Call for Peer Reviewers
CONTEXT: The U.S. Department of Education, Office of Innovation and Improvement (OII), is seeking individuals to serve as peer reviewers for the FY 2011 Investing in Innovation (i3) grant competition. Qualified peer reviewers must meet the criteria listed below. NOTE: Even if you applied to be a peer reviewer last year, please submit your resume and checklist (as directed below) by Friday, July 15 in order to be considered for this new competition in 2011.
WHO: We are seeking peer reviewers from various backgrounds and professions including: PK-12 teachers and principals, college and university educators, educational evaluators, social entrepreneurs, strategy consultants, grant makers and managers, and others with education expertise. The selected reviewers must have expertise in at least one of the program's five absolute priorities or in educational evaluation. Additionally, the most qualified candidates will also have expertise in one or more of the following attributes or skills: program or organizational innovation, experience disseminating or scaling successful programs, and prior experience reviewing or approving grant applications, as defined below.
REQUIRED AREAS OF EXPERTISE: Reviewers will be selected to serve in one of the two following categories (you may be considered for either).
i3 Absolute Priorities
You must have specific expertise in at least one of these priorities (for a detailed explanation of each priority, see the descriptions included in any of the three i3 Notices Inviting Applications (NIA's) that can found at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/applicant.html).
- Supporting Effective Teachers and Principals
- Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education
- Implementing Standards and Assessments
- Turning Around Low Performing Schools
- Improving Achievement in Rural LEA's
Experience in designing, conducting, and reviewing rigorous educational evaluations, including:
- Understanding of education research and recent findings of the relevant literature
- Knowledge of education data sources and measures of program implementation and outcomes
- Expertise with experimental and quasi-experimental research designs
- Fluency in reviewing organizational and project evaluation plans and evaluation results
OTHER DESIRED ATTRIBUTES AND SKILLS:
- Experience starting, growing, leading, and/or supporting innovative projects or organizations
- Experience leading or helping organizations to develop business models, create plans for scale and sustainability, and build capacity to achieve goals
Strategy and Growth
- Knowledge of or experience in strategies to grow programs and to replicate them widely in new settings
- Knowledge of effective operational and organizational/management infrastructures required to scale with quality (e.g., people, processes, accountability structures, technology systems, program and grant management)
- Knowledge of or experience with building effective partnerships and successfully engaging diverse groups of stakeholders
- Experience reviewing grant applications and making funding recommendations
- Experience participating in or managing State, federal, and/or philanthropic grant project reviews
- Ability to assess the effectiveness of leadership teams and key contributors
- Fluency in reviewing organizational and project budgets and cost measures
OTHER REQUIREMENTS: In addition to the skills, attributes and expertise highlighted above, peer reviewers must also meet the following requirements:
Absolute Priorities Reviewers:
- Must be available for a 4-week period spanning from mid-August to mid-September 2011 (not full-time), working remotely and via teleconference (approximately two weeks to read applications and two weeks for panel discussion and submitting final comments/scores).
Educational Evaluation Reviewers:
- Must be available for a 4-week period spanning from mid-August to mid-September 2011 (not full-time), working remotely and via teleconference (approximately two week to read applications and two weeks for panel discussion and submitting final comments/scores).
- Must be available for a 2-week period spanning from late September to mid-October 2011 (not full-time), working remotely and via teleconference (approximately one weeks to read applications and one week for panel discussion and submitting final comments/scores).
Tools: Each reviewer must have access to the Internet, a phone, a printer and have the ability to interact within a web-based environment.
Quality of Review: Each reviewer must commit to providing detailed, objective, constructive, and timely written reviews for each assigned application. These reviews will be used to recommend applications for funding. They will also be shared with each applicant following the reviews.
Reviewers will receive an honorarium for their time and effort, contingent upon satisfactory completion of the above requirements and consistent with the required schedule.
IF INTERESTED: If you would like to be considered as a peer reviewer, please e-mail a copy of your current resume (no more than 5 pages) along with a completed i3 Peer Reviewer Checklist MS Word (100KB) to the i3 Program at firstname.lastname@example.org by Friday, July 15, 2011. Please include in your resume a brief list of career highlights or bullet points outlining your specific expertise either in evaluation or in the i3 absolute priority areas for which you would like to be considered as a reviewer. Please do not exceed the five-page limit for resumes.
Note: When you submit the i3 Peer Reviewer Checklist, please save it in MS Word only and title the document as follows: lastnamefirstname_reviewerchecklist.
PROGRAM INFORMATION: For more information about the i3 Program, go to http://www.ed.gov/programs/innovation/index.html