S-BOLD Stony Brook Online Learning Development (S-BOLD) Initiative

Office of the Provost

S-BOLD 2015-2016 Proposal Guidelines

These guidelines articulate the detailed expectations of the S-BOLD review committee. Proponents should consult this guide to assist them in thinking through their proposed projects, and providing enough information in their full proposal for funding.

Impact 30 points	Excellent	Very Good	Good	Needs Improvement
Number / % of Students Impacted	Reaches 75% of a program or at least 600 students	Reaches 50% of a program or at least 300 students	Reaches 25% of a program or at least 150 students	Reaches fewer than 25% of a program or fewer than 150 students
Improved 4-year Graduation Rates Provide predicted evidence such as: ability to meet high demand as demonstrated by decreasing waitlists more frequent scheduling of a course currently limited by faculty or classroom availability decrease in high retake rates increase in enrollment cap	Strongly demonstrates 4 of the “predicted evidence” items showing how funding will lead to improved 4-year graduation rates.	Somewhat demonstrates 2-3 of the “predicted evidence” items showing how funding will lead to improved 4-year graduation rates.	Demonstrates 1 of the “predicted evidence” items showing how funding will lead to improved 4-year graduation rates.	Does not demonstrate how funding will lead to improved 4-year graduation rates
Improved degree completion rates Provide predicted evidence such as: lowering high retake & DFW rates increasing large class sizes remedying a lack of active learning/engagement in course more frequent scheduling of GenEds & prereq courses	Demonstrates 3-4 of the “predicted evidence” items showing how the funding has the potential to lead to improved degree completion rates.	Demonstrates 2 of the “predicted evidence” items showing how the funding has the potential to lead to improved degree completion rates.	Demonstrates 1 of the “predicted evidence” items showing how funding has the potential to lead to improved degree completion rates.	Does not demonstrate how funding will potentially lead to improved degree completion rates.
Institutional Context 30 points	Excellent	Very Good	Good	Needs Improvement
Institutional Support	Project is *enthusiastically* supported by both the chair and dean.			Project is not supported by either the dean or the chair. Letters are missing.
Sustainability	Plan clearly articulates a reasonable method to effectively continue the project after the grant year, including evidence of buy-in from faculty colleagues.	Plan articulates a reasonable method to effectively continue the project after the grant year, but evidence of buy-in from faculty colleagues is unclear.	Sustainability plan appears inadequate to effectively continue the project after the grant year	Plan does not address sustainability.
Scalability	Demonstrates how the project extends to other courses, other faculty, and other programs, including evidence of buy-in from other departments and other faculty.	Demonstrates how the project extends to either other courses and other faculty, or other programs. Plan includes evidence of buy-in from these stakeholders.	Demonstrates how the project extends to other courses, other faculty, or other programs. Does not include indication of buy-in from department or other faculty.	Does not demonstrate how the project extends to other courses, other faculty, or other programs. Does not include any buy-in from others.
Reach	Project clearly extends beyond SUNY-wide courses, faculty, or other programs, and/or other non-SUNY courses, faculty or programs.	Project extends SUNY-wide to courses, faculty, or other programs and/or other non-SUNY courses, faculty or programs	Project has potential to extend SUNY-wide to courses, faculty, or other programs and/or other non-SUNY courses, faculty or programs	Project does not extend beyond SBU campus.
Feasibility 20 Points	Excellent	Very Good	Good	Needs Improvement
Technology Proposal must include a completed “technology checklist,” which can be found in the Proposal instructions packet.	Project plan falls within the means and scope of technologies that are currently available and supported (either through SBU, open resources, or commercially available products). If not currently supported, proposed technologies are innovative, open source, cost effective, and/or could support other projects as well.	Ideas fall within the means and scope of technologies that are obtainable but do not fall within one or more of these criteria: innovative, open source, cost effective, and/or could support other programs as well	Ideas fall within the means and scope of technologies that would need to be developed from scratch and completed within the timeframe allowed.	Ideas show a lack of understanding of the current pedagogical or technological possibilities.
Timeline	Proponent has an accurate estimate of development tasks and time needed to accomplish them. Tasks to be completed by PI, TAs, and others are clearly delineated. Timeline has clear milestones and reasonable deadlines.	Timeline and/or milestones need revision.		Timeline is not feasible or milestones are not clear.
Assessment/Quality 20 Points	Excellent	Very Good	Good	Needs Improvement
Goals	Proposal addresses and/or elaborates upon multiple goals/beneficiaries of the project and articulates the way in which student learning is enhanced.	Proposal addresses and/or elaborates on goals/beneficiaries of the project, but articulation of the way in which student learning is enhanced is unclear.	Proposal only reiterates what has been stated previously in the application, does not elaborate upon other goals, nor enhancement of student learning.	Proposal does not address this question.
Measurable Outcomes Examples of evidence include items such as: decrease in DFWs decrease in retakes increase in seats available feedback from student course evaluations usage reports from Blackboard or Echo/video	Stated project outcomes are descriptive, specific and measurable. Multiple types of data will be gathered as evidence of outcomes.	Stated project outcomes are descriptive and somewhat measurable. Types data that will be gathered as evidence of outcomes is unclear or incomplete.	Stated project outcomes are descriptive but either not measurable, not specific or not appropriate measures. Types of data that will be gathered as evidence of outcomes is missing.	Stated project outcomes are neither measurable nor specific.