Roger D. Goddard, Ph.D.
March 21, 2012
Purposes
 Overview of Major Research Grants Programs
Administered by IES;
 Particular Focus on the Education Research Grants
(Goals 1-5);
 Description of Scoring Rubrics, Processes, and Cut
Points;
 Your Questions.
Major IES Research Programs
 Education Research Programs (84.305A)
 Special Education Research Programs (84.324A)
 Statistical and Research Methodology in Education
(84.305D)
 Special Education Initiative: Accelerating the
Academic Achievement of Students with Learning
Disabilities Research Initiative (84.324D) (New)
 Evaluation of State and Local Education Programs and
Policies (84.305E)
Other IES Programs
 Research Training Programs in Education Sciences
(84305B)
 Post-doctoral RTP
 Researcher and Policymaker Training Program (new)
 Research Training Program in Special Education
(84.324B)
 Other
 Grants for Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems
 Unsolicited
Education Research Program Areas







Reading and Writing
Mathematics and Science Education
Cognition and Student Learning
Social and Behavioral Context for Academic Learning
Education Technology
Effective Teachers and Effective Teaching
Improving Education Systems: Policies, Organization,
Management, and Leadership
 Post-secondary and Adult Education
 Early Learning Programs and Policies
 English Learners
IES Education Research Grant
Program Goals
 Goal 1: Exploration (13%)
 Goal 2: Development and Innovation (46%)
 Goal 3: Efficacy and Replication (26%)
 Goal 4: Effectiveness (2%)
 Goal 5: Measurement (13%)
Goal 1: Exploration
 Identify malleable factors associated with student
outcomes, and mediators or moderators of the relation
between malleable factors and student outcomes
 Original data collection, secondary data analysis, or meta
analysis
 MUST: (a) generate hypotheses re: possible causal relations
between malleable factors and outcomes, (b) contribute to
theories of change for interventions, (c) contribute to the
development or improvement of interventions that can
improve student outcomes and (d) identify potentially
beneficial interventions.
 2 or 4 Years; $700,000 or $1,600,000
Goal 2: Development and Innovation (46%)
 Iterative Development of new or existing interventions





that improve student outcomes in an authentic
delivery setting
Interventions encompass curricula, instructional
approaches, technology, education practices,
programs, and policies
At Least 70% development activity
Up to 30% pilot testing
IES expects evidence that will lead to Efficacy and/or
Replication projects
3 or 4 years, $1,500,000
Goal 3: Efficacy and Replication (26%)
 To determine whether a fully developed intervention has a





beneficial impact on student outcomes
May be implemented under ideal circumstances to
determine whether the intervention works for some group
somewhere
Replications may evaluate an already evaluated
intervention under different conditions
Causal Evidence ONLY – RCT or RDD
Fidelity of Implementation Important
4 years, $3,500,000 or for Efficacy Follow-up 2 yrs,
$1,2000,000
Goal 4: Effectiveness (2%)
 Similar to Efficacy/Replication but much larger in
scale (used to be called Scale-up)
 Requires at least rigorous two evaluations of the
intervention that meet Goal 3 requirements
 5 years, $5,000,000
Goal 5: Measurement (13%)
 Development of new assessments or refinement of existing




assessments and the validation of these assessments
Validation of existing assessments for specific purposes,
contexts, and populations
Examples include assessments of students (e.g., screening
or outcomes), education professionals (e.g., credentialing
or evaluating), and education systems (accountability
standards)
All measures must be directly or indirectly related to
student outcomes
4 years, $1,600,000
2012 Schedule for IES Submissions
Round
JUNE
SEPT.
LOI
4/19/12
7/19/12
App Available
4/19/12
7/19/12
App Due
6/21/12
9/20/12
Submit CEHD FORM 3 WEEKS in Advance OR MORE
Allow Time for OSRS
Tamara Lopez (talopez@tamus.edu) (979-458-0065)
Evaluation of IES Proposals:
Scientific Peer Review
 The sections evaluated
 Significance (1-7)
 Research Plan (1-7)
 Personnel (1-7)
 Resources (1-7)
 Overall Score (1-5) in tenths, reverse scored
The Screening and Triage Process
 Applications Move Forward or Not Based on the
Average of Overall Scores
 Overall Score Rubric
1.0-1.5
Outstanding
1.6-20
Excellent
2.1-2.5
Very Good
2.6-3.0
Good
3.1-4.0
Fair
4.1-5.0
Poor