1  

Broader  Impacts  infrastructure  Summit    April  16-­‐18,  2014  Preliminary  Report  

Submitted  by  the  Organizing  Committee  Dr.  Susan  D.  Renoe,  Chairperson  

 

BII  Summit  Background  

Building  on  the  success  of  the  inaugural  Broader  Impacts  Infrastructure  Summit  held  at  the  University  of  Missouri  in  2013,  more  than  120  members  of  the  national  broader  impacts  community  met  in  Arlington,  Virginia  April  16-­‐18,  2014  to  share  promising  practices,  to  discuss  the  future  of  the  national  broader  impacts  community,  and,  most  importantly,  to  dialogue  about  the  future  of  broader  impacts.    The  Summit  had  three  goals:  increase  collaboration  among  broader  impacts  professionals,  enhance  broader  impacts  scholarship,  and  influence  policy  regarding  broader  impacts.      

NSF  supported  the  Summit  via  an  EPSCoR  Workshop  award  (#IIA-­‐1437105)  from  the  Office  of  International  and  Integrative  Activities  and  by  an  award  from  the  Directorate  for  Biosciences  (#MCB-­‐1313197).    These  two  awards  were  critical  to  the  success  of  the  Summit.    The  Summit  was  also  sponsored  by  the  American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science,  the  American  Society  for  Biochemistry  and  Molecular  Biology,  the  University  of  Missouri  Office  of  Research,  Mizzou  Advantage  (University  of  Missouri),  Strengthening  the  Professoriate  at  Iowa  State  University,  the  Office  of  STEM  Education  Partnerships  at  Northwestern  University,  EPSCoR  Iowa,  and  Missouri  EPSCoR.    A  broader  impact  of  the  Summit  itself  was  increased  participation  in  the  national  community  by  representatives  from  EPSCoR  jurisdictions  as  compared  to  the  first  Summit  held  in  Columbia,  MO  last  year.    Of  the  registered  participants,  29  were  from  EPSCoR  jurisdictions—including  several  EPSCoR  state  offices.    

BII  Summit  Highlights  

Highlights  of  the  Summit  were  the  keynote  addresses  by  NSF  Director  Dr.  France  Córdova  and  Chief  Executive  Officer  of  the  American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science  and  Executive  Publisher  of  the  journal  Science  Dr.  Alan  Leshner,  the announcement  of  recommended  funding  for  the  national  Broader  Impacts  Network  through  the  Division  of  Biosciences,  and  the  opening  session  by  Dr.  Nancy  Cantor,  Chancellor  of  Rutgers-­‐Newark  and  Dr.  Freeman  Hrabowski,  President  of  the  University  of  Maryland-­‐Baltimore  County.    Dr. Córdova’s  speech  was  her  first  public  address  as  Director  of  NSF.    The  Summit  participants  were  honored  that  she  chose  the  Summit  for  her  first  official  speech  as  Director,  which  speaks  to  the  emphasis  NSF  places  on  broader  impacts  as  a  merit  review  criterion.    

  2  

Dr.  Leshner  spoke  not  only  of  the  importance  of  the  broader  impacts  criterion  but  of  the  critical  need  for  those  with  expertise  in  this  domain  to  collaborate  with  researchers,  and  for  broader  impact  professionals  to  receive  support  from  their  institutions.      

Summit  attendees  also  heard  from  Dr.  Wanda  Ward,  Head  of  NSF’s  Office  of  International  and  Integrative  Activities;  as  well  as  Assistant  Directors  Drs.  John  Wingfield  (Biosciences)  and  Pramod  Khargonekar  (Engineering).    Other  Summit  speakers  from  NSF  included  Dr.  David  Blockstein  (Environmental  Research  and  Education  Advisory  Committee),  Dr.  Diane  Spresser  (International  and  Integrative  Activities),  Dr.  Larry  Weber  (Geosciences),  Dr.  David  Rockcliffe  (Biosciences),  and  Dr.  Jennifer  Yttri  (AAAS  Fellow  embedded  at  NSF).  The  direct  and  sustained  engagement  between  NSF  personnel  and  the  broader  impacts  professionals  reinforced  the  status  of  this  review  criterion  as  well  as  NSF’s  interest  in  supporting  a  national  broader  impacts  network.      

The  other  major  highlight  of  the  Summit  was  the  announcement  of  recommended  funding  for  the  national  organization.    Shortly  before  the  Summit,  Dr.  Susan  Renoe,  who  led  the  effort  to  submit  a  Research  Coordination  Network  (RCN)  proposal,  was  informed  that  it  had  been  recommended  for  funding  by  the  Directorate  for  Biosciences.    The  RCN  proposal  was  written  by  a  team  of  eight  broader  impacts  professionals  including  Dr.  Renoe  (who  will  serve  as  Principal  Investigator),  Megan  Heitmann,  (Iowa  State  University),  Jane  Horwitz  (University  of  Pennsylvania),  Dr.  Kemi  Jona  (Northwestern  University),  Dr.  Kevin  Niemi  (University  of  Wisconsin-­‐Madison),  Dr.  Amy  Pratt  (Northwestern  University),  Dr.  Diane  Rover  (Iowa  State  University),  and  Kaye  Storm  (Stanford  University).    The  networking  dinner  on  Thursday  and  the  final  session  of  the  Summit  on  Friday  were  used  to  outline  the  framework  of  the  Broader  Impacts  and  Outreach  Network  for  Institutional  Collaboration  (BIONIC)  and  to  solicit  feedback  from  the  community  on  its  goals  and  direction.    Needless  to  say,  there  was  definite  excitement  about  this  news  among  all  participants,  with  many  enthusiastic  to  contribute  to  BIONIC  as  it  develops.  

Drs.  Cantor  and  Hrabowski  opened  the  Summit  with  an  energetic  call  to  community  engagement  through  broader  impacts.    Dr.  Cantor  discussed  the  importance  of  broader  impacts  being  central  to  the  success  of  the  STEM  enterprise.    She  introduced  the  idea  of  institutions  being  of  the  community  and  not  simply  in  the  community  and  community  engagement  should  be  the  cornerstone  of  institutions  of  higher  learning.    She  also  offered  a  bottom-­‐up,  top-­‐down  approach  to  maintain  institutional  accountability  for  broader  impacts.  Dr.  Hrabowski  challenged  institutions  to  do  the  analysis  of  diversity  questions  on  their  campuses  and  not  just  rely  on  what  they  “see.”    He  was  surprised  at  what  he  found  at  UMBC  when  the  analysis  was  done  and  where  they  could  improve.    He  further  challenged  the  audience  to  find  successful  models  for  broader  impacts  and  look  at  how  they  can  be  scaled  or  replicated  to  other  areas.    He  offered,  if  we  truly  integrate  broader  impacts  into  the  fabric  of  our  institutions,  broadening  participation  will  naturally  follow.    

  3  

 BII  Summit  Themes    During  the  Summit,  participants  were  encouraged  to  document  discussions,  and  several  themes  emerged:    • A  call  for  systematic  training  for  NSF  panel  reviewers  on  broader  impacts  • A  need  for  a  national  organization  for  broader  impacts  professionals  • A  consensus  that  institutional  support  for  centralized  broader  impacts  offices  is  

critical  to  successfully  implementing  the  broader  impacts  criterion  • A  need  to  share  promising  practices    • A  need  for  increased  scholarship  on  broader  impacts  • A  need  for  NSF  to  take  the  lead  in  messaging  about  the  importance  of  broader  

impacts  and  its  longevity  as  a  merit  review  criterion  • The  role  of  centralized  infrastructure  at  the  institutional  level  in  the  evaluation  

and  reporting  of  broader  impacts  activities  in  the  aggregate.      BII  Summit  Products    Two  main  outcomes  are  anticipated  from  the  Summit:    1)  the  creation  of  a  national  network  of  broader  impacts  professionals  supported  by  a  NSF  Research  Coordination  Network  award  through  the  Directorate  for  Biosciences;  and  2)  a  current  state  of  broader  impacts  support  and  Summit  convening  document.        BII  Summit  Agenda    The  Summit  was  conceived  as  a  dialogue  between  NSF  and  the  national  broader  impacts  community,  as  well  as  an  opportunity  for  professional  development  for  attendees.  As  such,  all  sessions  were  designed  to  fit  one  or  both  of  those  goals.    The  following  details  the  proceedings:    Wednesday,  April  16,  2014    

Registration  and  Networking  Reception  

Opening  Session:    Broader  Impacts:  Leadership  Perspectives    Panelists:  Nancy  Cantor  (Rutgers-­‐Newark)  and  Freeman  Hrabowski  III  (UMBC)  Facilitator:  Diane  Rover  (Iowa  State)      Thursday,  April  17,  2014    Opening  Session:  Broader  Impacts:  A  National  Science  Foundation  Perspective  

  4  

 Speaker:  Wanda  Ward  (International  and  Integrative  Activities,  NSF)  Facilitator:  Susan  Renoe  (Missouri)    

SP@ISU  Networking  Break  Workshop:  BI  Practice:  How  to  Train  and  Motivate  Scientists    Panelists:  John  Besley  (Michigan  State),  Nancy  Franz  (Iowa  State),  Bruce  MacFadden  (Florida  Museum  of  Natural  History),  and  Rick  Tankersley  (NSF)    Description:  NSF  has  built  broader  impacts  into  its  grantmaking  process  to  provide  a  form  of  motivation  for  BI.  What  else  works  to  motivate  scientists’  participation  in  BI?  Panelists  will  note  the  benefits  of  internal  or  intrinsic  motivators  as  well  as  external  motivators,  including  the  tenure  and  promotion  system.  Examples  of  and  research  about  these  motivators  will  be  highlighted,  particularly  where  they  might  contradict  widely  held  assumptions  about  scientists’  willingness  to  do  BI.  Workshop:  BI  Measurement:  What,  how,  and  why?    Panelists:  Jamie  Bell  (CAISE),  Jeff  Buehler  (Missouri),  Mack  Shelley  (Iowa  State),  and  Douglas  Spencer  (Edu,  Inc.)  Facilitator:  Oludurotimi  Adetunji  (Brown  University)  

Description:  Panelists  will  address  questions  about  the  scale  and  focus  of  evaluation  of  BI  and  related  outreach  and  engagement  and  educational  activities.  What  is  or  should  be  measured  about  BIs  and  why?  What  methods  might  be  most  effective  for  aggregating  this  information  in  different  settings?  How  can  this  inform  NSF’s  recent  calls  for  evaluating  BIs  in  the  aggregate  across  programs?  Does  that  sort  of  cumulative  impact  crowd  out  what  is  learned  from  innovative  or  small-­‐scale  programs?  

American  Society  for  Biochemistry  and  Molecular  Biology  Networking  Lunch  

Keynote  Addresses:    Broader  Impacts:  Perspectives  from  the  NSF  Office  of  the  Director  and  the  National  Science  Board    Speakers:  France  Córdova  (Director,  NSF)  and  Alan  Leshner  (American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science  and  the  National  Science  Board)  Facilitator:  Kemi  Jona  (Northwestern)    

OSEP  Networking  Break  Workshop:  BI  Practice:  Infrastructure  Models      Panelists:  Elijah  Mermin  (UC  Santa  Cruz),  Claudia  Merson  (Yale),  Ari  Daniel  (Independent  Science  Writer),  and  Sondra  Lancaster    (Institute  for  Broadening  Participation)    

  5  

Description:  Panelists  will  share  their  experience  establishing  and  coordinating  BI  offices  in  universities,  including  how  they  have  leveraged  internal  and  external  resources.    Models  will  demonstrate  the  range  of  variation,  including  centralized  versus  decentralized,  well-­‐established  or  emerging,  education-­‐  or  science-­‐led,  deliberately  coordinated  or  more  organic.  External  partners  to  universities  (including  media,  citizens,  students,  other  scientific  groups,  policy  makers)  will  share  their  views  and  experience  on  the  various  models.  Panelists  will  discuss  the  way  in  which  various  infrastructures  support  institutional  goals  (including  scientific  literacy,  education,  and  workforce  development)  and  how  they  measure  success.      Workshop:  BI  Directions:  What  is  the  future  of  BI  and  where  can  it  go?    Panelists:  Jeanne  Braha  (AAAS),  Dan  Sarewitz  (Arizona  State),  Martin  Storksdieck  (National  Academy  of  Sciences),  and  Esther  DeSmet  (Ghent  University,  Belgium)  Facilitators:  Megan  Heitmann  (Iowa  State  University)  and  Mary  Ann  Steiner  (University  of  Pittsburgh)    Description:  Panelists  and  attendees  will  discuss  a  vision  for  BI  that  reframes  BI  from  project  specific  mechanisms  to  a  vision  of  the  university  in  a  democratic  society.  Panelists  will  check  assumptions  about  BI  policy,  including  accountability,  productivity,  purpose,  and  infrastructure.  Discussion  will  consider  the  porous  walls  between  the  community  and  science,  public  impact  on  science  and  the  future  impact  on  society,  and  the  ways  in  which  a  broad  array  of  audiences  benefit  and  engage  in  this  enterprise.  

BIONIC  Networking  Dinner    

 Friday,  April  18,  2014  Panel  Discussion:  Broader  Impacts:  A  Programmatic  Perspective    Panelists:  Diane  Spresser  (International  and  Integrative  Activities,  NSF),  Larry  Weber  (Geosciences,  NSF),  David  Rockcliffe  (Biological  Sciences,  NSF),  and  Jennifer  Yttri  (AAAS  Fellow)  Facilitator:  Kevin  Niemi  (Wisconsin)    Panel  Discussion:  Broader  Impacts  from  a  Broader  Perspective  

Panelist:  John  Wingfield  (Directorate  for  Biological  Sciences,  NSF),  Pramod  Khargonekar  (Directorate  for  Engineering,  NSF),  and  David  Blockstein  (Environmental  Research  and  Education  Advisory  Committee)  Panel  Discussion:  The  Future  of  the  BI  Infrastructure  Community    

Discussants:  Megan  Heitmann  (Iowa  State),  Jane  Horwitz  (Penn),  Kemi  Jona  (Northwestern),  Kevin  Niemi  (Wisconsin),  Amy  Pratt  (Northwestern),  Susan  Renoe  (Missouri),  Diane  Rover  (Iowa  State),  and  Kaye  Storm  (Stanford)      

  6  

BII  Summit  Organizing  Committee  and  Affiliation    Name   Organization  Adetunji,  Oludurotimi*   Brown  University  Aizenman,  Jennie   Bridgewater  State  University  Anderson,  Christopher   The  Ohio  State  University    

Bell,  Jamie  Center  for  the  Advancement  of  Informal  Science  Education  

Blockus,  Linda*   University  of  Missouri  Braha,  Jeanne   American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science  Brown,  Heather*   University  of  Missouri  Buckley,  Meghan   Indian  River  State  College  Buhr  Sullivan,  Susan   University  of  Colorado  Carter,  Susan~   University  of  California-­‐Merced  Clemons,  Tammy*   University  of  Kentucky  Dawe,  Janice*   University  of  Alaska-­‐Fairbanks  deCharon,  Annette*   University  of  Maine  Duggan,  Claire   Northeastern  University  Ferraro,  Carrie   Rutgers  University  Finch,  Tabitha*   McWane  Science  Center  Heitmann,  Meghan*   Iowa  State  University  Horwitz,  Jane   University  of  Pennsylvania  Johnson,  Matthew   The  Pennsylvania  State  University  Jona,  Kemi   Northwestern  University  Korhonen,  Marilyn*   University  of  Oklahoma  Magliaro,  Susan   Virginia  Polytechnic  Institute  and  State  University  McDonnell,  Janice   Rutgers  University  Mitchell,  James^   Howard  University  Mitchell,  Martha*   New  Mexico  State  University  Nagy,  Dianne*   South  Dakota  State  University  Niemi,  Kevin   University  of  Wisconsin-­‐Madison  Noel-­‐Storr,  Jake   Rochester  Institute  of  Technology  Pearson,  Barbara   University  of  Massachusetts-­‐Amherst  Pratt,  Amy   Northwestern  University  Renoe,  Susan*+   University  of  Missouri  Rover,  Diane*   Iowa  State  University  Steiner,  Mary  Ann   University  of  Pittsburgh  Storm,  Kaye   Stanford  University  Ward,  Annmarie   The  Pennsylvania  State  University  Woodford-­‐Thomas,  Terry*   Donald  Danforth  Plant  Science  Center  

  7  

*EPSCoR  Jurisdiction  s:  Alabama  (Finch),  Alaska  (Dawe),  Iowa  (Rover/Heitmann),  Kentucky  (Clemons),  Maine  (deCharon),  Missouri  (Blockus,  Brown,  Renoe),  New  Mexico  (Mitchel),  Oklahoma  (Korhonen),  Rhode  Island  (Adetunji),  and  South  Dakota  (Nagy)  ~Minority  Serving  Institution  ^Historically  Black  College  or  University  +Chairperson    BII  Summit  Participants    More  than  120  professionals  representing  80  diverse  institutions  and  several  geographic  regions  (including  one  international  participant)  attended  the  Summit.

List  of  Institutions  Represented  at  the  Summit    • The  American  Association  for  the  

Advancement  of  Science  • Association  of  Public  and  Land-­‐

Grant  Universities  • American  Institute  of  Biological  

Sciences  • American  Institute  of  Physics  • American  Society  for  Microbiology  • The  American  Society  for  

Biochemistry  and  Molecular  Biology  

• Association  of  American  Universities  

• Boston  University  • Brown  University  • Carnegie  Mellon  University  • Center  for  Advancement  of  

Informal  Science  Education  • Cooperative  Institute  for  Research  

In  Environmental  Sciences  • COSEE  Florida  • Council  on  Undergraduate  

Research  • Donald  Danforth  Plant  Science  

Center  • Edu  • Florida  Museum  of  Natural  History  • Georgetown  University  • Ghent  University  (Belgium)  • Harvard  University  

 • Inner  Space  Center  • Institute  for  Broadening  

Participation  • Iowa  State  University  • Kent  State  University  • Lewis  Burke  Associates  LLC  • Maine  EPSCoR  at  the  University  of  

Maine  • Massachusetts  Institute  of  

Technology  • McWane  Science  Center  • Michigan  State  University  • Mississippi  EPSCoR  • Missouri  Botanical  Garden  • Museum  of  Science  Nanoscale  

Informal  Science  Education  Network  

• National  Academy  of  Sciences  • National  Evolutionary  Synthesis  

Center  • National  Science  Foundation  • New  Mexico  State  University  • Northeastern  University    • Northwestern  University  • North  Dakota  State  University  • Ocean  Research  Conservation  

Association  • Oklahoma  EPSCoR  • Oregon  State  University  

  8  

• Pacific  Science  Center  • Pennsylvania  State  University  • Princeton  University  • Rice  University  • Rochester  Institute  of  Technology  • Rutgers  University  • Smithsonian  National  Museum  of  

Natural  History  • South  Dakota  State  University  • Stanford  University  • Texas  AM  University  • The  Study  Group  Inc.  • Tennessee  EPSCoR  • University  of  Alabama  • University  of  Alaska-­‐Fairbanks    • University  of  California-­‐Berkeley  • University  of  California-­‐Merced  • University  of  California-­‐Santa  

Barbara  • University  of  California-­‐Santa  Cruz  • University  of  Florida  

• University  of  Maine  • University  of  Maryland  • University  of  Massachusetts-­‐  

Amherst  • University  of  Missouri  • University  of  New  Mexico    • University  of  North  Carolina-­‐  

Morehead  Planetarium  and  Science  Center  

• University  of  Oklahoma  • University  of  Oregon  • University  of  Pennsylvania  • University  of  Pittsburgh  • University  of  Tennessee  • University  of  Utah  • University  of  Virginia  • University  of  Wisconsin-­‐Madison  • Virginia  Institute  of  Marine  Science  • Virginia  Tech  University  • Yale  University  

 Geographic  Distribution  of  Summit  Participants  

 Graphic  credit:  Office  of  STEM  Education  Partnerships  Northwestern  University    Future  Directions    In  addition  to  this  preliminary  report,  the  organizing  committee  will  compile  and  publish  a  detailed  proceedings  document  from  the  Summit  including  evaluation  and  

  9  

assessment  information  and  notes  taken  during  the  sessions.    This  document  will  be  forthcoming.    In  addition,  the  BIONIC  steering  committee  will  begin  the  process  of  forming  a  national  broader  impacts  support  network.