A workshop supported by the Office of Multidisciplinary Activities of the Mathematical and Physics Sciences Directorate of the National Science Foundation was held on May 16-17, 2005. Twenty-three people representing a range of STEM fields met in Arlington, VA, to discuss issues surrounding the broader-impacts criterion, including how researchers and reviewers understand (or don’t understand) the criterion, existing resources that could be more widely disseminated, and the need for new resources. Workshop participants included scientists, experts in facilitating broader-impacts activities and professional-society representatives.
Primary Outcomes
Community attitudes and outcomes regarding the broader-impacts criterion could be improved significantly by emphasizing to researchers the motivation for implementing the broader-impacts criterion, and improving applicant, reviewer and program officer understanding of the criterion to produce more consistent application.
Action Item 1: Develop a document in a Frequently-Asked-Questions format that clarifies the motivation behind broader impacts and what is expected from applicants. A survey of researchers (funded and unfunded) and reviewers would identify what issues should be addressed. The document could be disseminated via the web and through workshops run in collaboration with professional societies, research and education centers, and universities and colleges.
Action Item 2: Encourage and facilitate community conversations about the broader-impacts criterion to encourage disciplines to explore how the broader-impacts criterion applies to their communities. This may take place through NSF-organized opportunities, such as PI meetings, or through gatherings at disciplinary meetings.
An organized and easily accessible knowledge base for broader-impacts activities would help researchers develop and evaluate effective activities by leveraging existing knowledge and experience.
Action Item 3: Develop a Broader Impacts Toolbox that addresses topics such as: what works and the evidence for it, questions that should be addressed before working with particular audiences, evaluation, and dissemination.
Action Item 4: Develop a workshop template that can be adapted for different disciplines and used to disseminate the tools to different constituencies via workshops.
Institution-centered (disciplinary societies, regional networks, colleges and universities, research centers, etc.) infrastructure can be an outstanding resource for assisting researchers in fulfilling the broader-impacts criterion in an effective manner. These organizations leverage existing programs and experience, and have important roles as bridges between researchers and the results of education research.
Action Item 5: Hold workshops to disseminate models of how institutions, disciplinary groups and regional networks can help researchers optimize the broader impacts of their research.
Action Item 6: Support networking opportunities for those who have made involvement in broader-impacts activities part or all of their professional responsibilities. Facilitate sharing information such as evaluation data, management tools, and resources.