Graduate Student Research Projects - Initial Rollout
This robust document guides the user in examining the participation of people engaged in the engineering pathways (from K-12 through employment); the capacity of the ecosystem to support engineering education; the access historically underrepresented populations have to that ecosystem; and to the experiences of those populations. The report provides example questions to ask and available data sources.
This portal will allow the user to examine enrollment and completion data from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) including IPEDS, allowing examination by institution and regional Hub. Metrics include numbers, percents and ratios allowing for a more complete view into equitable participation in engineering programs.
This interactive map locates institutions that are part of Engineering Plus programming, ADRP, Microelectronics hubs, Tech hubs and LSAMP lead organizations offering an interactive view of the engineering education infrastructure of the United States.
You can utilize the map by clicking the image or button below You can also learn more through our User Guide.
This interactive factsheet from NSF provides information on the awards and award proposals that have been active at an institution over time:
Degrees awarded at each US institution of higher Education are quickly visible through this portal.
These resources include presentations, reports and data visuals: These ready-to-use visuals and data explanations can facilitate meaningful strategic conversations within and across engineering programs in the United States.
2023 Equity Walk: This set of slides provides an overview of the state of Engineering Education and economic opportunity. It was presented in October 2023 at the LSMRCE
2022 Data workshops: These three workshops provide an introduction to the CIDER resources including the ecosystem data landscape framework and data.
2022 Equity Walk at ASEE: ASEE Equity Walk Slides.pdf This set of slides provides an overview of the state of Engineering Education and economic opportunity with a focus on the host city, Minnesota!
2022 CIDER for Hubs: This presentation was shared with the New England Regional Hubs to begin understanding the local engineering education context and build a shared understanding of Hub priorities.
This meeting will primarily serve active awardees in the CS for All community and is by invitation only. If you are invited to attend, you will receive that notification by an NSF representative. If you did not receive an invitation, but feel that you should have, please reach out to your NSF program officer.
If you are one of the 2 invited participants, ultimately, NSF. You will book and pay independently for your own travel arrangements. After the meeting, you will be sent a link with instructions to submit for reimbursement. This process is done through members of our organizing committee at SageFox Consulting Group. SageFox will then request funds to be released and will send payment back to you. All of the details in regard to requesting reimbursement can be found HERE
If you are not one of the 2 invited participants but are still attending, you should consider using project funding to help pay for your travel and conference fees.
After the meeting you will receive an email with a link to submit your reimbursement. A link will also be made available on this site.
You do! You are responsible for making all travel arrangements - including booking your hotel room. You will receive a link to book at the negotiated rate upon completing registration.
So sorry about that! We tried our best to encourage folks to book early! You will need to find alternate accommodations somewhere as close to the venue as possible. You will still be reimbursed for 2 nights at the negotiated rate for a maximum of $371.88
SageFox specializes in both formative and summative program evaluation and research on educational projects. We can both help with the development of a grant proposal or come in as partners on an existing project. In both circumstances, we would work with you to develop a research or evaluation plan that is tailored to your project. This would include:
Co-development of a logic model to deeply understand the approach the project will take to realize its objectives and goals
Development or adaptation of instruments to measure the project objectives
Implementation of these tools, including surveys, tests, focus groups, interviews, classroom observations, etc.
Regular reporting of outcomes to your team and providing suggestions for increasing the effectiveness of the project
Helping your team think through the consequences of the evaluation or research
Supporting the reporting to the funding agency
Helping disseminate the results of your project
Our focus is on providing information that will help improve the project as it moves forward and makes important decisions about future growth. As such, we involve all major stakeholders in the information-gathering process and collaborate with project leadership to make sense of their feedback.
Summative evaluation is meant to provide an overview of whether and how your project has met its stated goals. Our focus is not only on providing information that tells you how well you have met the objectives of the project but also on trying to understand why you may not have met certain goals. As such, we prefer to collaborate with your team not only in gathering the summative data but also in interpreting what it means in the context of your project. SageFox’s collaborative approach and on-going communication means there are no surprises in summative reporting.
We believe research should furthers the state of knowledge in the fields of education and evaluation while being of use to educational practitioners in developing and implementing projects. As such, we focus not only on the best way to answer a research question but also on how it may inform future projects in the field. We have performed research both as principal investigators on dedicated research grants and also closely collaborate in dissemination efforts following program evaluations.
Although we can work with an existing project, we can be more valuable to you if we can be part of the team developing the initial grant proposal. We suggest that you contact us early enough that we can use our experience with other projects to help you frame your grant and ensure that the evaluation or research component is integrated well into the rest of the proposal.
Once a grant is funded, our preferred relationship with our clients is one where we work very collaboratively and where the communication level is high enough that we can respond well to the project‘s changing needs.
Typically, an evaluator should cost about 10% of the overall project budget, depending on the nature of the work. For educational research, this proportion may be higher depending on what proportion of the project is based on research.
INTRODUCTION
This policy governing financial conflict of interest applies to all Investigators employed by SageFox Consulting. In the event a financial conflict of interest is discovered, all relevant activities may be suspended until the financial conflict of interest is resolved or other action deemed appropriate is implemented. Violation of any part of these policies may also constitute cause for disciplinary or other administrative action pursuant to Institutional policy.
DEFINITIONS
Conflict of Interest Administrator means the individual at SageFox who advises on conflict of interest matters.
Family means any member of the Investigator’s immediate family, specifically, any dependent children and spouse.
Financial Interest means anything of monetary value received or held by an Investigator or an Investigator’s Family, whether or not the value is readily ascertainable, including, but not limited to: salary or other payments for services (e.g., consulting fees, honoraria, or paid authorships for other than scholarly works); any equity interests (e.g., stocks, stock options, or other ownership interests); and intellectual property rights and interests (e.g., patents, trademarks, service marks, and copyrights), upon receipt of royalties or other income related to such intellectual property rights and interests.
Financial Interest does NOT include:
salary, royalties, or other remuneration from the Institution;
income from the authorship of academic or scholarly works;
income from seminars, lectures, or teaching engagements sponsored by or from advisory committees or review panels for U.S. Federal, state or local governmental agencies; U.S. institutions of higher education; U.S. research institutes affiliated with institutions of higher education, academic teaching hospitals, and medical centers; or
equity interests or income from investment vehicles, such as mutual funds and retirement accounts, so long as the Investigator does not directly control the investment decisions made in these vehicles.
For Investigators, Financial Interest also includes any reimbursed or sponsored travel undertaken by the Investigator and related to his/her institutional responsibilities. This includes travel that is paid on behalf of the Investigator rather than reimbursed, even if the exact monetary value is not readily available. It excludes travel reimbursed or sponsored by U.S. Federal, state or local governmental agencies, U.S. institutions of higher education, research institutes affiliated with institutions of higher education, academic teaching hospitals, and medical centers.
Significant Financial Interest means a Financial Interest that reasonably appears to be related to the Investigator’s Institutional Responsibilities, and:
if with a publicly traded entity, the aggregate value of any salary or other payments for services received during the 12 month period preceding the disclosure, and the value of any equity interest during the 12 month period preceding or as of the date of disclosure, exceeds $5,000; or if with a non-publicly traded entity, the aggregate value of any salary or other payments for services received during the 12 month period preceding the disclosure exceeds $5,000; or if with a non-publicly-traded company, is an equity interest of any value during the 12 month period preceding or as of the date of disclosure; or
is income related to intellectual property rights and interests not reimbursed through the Institution.
Financial Conflict of Interest means a Significant Financial Interest (or, where the Institutional official requires disclosure of other Financial Interests, a Financial Interest) that the Institution reasonably determines could directly and significantly affect the design, conduct or reporting of Institutional research.
Conflict of Interest Administrator means the individual within the Institution that is responsible for the solicitation and review of disclosures of significant financial interests including those of the Investigator’s Family related to the Investigator’s institutional responsibilities.
Institutional responsibilities means the Investigator’s responsibilities associated with his or her Institutional appointment or position, such as research, teaching, clinical activities, administration, and institutional, internal and external professional committee service.
Investigator means any individual who is responsible for the design, conduct, or reporting of PHS sponsored research, or proposals for such funding. This definition is not limited to those titled or budgeted as principal investigator or co-investigator on a particular proposal, and may include postdoctoral associates, senior scientists, or graduate students. The definition may also include collaborators or consultants as appropriate.
Public Health Service or PHS means the Public Health Service of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and any components of the PHS to which the authority of the PHS may be delegated. The components of the PHS include, but are not limited to, the Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Aging, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Federal Occupational Health, Food and Drug Administration, Health Resources and Services Administration, Indian Health Service, National Institutes of Health, and Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
Research means a systematic investigation, study, or experiment designed to contribute to generalizable knowledge relating broadly to public health, including behavioral and social-sciences research. The term encompasses basic and applied research (e.g., a published article, book or book chapter) and product development (e.g., a diagnostic test or drug).
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
This policy is predicated on the expectation that Investigators should conduct their affairs so as to avoid or minimize conflicts of interest, and must respond appropriately when conflicts of interest arise. To that end, this policy informs faculty about situations that generate conflicts of interest related to research, provides mechanisms for Investigators and the Institution to manage those conflicts of interest that arise, and describes situations that are prohibited. Every Investigator has an obligation to become familiar with, and abide by, the provisions of this policy. If a situation raising questions of conflict of interest arises, an Investigator should discuss the situation with the Institutional official.
DISCLOSURE OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS
All Investigators are required to disclose their outside financial interests to the Institution on an annual and on an ad hoc basis, as described below. The Conflict of Interest Administrator is responsible for the distribution, receipt, processing, review and retention of disclosure forms Regardless of the disclosure requirements, the Investigator, in his or her own best interest, is encouraged to disclose any other financial or related interest that could present an actual conflict of interest or be perceived to present a conflict of interest.
Annual Disclosures
All Investigators must disclose their Significant Financial Interests to the Institution, through the Institutional Official, on an annual basis. All forms should be submitted to the Institutional official or designee by July 1 for the previous calendar year or as determined by the sub-recipient.
Ad hoc Disclosures
In addition to annual disclosure, certain situations require ad hoc disclosure. All Investigators must disclose their Significant Financial Interests to the Institution, through the Institutional Official, within 30 days of their initial appointment or employment.
Prior to entering into sponsored projects or applications for sponsored projects, where the Investigator has a Significant Financial Interest, the Investigator must submit to the Conflict of Interest Administrator an ad hoc updated disclosure of his or her Significant Financial Interests with the outside entity. The Institution will not submit a research proposal unless the Investigator(s) have submitted such ad hoc disclosures.
In addition, all Investigators must submit to the Institutional official an ad hoc disclosure of any Significant Financial Interest they acquire during the course of the year within thirty (30) days of discovering or acquiring the Significant Financial Interest.
Travel Investigators must also disclose reimbursed or sponsored travel related to their institutional responsibilities, as defined above in the definition of Financial Interest. Such disclosures must include, at a minimum, the purpose of the trip, the identity of the sponsor/organizer, the destination, the duration, and, if known, the monetary value. The Institutional Official will determine if additional information is needed (e.g., the monetary value if not already disclosed) to determine whether the travel constitutes a Financial Conflict of Interest with the Investigator’s research.
REVIEW AND DECISION OF THE INSTITUTIONAL OFFICIAL
If the disclosure form reveals a Significant Financial Interest, it will be reviewed promptly by the Institutional Official or designee for a determination of whether it constitutes a Financial Conflict of Interest. If a Financial Conflict of Interest exists, the Conflict of Interest Administrator will take action to eliminate, reduce, or manage the conflict, as appropriate.
A Financial Conflict of Interest will exist when the Conflict of Interest Administrator or designee determines that a Significant Financial Interest could directly and significantly affect the design, conduct, or reporting of PHS-supported research. If the Conflict of Interest Administrator determines that there is a Financial Conflict of Interest that can be managed, he or she must require and approve a written management plan before any related research goes forward. The affected Investigator or the COI Committee is responsible for developing and submitting a proposed management plan, in consultation with the Conflict of Interest Administrator.
To address complex situations, oversight committees may be established by the Conflict of Interest Administrator to periodically review the ongoing activity, to monitor the conduct of the activity (including use of students and postdoctoral appointees), to ensure open and timely dissemination of the research results, and to otherwise oversee compliance with the management plan.
REPORTING TO PHS
Should any reported conflict or non-compliance require reporting to PHS, the Conflict of Interest Administrator will report in accordance with PHS regulations. If the funding for the Research is made available from a prime PHS-awardee, such reporting shall be made available to the prime awardee such that they may fulfill their reporting obligations to the PHS.
INVESTIGATOR NON-COMPLIANCE
Disciplinary Action
In the event of an Investigator’s failure to comply with this Policy, the Conflict of Interest Administrator may suspend all relevant activities or take other disciplinary action until the matter is resolved or other action deemed appropriate by the Conflict of Interest Administrator is implemented.
A Conflict of Interest Administrator’s decision to impose sanctions on an Investigator because of failure to comply with this Policy, or failure to comply with the decision of the Conflict of Interest Administrator, will be described in a written explanation of the decision to the investigator, COI Committee, and, where applicable, the IRB, and will notify the individual of the right to appeal the decision.
Retrospective Review
In addition, if the Conflict of Interest Administrator determines that a Financial Conflict of Interest was not identified or managed in a timely manner, including but not limited to an Investigator’s failure to disclose a Significant Financial Interest that is determined to be a Financial Conflict of Interest, or failure by an Investigator to materially comply with a management plan for a Financial Conflict of Interest.
Documentation of the retrospective review shall include the project number, project title, PI, name of Investigator with the Financial Conflict of Interest, name of the entity with which the Investigator has the Financial Conflict of Interest, reason(s) for the retrospective review, detailed methodology used for the retrospective review, and findings and conclusions of the review.
The Institutional official will update any previously submitted report to the PHS or the prime PHS-awardee relating to the research, specifying the actions that will be taken to manage the Financial Conflict of Interest going forward. If bias is found, the report will include a mitigation report in accordance with the PHS regulations, including a description of the impact of the bias on the research project and the plan of action to eliminate or mitigate the effect of the bias.
TRAINING
Each Investigator must complete training on this Policy prior to engaging in research funded by PHS, and at least every four years thereafter. They must also complete training within a reasonable period of time as determined by the Conflict of Interest Administrator in the event that this Policy is substantively amended in a manner that affects the requirements of Investigators, or if it is determined that the Investigator has not complied with this policy or with a management plan related to their activities.
RECORD RETENTION
The Conflict of Interest Administrator will retain all disclosure forms, conflict management plans, and related documents for a period of three years from the date the final expenditure report is submitted to the PHS or to the prime PHS awardee.
CONFIDENTIALITY
To the extent permitted by law, all disclosure forms, conflict management plans, and related information will be confidential. However, the Institution may make such information available to an agency funding research of the faculty member, to a requestor of information concerning financial conflict of interest related to PHS funding or to the primary entity who made the funding available to the Institution, if requested or required. If the Institution is requested to provide disclosure forms, conflict management plans, and related information to an outside entity, the Investigator will be informed of this disclosure.
PUBLIC ACCESSIBILITY
Prior to the expenditure of funds, the Institution will publish on a publicly-accessible website or respond to any requestor within five business days of the request, information concerning any Significant Financial Interest that meets the following criteria:
The Significant Financial Interest was disclosed and is still held by the Investigator;
A determination has been made that the Significant Financial Interest is related to the PHS-funded research; and A determination has been made that the Significant Financial Interest is a Financial Conflict of Interest.
The information to be made available shall be consistent with the requirements of the PHS policy.
REGULATORY AUTHORITY
This policy implements the requirements of 42 CFR 50 and 45 CFR 94; where there are substantive differences between this policy and the requirements, the requirements shall take precedence.
SageFox specializes in both formative and summative program evaluation and research on educational projects. We can both help with the development of a grant proposal or come in as partners on an existing project. In both circumstances, we would work with you to develop a research or evaluation plan that is tailored to your project. This would include:
Co-development of a logic model to deeply understand the approach the project will take to realize its objectives and goals
Development or adaptation of instruments to measure the project objectives
Implementation of these tools, including surveys, tests, focus groups, interviews, classroom observations, etc.
Regular reporting of outcomes to your team and providing suggestions for increasing the effectiveness of the project
Helping your team think through the consequences of the evaluation or research
Supporting the reporting to the funding agency
Helping disseminate the results of your project
Our focus is on providing information that will help improve the project as it moves forward and makes important decisions about future growth. As such, we involve all major stakeholders in the information-gathering process and collaborate with project leadership to make sense of their feedback.
Summative evaluation is meant to provide an overview of whether and how your project has met its stated goals. Our focus is not only on providing information that tells you how well you have met the objectives of the project but also on trying to understand why you may not have met certain goals. As such, we prefer to collaborate with your team not only in gathering the summative data but also in interpreting what it means in the context of your project. SageFox’s collaborative approach and on-going communication means there are no surprises in summative reporting.
We believe research should furthers the state of knowledge in the fields of education and evaluation while being of use to educational practitioners in developing and implementing projects. As such, we focus not only on the best way to answer a research question but also on how it may inform future projects in the field. We have performed research both as principal investigators on dedicated research grants and also closely collaborate in dissemination efforts following program evaluations.
Although we can work with an existing project, we can be more valuable to you if we can be part of the team developing the initial grant proposal. We suggest that you contact us early enough that we can use our experience with other projects to help you frame your grant and ensure that the evaluation or research component is integrated well into the rest of the proposal.
Once a grant is funded, our preferred relationship with our clients is one where we work very collaboratively and where the communication level is high enough that we can respond well to the project‘s changing needs.
Typically, an evaluator should cost about 10% of the overall project budget, depending on the nature of the work. For educational research, this proportion may be higher depending on what proportion of the project is based on research.
This database allows you to search through our existing community of projects on a range of characteristics. You can use this resource to find people who are geographically close to you, working on a similar problem of practice, working with a similar student or teacher population, and more!
The first map, "Projects by Research Team" shows the dispersion of project PIs across the country. The second map, "Projects by Implementation Location" demonstrates the distribution of projects by the proposed state of implementation. *Note: these features are only availible for viewing on your desktop. Sorry for any inconvinence!
We administer an annual survey to our community of projects seeking their feedback about our community, as well as their experiences working in an RPP and the perceived efficaciousness of the methodology. We ask some direct questions about advice that PIs would give to incoming projects that may be worth your time to review.
2019 Summary | 2019 Full Report
Periodically we’ll interview a small number of community members about a particular phenomena within the projects (for instance, culturally responsive computing, engaging women and girls, or utilizing the health self-assessment tool) and create a short Research Practice Brief (RPB). These briefs are intended to give a quick snapshot of what’s going on inside various projects.
We are so very proud to highlight some of the great products that came out of our communities efforts through the Spring 2020 RESPECT conference :
ECS Community Meeting: Shared Research, Shared Data (Coming soon!)
Each month the RPPforCS team produces a newsletter that is chock-full of updates, announcements, deadlines and dates for conferences and other opportunities, as well as share-outs from our community of projects.
We host monthly topical webinars that feature experts, community members, and other organizations. These webinars address both pressing issues for RPPs and topical problems in Computer Science Education. For most webinars we have a video recording of the presentation and discussion, public-facing slides, as well as notes documents from our breakout sessions.
2020
RPPs in CS: Taking Stock 3 Years In
Cohort 4 Orientation
COVID-19 Disruptions, Impacts, and Opportunities - May 26, 2020
Share Out: CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Our Projects - January 21, 2020
2019
Reflections and Future Plans - July 24, 2019
Welcoming Cohort 3 to the Community - November 13, 2019
2018
Cohort 2: Welcome to the RPPforCS Community! - November 13, 2018
Welcome to the RPPforCS Community - October 12, 2017
2020
Presentations from the Community (SIGCSE, Take 2) -April 21, 2020
Virtual RPPforCS Community Meetup "at" RESPECT 2020 - March 11, 2020
How Tos - RPPs
2020
Ethical Considerations for Data Security and Management - December 16, 2020
RPP Sustainability - November 18, 2020
Balancing Research and Implementation - February 25, 2020
2019
Supporting Practice Partners in Achieveing Goals - October 15, 2019
Teaching Leadership in RPPs - September 24, 2019
Virtual Communities as a Strategy for Community Building - May 20, 2019
Implementation Coherence - March 27, 2019
2018
The Dimension of RPP Effectiveness - December 19, 2018
Making the RPP Work: Project Coordinators and Summer PD - October 24, 2018
Theme Study 1: Trust and Relationship Building
2017
Focusing on the Research Agenda - November 29th, 2017
Relationships, relationships, relationships: How to Get RPPs Going - November 6, 2017
How Tos - Accessibility & Broadening Participation
2019
Understanding CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge - December 17, 2019
Attending to Accessibility - November 20, 2019
Teaching Leadership in the Broadening Participation in Computing Movement - April 22, 2019
2018
Minding the Gender Gap Using RPP
This tool was designed to help RPP teams assess their own functioning and provide language for identifying how you can improve your partnership over time.
SageFox specializes in both formative and summative program evaluation and research on educational projects. We can both help with the development of a grant proposal or come in as partners on an existing project. In both circumstances, we would work with you to develop a research or evaluation plan that is tailored to your project. This would include:
Co-development of a logic model to deeply understand the approach the project will take to realize its objectives and goals
Development or adaptation of instruments to measure the project objectives
Implementation of these tools, including surveys, tests, focus groups, interviews, classroom observations, etc.
Regular reporting of outcomes to your team and providing suggestions for increasing the effectiveness of the project
Helping your team think through the consequences of the evaluation or research
Supporting the reporting to the funding agency
Helping disseminate the results of your project
Our focus is on providing information that will help improve the project as it moves forward and makes important decisions about future growth. As such, we involve all major stakeholders in the information-gathering process and collaborate with project leadership to make sense of their feedback.
Summative evaluation is meant to provide an overview of whether and how your project has met its stated goals. Our focus is not only on providing information that tells you how well you have met the objectives of the project but also on trying to understand why you may not have met certain goals. As such, we prefer to collaborate with your team not only in gathering the summative data but also in interpreting what it means in the context of your project. SageFox’s collaborative approach and on-going communication means there are no surprises in summative reporting.
We believe research should furthers the state of knowledge in the fields of education and evaluation while being of use to educational practitioners in developing and implementing projects. As such, we focus not only on the best way to answer a research question but also on how it may inform future projects in the field. We have performed research both as principal investigators on dedicated research grants and also closely collaborate in dissemination efforts following program evaluations.
Although we can work with an existing project, we can be more valuable to you if we can be part of the team developing the initial grant proposal. We suggest that you contact us early enough that we can use our experience with other projects to help you frame your grant and ensure that the evaluation or research component is integrated well into the rest of the proposal.
Once a grant is funded, our preferred relationship with our clients is one where we work very collaboratively and where the communication level is high enough that we can respond well to the project‘s changing needs.
Typically, an evaluator should cost about 10% of the overall project budget, depending on the nature of the work. For educational research, this proportion may be higher depending on what proportion of the project is based on research.
This database allows you to search through our existing community of projects on a range of characteristics. You can use this resource to find people who are geographically close to you, working on a similar problem of practice, working with a similar student or teacher population, and more!
The first map, "Projects by Research Team" shows the dispersion of project PIs across the country. The second map, "Projects by Implementation Location" demonstrates the distribution of projects by the proposed state of implementation.
Each month the RPPforCS team produces a newsletter that is chock-full of updates, announcements, deadlines and dates for conferences and other opportunities, as well as share-outs from our community of projects. Click here for a complete archive.
2019 Summary | 2019 Full Report We administer and annual survey to our community of projects seeking their feedback about our community, as well as their experiences working in an RPP and the perceived efficaciousness of the methodology. We ask some direct questions about advice that PIs would give to incoming projects that may be worth your time to review.
We host monthly topical webinars that feature experts, community members, and other organizations. These webinars address both pressing issues for RPPs and topical problems in Computer Science Education. For most webinars we have a video recording of the presentation and discussion, public-facing slides, as well as notes documents from our breakout sessions. You can find the full archive here.
Periodically we’ll interview a small number of community members about a particular phenomena within the projects (for instance, culturally responsive computing, engaging women and girls, or utilizing the health self-assessment tool) and create a short Research Practice Brief (RPB). These briefs are intended to give a quick snapshot of what’s going on inside various projects.
Theme studies are intended to be somewhat more rigorous than an RPB and connect you to other resources in a contextualized way. These are produced on a semi-annual basis, and involve a greater number of projects than an RPB. WT Grant Foundation suggested a five dimension framework for assessing effectiveness and growth in RPPs. A series of five theme studies will be generated reflecting experiences during the grant period of a subset of RPPforCS projects around each of the five dimensions, including:
Trust and building relationships, by Todd Lash, Stephanie Wortel-London, and Jessica Velesaca
Rigorous research informing action
Supporting the partner practice organization in achieving its goals Roles Computer Science Teachers Play in RPP, by Stephanie Wortel-London, Leigh Ann DeLyser, and Deepa Muralidhar
Producing knowledge that informs educational improvement broadly
Capacity building in each partner toward ability to engage in partnership work
This tool was designed to help RPP teams assess their own functioning and provide language for identifying how you can improve your partnership over time.
AWSM
CRoCS
SCRIPT
Join CSforALL! It’s easy and your can customize your profiles for both your projects and your researchers as individuals!
NNERPP
WT Grant RPP microsite
R+P Collaboratory
This database allows you to search through our existing community of projects on a range of characteristics. You can use this resource to find people who are geographically close to you, working on a similar problem of practice, working with a similar student or teacher population, and more!
The first map, "Projects by Research Team" shows the dispersion of project PIs across the country. The second map, "Projects by Implementation Location" demonstrates the distribution of projects by the proposed state of implementation. *Note: these features are only availible for viewing on your desktop. Sorry for any inconvinence!
We administer an annual survey to our community of projects seeking their feedback about our community, as well as their experiences working in an RPP and the perceived efficaciousness of the methodology. We ask some direct questions about advice that PIs would give to incoming projects that may be worth your time to review.
2019 Summary | 2019 Full Report
Periodically we’ll interview a small number of community members about a particular phenomena within the projects (for instance, culturally responsive computing, engaging women and girls, or utilizing the health self-assessment tool) and create a short Research Practice Brief (RPB). These briefs are intended to give a quick snapshot of what’s going on inside various projects.
We are so very proud to highlight some of the great products that came out of our communities efforts through the Spring 2020 RESPECT conference :
ECS Community Meeting: Shared Research, Shared Data (Coming soon!)
Each month the RPPforCS team produces a newsletter that is chock-full of updates, announcements, deadlines and dates for conferences and other opportunities, as well as share-outs from our community of projects.
We host monthly topical webinars that feature experts, community members, and other organizations. These webinars address both pressing issues for RPPs and topical problems in Computer Science Education. For most webinars we have a video recording of the presentation and discussion, public-facing slides, as well as notes documents from our breakout sessions.
2020
RPPs in CS: Taking Stock 3 Years In
Cohort 4 Orientation
COVID-19 Disruptions, Impacts, and Opportunities - May 26, 2020
Share Out: CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Our Projects - January 21, 2020
2019
Reflections and Future Plans - July 24, 2019
Welcoming Cohort 3 to the Community - November 13, 2019
2018
Cohort 2: Welcome to the RPPforCS Community! - November 13, 2018
Welcome to the RPPforCS Community - October 12, 2017
2020
Presentations from the Community (SIGCSE, Take 2) -April 21, 2020
Virtual RPPforCS Community Meetup "at" RESPECT 2020 - March 11, 2020
How Tos - RPPs
2020
RPP Sustainability - November 18, 2020
Balancing Research and Implementation - February 25, 2020
2019
Supporting Practice Partners in Achieveing Goals - October 15, 2019
Teaching Leadership in RPPs - September 24, 2019
Virtual Communities as a Strategy for Community Building - May 20, 2019
Implementation Coherence - March 27, 2019
2018
The Dimension of RPP Effectiveness - December 19, 2018
Making the RPP Work: Project Coordinators and Summer PD - October 24, 2018
Theme Study 1: Trust and Relationship Building
2017
Focusing on the Research Agenda - November 29th, 2017
Relationships, relationships, relationships: How to Get RPPs Going - November 6, 2017
How Tos - Accessibility & Broadening Participation
2019
Understanding CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge - December 17, 2019
Attending to Accessibility - November 20, 2019
Teaching Leadership in the Broadening Participation in Computing Movement - April 22, 2019
2018
Minding the Gender Gap Using RPP
This tool was designed to help RPP teams assess their own functioning and provide language for identifying how you can improve your partnership over time.
This database allows you to search through our existing community of projects on a range of characteristics. You can use this resource to find people who are geographically close to you, working on a similar problem of practice, working with a similar student or teacher population, and more!
The first map, "Projects by Research Team" shows the dispersion of project PIs across the country. The second map, "Projects by Implementation Location" demonstrates the distribution of projects by the proposed state of implementation. *Note: these features are only availible for viewing on your desktop. Sorry for any inconvinence!
We administer an annual survey to our community of projects seeking their feedback about our community, as well as their experiences working in an RPP and the perceived efficaciousness of the methodology. We ask some direct questions about advice that PIs would give to incoming projects that may be worth your time to review.
2019 Summary | 2019 Full Report
Periodically we’ll interview a small number of community members about a particular phenomena within the projects (for instance, culturally responsive computing, engaging women and girls, or utilizing the health self-assessment tool) and create a short Research Practice Brief (RPB). These briefs are intended to give a quick snapshot of what’s going on inside various projects.
We are so very proud to highlight some of the great products that came out of our communities efforts through the Spring 2020 RESPECT conference :
ECS Community Meeting: Shared Research, Shared Data (Coming soon!)
Each month the RPPforCS team produces a newsletter that is chock-full of updates, announcements, deadlines and dates for conferences and other opportunities, as well as share-outs from our community of projects.
We host monthly topical webinars that feature experts, community members, and other organizations. These webinars address both pressing issues for RPPs and topical problems in Computer Science Education. For most webinars we have a video recording of the presentation and discussion, public-facing slides, as well as notes documents from our breakout sessions.
2020
RPPs in CS: Taking Stock 3 Years In
Cohort 4 Orientation
COVID-19 Disruptions, Impacts, and Opportunities - May 26, 2020
Share Out: CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Our Projects - January 21, 2020
2019
Reflections and Future Plans - July 24, 2019
Welcoming Cohort 3 to the Community - November 13, 2019
2018
Cohort 2: Welcome to the RPPforCS Community! - November 13, 2018
Welcome to the RPPforCS Community - October 12, 2017
2020
Presentations from the Community (SIGCSE, Take 2) -April 21, 2020
Virtual RPPforCS Community Meetup "at" RESPECT 2020 - March 11, 2020
How Tos - RPPs
2020
RPP Sustainability - November 18, 2020
Balancing Research and Implementation - February 25, 2020
2019
Supporting Practice Partners in Achieveing Goals - October 15, 2019
Teaching Leadership in RPPs - September 24, 2019
Virtual Communities as a Strategy for Community Building - May 20, 2019
Implementation Coherence - March 27, 2019
2018
The Dimension of RPP Effectiveness - December 19, 2018
Making the RPP Work: Project Coordinators and Summer PD - October 24, 2018
Theme Study 1: Trust and Relationship Building
2017
Focusing on the Research Agenda - November 29th, 2017
Relationships, relationships, relationships: How to Get RPPs Going - November 6, 2017
How Tos - Accessibility & Broadening Participation
2019
Understanding CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge - December 17, 2019
Attending to Accessibility - November 20, 2019
Teaching Leadership in the Broadening Participation in Computing Movement - April 22, 2019
2018
Minding the Gender Gap Using RPP
This tool was designed to help RPP teams assess their own functioning and provide language for identifying how you can improve your partnership over time.
This database allows you to search through our existing community of projects on a range of characteristics. You can use this resource to find people who are geographically close to you, working on a similar problem of practice, working with a similar student or teacher population, and more!
The first map, "Projects by Research Team" shows the dispersion of project PIs across the country. The second map, "Projects by Implementation Location" demonstrates the distribution of projects by the proposed state of implementation. *Note: these features are only availible for viewing on your desktop. Sorry for any inconvinence!
We administer an annual survey to our community of projects seeking their feedback about our community, as well as their experiences working in an RPP and the perceived efficaciousness of the methodology. We ask some direct questions about advice that PIs would give to incoming projects that may be worth your time to review.
2019 Summary | 2019 Full Report
Periodically we’ll interview a small number of community members about a particular phenomena within the projects (for instance, culturally responsive computing, engaging women and girls, or utilizing the health self-assessment tool) and create a short Research Practice Brief (RPB). These briefs are intended to give a quick snapshot of what’s going on inside various projects.
We are so very proud to highlight some of the great products that came out of our communities efforts through the Spring 2020 RESPECT conference :
ECS Community Meeting: Shared Research, Shared Data (Coming soon!)
Each month the RPPforCS team produces a newsletter that is chock-full of updates, announcements, deadlines and dates for conferences and other opportunities, as well as share-outs from our community of projects.
We host monthly topical webinars that feature experts, community members, and other organizations. These webinars address both pressing issues for RPPs and topical problems in Computer Science Education. For most webinars we have a video recording of the presentation and discussion, public-facing slides, as well as notes documents from our breakout sessions.
2020
RPPs in CS: Taking Stock 3 Years In
Cohort 4 Orientation
COVID-19 Disruptions, Impacts, and Opportunities - May 26, 2020
Share Out: CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Our Projects - January 21, 2020
2019
Reflections and Future Plans - July 24, 2019
Welcoming Cohort 3 to the Community - November 13, 2019
2018
Cohort 2: Welcome to the RPPforCS Community! - November 13, 2018
Welcome to the RPPforCS Community - October 12, 2017
2020
Presentations from the Community (SIGCSE, Take 2) -April 21, 2020
Virtual RPPforCS Community Meetup "at" RESPECT 2020 - March 11, 2020
How Tos - RPPs
2020
RPP Sustainability - November 18, 2020
Balancing Research and Implementation - February 25, 2020
2019
Supporting Practice Partners in Achieveing Goals - October 15, 2019
Teaching Leadership in RPPs - September 24, 2019
Virtual Communities as a Strategy for Community Building - May 20, 2019
Implementation Coherence - March 27, 2019
2018
The Dimension of RPP Effectiveness - December 19, 2018
Making the RPP Work: Project Coordinators and Summer PD - October 24, 2018
Theme Study 1: Trust and Relationship Building
2017
Focusing on the Research Agenda - November 29th, 2017
Relationships, relationships, relationships: How to Get RPPs Going - November 6, 2017
How Tos - Accessibility & Broadening Participation
2019
Understanding CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge - December 17, 2019
Attending to Accessibility - November 20, 2019
Teaching Leadership in the Broadening Participation in Computing Movement - April 22, 2019
2018
Minding the Gender Gap Using RPP
This tool was designed to help RPP teams assess their own functioning and provide language for identifying how you can improve your partnership over time.
This database allows you to search through our existing community of projects on a range of characteristics. You can use this resource to find people who are geographically close to you, working on a similar problem of practice, working with a similar student or teacher population, and more!
The first map, "Projects by Research Team" shows the dispersion of project PIs across the country. The second map, "Projects by Implementation Location" demonstrates the distribution of projects by the proposed state of implementation. *Note: these features are only availible for viewing on your desktop. Sorry for any inconvinence!
We administer an annual survey to our community of projects seeking their feedback about our community, as well as their experiences working in an RPP and the perceived efficaciousness of the methodology. We ask some direct questions about advice that PIs would give to incoming projects that may be worth your time to review.
2019 Summary | 2019 Full Report
Periodically we’ll interview a small number of community members about a particular phenomena within the projects (for instance, culturally responsive computing, engaging women and girls, or utilizing the health self-assessment tool) and create a short Research Practice Brief (RPB). These briefs are intended to give a quick snapshot of what’s going on inside various projects.
We are so very proud to highlight some of the great products that came out of our communities efforts through the Spring 2020 RESPECT conference :
ECS Community Meeting: Shared Research, Shared Data (Coming soon!)
Each month the RPPforCS team produces a newsletter that is chock-full of updates, announcements, deadlines and dates for conferences and other opportunities, as well as share-outs from our community of projects.
We host monthly topical webinars that feature experts, community members, and other organizations. These webinars address both pressing issues for RPPs and topical problems in Computer Science Education. For most webinars we have a video recording of the presentation and discussion, public-facing slides, as well as notes documents from our breakout sessions.
2020
RPPs in CS: Taking Stock 3 Years In
Cohort 4 Orientation
COVID-19 Disruptions, Impacts, and Opportunities - May 26, 2020
Share Out: CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Our Projects - January 21, 2020
2019
Reflections and Future Plans - July 24, 2019
Welcoming Cohort 3 to the Community - November 13, 2019
2018
Cohort 2: Welcome to the RPPforCS Community! - November 13, 2018
Welcome to the RPPforCS Community - October 12, 2017
2020
Presentations from the Community (SIGCSE, Take 2) -April 21, 2020
Virtual RPPforCS Community Meetup "at" RESPECT 2020 - March 11, 2020
How Tos - RPPs
2020
RPP Sustainability - November 18, 2020
Balancing Research and Implementation - February 25, 2020
2019
Supporting Practice Partners in Achieveing Goals - October 15, 2019
Teaching Leadership in RPPs - September 24, 2019
Virtual Communities as a Strategy for Community Building - May 20, 2019
Implementation Coherence - March 27, 2019
2018
The Dimension of RPP Effectiveness - December 19, 2018
Making the RPP Work: Project Coordinators and Summer PD - October 24, 2018
Theme Study 1: Trust and Relationship Building
2017
Focusing on the Research Agenda - November 29th, 2017
Relationships, relationships, relationships: How to Get RPPs Going - November 6, 2017
How Tos - Accessibility & Broadening Participation
2019
Understanding CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge - December 17, 2019
Attending to Accessibility - November 20, 2019
Teaching Leadership in the Broadening Participation in Computing Movement - April 22, 2019
2018
Minding the Gender Gap Using RPP
This tool was designed to help RPP teams assess their own functioning and provide language for identifying how you can improve your partnership over time.
To add a new question go to app settings and press "Manage Questions" button.
Yes! To add a picture follow these simple steps:
Enter App Settings
Click the "Manage Questions" button
Click on the question you would like to attach a picture to
When editing your answer, click on the picture icon and then add an image from your library
To add a new question go to app settings and press "Manage Questions" button.
The FAQ title can be adjusted in the settings tab of the App Settings. You can also remove the title by unchecking its checkbox in the settings tab.
Periodically we’ll interview a small number of community members about a particular phenomena within the projects (for instance, culturally responsive computing, engaging women and girls, or utilizing the health self-assessment tool) and create a short Research Practice Brief (RPB). These briefs are intended to give a quick snapshot of what’s going on inside various projects.
We administer an annual survey to our community of projects seeking their feedback about our community, as well as their experiences working in an RPP and the perceived efficaciousness of the methodology. We ask some direct questions about advice that PIs would give to incoming projects that may be worth your time to review.
This database allows you to search through our existing community of projects on a range of characteristics. You can use this resource to find people who are geographically close to you, working on a similar problem of practice, working with a similar student or teacher population, and more!
The first map, "Projects by Research Team" shows the dispersion of project PIs across the country. The second map, "Projects by Implementation Location" demonstrates the distribution of projects by the proposed state of implementation. *Note: these features are only availible for viewing on your desktop. Sorry for any inconvinence!
We administer an annual survey to our community of projects seeking their feedback about our community, as well as their experiences working in an RPP and the perceived efficaciousness of the methodology. We ask some direct questions about advice that PIs would give to incoming projects that may be worth your time to review.
2019 Summary | 2019 Full Report
Periodically we’ll interview a small number of community members about a particular phenomena within the projects (for instance, culturally responsive computing, engaging women and girls, or utilizing the health self-assessment tool) and create a short Research Practice Brief (RPB). These briefs are intended to give a quick snapshot of what’s going on inside various projects.
We are so very proud to highlight some of the great products that came out of our communities efforts through the Spring 2020 RESPECT conference :
ECS Community Meeting: Shared Research, Shared Data (Coming soon!)
Each month the RPPforCS team produces a newsletter that is chock-full of updates, announcements, deadlines and dates for conferences and other opportunities, as well as share-outs from our community of projects.
We host monthly topical webinars that feature experts, community members, and other organizations. These webinars address both pressing issues for RPPs and topical problems in Computer Science Education. For most webinars we have a video recording of the presentation and discussion, public-facing slides, as well as notes documents from our breakout sessions.
2020
RPPs in CS: Taking Stock 3 Years In
Cohort 4 Orientation
COVID-19 Disruptions, Impacts, and Opportunities - May 26, 2020
Share Out: CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Our Projects - January 21, 2020
2019
Reflections and Future Plans - July 24, 2019
Welcoming Cohort 3 to the Community - November 13, 2019
2018
Cohort 2: Welcome to the RPPforCS Community! - November 13, 2018
Welcome to the RPPforCS Community - October 12, 2017
2020
Presentations from the Community (SIGCSE, Take 2) -April 21, 2020
Virtual RPPforCS Community Meetup "at" RESPECT 2020 - March 11, 2020
How Tos - RPPs
2020
Ethical Considerations for Data Security and Management - December 16, 2020
RPP Sustainability - November 18, 2020
Balancing Research and Implementation - February 25, 2020
2019
Supporting Practice Partners in Achieveing Goals - October 15, 2019
Teaching Leadership in RPPs - September 24, 2019
Virtual Communities as a Strategy for Community Building - May 20, 2019
Implementation Coherence - March 27, 2019
2018
The Dimension of RPP Effectiveness - December 19, 2018
Making the RPP Work: Project Coordinators and Summer PD - October 24, 2018
Theme Study 1: Trust and Relationship Building
2017
Focusing on the Research Agenda - November 29th, 2017
Relationships, relationships, relationships: How to Get RPPs Going - November 6, 2017
How Tos - Accessibility & Broadening Participation
2019
Understanding CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge - December 17, 2019
Attending to Accessibility - November 20, 2019
Teaching Leadership in the Broadening Participation in Computing Movement - April 22, 2019
2018
Minding the Gender Gap Using RPP
This tool was designed to help RPP teams assess their own functioning and provide language for identifying how you can improve your partnership over time.
We host monthly topical webinars that feature experts, community members, and other organizations. These webinars address both pressing issues for RPPs and topical problems in Computer Science Education. For most webinars we have a video recording of the presentation and discussion, public-facing slides, as well as notes documents from our breakout sessions.
2020
RPPs in CS: Taking Stock 3 Years In
Cohort 4 Orientation
COVID-19 Disruptions, Impacts, and Opportunities - May 26, 2020
Share Out: CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Our Projects - January 21, 2020
2019
Reflections and Future Plans - July 24, 2019
Welcoming Cohort 3 to the Community - November 13, 2019
2018
Cohort 2: Welcome to the RPPforCS Community! - November 13, 2018
Welcome to the RPPforCS Community - October 12, 2017
2020
Presentations from the Community (SIGCSE, Take 2) -April 21, 2020
Virtual RPPforCS Community Meetup "at" RESPECT 2020 - March 11, 2020
How Tos - RPPs
2020
Ethical Considerations for Data Security and Management - December 16, 2020
RPP Sustainability - November 18, 2020
Balancing Research and Implementation - February 25, 2020
2019
Supporting Practice Partners in Achieveing Goals - October 15, 2019
Teaching Leadership in RPPs - September 24, 2019
Virtual Communities as a Strategy for Community Building - May 20, 2019
Implementation Coherence - March 27, 2019
2018
The Dimension of RPP Effectiveness - December 19, 2018
Making the RPP Work: Project Coordinators and Summer PD - October 24, 2018
Theme Study 1: Trust and Relationship Building
2017
Focusing on the Research Agenda - November 29th, 2017
Relationships, relationships, relationships: How to Get RPPs Going - November 6, 2017
How Tos - Accessibility & Broadening Participation
2019
Understanding CS Pedagogical Content Knowledge - December 17, 2019
Attending to Accessibility - November 20, 2019
Teaching Leadership in the Broadening Participation in Computing Movement - April 22, 2019
2018
Minding the Gender Gap Using RPP
CSEdGrad is an NSF-funded project that aims to assess the current experiences and barriers of CSEd graduate students and their advisors. An element of the CSEdGrad project is to understand what currently exists for graduate students in the way of formalized training in CSEd Research.
While these are 2 separate projects, there is an expectation of collaboration and application of a common framework between them.
Each project is expected to have a written review of the field and has the potential to result in a conference submission to a professional conference such as at SIGCSE, AERA, and/or ICER. Additional dissemination opportunities (e.g., webinar presentations) are possible.
The researcher will conduct a review of the field, including but not limited to available courses for graduate students, any defined programs of study, academic institutions, and where they fit into the map of CSEd Research efforts. The international project will have primary geographic targets as international entities with a defined Computer Science Education research field of study while the domestic targets will be within the United States.
Each researcher should be curious, dogged, and be able to think creatively about their data sources as well as
be able to synthesize and make sense of multiple data sources
have video conferencing capabilities
have access to and abilities with Microsoft Office or equivalent product
have fair collaboration skills
For information on CSEdGrad and related work, as well as about us, please visit:
Estimated 120 hours of effort
Deadline: Various check-points with an end date August 31
$3000 total stipend
CSEdGrad is an NSF-funded project that aims to assess the current experiences and barriers of CSEd graduate students and their advisors. An element of the CSEdGrad project is to understand what currently exists for graduate students in the way of formalized training in CSEd Research.
While these are 2 separate projects, there is an expectation of collaboration and application of a common framework between them.
Each project is expected to have a written review of the field and has the potential to result in a conference submission to a professional conference such as at SIGCSE, AERA, and/or ICER. Additional dissemination opportunities (e.g., webinar presentations) are possible.
The researcher will conduct a review of the field, including but not limited to available courses for graduate students, any defined programs of study, academic institutions, and where they fit into the map of CSEd Research efforts. The international project will have primary geographic targets as international entities with a defined Computer Science Education research field of study while the domestic targets will be within the United States
Each researcher should be curious, dogged, and be able to think creatively about their data sources as well as
be able to synthesize and make sense of multiple data sources
have video conferencing capabilities
have access to and abilities with Microsoft Office or equivalent product
have fair collaboration skills
For information on CSEdGrad and related work, as well as about us, please visit:
Estimated 150 hours of effort
Deadline: Various check-points with an end date August 31
$3750 total stipend
CSEdGrad is an NSF-funded project that aims to assess the current experiences and barriers of CSEd graduate students and their advisors. A feature of our project is the creation of a set of community-facing activities that can support current graduate students. In May we conducted a needs assessment survey in which graduate students were asked to identify the specific areas in which they want support. One area they identified was a general overview of the field of CS Ed research, including history, open questions, and research methods. Using The Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research, as well as survey results from the needs assessment, the candidate will develop a framework for organizing a set of community-facing activities that address the broad sections taken up by the Handbook. The researcher may choose to organize deeper dive sessions for topics that are especially meaningful to the community, such as research methods.
This work will proceed in two phases. First, the researcher will review the survey results and familiarize themselves with the content of the Handbook. Using this information, the researcher will develop a presentation of potential community facing activities.
In phase two, based on guidance from the CSEdGrad leadership team, the researcher will develop one or two of these ideas further and organize them to the stage that they could be resourced and implemented in academic year 2020-21.
Should both parties be interested, there is the potential for the researcher to take on a leadership position in the facilitation of these activities; however, that is not within the scope of this specific funding opportunity.
The ideal candidate will
Be a current graduate student in computing education research with an interest in eventually teaching graduate-level courses in the field.
Be comfortable planning remote learning sessions communicating with a diverse audience
Have access to video conferencing (Zoom or similar)
For information on CSEdGrad, background material for this project, and related work, please visit:
Estimated 200 hours of effort
Deadline: Various check-points with an end date August 31
$5000 total stipend
With the onset of computing education into grades K-12, there have been 74 Research-Practice Partnerships (RPPs) projects funded by the NSF over the last few years. The RPPs have been implemented in various ways across the demographically diverse initiatives. Our goal with this particularly focused study is to conduct a case study of 3 to 4 RPPforCS projects to answer the question “How are RPPs informed by and contribute to generalized knowledge about CS Ed Research?”
The researcher who will work on this project will be involved with 1) shaping the case study protocol, 2) conducting case study interviews and other data collection, 3) providing a narrative report of the cases, 4) and assisting with journal article production. The researcher will work closely with the lead researcher and other researchers involved in the RPPforCS Community project. Discourse with researchers about the findings from the case studies may also add value to the project as well as personal growth as a new CS Ed researcher.
This work will be used to inform the larger CS Education research community how RPPs can be used in K-12 CS Education research. We anticipate submitting this work as a formal publication (anticipated journal article). This may also lead to additional dissemination of types of RPPs within K-12 CS Ed (e.g. future panels or webinars).
As a contributor to this work, we anticipate including the researcher as a contributing author for this targeted work. Deliverables are as follows:
Case study protocol development - mid-June
Case study 1 - mid-July
Case studies 2 and 3 - mid-August
Narrative - by August 31
The ideal candidate will be required to have the following skills and software:
Graduate student in Computer Science Education, with a focus on or interest in K-12 CS Ed
Familiarity with conducting qualitative research (class or other related work)
Familiarity with research protocols and their importance in producing high quality research
Strong writing skills
Access to a computer, Google Drive, Overlead, and Teleconferencing Capabilities
Preferred skills include:
Familiarity with case study methodology
Familiarity with Research-Practice Partnerships
For information on RPPs, RPPforCS, and related work, please visit:
Estimated 200 hours of effort
Deadline: Multiple deliverables with an end date of August 31
$5000 total stipend
SageFox Consulting Group, the host organization for CSEdGrad.org, is a small business in Massachusetts with the great fortune of having funding for our research and evaluation such that we all are able to stay fully employed in these difficult times.
We are offering opportunities currently enrolled graduate students to work with us this summer.
We are aware that many of you as graduate students are sharing in these challenging times with financial and career-related disruptions. As such, we have developed a set of research projects that we invite you to consider collaborating on with us. Each of the projects is scaled to be doable in a six to ten week period this summer. Stipends will be paid ranging from $3000 to $5000.
We have kept the application process as simple as possible. Fundamentally we want to know why this project is of interest, how you intend to work with us in addressing the project, and what capabilities and/or experience you bring to bear. We are also asking that your graduate advisor signs off on your application as we want to ensure that they are aware of your time commitment.
Below is our first round of projects being offered. We will have more coming, but for now,
-
Review the requirements of the 4 projects listed
-
Send any questions you might have to projects@sagefoxgroup.com
-
Complete the application form by June 1
-
We hope to make decisions and allow projects to start by June 15