Grantee Meeting Cognition and Student Learning 2010 IES Research Conference Carol O - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation

Grantee Meeting Cognition and Student Learning 2010 IES Research Conference Carol O


Grantee Meeting Cognition and Student Learning 2010 IES Research Conference Carol O Donnell Program Officer * * Remember projects can focus on more than one ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:109
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 60
Provided by: Elizabet484
Learn more at:


Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Grantee Meeting Cognition and Student Learning 2010 IES Research Conference Carol O

Grantee MeetingCognition and Student Learning
2010 IES Research Conference Carol
ODonnellProgram Officer
Agenda for Grantee Meeting (130 135)
  • 135 145 Introductions (and important note re
    2011 IES conference)
  • 145 215 State of the CASL Portfolio
  • Statistics
  • Highlights
  • Trends and Gaps
  • 215 245 Discussion Groups Making Findings
  • 245 315 Report Out Making Research Relevant
  • 315 400 Research Issues Solutions
  • 400 430 Grant Monitoring Tips (Refresher
    for New Grantees)
  • Grants Administration
  • Website
  • New Funding Opportunities

Introductions (135 145)
  • Note about 2011 IES Conference size is
    increasing, need program committee to conduct
    peer review of papers, panels, poster grantee
    meetings will piggyback off of SREE conference.
  • See list of grantees (handout) and posters (pp
    105 115)
  • Rapid Introductionsput a face to a name
  • Name
  • University
  • Goal (Exploration, Develop., Efficacy,
  • Area of study

State of the CASL Portfolio (145 215)
  • Purpose of CASL Program
  • Portfolio Statistics
  • CASL Highlights
  • Trends and Gaps in the CASL Portfolio

Purpose of CASL Program
  • To establish a scientific foundation for
    education by building on the theoretical and
    empirical advances of cognitive science and
    applying them to education practice with the goal
    of improving student learning and academic

Portfolio Statistics
Number of CASL Awards (2002-2010)
From FY02-FY10 IES funded 78 CASL research
projects, averaging 9 grant awards per year.
Funding rate ( awards / responsive apps)
average around 10-12 but will drop as the number
of applications increases.
Content CASL Studies (2002-2010)
Majority of CASL projects focus on math or
science, the primary areas of need identified by
Bob Bjork in his 2002 address to the IES staff.
Fewer focus on reading or writing. Study skills
are often contextualized within a domain. Some
projects overlap domains.
Age of Participants in CASL (2002-2010)
of apps for college students alone dropped to
0 in FY09 many pre-K apply to Early Childhood
Number of Funded CASL Projects Per Goal
CASL Highlights(see highlights handout)
CASL Highlights
  • More than 20 CASL projects were highlighted in
    the IES Internal Weekly Report and IES Online
    Newsletter this past year.
  • More than 18 articles with positive findings were
    submitted to the Commissioner for our IES
    management goals.
  • See the attached sheet for some examples.
  • Thank you to those who send their publications to
    me at the time of their publication (not in

  • Findings from 38 separate CASL projects were
    highlighted in ten accepted symposia presented at
    the Association for Psychological Science 2009
    and 2010 annual conventions. Symposia topics
  • Developing students mental models using animated
    pedagogical agents.
  • Learning from concrete and abstract
  • Test-enhanced learning, spacing, and
  • Self-regulated learning.
  • Fundamental understanding of mathematics.
  • Conducting RCTs of attention interventions in
    school settings.
  • Argumentation for critical thinking.
  • Problem solving in schools.
  • Neurocognitive functions underlying academic
  • Perceptual characteristics and concept mastery.

  • 12 CASL grantees contributed to a compendium,
    Handbook of Metacognition in Education (2009),
    which provides comprehensive coverage of the
    theoretical basis of metacognition and its
    applications to educational practice.
    Contributors include CASL grantees
  • John Dunlosky (editor)
  • Arthur C. Graesser (editor)
  • Margaret McKeowen
  • Danielle McNamara
  • Joe Magliano
  • Keith Thiede
  • Thomas Griffin
  • Jenny Wiley
  • Joshua Redford
  • Barry Zimmerman
  • Adam Moylan
  • Janet Metcalfe

  • National honors bestowed upon two CASL grantees
  • David Klahr honored by the 37th Carnegie
    Symposium on Cognition for his lifetime of
    scientific and education contributions to
    cognitive development, scientific discovery, and
  • Katherine Rawson received the 2009 Presidential
    Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers
    for her research on improving the comprehension
    of text and on helping students self-regulate
    their learning. Nicole McNeil won this
    prestigious honor last year.
  • CASL findings highlighted in national education
    news outlets and publications
  • Education Week reported on three CASL studies
    focused on argumentation (Britt, Kuhn, and
    Anderson) and one focused on test-enhance
    learning (Roediger).
  • The Chronicle of Higher Education reported on the
    findings of CASL PI Henry Roedigers work, which
    confirmed that frequently quizzing students on
    reading material helps them retain what they have
  • Rohrer and Pashlers review of experimental
    studies on optimal instructional strategies
    published in Educational Researcher.

Trends and Gaps in the CASL Portfolio(see chart
(No Transcript)
Trends and GAPS in CASL Portfolio
  • Attention addressed in earlier grades (Neville,
    Steiner, Hooper, Rabiner), but not in middle or
    high school.
  • Perception studied in all grades (Cottrell, Mix,
    Siegler, Sloutsky, Uttal, Goldstone, Kellman,
    Alibali, Whitten, Novick, Puntambekar, Pavlick),
    but limited to Goal 2 with one exception
    (Pasnakefficacy of patterning).
  • Memoryincluding retrieval, learning, and general
    conception and misconceptionand optimal
    conditions of learning are the most
    comprehensively addressed in the portfolio all
    grades and all Goals (Russell, Ward, Pashler,
    Rawson, Heckler, Metcalfe, Bjork, Roediger,
    Delaney-Black, Millis, Anderson, Blair, Aronson,
    Biswas, Thiede, Wiley, Zimmerman, Dunlosky).

Trends and GAPS in CASL Portfolio
  • Language studied predominantly in the early
    grades (Anthony, Mostow, Connor, Hooper, and
    Glenberg), with one in middle grades (McCutchen).
    None in high school.
  • Problem solving covers all grades in Math and
    Science but mostly Goal 2 (Whitten, Swanson,
    Star, Sternberg, Beal, Bottge, Booth, McNeil,
    Ward, Ross, Rabinowitz).
  • Argumentation and reasoning (including scientific
    and mathematical) are well-represented (Katz,
    Klahr, Lorch, Anderson, Kuhn, Gholson, Holyoak,
    Rips, Britt), but there are no CASL studies of
    reasoning in the earlier grades.
  • Bigger gaps exist within teacher cognition
    (Alibali) and social cognition / goal orientation
    (Dweck, Aronson, Mangels, Beilock).

215 245 Discussion Groups Making Findings
Relevant(suggested division into Groups 1-7)
(No Transcript)
Classroom Scenario Group Discussion
  • The previous list of Trends and Gaps in the CASL
    portfolio represents a series of interdependent
    cognitive processes involved in making sense of
    new information within the education
    settingattention, perception, memory and
    learning, language, problem solving,
    argumentation, and reasoning.
  • At a practical level, all of the processes and
    structures of the cognitive system are
    interdependent and influenced by both the
    environment and by student characteristics.
  • Review the list of select CASL findings
    highlighted on handout.
  • Read the scenario, which attempts to demonstrate
    the complexity of what a teacher and student
    might consider if the findings from CASL were
    implemented into one school day.

Classroom Scenario Group Discussion
  • Knowing your own findings and those highlighted,
    discuss the following
  • What trends exist in the CASL portfolio that can
    cohesively inform a teachers instructional
    practice, development of instructional materials,
    and students study skills?
  • What gaps are missing? For example, while the
    CASL portfolio has several studies using
    artificial intelligence (Millis, Ward Cole,
    etc) which involve constructing computer systems
    that produce intelligent outcomes, there are
    fewer CASL studies of computational modeling,
    which involves programming computers to model or
    mimic some aspect of human cognitive functioning
    (Anderson, Katz). Other gaps include teacher
    cognition social cognition.
  • How can CASL researchers continue to contribute
    to the development and testing of basic theory
    (e.g., neuro-education) yet make research
    questions relevant to education settings?
  • How can we ensure CASL exploratory studies are
    methodological rigorous yet ecologically valid
    and lead to the development of feasible education

245 315 Report Out As you report out your
groups discussion of the 4 questions, consider
how we might move forward by making Research
Problems and Solutions (315 400)Continue our
Discussion of Last Years Topics
  • Methodological Issues (measurement challenges,
    observational techniques, translating laboratory
    research to the classroomeffect size reduction
    from lab to school JREE)
  • Logistical Issues (obtaining preK-12 samples
    reducing attrition maintaining school
    collaboration ensuring feasibility fidelity of
  • Dissemination Issues (getting research into the
    hands of practitioners, sustaining the
    intervention after the grant ends)
  • Future Grant Issues (Goal 1 vs Goal 2 moving
    from a Goal 2 to 3 applying to Ed Tech vs CASL)
  • Others?

400 430 Grant Monitoring Tips (Refresher
for New Grantees)- Grants Administration-
Website - New Funding Opportunities
Grants Administration
Using the e-grants system
  • Annual Reports relationship to performance
  • Final Reports
  • Requesting no-cost extensions
  • Requesting other administrative changes

(No Transcript)
Annual Reports (see attached Tips Sheet)
  • Cover Sheet
  • Section A Project Objectives
  • Section B Budget Information
  • Section C Additional Information

Cover Sheet
  • Complete online
  • Remember to send original signed cover sheet to
  • Director, Grants Administration
  • US Department of Education/IES
  • 555 New Jersey Ave., Room 508c
  • Washington, D.C. 20208
  • FAX (202) 219-2159

Section A Project Objectives
  • Select PROJ for Measure Type. Ignore all
    other Performance Measure boxes.
  • Your Performance Agreement lists your project
    objectives for each year. List each objective in
    Section A, then cut and paste text beneath each
    objective to describe how you have met it (see
    the next slide).

Write your objective from the performance
agreement here.
Explanation of progress on this objective goes
here. This is often several paragraphs long.
Section A Project Objectives
  • Describe status of all steps taken toward
    completion of your projects.
  • Include details of what was done and how it was
  • Describe what was completed.
  • Describe any findings to date.
  • Describe any work planned, but not undertaken.

Section B Budget Information
  • Provide an explanation if you did not expend
    funds at expected rate during the reporting
  • Describe any significant changes to your budget
    resulting from modification of project
  • Describe any changes to your budget that affected
    your ability to achieve your objectives.
  • Include a list or table of broad categories
    (e.g., Personnel, Travel, Subcontract) that
    compares the Award Amount for the given grant
    year vs. Actual Expenses.

Section C Additional Information
  • Attach a file the contains any additional
    information that you may want to include, such
  • Changes you plan to make for next year that are
    consistent with scope and objectives.
  • Anticipated changes to key personnel.
  • Updated curriculum vitae for proposed personnel.
  • Information on the measures that will be
    developed or have been used in your study
  • Unanticipated outcomes or benefits from your
  • List of grant-related presentations
  • Copies of papers or posters related to the grant
    - ERIC.
  • Revised/anticipated timeline for the upcoming
  • There is no limit as to how many pages you can
    include here, but it has to be one document.

Other Attachments
  • Charts attach the document that contains any
    figures or charts referenced in Section A.
  • Tables attach the document that contains any
    tables referenced in Section A.
  • Program Specific Requirements attach your
    revised IRB Certification here.

Final Reports
  • Due 90 days after the end of your grant award.
  • Include the same types of information as in the
    Annual report, described above, but summarize the
    entire project
  • Must answer the final questions (1, 2, 3).

Final Report Question 1
  • Utilizing your evaluation results, draw
    conclusions about the success of the project and
    its impact.
  • Describe any unanticipated outcomes or benefits
    from your project and any barriers you may have

Final Report Question 2
  • What would you recommend as advice to other
    educators that are interested in your project?
  • How did your original ideas change as a result of
    conducting this project?

Final Report Question 3
  • If applicable, describe your plans for continuing
    the project (sustainability capacity building)
    and/or disseminating the project results.

Administrative Changes (see NCE handout)
  • No-cost extensions (why performance agreement
    updates are important)
  • Changes to key personnel

Using e-grants
Change of Key Personnel listed on GAN upload CV
for new person
No-Cost Extension (NCE)
IES WebsiteNational Center for Education
Research (NCER)
  • Go to
  • http//

(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
To learn about other CASL grantees work, pick a
Year, Goal, or PI, then click on the project URL.
(No Transcript)
ERICEducation Resources Information
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
  • The research reported here was supported by the
    Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department
    of Education, through Grant ltinsert grant numbergt
    to ltinsert name of university or institutiongt.
    The opinions expressed are those of the authors
    and do not represent views of the Institute or
    the U.S. Department of Education.

New Funding Opportunitieshttp//
Applications for Additional Funding
  • Education Research 84.305A (June 24th, Sept
    16th deadlines)
  • Training Grants 84.305B (June 24th only)
  • Postdoctoral Fellowships Only
  • New RD Centers 84.305C (Sept 16th only)
  • National Center on Cognition and Adult Literacy
  • National Center on State and Local Policy
  • National Center on Postsecondary Education and
  • New RD Center 84.324C (Sept 16th only)
  • National Center on Working Memory Interventions
    for Students with Disabilities

Cognition and Student Learning
RD Center on Cognition and Adult Literacy
RD Center on Working Memory Interventions for
Students with Disabilities
Wrap-up and Final QA (425 430 pm)
  • Carol ODonnell
  • Cognition Student Learning
  • 202-208-3749
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)