Summer Grants for Faculty Research

Purpose

Awards provide approximately $3,000 in compensation for 8 weeks of full-time research.

Eligibility

Proposals may be submitted by full-time continuing Ithaca College faculty members and by faculty regularly employed on at least a half-time basis. No individual may receive a Summer Research Grant in consecutive summers. (Center for Educational Technology Summer Fellowships are considered the equivalent of the Summer Research Grants: they may not be received consecutively with each other.) Proposals for projects involving human subjects must have been reviewed and approved by theAll-College Review Board for Human Subjects Research prior to submission.

Because of the full-time commitment required by this program, awardees will be limited in their ability to participate in other summer programs that are paid. Consult the For Faculty web site for details.

Further, it is expected that awardees will not participate in other professional activities or programs that detract from this full-time endeavor. Failure to observe this regulation will result in withdrawal of the award.

Guidelines

1. Eligible Activities. This grant program is intended to support post-terminal degree scholarly endeavors. It is not intended for use by faculty in their pursuit of advanced degrees.

2. Deadline. The deadline for submitting proposals to the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs is February 15. The original proposal plus 10 copies should be submitted. Allow time for department chair's and dean's review before the deadline. Awards will be announced by March 31 or as soon thereafter as possible.

3. Contents. The proposal should include:

a. a completed cover page (containing requested information and acknowledgment signatures);

b. narrative, not to exceed 6 typewritten pages;

c. an evaluation and recommendation from a colleague who has expertise in the project's field, addressing:

--the innovative nature of the research proposal

--the investigator's qualifications

--the likelihood that the project can be completed

--the significance of the research.

The colleague letter may be from an internal or external colleague. It should demonstrate detailed technical understanding. An encomium on the proposer's qualities as a colleague or a general statement of support will not help and may actually weaken the proposal. The colleague letter may be sent separately from the proposal but should arrive in the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs by the submission deadline.

d. Curriculum Vitae in professional form with relevant recent publication or activities.

e. If completion of a project will require support from Academic Computing and Client Services (ACCS) or the Center for Educational Technology (CET), a memo of support from ACCS/CET should accompany the proposal.

4. Review Criteria. A faculty review committee, appointed by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, will review each proposal according to criteria indicated on the enclosed sheets. Because many disciplines are included, the proposals may not be ranked numerically but recommended to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs as "Highly Recommended," "Recommended," and "Not Recommended." The following criteria are used by reviewers to evaluate each proposal:

a. objectives are clear, precise, and measurable;

b. design involves well-defined methodologies;

c. investigator possesses requisite background and expertise;

d. recommending colleague supports the project;

e. projected time schedule is adequate to conduct the research;

f. necessary tools and equipment are available;

g. significance of the project has been established;

h. contribution to the proposer's professional development is evident;

i. prospect of long-term impact; e.g., external support or multi-year studies, is explained if at all relevant.

5. Definition of "Research." The word "Research" is broadly defined to include such activities as creative writing and musical composition, as well as collaborative projects between faculty and students, community service, and/or service learning projects. Projects that do not have a specific outcome--such as an article, book, or musical score, or concrete project outcomes--are likely to be less competitive than others. Projects that represent a departure from one's documented areas of qualification, or that cross disciplinary boundaries are strongly welcomed but require very careful documentation of investigator's preparedness, feasibility and significance.

6. Sub-Categories of Award. The award committee may, in a given year, set "target categories;" e.g., of nine awards, five to "senior" (tenured) faculty, three to "junior" (untenured), and one to an interdisciplinary proposal in which an able investigator works in a new or unusually broad subject.

The Committee and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs attempt to assure balance among schools and disciplines when the diversity of well-rated proposals warrants doing so.

7. Style of Proposal. Summer Research proposals are reviewed by faculty of varied backgrounds who compare "apples and oranges;" poetry manuscripts are compared to laboratory experiments and philosophic essays are contrasted to stock market analyses. The proposal should be written in the professional style of the discipline using language that is comprehensible by a non-specialist reviewer and should avoid reliance upon technical or dense professional vocabulary. Colleague evaluators help the non-specialist reviewer to judge the project's significance. The curriculum vitae, similarly, clarifies the investigator's contributions to the profession and qualifications to undertake the project.

8. Recommendation for Award. The faculty review committee will submit its recommendations for funding to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. Due to the number of submissions annually, it is not possible to fund all worthy projects due to limitation.

Faculty who receive a summer award are obligated to return for at least a full year of teaching afterward. Faculty who receive an award and choose not to return are required to return the amount of the award to Ithaca College.

9. Reporting. A report should be submitted to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs within six months of the end of the award period. Copies or reprints of resulting publications should be submitted when they appear. An acknowledgment of grant support should appear in publications resulting from the award. The results of previous awards are examined when considering new ones.

10. Form of Award. Award is normally made in the form of a two-month summer contract. If special circumstances make a different method necessary, arrangements should be made immediately upon notification.

11. External Grantseeking Encouraged. Although seeking external funds is not requisite for award of summer research, the review committees will be urged to look with favor on projects that make external funding more likely or that duplicate pending external proposals. Simultaneous internal and external proposals are specifically encouraged. However, an award will be asked to decline the Ithaca College grant if external funds for the same project become available.

12. Inspection of Funded Proposals. Funded proposals are open to inspection by the campus community. Submission of a proposal implies permission to share the proposal or reproduce it for on-campus discussion if it is funded.

Download Summer Grants for Faculty Research Microsoft Word Document - Size: 23 kB