Proposal Review Process
- Proposals will be reviewed by a panel consisting of faculty and CTL staff. Reviewers are past CEG awardees and faculty who are champions of teaching and learning in their schools.
- Review panels that are chaired by the CEG Initiative Co-Chairs meet to rank order and recommend CEG proposals for funding.
- The CTL Leadership Team and the CEG Initiative Co-Chairs review the panels' ranking and recommendations and finalize CEG decisions.
- To support curricular enhancements across all academic units, decisions about CEG funding will be made in two stages. In the first stage, one qualifying grant per academic unit will be awarded. Units with more than one qualifying grant will be moved to the second stage. In the second stage, remaining available funds will be awarded to qualifying grants irrespective of their unit affiliations.
- During the review or decision making process questions may arise regarding budget or other aspects of the proposals. In the event, the CTL will contact proposers to negotiate changes in budget requests or other project features.
- Applicants will be notified of award decisions in early April.
Proposal Review Criteria
Each of the following components of the proposal are rated on a scale of Poor - Exemplary.
- Abstract: Provides a clear and detailed description of the project.
- Student Success Track only: Course/curriculum analysis includes complete DFW table with disaggregated data, a thorough reflection on the data, and possible reasons for students’ performance patterns.
- Rationale and Literature Review: Rationale for project is compelling. Literature review synthesizes recent and relevant literature that addresses the significance of the project.
- Project Description: States two to three SMART project goals of which one is related to inclusion and equity, describes appropriate assessments that will be used to measure achievement of goals, and describes meaningful activities to achieve goals.
- Plan for sustainabilty: Provides a thoughtful plan to sustain project beyond the grant period.
- Dissemination Plan: Clearly describes how the CEG work will be shared within the IU community and beyond.
- Project Timeline: Is realistic, clearly aligned to project tasks, and includes time and plans for contingencies.
- Budget and Justification: Funding amount, line items, and rationale are appropriate for the proposed project.
- AI Disclosure: If generative AI was used in proposal development, complete and specifc details about where and how it was used is provided.
- Biographical Sketches: Includes relevant professional experience, background, and interests of PIs and Co-PIs that supports their abilities to undertake the project.
- Support Letter: Department or School administrator describes how project fits into an overall curricular plan, suitability of faculty member or team to implement the project, how change will be sustained, and verification of the amount and nature of departmental funding match.
Priority Criteria
Priority will be given to proposals with:
- Potential for significant impact on student learning and success, especially in 100 and 200 level courses with high DFW rates, at IU Indianapolis, IU Columbus, or IU Fort Wayne
- The prospect of addressing a recognized need or opportunity in the department or schools at IU Indianapolis, IU Columbus, or IU Fort Wayne
- Innovative production and use of new materials, processes, and ideas; or implementation of tested methods new to IU Indianapolis, IU Columbus, or IU Fort Wayne
- Enhancements, not merely continuations, of existing programs
