Section Navigation

Appalachian Foundation Fellows Grants

Microsoft Word Downloads:
Criteria and Description
Application Form
Sample Proposal 1
Sample Proposal 2

Criteria for Funding:

  1. Projects must provide significant support for a faculty member’s career development in teaching, scholarship or creative activity, and/or service. Projects may include but are not limited to: a) Development of new pedagogies (e.g., attendance at conferences, purchase of software, using a course buyout to team-teach a new course, developing a distance-education course, participating in a faculty exchange, purchase of equipment, development of web-based materials).
    b) Development of new fields and/or skills in scholarship or creative activity (e.g., attendance at conferences in a new subdiscipline, organizing and implementing a faculty seminar, attendance at grant writing workshops, support for a graduate or undergraduate research assistant, subsidizing the performance of new works or the creation of new artistic forms, development of web sites).
    c) Development of university, community, or regional service projects (e.g., economic development projects, service to the discipline, certain types of community service).
    d) Innovative cross-disciplinary work in teaching, scholarship or creative activity, and/or service.
    e) Faculty contribution to scholarly collaboration with students (e.g., travel, equipment and materials, faculty time).
    f) Administrative development (e.g., travel to conferences and seminars, short courses).
    g) Projects involving technology transfer and/or development and commercialization of intellectual property.
    h) Strengthening particular areas of weakness in teaching, scholarship or creative activity, or service. (This form of application requires a specific recommendation by the department chair or other immediate supervisor.)
  2. Requests for funding may be up to $5,000 per application. These monies may be used for one or both of the following purposes:
    a) Travel, equipment, books and materials, registration fees, seed money for external grants, clerical assistance, or other approved expenses. Funding requests are for specific items as identified in the budget. Should actual expenditures be less than the amount granted, unused funds may not be used for other purposes.
    b) Summer stipend or course buyout during the academic year. Funds awarded for these purposes will be treated as salaries, will be paid after the work is completed, and will have taxes and benefits deducted. Also, summer stipends are paid after summer school; they may not be paid in advance.
  3. Two or more faculty members may apply for funding for a collaborative project, but one must be named the primary applicant.
  4. This funding may supplement but not duplicate other internal or external funding sources. For example, a URC grant for research travel expenses could be combined with a summer stipend through this program. The project budget should clearly indicate related funding for which the applicant has applied or intends to apply. Projects typically not funded through this program include those that can be fully funded through other units such as the Hubbard Center, International Education and Development, the Office of Student Research, or the University Research Council.
  5. Projects must have a clear design that includes specific and measurable outcomes, an assessment plan that can measure the impact on the applicant’s career, and a dissemination plan that will allow the project to serve as a potential example to others.
  6. Proposals will be evaluated according to the following criteria:
    a) Potential specific, positive impact on the career plan of the author and his or her coauthors. (The narrative should specify how this project will take the faculty member to a higher level of professional development.)
    b) The likelihood that the project can be carried out within the time and budget specified.
    c) The quality of the project’s design.
    d) The quality of the project’s assessment plan.
    e) The quality of the project’s dissemination plan.
  7. Role of the Department Chair:
    a) Make a specific recommendation on behalf of a faculty member who shows evidence of a need for development in a particular area; or
    b) Sign off on individual applications to indicate (1) approval of proposed project, and (2) that the department will not be negatively affected by this use of the faculty member’s time and energy.

Deadlines:

October 1, 2007: Call for Proposals
November 26, 2007: Draft proposals due (optional)
January 14, 2008: Final proposals due
February 15, 2008: Notification of funding
July 1, 2008: Beginning of grant cycle
June 15, 2009: End of grant cycle


Exemplary vs. Non-exemplary Applications

Exemplary applications for ASU Foundation Fellows Grants:

  • are carefully conceived and fully developed;
  • support the career development of one or more faculty;
  • identify clear goals and objectives;
  • may involve service learning, diversity, or technology, and/or be interdisciplinary or collaborative in nature;
  • outline a clear plan for implementation;
  • have a clearly-defined evaluation method;
  • outline a clear plan for dissemination of the deliverable(s);
  • propose a realistic time line, clearly specifying who will do what by when;
  • propose a realistic budget that includes items to be supported by Appalachian State University Foundation Fellows as well as items to be supported by other sources (e.g., the department,  college, Hubbard Center, Graduate School, Student Research,  International Programs, etc.); and
  • articulate proposed future professional steps.

Non-exemplary applications may:

  • be written on an impulse; not thoroughly thought out;
  • be unpersuasive with regard to how they will further a faculty member’s career;
  • contain vague goals and objectives;
  • propose a vague plan of implementation (and/or be written in the passive voice);
  • propose vague or inappropriate methods of evaluation;
  • propose a vague plan for dissemination of the deliverable(s);
  • propose an unrealistic time line or unrealistic expectations;
  • have unrealistically high or low budgets;
  • involve only an individual faculty member’s submitting an application to address a larger departmental need (e.g., integration of content into one course when it should be part of several courses in a sequence);
  • contain a request for support of items that are solely within the purview of some University agency (e. g., the department, college, Hubbard Center, etc.); or
  • fail to address future professional steps.


Examples of Other Grants Available

1. Teaching Enhancement Grants (Hubbard Center):

    • purchase of supplies, books, software, videos, etc.
    • photography, surveys, group registrations, etc.
    • video, DVD, and CD production

2. Textbook Grants (Hubbard Center):

    • print and electronic (CD)
    • funding recouped through sales to Bookstore
    • budget includes material only, not labor
    • academic books only

3. External Scholars Grants (University Forum Committee):

    • honoraria and expenses

4. University Research Council Grants (Graduate School):

    • research in the discipline
    • purchase of supplies, travel, equipment, postage, and/or processing services

5. Research Development Award (Graduate School)

    • seed funds for significant external research
    • for tenured or tenure track faculty only

6. 100 Scholars Award (Graduate School):

    • recognition of sustained research or creative scholarship over several years
    • recipients more than likely will be senior faculty

7. Wachovia Award (Graduate School):

    • recognition of significant work done on environmental issues

8. International Travel Matching Grants (International Education and Development):

    • travel to enhance the internationalization of the University


Questions for Reviewers

  • Is this proposal written in the active voice?
  • Does the proposal persuade you that the applicant needs support to complete the proposed task to further his/her career?
  • Does the proposal persuade you that support is needed above and beyond typical avenues of University support (department, college, Graduate School, Hubbard Center, International Programs)?
  • Does the budget contain items that are better supported through other University avenues (department, college, Graduate School, Hubbard Center, International Programs)?
  • Is this proposal well conceived and cogent?
  • Does this proposal include clear goals and objectives?
  • Is the implementation clear?  Can you tell exactly who will do what and when?
  • Are the logistics realistic, free of potentially insurmountable problems?
  • Does the project have a realistic time line?
  • Does the proposal contain a clear evaluation plan?
  • Does the proposal contain a clear dissemination plan?
  • Will the project result in benefits beyond its immediate activity (e.g., future external funding, a career enhancement)?
  • Is the budget realistic, neither too high nor too low?
  • If the proposal is developmental, do the author and his or her supervisor make a convincing case that the typical avenues of funding are insufficient?


Selection Committee

 Applications will be divided into the following categories:

  1. Four categories of applicants:
    • Pre-tenure, early career faculty (<7 years)
    • Tenured, mid-career faculty (7-15 years)
    • Tenured, late-career faculty (16+ years)
    • Non-tenure-track faculty

2. The Selection Committee will consist of four subcommittees to review applications:

    • Pre-tenure, early career faculty (<7 years)
    • Tenured, mid-career faculty (7-15 years)
    • Tenured, late-career faculty (16+ years)
    • Non-tenure-track faculty

3.  Twelve members will serve on the full selection committee; with three members on each sub-committee, drawn from the larger population.

4.  Selection Committee members will serve staggered terms.  Eventually each member will serve for three years.  Initially, one member of each sub-committee will serve a one-year term, one will serve a two-year term, and one will serve a three-year term.

5.  The full committee will include at least one faculty member from each college/school (5) and the Library (1).

6.  The Selection Committee will make funding recommendations to the Hubbard Center, which will then forward those recommendations to the Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for final approval.