[ *** This list is for use by the OOR nsf-07061 team only - please do not share
or forward message without consent from the team! *** ] (01)
Was something supposed to be attached to this email?
If so, could you send it again? (02)
-- Ken (03)
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Bargmeyer wrote: (04)
> Ken,
>
> See my comments in yours. Mine are prefaced with BEB:
>
> I appreciate all of the work that you are putting into this. The hardest
> part is yet to come with preparation of the project description.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> ----Sent by--------------------------
> Bruce Bargmeyer
> University of California, Berkeley
> and
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
> 1 Cyclotron Road, MS 50B-2231A
> Berkeley, California 94720
> Tel: +1 510-495-2905
> Fax: +1 510-486-4004
> email: bebargmeyer@xxxxxxx
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Baclawski [mailto:kenb@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 12:07 PM
> To: BEBargmeyer@xxxxxxx; oor-nsf07601
> Subject: Re: [oor-nsf07601] New version of the summary
>
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2008, Bargmeyer wrote:
>
>>
>> [ *** This list is for use by the OOR nsf-07061 team only - please do not
> share or forward message without consent from the team! *** ]
>>
>> Ken,
>>
>> The summary looks good. I have a couple comments.
>>
>> 1. Is it written in one of the fonts approved by NSF? It looks like a
> serif
>> font to me and I think the fonts approved by NSF are sans-serif fonts. I
>> believe that Sylvia Spengler, one of the Program Officers for this
>> solicitation, does not like serif fonts such as Times New Roman. The NSF
>> Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide - (NSF 07-140) lists the
>> following fonts:
>> a. Use of only the approved typefaces identified below, a black font
> color,
>> and a font size of 10 points or larger must be used:
>> . For Windows users: Arial, Helvetica, Palatino Linotype, or Georgia
>> . For Macintosh users: Arial, Helvetica, Palatino, or Georgia
>> . For TeX users: Computer Modern
>>
>> There may be an update to that somewhere, but I have not seen it.
>
> I was going by the NSF GPG where it states at
> http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf08_1/gpg_2.jsp#IIB
>
> "2. Proposal Margin and Spacing Requirements
>
> The proposal must be clear, readily legible, and conform to the following
> requirements:
>
> a. Use one of the following typefaces identified below:
>
> * Arial10, Courier New, or Palatino Linotype at a font size of 10
> points or larger
> * Times New Roman at a font size of 11 points or larger
> * Computer Modern family of fonts at a font size of 11 points or
> larger
>
> A font size of less than 10 points may be used for mathematical formulas
> or equations, figure, table or diagram captions and when using a Symbol
> font to insert Greek letters or special characters. PIs are cautioned,
> however, that the text must still be readable;
>
> b. No more than 6 lines of text within a vertical space of 1 inch; and
>
> c. Margins, in all directions, must be at least an inch.
>
> These requirements apply to all uploaded sections of a proposal, including
> supplementary documentation."
>
> I used 11 point Times New Roman. I then printed the summary and measured
> the number of lines vertically as well as the margins. I would be happy
> to use a different font if that would be preferred by the PM.
>
> What is the decision about the font to use? All votes must be in by 8pm
> Tuesday.
>>
>> 2. Broader impact:
>>
>> I understand that it is usually important to emphasize the educational
>> opportunities in this section. That is, to state that the project will
>> provide exceptional opportunities for graduate student research and
>> education in advancing information and computer science techniques and
>> technologies. Also state here, that an aggressive effort will be
> undertaken
>> to recruit students from underrepresented groups, including minorities and
>> females.
>
> I have the "exceptional opportunity" part in the summary. What is missing
> is a statement about underrepresented groups. Northeastern has been very
> good at recruiting minorities and females. One of my recent students was
> not only a black female, she also won the CRA award for best
> undergraduate.
>
> If you could come up with some good wording here, it would be helpful.
>
> BEB: The project will provide opportunities for graduate student research
> and education. Northeastern has been very good at recruiting minorities and
> females. [put some statistics here about the Northeastern College of
> Computer and Information Science, or better yet, your personal results in
> this area]. One of the PIs recent [graduate or undergraduate?] students was
> a black female, who won the Computer Research Association award for best
> undergraduate. An aggressive effort will be undertaken to recruit students
> from underrepresented groups, including minorities and females.
>
> BEB: For the preliminary proposal project description (seven page document),
> we should be have between 1/3 and 2/3 a half page of broader impact
> including both education and how we change the world. We might add in any
> accomplishments by the other collaborators in the area of graduate student
> education.
>
>> The guidance in NSF Solicitation (NSF 07-601) reads: (3) describe the
>> broader impacts of the proposed work, including any exceptional
>> opportunities for progress in research and education that may arise from
> the
>> planned structure, composition, and/or organization of the proposed
> Partner,
>> the educational and training activities, and plans for achieving a diverse
>> organization serving a wide variety of users and communities.
>
> I think we satisfy this, although it would help to discuss it more in the
> project description.
>
>> 3. Sustainability
>>
>> The summary emphasizes the sustainable technology approach. I think NSF is
>> more interested in sustaining the DataNet itself. I think that our
> approach
>> is to develop an OOR that can be adopted by diverse and dispersed
>> organizations. In the long term, each organization would implement the OOR
>> to support its own mission.
>
> This is a difficult one for any proposal. How can one support something
> after the funding has ended? Our argument is that an infrastructure will
> be self-sustaining only if it is considered to be essential by
> communities. The Internet started out as an ARPA project, but when
> funding ended it continued because the organizations that used it realized
> that it was an essential infrastructure.
>
> BEB: NSF is interested in how this can be sustained for 50 years, obviously
> long beyond the NSF funding. NSF wants an operational data repository before
> the end of the award. NSF is looking for a sustainability plan, e.g.,
> financially, for 50 years. This could be subscription fees, a consortium, an
> endowment, .... One of the PDs, Lucy Nowell, has been quite outspoken about
> this.
>
>> 4. Format
>>
>> I know that many proposals, sent to NSF, break the one page summary into
> two
>> sections with the headings:
>>
>> . Intellectual merit
>> . Broader impacts
>
> Yes, I know about that. The last paragraph deals with broader impacts
> explicitly, but other parts also deal with it implicitly.
>
> Should I explicitly mark the two parts?
>
>> These two topics must be addressed in separate statements. The directions
> in
>> the proposal preparation guidelines (NSF 07-140) read:
>>
>> The proposal must contain a summary of the proposed activity suitable for
>> publication, not more than one page in length. It should not be an
> abstract
>> of the proposal, but rather a self-contained description of the activity
>> that would result if the proposal were funded. The summary should be
> written
>> in the third person and include a statement of objectives and methods to
> be
>> employed. It must clearly address in separate statements (within the
>> one-page summary):
>> . the intellectual merit of the proposed activity; and
>> . the broader impacts resulting from the proposed activity.
>> ... Proposals that do not separately address both merit review criteria
>> within the one-page Project Summary will be returned without review.
>>
>> I know that it is hard to get everything into the one-page summary.
>
> I have been working on it for 2 days now...
>
> The summary as I have written it is self-contained. It was never an
> abstract. However I did not realize that it had to be in the third
> person. I will fix that.
>>
>> I note that there is a new guidance document from NSF. A revised version
> of
>> the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG), NSF 09-1,
> was
>> issued on October 1, 2008 and is effective for proposals submitted on or
>> after January 5, 2009. It should not apply to this preliminary proposal,
> but
>> is good to know about.
>>
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>>
>>
>> ----Sent by--------------------------
>> Bruce Bargmeyer
>> University of California, Berkeley
>> and
>> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
>> 1 Cyclotron Road, MS 50B-2231A
>> Berkeley, California 94720
>> Tel: +1 510-495-2905
>> Fax: +1 510-486-4004
>> email: bebargmeyer@xxxxxxx
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: oor-nsf07601-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:oor-nsf07601-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Baclawski
>> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 7:39 AM
>> To: oor-nsf07601
>> Subject: [oor-nsf07601] New version of the summary
>>
>>
>> [ *** This list is for use by the OOR nsf-07061 team only - please do not
>> share or forward message without consent from the team! *** ]
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-nsf07601/
>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/community/project/OOR/nsf07601/
>> Wiki:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository_Proposal/Nsf_
> 07601
>>
>
> (05)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-nsf07601/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/community/project/OOR/nsf07601/
Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository_Proposal/Nsf_07601 (06)
|