Luanne Johnson « The Erlenmeyer Flask

NIH – Director’s Early Independence Awards (DP5): The Research Office Incentive Programs is requesting letters of intent for the Director’s Early Independence Awards (DP5) program. The program provides an opportunity for exceptional junior scientists to accelerate their entry into an independent research career. Guidelines for letters of intent: http://oregonstate.edu/research/incentive/NIH-DEI-DP5. Information: Debbie Delmore at debbie.delmore@oregonstate.edu. Research Office Deadline: Sept. 23.

1. NIH Funding Opportunity: Big Data Centers of Excellence

On July 22, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) released a Request for Applications (RFA) for Centers of Excellence for Big Data Computing in the Biomedical Sciences, the signature Centers program supported by NIH’s Big Data to Knowledge (BD2K) Initiative. These BD2K Centers of Excellence will support multi- investigator, interdisciplinary teams to advance the science and utility of biomedical Big Data by creating new approaches, software, and tools that will be broadly applicable to the needs of the biomedical research community. NIH began developing the BD2K Initiative, including the BD2K Center program, as part of its plan to implement recommendations of a Data and Informatics Working Group of the Advisory Committee to the NIH Director, which highlighted the need to address challenges related to the use of biomedical Big Data.

Research at these Centers will range from early-stage to mature development of methods and resources. NIH will not support BD2K Centers to generate large datasets or databases. The RFA identifies four areas of Big Data science that NIH is hoping to address though the program’s activities. Center applicants are encouraged to focus on one or more of the following; a single Center is not expected to address all of these areas:

1. Collaborative environments and technologies:

A Center may address issues related to the release and accessibility of Big Data and tools.

2. Data integration:

A Center may develop strategies for creating connections across data types.

3. Analysis and modeling methodologies:

A Center may develop approaches for modeling, simulation, or analysis to produce new, useful biomedical information not provided by current methods.

4. Computer science and statistical approaches:

A Center may explore research areas in the basic computational science of biomedical Big Data.

Also included in the RFA are several examples of projects that could be proposed by Center applicants to enable the development of approaches, methods, and tools that would improve the ability to extract new knowledge from large, complex datasets. It is expected that the research of the Centers will focus on specific biomedical questions, but the results and products of the research should be applicable to broader uses. NIH does not specify a particular organizational structure for the BD2K Centers, but applicants are advised to submit well-integrated plans that incorporate large-scale research, dissemination, and training activities into a cohesive Center.

The BD2K Center awards will use the U54 Specialized Center Cooperative Agreement mechanism. Under this mechanism, NIH plans to organize a BD2K Center Consortium in which all BD2K Center of Excellence awardees will be expected to participate. Consortium activities will identify areas of synergy among the Centers and explore possibilities for concerted actions that have the potential to advance the field of data science beyond the efforts of individual Centers.

Letters of Intent: Letters of intent are optional and should be submitted by October 20, 2013. Application Due Date: Full proposals are due November 20, 2013.

2. DOD Funding Opportunity: DOD Releases FY 2014 MURI BAA

On August 19, the Department of Defense (DOD) released its fiscal year (FY) 2014 Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) for the popular Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative (MURI) program. MURI is one of DOD’s cornerstone university research programs, supporting basic research projects at the intersection of multiple scientific disciplines in areas of interest to DOD. DOD indicates that it will award a total of up to $250 million for MURI projects in FY 2014. While the BAA was released through the Office of Naval Research (ONR), the Army Research Office (ARO) and Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) also partake in the program. Each of the service branch research offices administers specific topic areas within the BAA (see below). Researchers submit proposals directly to the office responsible for the topic area to which they are responding.

The FY 2014 MURI topics reflect a number of crosscutting priority areas for DOD, including energy, advanced materials, biology and synthetic biology, and computational and information sciences. These areas map with topics recently identified by senior DOD research officials as enduring science and technology priorities despite budget pressure caused by sequestration and other spending reductions. New for FY 2014, DOD stipulates the funding amount and desired team size for each individual topic area rather than providing general guidelines, as was previous practice. Details are included in the complete description of each topic area contained in the full BAA. FY 2014 MURI topic areas by service branch are:

Army Research Office

· Attosecond Electron Dynamics
· Force-Activated Synthetic Biology
· Nonlinear Dynamics of Energy Hypersurfaces Governing Reaction Networks
· Strongly Linked Multiscale Models for Predicting Novel Functional Materials
· Multistep Catalysis
· Innovation in Prokaryotic Evolution
· Ultracold Molecular Ion Reactions
· The Skin-Microbe Interactome

Office of Naval Research

· Understanding Energy Harvesting Mechanisms in Polymer-Based Photovoltaics
· Role of Bidirectional Computation in Visual Scene Analysis
· Exploring the Atomic and Electronic Structure of Materials to Predict Functional Material Properties
· Optical Computing
· Quantum optomechanics
· Air-Sea Interaction and RF Propagation in Maritime Atmospheric Boundary Layers
· Hydrodynamics of Non-traditional Propulsion

Air Force Office of Scientific Research

· Time-resolved quantum dynamics of complex systems
· Computational Foundation of Mathematics and Information
· Transport and Utilization of Energy Using Plasmon-induced Processes
· Design Rules for Biobased and Bioinspired Materials
· Control of Coherent Structures in Plasmas for Reconfigurable Metamaterial-Based Devices
· Multifunctional Quantum Transduction of Photons, Electrons and Phonons
· Control of Light Propagation through Metasurfaces
· Goal-Driven, Multi-Source Algorithms for Complex Resilient Multi-Physics Systems
· Security Theory of Nano-Scale Devices

Letters of Intent: Letters of intent are not required. However, DOD encourages interested researchers to submit white papers to the appropriate program manager in advance of preparing a full proposal. Program managers provide feedback on the extent to which ideas align with current DOD priorities. The deadline for submitting white papers is 4:00 PM EDT on October 15. The BAA states that DOD will provide feedback on white papers by October 29.

Due Dates: As noted above, white papers are due by October 15. For those receiving positive responses to white papers, the deadline for submitting full proposals is December 16, 2013. Full proposals must be submitted electronically through grants.gov. While white papers are not required in order to submit a full proposal, DOD strongly encourages this initial step.

Total Funding and Award Size: DOD anticipates awarding a total of $250 million through this BAA subject to future appropriations. Individual awards range from $1 million-$2.5 million per year, with most awards between $1.25 million and $1.5 million. Awards are for an initial three year period with the possibility of one two year extension. Detailed funding levels for each topic area are in the full BAA.

Eligibility and Limitations: The MURI competition is open to U.S. universities with degree-granting programs in science and engineering. DOD encourages submissions from Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions, but will not set aside any funding specifically for these entities. Teams of researchers from multiple institutions can apply for a topic area, but the proposal must designate one lead institution and one lead investigator from that institution to serve as the primary interface with DOD. Desired team sizes for each topic area are in the full BAA.

Sources and Additional Information:

· The full FY 2014 MURI BAA is available by searching “ONRBAA13-022” at grants.gov.
· For reference, the list of selected projects through the FY 2013 MURI competition is at

http://www.defense.gov/news/2013MURITeams.pdf.

3. DOD Funding Opportunity: Office of Naval Research Releases FY 2014 BAA for Young Investigator Program

The Office of Naval Research (ONR) released its fiscal year (FY) 2014 Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) for the Young Investigator Program (YIP). This popular program, which is also offered by other DOD branches like the Army Research Office and the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, provides early career university faculty a path into the Navy’s research enterprise through multi-year research grants. With this program, ONR identifies promising young tenure-track faculty in their first or second year who demonstrate the ability to deliver innovative research aligned with ONR’s research priorities. Competition for this program has been intense in recent years; ONR awarded 16 proposals out of 369 for the FY 2013 competition.

Like other BAAs, DOD will accept any proposals that address research areas outlined in ONR’s broad research portfolio. A complete list of topics of interest to each of ONR’s six departments – Expeditionary Maneuver Warfare and Combating Terrorism (Code 30); Command, Control Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (Code 31); Ocean Battlespace Sensing (Code 32); Sea Warfare and Weapons (Code 33); Warfighter Performance (Code 34); and Naval Air Warfare and Weapons (Code 35) – are available on ONR’s science and technology homepage located at http://www.onr.navy.mil/Science- Technology/Departments.aspx.

Due to DOD’s continued emphasis on seven research thrusts outlined by former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Zach Lemnios (autonomy, counter weapons of mass destruction, cyber, data-to-decisions, electronic warfare and protection, human systems, and engineering resilient systems), ONR continues to map its individual research foci to these priorities. Most recently, DOD officials have emphasized cognitive sciences, synthetic biology, advanced materials, and quantum information sciences within these areas. Faculty are encouraged to contact the appropriate program manager to discuss research proposals and how they align with ONR’s research foci and the above priorities. ONR will accept brief white papers to facilitate discussion.

Letters of Intent: None required. ONR encourages researchers to submit white papers to ONR technical leads to discuss the applicability of proposed research topics to ONR’s interests.

Due Dates: January 3, 2014.

Total Funding and Award Size: ONR anticipates having $9.6 million for YIP awards in FY 2014, with individual awards up to $170,000 per year for three years. ONR anticipates making approximately 15 awards for this competition. Budget uncertainties caused by sequestration may alter this funding for FY 2014 and beyond.

Eligibility and Limitations: This BAA is open to first or second year tenure-track faculty from institutions of higher education that award degrees in science, engineering, and/or mathematics. Note that ONR makes awards to institutions, not individuals. Researchers therefore must submit proposals along with a letter of support from the university through appropriate administrators.

Sources and Additional Information:

· Further information on awards, application processes, and technical requirements can be found in the full announcement located at http://www.onr.navy.mil/~/media/Files/Funding- Announcements/BAA/2013/13-023.ashx.
· Information on ONR’s research focus areas can be found at http://www.onr.navy.mil/Science- Technology/Departments.aspx.

NEW! NSF – STEP-Type 1: The Research Office, Incentive Programs is requesting letters of intent for the NSF – Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Talent Expansion Program (STEP) – Type 1. The program seeks to increase the number of students receiving associate or baccalaureate degrees in established or emerging fields within science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Guidelines for letters of intent: http://oregonstate.edu/research/incentive/nsf_step_type1. Information: Debbie Delmore at debbie.delmore@oregonstate.edu. Research Office Deadline: Sept. 23.

NEW! Research Office New Faculty Orientation: New faculty are invited to come Oct. 17, to hear an overview of services that support faculty success in research such as navigating rules and regulations, successes in funding and more. Includes a panel discussion on working with Federal agencies. Lunch and late afternoon reception included. Register at http://oregonstate.edu/training/course_list.php?cat_id=22. For more information: 541-737-3467.

NEW! TAC Webinar: New Educator Organization (NEO), with Lynn Greenough (TAC). Are you new to teaching at OSU? Wondering where to find what you need, and who to ask? This webinar addresses commonly-asked questions and gives an overview of support available to instructors of all stripes (experienced faculty, GTA’s, researchers, etc.). We’ll cover the basics of Blackboard, classroom technologies, and OSU’s teaching and learning resources. Questions welcome! Tues., Sept. 3, 2 to 2:50 p.m. Register here: http://bit.ly/12rGoDI

The Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation announces the September 11 deadline for applications to the Senior Scientist Mentor Program. The Foundation supports emeritus faculty who maintain active research programs with undergraduates in the chemical science. The program provides an award of $20,000 over two years for undergraduate stipends and modest research support. Additional details are given at the Foundation Web site: www.dreyfus.org

You and the researchers in your department are invited to our 8th Annual BioResearch Product Faire coming to:

Oregon State University, Women s Building Lobby

When: Wednesday, September 11th, 2013

Where: Women s Building Lobby

Time: 11:00 am 1:30 pm

Stop by the event to:

* Network with other Researchers

* View Product Demonstrations

* Connect with Industry Experts

* Discover New Research Tools

* Learn Troubleshooting Skills

* Hear About Laboratory Services

* Learn about Career Opportunities

Using the right tools for your research saves you time at the bench.

**THIS EVENT IS FREE & INCLUDES AN EXTENSIVE BUFFET OF REFRESHMENTS**

Visit the link below to find

* A list of exhibitors

* Save time by pre-registering on-line!

www.biotech-calendar.com/pdf_files/EmailInvite_OrStU13.pdf

http://www.biotech-calendar.com/showinfo/detail.php?showcode=OrStU13

August 12, 2013

Scott Jaschik

NEW YORK — Why are some majors more popular than others with undergraduates? Is it the perception that they lead to good (well paying) jobs? Are certain fields naturally more attractive to new undergraduates? Will students respond to tuition incentives to pick (or bypass) some fields?

Maybe it’s much more simple: Undergraduates are significantly more likely to major in a field if they have an inspiring and caring faculty member in their introduction to the field. And they are equally likely to write off a field based on a single negative experience with a professor.

Those are the findings of a paper presented here during a session at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association by Christopher G. Takacs, a graduate student in sociology at the University of Chicago, and Daniel F. Chambliss, a professor of sociology at Hamilton College. The paper is one part of How College Works, their forthcoming book from Harvard University Press.

In their study, they tracked the educational choices of about 100 students at a college that isn’t named but that sounds like Hamilton College. Students were interviewed about their original educational plans and why they either followed through on those plans or changed them, and they were tracked over their college careers and after graduation as well.

What they found challenges the views of many experts that choice of major is “fixed” by such factors as a desire for a lucrative career. And their findings also suggest that those policy makers who want to attract more students to science and technology fields need to focus on teaching quality in those fields, not just financial benefits.

Overwhelmingly, the authors write, students’ “taste formation” in choice of major is due to faculty members, although the influence can go either way. “Faculty determine students’ taste for academic fields by acting as gatekeepers, either by welcoming them into an area of knowledge, encouraging and inspiring them to explore it, or by raising the costs of entry so high so as to effectively prohibit continuing in it,” Takacs and Chambliss write. “Faculty can positively or negatively influence student taste for a field — some compelling teachers can get students engaged in fields that they previously disliked, while other, more uncharismatic faculty can alienate students from entire bodies of knowledge, sometimes permanently.”

The research found the role of the first faculty member is strong whether the student has an intended major or doesn’t. And the interviews — up to four years after graduation — found that students remembered the professors who inspired them and those who annoyed them, and attributed their decisions on majors to those faculty members.

In interviews here, both authors said that there are clear implications for colleges and departments that want to encourage students to major (or at least consider majoring) in certain fields. And the change may be more important in departments where senior faculty members may not want to teach freshmen.

“It’s important for department chairs and deans to recognize who their more skilled teachers are, and the teachers they can use to draw students into certain majors,” Takacs said. College leaders need to go to departments and say “why don’t you get so-and-so to teach this introductory course.”

There is real danger in failing to do so, he added. Many of the students indicated that they made judgments not just on the professor or his or her discipline, but entire branches of disciplines — with a bad course in any science field, for example, leading students to write off all science. The authors, based on their interviews, talk about the phenomenon of “majoring in a professor.”

Chambliss said that there may be some fields that so many freshmen want to study that a single bad experience may not be decisive. But for lesser-known fields, or subjects thought to be challenging, enrollments are going to fall.

“English and history can probably survive a bad course, but geology can’t,” Chambliss said. Nor can subjects with sequential curriculum, where students must move from course to course in a pattern and can’t skip over a course taught by someone with a bad teaching reputation. This is the case in many science fields.

“Once they leave, they don’t come back,” he said. “It’s important to do better in your intro course than in your capstone courses.”

Of course, as others here pointed out in questions to the authors during their presentation, many departments let their senior scholars focus on the senior seminars or graduate courses. And one sociologist here, while agreeing that the authors were correct, said she wondered about the “backlash” a chair or dean would get upon telling a senior faculty member who was a skilled teacher that his or her reward was going to be teaching the intro course.

But Chambliss said that this is in fact what they should do. He noted that departments spend a lot of time talking about how to make their overall curriculum more inviting, but that a “very small intervention” and one that doesn’t necessarily cost any money can be more transformative. At a large university, making sure the right person is teaching the intro course can affect the experience and future choices of 500 or more students each semester, he said. “If you put someone who is not as good, you have damaged a lot of students.” (Chambliss practices what he preaches. A senior member of Hamilton’s sociology department, he is also one of those who teaches the 101 course there.)

Chambliss and Takacs acknowledged that the impact of the first instructor may be different at some large universities, where students apply and enroll in divisions of a university focused on, for example, business or engineering or liberal arts. But they said that they suspect that within those divisions, one would find the same impact.

One of the arguments offered by proponents of massive open online courses is that they can expose students around the world to “the best professor” in a given field.

Chambliss is quick to say that this research does not back the idea that MOOCs will attract students to various fields. “Charisma alone is not the answer,” he said, noting that while part of the students’ judgments of their professors in the new study was based on the quality of lectures and presentations, far more was about the extent to which professors were engaged with students, took steps to get to know their students, were personally accessible, and so forth.

“This is about the caliber of the people you meet in the classroom,” he said.

Inside Higher Ed
Sastry G. Pantula