The U.S. Department of Education (ED) process for awarding Title

appendix C Selection Criteria and Priorities in Title VI and Fulbright-Hays Programs The U.S. Department of Education (ED) process for awarding Title VI and Fulbright-Hays grants begins when ED solicits applications by publishing a request for applications (RFA). The RFA outlines the criteria and any ED will use to review and rank applications. In recent years, ED has used both criteria and to influence grant applications and direct funding toward perceived national. More specifically, ED has included three types of in the RFAs soliciting applications for Title VI grants: Absolute priority applications not meeting the priority will not be considered for funding. Competitive priority applications meeting this priority are awarded a small number of extra points in the review process. Invitational priority applicants are invited to meet this priority, but doing so does not give them a competitive or absolute priority over other applications (although it can lead to a larger grant award). When soliciting grant applications, ED publicizes the criteria that the panel of reviewers will use to evaluate and rank each application, determining which will receive funding. On March 21, 2005, ED issued a regulatory change designed to increase its flexibility in awarding grants by removing the mandatory point values associated with selection criteria that had been established for these programs in previous regulations. The new regulations affect 9 of the 14 international programs: 350

APPENDIX C 351 1. Business and International Education 2. Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships 3. International Research and Studies 4. Language Resource Centers 5. National Resource Centers 6. Undergraduate International Studies and Foreign Language 7. Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Research Abroad 8. Fulbright-Hays Faculty Research Abroad 9. Fulbright-Hays Group Projects Abroad The purpose of this regulatory change was to provide the Secretary with the flexibility to select specific point values from year to year to address current for the programs. 1 As shown in the accompanying tables illustrating competitions for the National Resource Centers, the Language Resource Centers, the Centers for International Business Education and Research, Business and International Education, and International Research and Studies, RFAs both before and after this regulatory change used a variety of to target applications to specific needs. The tables are drawn directly from multiple RFAs issued by ED to solicit applications for different competition years. Selection criteria and point values vary by program. 1 The new regulations are available at http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/iegps/index. html under What s New.

352 INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTERS (NRC) TABLE C-1 NRC Application Priorities Competition Year 1996 1999 Absolute Teacher training activities Teacher training activities Competitive Invitational Plans for evaluating and improving foreign language programs in ways compatible with developing national standards. Summer intensive language programs in cooperation with other higher education institutions. Special library projects in cooperation with other higher education institutions. Initiating or strengthening linkages between language and area studies programs and professional disciplines. Developing new courses or curricula in disciplines and issues that are currently underrepresented in the center s basic program.

APPENDIX C 353 2002 2005 Teacher training activities Activities designed to increase the number of international experts... with in-depth knowledge of Islamic societies. Activities designed to strengthen the quality of the language program so that students can attain advanced proficiency in LCTLs. Linkages with schools of education designed to improve teacher training in foreign languages, area, and international studies with an emphasis on the LCTLs and areas of the world where those languages are spoken. Collaboration with other Title VI centers with a focus on LCTLs and underrepresented professional disciplines. Activities that engage the language resources of local heritage communities. Teacher training activities Activities designed to demonstrate the quality of the center s or program s language instruction through the measurement of student proficiency in the less and least commonly taught languages (LCTLs) Activities designed to increase the number of specialists trained in areas that are vital to U.S. national security, such as Islamic societies. Activities designed to promote undergraduate language learning through two or more continuous years in the LCTLs. Linkages with schools of education designed to improve teacher training in foreign languages, area, and international studies with an emphasis on the LCTLs and areas of the world where those languages are spoken. Collaboration with other Title VI centers with the objective of increasing the nation s capacity to train and produce Americans with advanced proficiency of the LCTLs, along with an understanding of the societies in which those languages are spoken. Activities that expand and enhance outreach to K-12 constituencies.

354 INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES TABLE C-2 NRC Criteria and Weights Competition Year 2002 2005 Criteria for Review Criterion Points Criterion Points Program planning and budget 20 Program planning and budget Quality of staff resources 20 Quality of staff resources 15 Impact and evaluation 20 Impact and evaluation 25 Commitment to subject area Commitment to the subject area Strength of library 15 Strength of library 15 Quality of nonlanguage instructional program Quality of language instructional program 20 Quality of nonlanguage instructional program 20 Quality of language instructional program Quality of curriculum design 15 Quality of curriculum design Outreach activities 15 Outreach activities 20 Degree to which are served Degree to which competitive are served TOTAL points possible 165 TOTAL points possible 165 20 20 20

APPENDIX C 355 LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTERS (LRC) TABLE C-3 LRC Application Priorities Competition Year 2001 2002 a 2005 Absolute Competitive Invitational Must focus either on the languages of the Middle East or the languages of South Asia. Centers that focus on languages spoken in the following world regions: Africa, Inner Asia, the Middle East, South Asia, or Southeast Asia. Research conducted on new and improved methods for teaching foreign languages, including the use of technology and the dissemination of the research results. Collaboration with Title VI National Resource Centers, Language Resource Centers, and Centers for International Business Education, and American Overseas Research Centers in conducting development and dissemination activities with the objective of increasing the nation s capacity to produce Americans with advanced proficiency in the LCTLs and understanding of the societies in which those languages are spoken.

356 INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES TABLE C-4 LRC Criteria and Weights in 2001, 2002, and 2005 Criterion 1. Plan of operation 15 2. Quality of key personnel 3. Adequacy of resources 5 4. Need and potential impact 20 5. Likelihood of achieving results 6. Description of final form results 7. Evaluation plan 20 8. Budget and cost-effectiveness TOTAL points possible 0 Points Possible NOTE: The RFA issued on 8/31/01 identifies two sets of applicable regulations: (1) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 80, 82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99 and (2) The LRC regulations in 34 CFR parts 655 and 669. The most recent RFA issued on /18/05 provides the specific selection criteria established in 34 CFR sections 655.31, 669.20, 669.21, and 669.22. It appears that these criteria were also used in the previous grant competitions in 2001 and 2002. CENTERS FOR INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS RESEARCH AND EDUCATION (CIBER) TABLE C-5 CIBER Application Priorities Competition Year 2001 2005 Absolute Competitive Invitational Applications that propose innovative approaches to improving the teaching of foreign languages in a business or professional context, including the LCTLs. Applications that propose programs or activities focused on homeland security and U.S. international competitiveness.

APPENDIX C 357 TABLE C-6 CIBER Criteria and Weights in 2001 and 2005 Criterion 1. Meets the purpose of the authorizing statute 20 2. Significance 18 3. Quality of project design 4. Quality of management plan 5. Quality of project personnel 6. Quality of project services 2 7. Adequacy of resources 8. Quality of project evaluation 20 TOTAL points possible 0 Points Possible NOTE: The RFA issued on 9/28/01 states that the Department of Education has not established program-specific regulations outlining the criteria for review of CIBER applications. Instead, review criteria are determined by the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99, as applicable. The most recent CIBER RFA issued on /12/05 (available at http://www.ed.gov/programs/iegpscibe/applicant.html) again states that there are no program-specific regulations but also identifies the specific applicable criteria and weights (from EDGAR). It appears that these criteria, shown above, were also used in the earlier (2001) grant competition. BUSINESS AND INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION (BIE) PROGRAM In soliciting the most recent round of BIE applications, ED announced only one invitational priority (U.S. Department of Education, 2006a). The priority was for applications proposing projects integrated into the curricula of the institution and targeted to the world regions of Central and South Asia, the Middle East, Russia, the independent states of the former Soviet Union, and Africa. TABLE C-7 BIE Criteria and Points in 2006 Criterion 1. Need for the project 25 2. Plan of operations 20 3. Qualifications of key personnel 4. Budget and cost-effectiveness 15 5. Evaluation plan 25 6. Adequacy of resources 5 TOTAL points possible 0 Points Possible

358 INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH AND STUDIES (IRS) TABLE C-8 IRS Application Priorities Competition Year 1999 2002 2005 Absolute Competitive Invitational Materials development: Projects to develop instructional materials for the languages or regions of the Near or Middle East, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, Inner Asia, the Far East, Africa, or Latin America. Development of specialized materials for use in teaching the languages of the Islamic nations of the Middle East and Central Asia. Development of specialized materials for use in teaching the languages of South Asia. Development of instructional materials for use by students, teachers, and college faculty that focus on Islamic societies and the languages of those societies. Research, surveys, studies, or the development of instructional materials that serve to enhance international understanding for use at the elementary and secondary education levels or for use in teacher education programs.

APPENDIX C 359 TABLE C-9 Comparing IRS Criteria and Weights for Instructional Materials and for Research and Studies Grants (2005 RFA for FY 2006 grants) Type of Grant Instructional Materials Research and Studies Criteria Criterion Points Criterion Points 1. Plan of operation 1. Plan of operation 2. Quality of key personnel 2. Quality of key personnel 3. Budget and cost 3. Budget and cost effectiveness effectiveness 4. Evaluation plan 5 4. Evaluation plan 5 5. Adequacy of resources 5 5. Adequacy of resources 5 6. Need for the project 6. Need for the project 7. Potential for the use of 7. Usefulness of expected materials in programs to others results 8. Account of related materials 8. Development of new knowledge 9. Likelihood of achieving results. Expected contribution to other programs 11. Description of final form materials 9. Formulation of problems and knowledge of related research. Specificity of statement of procedures 5 11. Adequacy of methodology and scope of project 5 12. Provisions for pre-testing and revision TOTAL points possible 0 TOTAL points possible 0