here - National Institute of Education

Report
13th Request for Proposals:
MOE Academies Fund
Presentation to MOE & IHLs
Office of Education Research (OER)
20 November 2014
Background
The MOE Academies Fund (MAF) is a separate $10 million dollar grant
that offers a stream of funding in the third tranche of the Educational
Research Funding Programme (ERFP) in FY2013-2017, with specific
objectives to:
• support development and research projects that will contribute to
the enhancement of pedagogical practices or the professional
development of teachers
• provide opportunities for the MOE Academies to focus on identifying
key pedagogical and professional development approaches for
researchers to test, evaluate and propose areas of improvements
Background
•
The MAF is managed by the Office of Education Research (OER) at NIE.
•
Funding under the MAF is available to researchers outside of NIE to apply to
the MAF grant as principal investigators, specifically from the following
organizations and institutes:
– Education officers from MOE Academies and Language Centres:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Academy of Singapore Teachers (AST)
English Language Institute of Singapore (ELIS)
Physical Education and Sports Teacher Academy (PESTA)
Singapore Teachers’ Academy for the aRts (STAR)
Malay Language Centre of Singapore (MLCS)
Umar Pulavar Tamil Language Centre (UPTLC)
– Researchers and academic staff from Singapore’s Institutes of Higher
Learning (IHLs) and polytechnics
Education Research Projects
• Primary goal
– To produce new knowledge
• Secondary goal
– To improve practice
4
Development Projects
• Primary goal
– To improve practice
• Secondary goal
– To produce new knowledge
5
Research Project Types
• Intervention
– Researcher wishes to
investigate the
effectiveness of some
intervention.
– Usually a new way or
means of teaching,
curriculum, etc.
– Develops it, and then tests
its effectiveness.
– Aim is to develop a new
theory, challenge current
theories.
– Intended output: publish
6
Research vs Development
• Intervention = R & d
– Researcher wishes to
investigate the
effectiveness of some
intervention.
– Usually a new way or
means of teaching,
curriculum, etc.
– Develops it, and then tests
its effectiveness.
– Aim is to develop a new
theory, challenge current
theories.
– Intended output: publish
• Development = r & D
– Researcher wishes to
effect changes to practice
through some
intervention.
– Usually a new way or
means of teaching,
curriculum, etc.
– Develops it, and then tests
its effectiveness.
– Aim is to develop a new
way of teaching, PD, to
improve practice.
– Intended output: roll-out
7
A Strong Development Proposal
Clear description of what is being
developed, with clear objectives
and measurable KPIs to evaluate
success/effectiveness
Strong justification for
usefulness/potential impact of
the idea through literature
review, or description of past
research/practice outcomes
• Clarity in describing the deliverables
–
Say what your product/pedagogy/framework
does
in very clear
and
Inclusionetc.
of an
evaluative
phase
specific terms.
that provides evidence that the
Clear description of how the
– You can write these as KPIs or as guiding
questions. Justwhich
like research
product/process
has been
product/process will be
questions,
they should be precise. developed meets the desired
developed
objectives,
andproduct
achieves
– We can use them to evaluate the effectiveness
of your
bythe
examining
desired outcomes.
these KPIs or guiding questions.
8
A Strong Development Proposal
Clear description of what is being
developed, with clear objectives
and measurable KPIs to evaluate
success
Strong basis that the outcomes
are feasible, useful and can be
implemented, and that potential
impact is wide
• Show that the deliverables/outcomes useful, practical, effective and
have very strong potential to have wider
and even
impact
Inclusion
of an systemic
evaluative
phase
beyond the scope of the project: that provides evidence that the
Clear description of how the
product/process
which
been
– You must be clear that you take into account
the present context
and has
current
product/process will be
developed meets the desired
practice/policy.
developed
objectives,
and
the or
– You must demonstrate how the deliverables
of the project
canachieves
be implemented
outcomes.
continue beyond the project. This cannot simply desired
be a theoretical
possibility.
9
A Strong Development Proposal
Clear description of what is being
developed, with clear objectives
and measurable KPIs to evaluate
success
Strong basis that the outcomes
are feasible, useful and can be
implemented, and that potential
impact is wide
• Provide a strong basis for the feasibility and worthiness of the project
through any of the following:
Inclusion of an evaluative phase
– Experiences of the researcher: e.g. if you’ve been using this for a number of years,
that provides evidence that the
work with a of
teacher
Clear or
description
howwho
thehas used this way of teaching …
product/process which has been
–product/process
Ideas tested/trialled
a smaller pilot: e.g. perhaps in an SUG, an action research
willinbe
developed meets the desired
project,
etc.
developed
objectives, and achieves the
– Literature review: this differs from research projects, and should focus not only on
desired outcomes.
theory but on applicability. E.g., the review could focus on the success of some
intervention in some other context.
10
A Strong Development Proposal
• Show how you will ensure that the product/process/framework etc.
Clear description of what is being
Strong argument that the
can be developed:
developed, with clear objectives
outcomes are feasible, useful and
– Expertise of the team
and measurable KPIs to evaluate
can be implemented, and that
– Clear development processes/life cycles
success
potential impact is wide
–
Budgeting for appropriate resources
Clear description of how the
product/process will be
developed
Evaluation of the project
deliverable which provides
evidence that the developed
product/process meets the
desired objectives, and achieves
the intended outcomes.
11
A Strong Development Proposal
• The development must always be accompanied by the evaluation of
Clear description of what is being
Strong argument that the
the product/process/framework etc:
developed, with clear objectives
outcomes are feasible, useful and
– Run a small evaluation/test to show that product outcomes are as you’ve
and measurable KPIs to evaluate
can be implemented, and that
indicated.
success
potential impact is wide
–
–
You can go back and tweak the development based on the evaluation – iterative
development cycle.
Ensure your project timeline takes the evaluation phase into account.
Clear description of how the
product/process will be
developed
Inclusion of an evaluative phase
that provides evidence that the
developed product/process
meets the desired objectives, and
achieves the intended outcomes.
12
A Strong Development Proposal
Clear description of what is being
developed, with clear objectives
and measurable KPIs to evaluate
success
Strong basis that the outcomes
are feasible, useful and can be
implemented, and that potential
impact is wide
Clear description of how the
product/process will be
developed
Inclusion of an evaluative phase
that provides evidence that the
developed product/process
meets the desired objectives, and
achieves the intended outcomes.
13
Case for Support
14
Four Categories of Development
Ideation or Proof
of Concept
Translation
• Development of existing ideas into implementable modalities.
• E.g. synthesis of existing principles, theories or findings to develop PD frameworks,
curriculum/lesson material packages for your school/cluster.
• Implementation of tested ideas in new contexts.
• E.g. implementing an idea at another level, another subject in the same school,
another school.
Scaling
• Implementation of tested ideas in an increasing range or number of sites.
• E.g. a scaling project involves implementing the tested idea in an increased number
of classes or schools effectively.
Knowledge
Management
• Development of ideas that focus on the codification, transfer, and re-utilization of
knowledge.
• E.g. development of a system to capture specific types of knowledge so as to
improve practice, increase flow of information, etc.
15
Four Categories of Development
Ideation or Proof
of Concept
Translation
• Development of existing ideas into implementable modalities.
• E.g. synthesis of existing principles, theories or findings to develop PD frameworks,
curriculum/lesson material packages for your school/cluster.
• Implementation of tested ideas in new contexts.
• E.g. implementing an idea at another level, another subject in the same school,
another school.
Scaling
• Implementation of tested ideas in an increasing range or number of sites.
• E.g. a scaling project involves implementing the tested idea in an increased number
of classes or schools effectively.
Knowledge
Management
• Development of ideas that focus on the codification, transfer, and re-utilization of
knowledge.
• E.g. development of a system to capture specific types of knowledge so as to
improve practice, increase flow of information, etc.
16
Four Categories of Development
Ideation or Proof
of Concept
Translation
• Development of existing ideas into implementable modalities.
• E.g. synthesis of existing principles, theories or findings to develop PD frameworks,
curriculum/lesson material packages for your school/cluster.
• Implementation of tested ideas in new contexts.
• E.g. implementing an idea at another level, another subject in the same school,
another school.
Scaling
• Implementation of tested ideas in an increasing range or number of sites.
• E.g. a scaling project involves implementing the tested idea in an increased number
of classes or schools effectively.
Knowledge
Management
• Development of ideas that focus on the codification, transfer, and re-utilization of
knowledge.
• E.g. development of a system to capture specific types of knowledge so as to
improve practice, increase flow of information, etc.
17
Four Categories of Development
Ideation or Proof
of Concept
Translation
• Development of existing ideas into implementable modalities.
• E.g. synthesis of existing principles, theories or findings to develop PD frameworks,
curriculum/lesson material packages for your school/cluster.
• Implementation of tested ideas in new contexts.
• E.g. implementing an idea at another level, another subject in the same school,
another school.
Scaling
• Implementation of tested ideas in an increasing range or number of sites.
• E.g. a scaling project involves implementing the tested idea in an increased number
of classes or schools effectively.
Knowledge
Management
• Development of ideas that focus on the codification, transfer, and re-utilization of
knowledge.
• E.g. development of a system to capture specific types of knowledge so as to
improve practice, increase flow of information, etc.
18
Evaluation of Project Proposals
• Tier 1 ( less than $100,000)
– Decisions by the OER Education Research Committee (ERC)
chaired by Dean/OER.
• Tier 2 ($100,000 to less than $250,000)
– Decisions made by the NIE ERC, chaired by Director/NIE.
• Tier 3 ($250,000 and above)
– Decisions made by the MOE ERC, chaired by PS/MOE.
19
Panel of Reviewers for MAF Research
Projects
Tier 1 (< $100k)
Tier 2 ($100k - $250k) Tier 3 (>$250k)
Reviewers (NIE)
1 reviewer
1 reviewer
1 reviewer
Reviewers (Nominated)
1 reviewer
1 reviewer
1 reviewer
Reviewers (External)
1 reviewer
1 reviewer
3 reviewers
--
After recommendation by OER ERC, Tier 2 & 3
projects are sent to MOE Directors for
feedback.
Feedback by MOE
Panel of Reviewers for MAF
Development Projects
Reviewers (NIE)
Reviewers (non-NIE)
Tier 1 (< $100k)
Tier 2 ($100k - $250k) Tier 3 (>$250k)
1 reviewer
1 reviewer
1 reviewer
2 reviewers
2 reviewers
2 reviewers
- MOE non-directors
- Faculty from IHLs
- MOE non-directors
- Faculty from IHLs
- MOE non-directors
- Faculty from IHLs
1 reviewer
1 reviewer
- MOE director
- MOE director
1 reviewer
- Faculty from
international IHL
Funded MAF Research Projects
MOE Academies
Fund
Research
Endorsing Department
Title
PI
Tier
A Study on Developing Teacher
Leadership and Engendering an
Emerging Teacher-led Culture
Dr Liang See TAN
Tier 1
Singapore Teachers’ Academy
for the aRts (STAR)
A Two-Tiered Approach to Supporting
Pupils with Reading Difficulties in P3
Mainstream Classrooms
Dr Chee Soon TAN
Tier 1
English Language Institute of
Singapore (ELIS)
A Preliminary Study of Assessment
Progression: Evaluation of Assessment
for Learning Lessons and Summative
Assessment Tasks in General Music
Programme (GMP)
Dr Wei Shin LEONG
Metacognition and Mathematical
Problem Solving – Teaching and
Learning at the Primary Levels
(MetaMaps (Primary))
Asst/Prof Ngan Hoe LEE
Tier 1
Tier 1
Singapore Teachers’ Academy
for the aRts (STAR)
Academy of Singapore
Teachers (AST)
Funded MAF Development Projects
MOE
Nature of
Academies
Development
Fund
Title
PI
Implementing the 3Ps Professional
Development Framework in the Design of
Asst/P Chee Hoo LUM
a New Professional Development
Curriculum
Tier
Endorsing
Department
Tier 1
Singapore Teachers’
Academy for the aRts
(STAR)
Ideation/
Proof of
Concept
Knowledge Construction in Networked
Learning Communities in One Portal All
Learners (OPAL)
Dr S RAVINDRAN
Tier 1
Academy of Singapore
Teachers (AST)
Enhancing the Pedagogy of Mathematics
Teachers to Facilitate the Development of
21st Century Competencies in their
Classrooms (EPMT – 21st CC)
Prof Berinderjeet
KAUR
Tier 1
Academy of Singapore
Teachers (AST)
Knowledge
Management
-
-
-
-
Scaling
-
-
-
-
Development
Translation
Application Timeline
Timeline
20 November 14
Briefing Session to interested MAF applicants at AST
8 December 14
Applicants to indicate their expression of interest no later than 8 Dec 2014.
5 January 15
Feedback session for MAF applicants
7 January 15
Submission of proposal to Reporting Officer for endorsement.
19 January 15
Submission deadline: application must be received by OER,NIE.
NOTE:
•
•
Tier 1 and 2 projects that receive approved funding will generally commence in May 2015.
Tier 3 projects will generally commence in either June or July 2015.
Expression of Interest
MAF
• Applicants to indicate their expression of interest via
email ([email protected]).
• Include name of Principal Investigator, tentative title of
the project, category of project (research or
development), keywords (max. 5) and an abstract
(approx. 500 words).
The MAF application documents can be found at the NIE
website:
http://www.nie.edu.sg/office-education-research
/grants-application/moe-academies-fund
25
MOE Academies Fund
Application Process and
Documentation
20 Nov 2014
Application Process
8 December 14
Expression of Interest
Applicants to indicate
expression of interest via
email: [email protected]
Include:
name of Principal Investigator,
tentative title of the project,
category of project (research
or development), keywords
(max. 5) and an abstract
(approx. 500 words).
For IHLs Applicants
Based on the abstracts, the
Academies/Language
Centres (LCs) will shortlist
applicants from IHLs to
present at the feedback
session.
Shortlisted applicants who
have received the support
from the Academies/LCs will
then be informed to prepare
the proposals and
presentation slides for the
feedback session.
Note: Support from the Academy/Language Centre does not
equate an “approval”. It simply means the Academy/Language
Centre agrees for the proposal to go through OER’s review
process.
5 January 15
Feedback Session
Part 1: NIE colleagues to
provide feedback for
applicants from
Academies/LCs
Part 2: IHLs applicants to
present to Academies/LCs
representatives and for the
latter to give feedback.
Academies/LCs can sign
off on the spot if they
support the proposals.
Alternatively,
Academies/LCs may
indicate their support via
email.
Application Process
19 January 15
7 January 15
Submission deadline.
Applicants who have
received the support
from the Academies/LCs
to submit completed
proposals to Reporting
Officer for endorsement.
Soft copy of the
application documents
to be sent to OER
Grant Management
Unit
([email protected])
22 January 2015
Hard copy of the application
documents to be sent to OER
Grant Management Unit:
OER Grant Management Unit
Office of Education Research
National Institute of Education,
NIE 5-03-56A, 1 Nanyang Walk
Singapore 637616
OER’s
Review
Process
-
Tier 1 and 2 projects that receive approved funding will generally
commence in May 2015.
Tier 3 projects will generally commence around June 2015.
Academy/Language Centre’s Point of Contact
AST
Mr Benjamin Yong
Assistant Director, Standards and Research
([email protected])
ELIS
Dr Christopher Ward
Programme Director, Resesarch
([email protected])
PESTA
Mr Goh Kee Yong
Programme Director
([email protected])
STAR
Mr Lim Kok Boon
Programme Director (Art)
([email protected])
Mrs Tan-Chua Siew Ling
Programme Director (Music)
([email protected])
MLCS
Mr Mohamed Noh Daipi
Centre Director/MLCS and ADMTL1
([email protected])
UPTLC
Mr Jeyaradas Pandian
Supervisor/UPTLC
([email protected])
Application Form
The application documents can be found on:
http://www.nie.edu.sg/office-education-research/grants-application/moeacademies-fund
Application Form
The MOE Academies
Fund Form (OERRG3A)
contains tooltips which
you can activate by
moving your mouse over
the relevant terms when
you see an information
logo .
MAF Budget Documents
NIE Website
http://www.nie.edu.sg/office-educationresearch/grants-application/moe-academies-fund
- Budget templates for MAF project can be found in (5) and (7)
- Budgeting guide for MAF project can be found in (3)
Important!
Thank you!

similar documents