Advisory Council on Instructional Excellence (ACIE)
Minutes from the Innovation in Education Awards – Proposal Review Panel
Tuesday, March 25, 5-8 p.m. 817 Cathedral of Learning
Present: M. Bridges (Chair), B. Falcione, L. Delale O’Connor, L. Fennimore, J. Hart, Heffernan, Z. Horvath, B. Keown, T. Klinbubpa-Neff (via Zoom), J. Martinson, M. Norman, A. Tuttle
Not present: C. Bonneau, E. Votruba-Drzal
Summary
The Innovation in Education Awards review panel met to evaluate the 25 proposals submitted for the upcoming funding cycle. The review committee provided feedback on each proposal, assessing factors innovation, feasibility, scalability, assessment plans, and alignment with the University's teaching and learning goals. Reviewers were encouraged to consider each project's broader impact and sustainability while also being mindful of budget constraints. To prioritize funding decisions, the panel used a ranking system with categories: 'Definitely Yes,' 'Probably Yes,' 'Maybe,' 'Probably No,' and 'Definitely No.'
Discussion Summary:
- Reviewers acknowledged this cycle's overall high quality of submissions and emphasized the difficulty in narrowing the field due to strong ideas and innovation.
- Several proposals were commended for:
- Clear goals and outcomes
- Integration of student feedback or needs
- Potential for impact across multiple disciplines
- Some proposals raised questions about feasibility, especially those that involved extensive collaboration or technological elements without detailed implementation plans. Reviewers highlighted the value of projects that:
- Extend beyond a single course or term.
- Offer replicable models for broader application.
- Demonstrate sustainability, whether or not they receive ongoing funding. Projects that were both innovative and realistically executable were preferred.
- Examples of innovative approaches included role-play with standardized clients, partnerships across disciplines, and emerging tools to enhance engagement.
Next Steps:
- Synthesize the committee’s evaluations and funding recommendations
- Send out an executive summary of the proposals and the committee’s ratings
- Final deliberations and recommendations will be completed before forwarding to the provost for approval.
Meeting adjourned at ~8:20 p.m.