Covington, M.V.  (1998).  Teaching strategies that honor and motivate inner-city African-American students: A school/university collaboration.  Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 479-495.

U.S.  Department of Education (2000).  Before It's Too Late: A Report to the Nation from The National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century.  Washington, DC: U.S.  Department of Education.

Weiss, I.  R., Montgomery, D.  L., Ridgway, C.  J., & Bond, S.  L.  (1998, December).   Local systemic change through teacher enhancement: Year three cross-site report.   Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.

The categories of proposers identified in the Grant Proposal Guide are eligible to submit proposals under this program announcement/solicitation. 

An academic institution, organization, or agency may submit only one CLT proposal as the lead partner for a given competition. However, an academic institution, organization, or agency may be a co-partner in more than one CLT proposal.  Simultaneous submission of collaborative proposals from different organizations will not be allowed.

Center proposals must involve partnerships of organizations with a scientific, engineering, and/or educational mission.  Among these are two- and four-year colleges and universities, state and local education agencies, professional societies, research laboratories, business and industry, informal science centers, instructional materials development centers, private foundations, and/or other public and private organizations (whether for profit or nonprofit).  Each Center must have one or more school district partners (or an appropriate group of schools, e.g., specialized schools), as well as a partner, lead or otherwise, that is authorized to award doctoral degrees in an appropriate STEM education area.  

Under this Solicitation, awards will be made with an initial commitment of up to five years, and a potential duration of ten years.  The progress and plans of each funded CLT will be reviewed by NSF annually, prior to receiving continued NSF support.  In the fourth year of operation, the CLT may submit a renewal proposal for continued support, which will undergo merit review.  The CLT's achievements and future plans will be evaluated comprehensively.  The review will determine if the CLT is meeting the goals and objectives as originally proposed.  The CLT performance assessment will be guided by the goals and objectives of the CLT program and the individual goals of the particular CLT.

Centers successful in passing the fourth-year review will be eligible for renewal for another five years, pending availability of funds, commencing at the beginning of the sixth year, and including a two-year phase-out period.  Funding levels, in this subsequent period, will be considered at higher levels based on documented success of the Center, a compelling case for the proposed research efforts, and availability of funding.  Centers that pass the fourth-year review will continue to be reviewed by NSF at least every 18 months, in addition to the requisite annual reports.  Centers that do not pass the fourth year review will be phased-out over a one-year period, except that funds may be provided for continued support of the doctoral students appointed under the provisions of the original grant.  The NSF will support a CLT for a maximum of ten years.  

Support levels for graduate and post-doctoral students and interns may vary depending upon the academic background and/or teaching expertise of applicants.  It is envisioned that some advanced students will be paid academic-year stipends (in accordance with local institutional rates) plus tuition and fee waivers, while experienced professionals from teaching or other fields may be remunerated in proportion to their current salaries (up to $35,000/ten months) plus tuition and fee waivers.  Professional development activities for teachers may offer stipends of up to $100 per day; provide tuition and fee waivers for graduate credits; or provide support for substitutes to permit the release of teachers during the school day.  Although proposals may request funds for the development of new graduate courses in STEM education, the cost of delivering such courses may not be covered.  

Proposers' attention is directed to the recent NSF requirement that the two general review criteria, Intellectual Merit  and Broader Impact, must be explicitly addressed in the project summary and project description of proposals.  Additional review criteria described below should be addressed when preparing a proposal.  Project Description may not exceed 20 single-spaced pages in 12-point type with one-inch margins.  Submission by FastLane is required for both preliminary proposals (preproposals) and full proposals. 

Only collaborative proposals submitted as single proposals are allowed (see Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter II, Section D.3.a).  A single proposal submission allows investigators from two or more organizations who have developed an integrated research project to submit a single, focused proposal.   Simultaneous submission of proposals from different organizations is disallowed. 

Center awards will be made as continuing grants for up to five years, with the possibility of a five-year renewal.  Other budget limitations are identified in Section IV, Award Information.

Compliance with NSF third-party evaluation, as described under Project Characteristics in Section II.B.7.

Standard annual reports are to be submitted via FastLane.  Additional data may also be requested.  Such requests will be set as conditions to either the initial award or to continuing yearly funding.

Nanoscale Science and Engineering Education (http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/esie)

Teacher Professional Continuum, Division of Elementary, Secondary, and Informal Education  -- (http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/esie).

Instructional Materials Development (IMD) -- (http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/esie).

Informal Science Education (ISE) -- Program Solicitation [NSF-03-511]  (https://www.nsf.gov/pubsys/ods/getpub.cfm?ods_key=nsf03511)

Information Technology Experiences for Students and Teachers  (ITEST) -- Program Solicitation [NSF-02-147]  (https://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?nsf02147).

Math and Science Partnership Program (MSP) -- (https://www.ehr.nsf.gov/msp)

NSF Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Education (GK-12) -- (http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/dge)

Presidential Awards for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching -- (http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/pres_awards/).

Advanced Technological Education (ATE) -- (http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/due).