Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

13th Request for Proposals: MOE Academies Fund Presentation to MOE & IHLs Office of Education Research (OER) 20 November 2014.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "13th Request for Proposals: MOE Academies Fund Presentation to MOE & IHLs Office of Education Research (OER) 20 November 2014."— Presentation transcript:

1 13th Request for Proposals: MOE Academies Fund Presentation to MOE & IHLs Office of Education Research (OER) 20 November 2014

2 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 FY , 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

3 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 Background

4 Education Research Projects Primary goal Secondary goal 4 – To produce new knowledge – To improve practice

5 Development Projects Primary goal Secondary goal 5 – To produce new knowledge – To improve practice

6 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

7 Research vs Development 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 7 Development – 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 = R & d= r & D

8 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 Clear description of how the product/process will be developed Inclusion of an evaluative phase that provides evidence that the product/process which has been developed meets the desired objectives, and achieves the desired outcomes. 8 Clarity in describing the deliverables –Say what your product/pedagogy/framework etc. does in very clear and specific terms. –You can write these as KPIs or as guiding questions. Just like research questions, they should be precise. –We can use them to evaluate the effectiveness of your product by examining these KPIs or guiding questions.

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 Clear description of how the product/process will be developed Inclusion of an evaluative phase that provides evidence that the product/process which has been developed meets the desired objectives, and achieves the desired outcomes. 9 Show that the deliverables/outcomes useful, practical, effective and have very strong potential to have wider and even systemic impact beyond the scope of the project: –You must be clear that you take into account the present context and current practice/policy. –You must demonstrate how the deliverables of the project can be implemented or continue beyond the project. This cannot simply be a theoretical possibility.

10 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 product/process which has been developed meets the desired objectives, and achieves the desired outcomes. 10 Provide a strong basis for the feasibility and worthiness of the project through any of the following: –Experiences of the researcher: e.g. if you’ve been using this for a number of years, or work with a teacher who has used this way of teaching … –Ideas tested/trialled in a smaller pilot: e.g. perhaps in an SUG, an action research project, etc. –Literature review: this differs from research projects, and should focus not only on theory but on applicability. E.g., the review could focus on the success of some intervention in some other context.

11 A Strong Development Proposal Clear description of what is being developed, with clear objectives and measurable KPIs to evaluate success Strong argument 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 Evaluation of the project deliverable which provides evidence that the developed product/process meets the desired objectives, and achieves the intended outcomes. 11 Show how you will ensure that the product/process/framework etc. can be developed: –Expertise of the team –Clear development processes/life cycles –Budgeting for appropriate resources

12 A Strong Development Proposal Clear description of what is being developed, with clear objectives and measurable KPIs to evaluate success Strong argument 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. 12 The development must always be accompanied by the evaluation of the product/process/framework etc: –Run a small evaluation/test to show that product outcomes are as you’ve indicated. –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.

13 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

14 Case for Support 14

15 Four Categories of Development 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. Ideation or Proof of Concept Implementation of tested ideas in new contexts. E.g. implementing an idea at another level, another subject in the same school, another school. Translation 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. Scaling 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

16 Four Categories of Development 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. Ideation or Proof of Concept Implementation of tested ideas in new contexts. E.g. implementing an idea at another level, another subject in the same school, another school. Translation 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. Scaling 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

17 Four Categories of Development 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. Ideation or Proof of Concept Implementation of tested ideas in new contexts. E.g. implementing an idea at another level, another subject in the same school, another school. Translation 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. Scaling 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

18 Four Categories of Development 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. Ideation or Proof of Concept Implementation of tested ideas in new contexts. E.g. implementing an idea at another level, another subject in the same school, another school. Translation 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. Scaling 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

19 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

20 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 Feedback by MOE -- After recommendation by OER ERC, Tier 2 & 3 projects are sent to MOE Directors for feedback.

21 Panel of Reviewers for MAF Development Projects Tier 1 (< $100k)Tier 2 ($100k - $250k)Tier 3 (>$250k) Reviewers (NIE) 1 reviewer 1 reviewer 1 reviewer Reviewers (non-NIE) 2 reviewers -MOE non-directors -Faculty from IHLs 2 reviewers -MOE non-directors -Faculty from IHLs 2 reviewers -MOE non-directors -Faculty from IHLs 1 reviewer -MOE director 1 reviewer -MOE director 1 reviewer - Faculty from international IHL

22 Funded MAF Research Projects

23 Funded MAF Development Projects

24 Application Timeline Timeline 20 November 14Briefing Session to interested MAF applicants at AST 8 December 14Applicants to indicate their expression of interest no later than 8 Dec January 15Feedback session for MAF applicants 7 January 15Submission of proposal to Reporting Officer for endorsement. 19 January 15Submission deadline: application must be received by OER,NIE. NOTE: Tier 1 and 2 projects that receive approved funding will generally commence in May Tier 3 projects will generally commence in either June or July 2015.

25 Expression of Interest 25 MAF Applicants to indicate their expression of interest via 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: /grants-application/moe-academies-fund

26 MOE Academies Fund Application Process and Documentation 20 Nov 2014

27 Application Process 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. 8 December 14 Expression of Interest Applicants to indicate expression of interest via 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. 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 .

28 Application Process -Tier 1 and 2 projects that receive approved funding will generally commence in May Tier 3 projects will generally commence around June January 15 Applicants who have received the support from the Academies/LCs to submit completed proposals to Reporting Officer for endorsement. 19 January 15 Submission deadline. Soft copy of the application documents to be sent to OER Grant Management Unit OER’s Review Process 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 A, 1 Nanyang Walk Singapore

29 AST Mr Benjamin Yong Assistant Director, Standards and Research ELIS Dr Christopher Ward Programme Director, Resesarch PESTA Mr Goh Kee Yong Programme Director STAR Mr Lim Kok Boon Programme Director (Art) Mrs Tan-Chua Siew Ling Programme Director (Music) MLCS Mr Mohamed Noh Daipi Centre Director/MLCS and ADMTL1 UPTLC Mr Jeyaradas Pandian Supervisor/UPTLC Academy/Language Centre’s Point of Contact

30 Application Form The application documents can be found on: academies-fund

31 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.

32 MAF Budget Documents NIE Website - Budget templates for MAF project can be found in (5) and (7) - Budgeting guide for MAF project can be found in (3) research/grants-application/moe-academies-fund

33 Important!

34 Thank you!


Download ppt "13th Request for Proposals: MOE Academies Fund Presentation to MOE & IHLs Office of Education Research (OER) 20 November 2014."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google