The SimBio Foundation is open to proposals on any topic related to research directed towards improving undergraduate biology education. The foundation’s reviewers are looking for novel or creative work that promises to help undergraduates learn some aspect of biology better than current practices. Given the scale of the foundation’s grants, reviewers will be looking for proposals that are realistic about what can be accomplished with the funding offered. We expect this will often be funding initial exploration of a loftier vision, with the goal of generating enough preliminary results to be competitive for larger funding elsewhere. But smaller creative projects that can be completed with a smaller amount of funding are also strongly encouraged.
Within that broad category, The SimBio Foundation has a strong bias towards proposals with an aim of building some type of product for aiding biology education. Examples might include (but are not limited to):
- online or offline tools for teaching some aspect of biology
- assessments related to biology
- teaching techniques that can be readily adopted by biology instructors
- testing or comparing biology education tools or teaching techniques
- generation of knowledge that will help designers of biology education tools
Reviewers will be judging proposals on the following six criteria (this is the rubric that will be used):
- What is the potential for the proposed activity to:
- a. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
- b. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
- To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
- Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
- How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?
- Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?
- Is the proposal too novel or risky to be funded by other funding sources and might preliminary data improve the likelihood of further funding from another source?
While investigator experience is a criteria, new investigators are welcome to apply. For new investigators, reviewers will also consider whether the environment within which the investigator is working will help them successfully carry out the project. We believe that diversity benefits the scientific endeavor, science teaching, and the learning of science. A proposal may be deemed novel because it funds work by or with a focus on members of communities who are less likely to receive funding from larger funding sources without preliminary data. In that vein, although not an explicit grant criteria, we encourage applications from:
· PIs or Co-PIs who identify as members of historically or currently marginalized communities
· Institutions who are less likely to receive funding, such as 2-year institutions and predominantly undergraduate institutions (PUIs)
· Projects that focus on supporting biology education for learners who are members of historically or currently marginalized communities.