|
|
|
|
|
UC DAVIS: Office of the Provost
October 16, 2006
MEMBERS OF THE FACULTY
RE: The Undergraduate Instructional Improvement Program (UIIP)
The Undergraduate Instructional Improvement Grant Program is the primary source of
on-campus funding for undergraduate curricular renewal and pedagogical innovation.
Each year, areas of emphasis are identified on the basis of campus needs. Please
read the descriptions of these areas (provided in the attachment) carefully; some
have appeared in previous calls, others are new. Although priority is given to
proposals that address emphasis areas, faculty members are invited to submit
proposals on other topics as well. For more complete information regarding the
UIIP program, visit the UIIP grants page on the TRC website:
http://trc.ucdavis.edu/trc/grants/faculty/uiip.html.
This year's UIIP program encourages proposals to: (1) strengthen students' writing,
reading or oral communication skills, (2) internationalize teaching and learning,
(3) enhance the quality of faculty-student interactions in large enrollment classes,
(4) increase experiential and discovery learning in large enrollment classes, (5)
incorporate value-added and outcome based evaluations of courses, programs or
instructional technologies, (6) increase understanding of social-cultural diversity.
New technologies are not identified as a separate priority but can be a key feature
of applications focusing on any program emphasis area. With that in mind, I have set
aside a limited amount of Instructional Use of Computers (IUC) funds that can
supplement UIIP grants for projects that make effective use of instructional
technology. These funds will not normally be allocated for the purchase of hardware,
but to support the development of improved course materials and formats.
Review and funding of UIIP proposals is coordinated through the Teaching Resources
Center. All UIIP proposals are evaluated by a faculty-staff review committee. Whether
or not they are funded, UIIP proposals that request consultant time and/or production
services also may be eligible for a technical services resource allocation from IET-
Mediaworks.
Applications are accepted twice each year. The dates for 2006-2007 are listed below.
Fall Quarter Deadline Monday, November 13, 2006
Spring Quarter Deadline Monday, April 16, 2007
To ensure timely and full review, please send your completed proposal and the Chair's
departmental support letter as email attachments to Lenora Bruce at the Teaching
Resources Center: trc@ucdavis.edu. Proposals and support letters can be submitted as
Microsoft Word, RTF, or PDF files. To ensure that a proposal is considered for funding,
the TRC must receive your complete email application no later than 5:00 p.m. on the
deadline noted above.
Although this Call addresses the large grant program, I would also like to draw your
attention to the UIIP Minigrant Program that has a funding limit of $500. Applications
are accepted year round. For more complete information about the UIIP Minigrant program,
please visit the program website: http://trc.ucdavis.edu/trc/grants/mini_travel.html.
Fred Wood
Interim Vice Provost - Undergraduate Studies
06-110
2006-2007 CALL FOR PROPOSALS
THE UNDERGRADUATE INSTRUCTIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
A. Program Objectives
Undergraduate Instructional Improvement funds provide support for projects that enhance
the educational experience of UC Davis undergraduates. Proposals from individual
faculty members, faculty groups and departments or programs are invited. Projects may
range from efforts by an individual faculty member to revise an existing course to a
department-wide update of undergraduate curricula. (See Section C below).
B. Overview of the Application and Review Process
Applications must be prepared according to the guidelines described in Section E and
submitted via email to Lenora Bruce at the Teaching Resources Center: trc@ucdavis.edu.
The deadline for the first round of applications this year is Monday, November 13, 2006.
The second round of proposals is due Monday, April 16, 2007. All proposals are sent to
the appropriate college or divisional dean for comment and then to a Faculty Advisory
Committee for formal review. The Advisory Committee recommends awards to the Vice
Provost -- Undergraduate Studies. Normally, the entire process from application deadline
to notification of award takes 6-8 weeks. Most awards fall within the range of $1,000-
$8,000.
Review Criteria: In evaluating proposals, the Advisory Committee considers their relative
merits for improving teaching and learning on the Davis campus. Proposals are more likely
to be well regarded if they reflect some of the following elements:
-A clear statement of instructional purpose
-A direct response to themes listed in the annual UIIP Call
-A direct response to internal or external program reviews
-The potential to improve instruction for a substantial number of students
-Non-routine and essential course development features
-Budget projections that are strategic and reasonable
-New applicants and/or new approaches
A more complete description of UIIP review criteria is provided at the end of this call
and is also available on the UIIP page of the TRC web site:
http://trc.ucdavis.edu/trc/grants/faculty/UIIP_review.html
C. Categories of Awards
1. Department/Program Awards. Departments and programs can request UIIP funds to
substantially revise all or part of an existing curriculum. Revisions can include
developing new courses, consolidating existing courses, program assessment, and so on.
Requests of this sort normally complement additional resources committed by the college
or division and by the department or program.
2. Individual Faculty Awards. Individual faculty members can request UIIP funds to
develop new courses or make substantial revisions to existing courses. NOTE: proposals
to develop new courses require (a) a clearly stated commitment from the department to
support the course as a regular offering' and (b) evidence that the department has
formally submitted the course proposal to the Senate Committee on Courses of Instruction.
During the academic year, UIIP funds cannot be used for salaries of faculty members with
full-time appointments, but they may be used to develop or purchase course materials, hire
graduate or undergraduate assistants, and for other related expenses. (See Section E4).
Faculty members on nine-month appointments may request summer salary compensation for
course development work during the summer if that work requires exceptional time, effort,
skills or training. Summer salary may not exceed 1/9th of a nine-month salary, up to a
maximum of $6,000. To be eligible for summer salary both Senate and non-Senate faculty
must be employed at UC Davis for the following academic year(s) (See Section E4).
D. Areas of Special Emphasis for 2006-2007
1. Strengthening analytic writing, reading and communication skills. The UIIP Program
invites proposals to develop new or revised courses that place increased emphasis on
analytic competencies that are exercised through writing, reading and oral communication.
Proposals that address these matters in both lower and upper division courses are
encouraged. Writing and reading skills can emphasize analytical dimensions of technical,
academic or narrative genres. Oral communication can emphasize public speaking and
presentation skills, listening strategies that enhance understanding, debate skills and
strategies, and effective communication in-group settings, including questioning and
responding skills. Proposals can refer to seminars that include significant skill
development activities, structured feedback, and opportunities for peer discussions
about disciplinary topics, but the incorporation of similar elements in other course
formats is also encouraged. Attention to the needs of non-native speakers will be
considered as a positive component of any proposal.
2. Internationalizing teaching and learning. This area of emphasis is aimed at
encouraging departments or individual faculty members to incorporate, where applicable,
an international perspective in individual courses or in the curriculum as a whole.
Such perspectives might include exposing students to research conducted in other
countries, drawing comparisons between the US and other nations, or gaining an
understanding and appreciation of other cultures. Faculty may apply for funding
covering a wide range of activities aimed at developing or revising courses in ways
that are consistent with this larger goal, but UIIP funds cannot be used to support
foreign travel for either faculty or students.
3. Enhancing faculty-student interactions in large enrollment classes. Projects
addressing this emphasis area involve strategies for encouraging for formal and
informal faculty-student interchange in large enrollment classes. Strategies can
include personal response system (PRS) technologies ("clickers"), alternative formats
for in-class presentations and discussions or for faculty response to student work,
on-line interactions between faculty and students (course chats and blogs), and course
related but out-of-class mentoring, social activities and meetings.
4. Increasing experiential and discovery learning in large enrollment classes. Projects
focusing on this emphasis area can include strategies for engaging students from large
enrollment classes in hands-on, experience-based, and action-learning activities. These
can include in-class simulations, role-playing, exercises, laboratory activities,
presentations and group problem solving. Similar strategies can be pursued through
fieldwork, internships, and small-scale research or service projects.
5. Incorporating value-added or outcome-based evaluations of courses, programs or
instructional technologies. Proposals are invited to design, implement and assess
alternative outcome-based approaches to evaluating teaching and learning. Outcome-based
or "value-added" approaches can include various forms of pre and post testing as well as
comparative assessments of student work--across courses or course sections, over time,
or in among different instructional approaches, including contrasting assignments,
technological support and other planned variations. Proposals that incorporate these
elements can focus on enhancing course content or developing more effective means of
course delivery. In general, UIIP funds cannot be used to purchase equipment, as other
resources are available for that purpose.
6. Increasing understanding of social and cultural diversity. Support is available for
instructors to develop new courses or modify existing ones so that they meet the Academic
Senate's criteria as social-cultural diversity courses. These courses must have
substantial emphasis on issues, topics, and/or perspectives such as race, ethnicity,
social class, etc. that have been underrepresented in the curriculum.
E. Preparing and Submitting Applications
Submit all proposals by email (along with the Chair's departmental support letter) to
Lenora Bruce, Teaching Resources Center: trc@ucdavis.edu. Proposals and support letters
can be formatted as Microsoft Word, RTF, or PDF files. To ensure that a proposal is
considered for funding, the TRC must receive your complete email application no later
than 5:00 p.m. on the deadline of the funding cycle for which you are applying.
Please limit your proposal to a narrative description that is no more than two pages
long and a budget that is no more than one page long. Specific guidelines for preparing
a proposal are listed below.
Application Guidelines
1. Title. The title should briefly and accurately describe the nature of the project.
It becomes a key part of the UIIP project database. Please also provide the name and title
of the applicant(s).
2. Abstract. A brief (100 word or less) description that can be used in assigning the
proposal to appropriate reviewers.
3. Rationale. What problems and issues will the proposed project address? What
relationship do these have to the purpose and priorities of the Undergraduate Instructional
Improvement Program? How many students will benefit from the project? If a specific course
revision is proposed, how frequently will the course(s) be offered?
4. Project Description. Describe the project in enough detail that reviewers from other
departments can understand what you are proposing (typically, a page or two is sufficient).
What activities will be supported? What people will be involved and what role will they play?
How will activities be coordinated and managed? How will new activities be institutionalized?
How will ongoing activities be continued?
5. Budget. All budget requests must be itemized. Rough estimates for categories such as
"miscellaneous" or "videotapes" are not acceptable. Costs and expenses listed should be
reasonable and verifiable. It can be useful to the UIIP Review Committee if applicants
prioritize their proposed budget by distinguishing items that are essential to the project at
proposed levels from items that could be scaled back if less than full funding is available.
Please Note the following stipulations in preparing a proposed budget:
*The UIIP program does not fund routine departmental support for photocopying, word-processing,
telephone, NAM's and similar administrative expenses.
*Summer salary for faculty member can be requested only for faculty on nine-month appointments
and only when faculty involvement exceeds normal expectations for faculty course development
and revision.
* Salaries for students and the faculty must be based on official university personnel titles
and reflect consultation with the department MSO.
*Graduate students and non-Senate faculty must be paid using non-teaching titles (e.g., Research
Assistant, Specialist, Post Graduate Researcher).
*Benefits do not need to be calculated or included in the proposal budget. This does not
include international graduate student fees.
*Salary supplements will not include merit increases or range adjustments awarded after the
time of application.
6. Report and evaluation. To ensure full consideration, UIIP proposals must describe how
proposed activities will be evaluated. A written report and evaluation of the completed
project is required of all proposals supported by UIIP funds.
7. Chair's Letter. Proposals must be accompanied by a letter from the department or program
chair indicating her or his assessment of the project's value to the department. The chair
must also indicate the level of support the department or program is willing to provide if the
project is funded. Most letters are included with the proposal, but chairs do have the option
of submitting the letter directly to the Director of the Teaching Resources Center. Both the
chair's letter and the proposal should be submitted via email to Lenora Bruce at the following
address: trc@ucdavis.edu.
Please Note: All documents or other instructional materials that have been wholly or partially
supported by UIIP funds must contain an appropriate acknowledgment of this support.
=================================================================================
Undergraduate Instructional Improvement Program (UIIP)
Proposal Review Criteria
The Undergraduate Instructional Improvement Grant Program is the primary source of on-campus
funding for projects to improve undergraduate teaching and learning. Each year, UIIP funding
priorities are identified to reflect evolving campus challenges and opportunities, and each year
valuable projects are funded that could not be supported in any other way. Proposals that
address annual UIIP priorities are encouraged, but projects focusing on other aspects of
undergraduate instruction are also very much welcomed.
UIIP proposals are evaluated by a faculty-staff Advisory Committee that recommends awards to
the Vice-Provost for Undergraduate Studies. In assessing proposals, the Advisory Committee
considers their relative merits for improving teaching and learning on the Davis campus. In
recent years, proposals were more likely to be well regarded by the Advisory Committee if they
reflected some of the following features:
" A clear statement of instructional purpose
" A direct response to themes listed in the annual UIIP Call
" A direct response to internal or external program reviews
" The potential to improve instruction for a substantial number of students
" Non-routine and essential course development features
" Budget projections that are strategic and reasonable
" New applicants and/or new approaches
A clear statement of instructional purpose: Some proposals request funds to solve administrative
or facilities problems that are more properly addressed by departmental chairs and deans (i.e.
the lack of an instructor for a particular class, unsafe physical facilities, and so on). Other
proposals request funds for research or service projects that might or might not lead to
instructional improvement. These proposals are regarded less highly than proposals that have a
clear instructional purpose.
A direct response to themes listed in the UIIP Call: The UIIP program is guided by an "open" call
and welcomes a diverse array of proposals, but the UIIP call also emphasizes themes that are
important to the instructional development of the campus as a whole. All other things being equal-
and they rarely are- preference is given to proposals that respond to one or more of the key themes
listed in the UIIP Call.
A direct response to internal or external program reviews: Internal or external program reviews
can help define a thoughtful context for improving courses, programs and instructional approaches.
Proposals that acknowledge and respond to the findings of such reviews are given more credence by
the UIIP Advisory Committee than proposals that ignore or trivialize them. In general, proposals
that document the problems being addressed are taken more seriously than those that don't.
The potential to improve instruction for a substantial number of students: The Advisory Committee
has not defined what "substantial" means, but proposals that might improve instruction for many
students are typically ranked somewhat more highly than those that would affect only a few.
However, the depth and scope of instructional effect are also important considerations, regardless
of how many students are affected. No proposal is regarded highly simply because it appears to
serve many students.
Non-routine course development features: Some proposals for developing or revising courses include
components that clearly require additional resources (i.e., acquisition of materials, training or
technical assistance for faculty members, and so on). These proposals are regarded more highly
than proposals for faculty members to prepare lectures, design assignments, course syllabi, etc.
Though these activities are in many respects the heart of a good course, they are also more likely
to be considered by Committee members as part of a faculty member's routine responsibilities.
Budget projections that are strategic and reasonable: The availability of UIIP funding appears to
be more critical to the success of some proposals than to the success of others. In general,
proposals that request funding for activities that are likely to take place with or without UIIP
funding are not regarded as highly as those for which UIIP funding seems both necessary and
essential. In some cases applicants request funds to support normal instructional costs (a TA-ship
for example) that the Committee expects to be covered through normal operating budgets. As a special
case of "strategic investments," proposals that request funds to cover the cost of technical
services that are already freely available through Mediaworks are referred to Mediaworks rather
than awarded UIIP funds.
New applicants and/or new approaches: Proposals that call for a simple extension of previous
funding are regarded less highly than proposals that reflect a new or fresh approach. First-time
applicants receive some preference relative to applicants who have received UIIP funds recently or
who received them several times in the past.
Rev10/13/2006
===================================================================================
UIIP MINIGRANT PROGRAM
Minigrants provide support up to a maximum of $500 for small projects that require more immediate
funding. Typical minigrant requests support development of instructional materials (above what is
normally expected to be provided by a department), e.g., purchase of videotapes, CDs, and teaching-
related software, and travel to workshops or conferences on teaching. Support for guest lecturers
up to a maximum of $250 per year is also available. Minigrants have the advantage of relatively
quick turnaround - awards are usually made within a week. The application process is also simple.
The applicant submits to the Director of the Teaching Resources Center a 1-page request, signed by
the department chair. No additional copies are required. Instructors are generally limited to one
award per year. For further information contact Janet Chambers (752-6050 or trc@ucdavis.edu).
 Office of the Chancellor | Contact Information | Current Issues | Speaking Out | Staff and Organization | Philosophy of Purpose | Principles of Community | Administrative Resources Modified: 12/14/2006 12:57:17 PM Comments: |