ATE Grant Meetings

From

Current revision as of 21:58, 1 April 2010

Apr. 1st

Time: 2:30-4:30 Location: Chemeketa, Bld. 2, Rm 220 Call-in information:
Call: 888-363-4734
Access code: 1730513

Agenda: 1: Discussion of "Programs of Study" with Tom Thompson
2: Discussion on ATE Program grant, ATE Center grant or BOTH
3: Work session on bullet points for key ideas on each of the preliminary proposal sections

We can add item's tomorrow if I have missed something.

Note on item #2: An issue that was been churning in the back of my head is the sort of shift that happened in the discussions of this grant from it's original genesis from Jim Bailey. Jim currently has an ATE project grant at LCC for game development curriculum and started the original discussion on doing a ATE Center grant proposal focused on game development. Several others in the discussion (myself being one of those) where really more interested in the more general issue of building a good pipeline of potential CS students and have shifted the discussion to doing an ATE project grant with a focus on the more general pipeline issue (probably via a statewide model for a CS program of study).

But we really don't have to do one or the other, we could support the development of BOTH grant proposals. I would suggest having Lane submit an ATE Center grant (be the lead institution) with statewide support from this group. Chemeketa's support will certainly be helpful as Chemeketa has the only current ATE Center grant in Oregon right now (in natural resources). I would also suggest that Chemeketa submit an ATE project grant (as the lead institution) focused on the more general pipeline issues. Lane would take the lead in developing and writing the center grant, Chemeketa the lead on the project grant, and everyone giving the collaborative support that will be needed for these. We should discuss this tomorrow.

Also, I have posted a draft budget (read the draft in big bold letters :-) and added so items to the preliminary proposal page.

Feb. 18th conference call w/ Steve Cooper (Purdue)

On the call: Bruce, Jay, Molly, Mitch, Bart, Steve, Chris
Time: 9:30am
Call-in information:
Call: 888-363-4734
Access code: 1730513
You will be put on hold until Bruce dials in with the host code.


Questions to clarify with Steve:

• Time frame issues (no current RFP for ATE - ADDED NOTE: IT WAS POSTED ON FEB. 12th)
• Should we do an unsolicited proposal?
• ATE Center funding availability
• ATE proposal process of successful applicants
• Insight on new ATE directions
• Do our goals align with new ATE directions
• Starting a dialog with NSF program officer, when and who

Comment about set up we provided during call with Steve:

• We asked Steve a number of general questions about the ATE program. We did not do much set up about ourselves and our ATE center plans.
• Steve was not aware that we were asking about an ATE Center proposal until just before the end of the 1/2 hour discussion.
• Steve also was not told that the PI from the Lane CC ATE project grant was to be a PI for the proposed ATE Center.

Notes from call with Steve:

• Steve recommends that we submit a preliminary proposal: due April 22nd. Full proposals are due October 21st.
• Prepare 1-2 page description (goals, activities, how you would spend the $) before speaking with the program officer
• Make contact with a CS [ATE] Program officer: Scott Grissom (703) 292-4643, sgrissom@nsf.gov or Guy-Alain Amoussou, (703) 292-4645, gamousso@nsf.gov
• Only submit an unsolicited proposal if the program officer requests it
• Outline about a high level budget
• Research similar funded projects for last three years and request full proposals from the PI's (If not received by PI's, NSF should send us copies because of freedom of info act.)
• If we have a draft proposal by mid-August, Steve will try to review it before Oct. submisson
• Steve does not recommend an unsolicited proposal, and recomends to first submit an ATE project grant; build toward an ATE center later after success with initial grant
• Grants for projects have a very high funding percentage (~25%), ATE centers are much lower and generally require an established track record of effectively managing the $1 million grant amounts first
• Consider local issues and document the need: high-unemployment, rural needs, jobs for youth, etc.
• Focus our grant goals rather than a kitchen sink proposal; we have too many items, select and fully develop one or two items & narrow the focus
• workshops-training are activities to achieve the goal, not the goal
• Recommended we proposal $1 million budget for ATE project; maybe propose two different ATE projects since we have a lot of proposed work
  • Resource/activity coordination of existing projects
  • Curriculum/Pathways
  • Establishing outcome standards
• Contact existing centers on program Evaluation; recommends CC of San Franciso, Lane ATE center, CC in LA area (Canyonlands?) (also Chemeketa ATE center can be consulted)
• ATE Centers are hard to get and require a track record; ATE projects have a 25% funding rate

Feb. 4th conference call

On the call: Bruce, Chris, Jay, Mitch, Molley, Ron Time: 2:30
Call-in information:

Agenda:

• Digest everything from the Jan. 21st meeting
  
• Inventory current ATE programs in Oregon
  
  • Chemeketa has a long standing ATE Center (since 1995) ncsr.org
• Task assignments from the meeting:
  
  • Mitch will draft a mission statement from today's discussion and post the whiteboard center diagram (completed)
  • Next step is for everyone to help clarify the mission statement and goals prior to discussion with Steve Cooper from Purdue U.
  • Mitch will set up a time for a conference call discussion with Steve Cooper, 2 week time frame depending upon availability.

Jan. 21 meeting, Chemeketa CC, Building 37 conference room, Salem

Present at the meeting

Chris Stevenson, Molly Shor, Jay Bockelman, Mitch Fry, Bruce Shaffer

Primary topic was to pin down our goals for an ATE grant, look that the ATE proposal requirements and set up a rough plan for building a proposal. A rough draft of a goal statement was defined, and an organizational/resource diagram was also drafted. These have been posted to the ATE Center goals page.

Dec. 3 meeting, Chemeketa CC, Building 37 conference room, Salem

Present at the meeting

Joanne Goode, Chris Stevenson, Molly Shor, Ron Tenison, Tom Thompson, Mike Baily, Jay Bockelman, Mitch Fry, Colin Gobel, Bruce Shaffer

Discussion Notes

Meet with Joanna Goode to discuss the HS introductory curriculum that she has been involve with in urban schools in LA. Joanna and Chris presented and discussed the curriculum that they have developed.

We further discussed the rough ideas for an ATE center grant and agreed to meet in January to get focused on the development of an ATE Center grant (if we decide to move forward and think that we have the resources for this).

Nov. 7 brainstorming session at Chemeketa

Present at the meeting

Jim Baily, Jay Bockelman, Mitch Fry, Colin Gobel, Bruce Shaffer

Discussion Notes

Mosty a brainstorming session to try to gain some focus on the goals and resources available to do an ATE Center Grant. The pages associated with the discussion area are the result of some of the discussion. Bruce will be setting up next meetings for additional investigation into ideas generated during this meeting.

Oct. 15, 2009 Fall OCCC Meeting

Present at the meeting

Jim Baily, Jay Bockelman, Mitch Fry, Colin Goble, Molly Shore, Brian York

Initial discussion of potential for ATE Center Grant

An informal discussion was held at the end of the Fall OCCC meeting for all of those who were interested in looking at grant funding to support the development of Game curriculum. The discussion started with Bryant York giving a presentation on NSF organizational structure and potential direction of grant programs. The discussion evolved into a discussion of the more general goal of improving CS/Engineering pathway education (which is the primary point of the gaming classes). A follow up meeting was scheduled for Nov. 7 at Chemeketa CC.

Here are Molly's notes from the Oct. 15, 2009 OCCC meeting:

Game Development ATE discussion notes 10-16-09.pdf