United States

15th Conference on Understanding Interventions 2023 

CREST Center for Dynamic Multiscale and Multimodal Brain Mapping over the Lifespan [D-MAP]

poster

### Welcome to the 2023 Understanding Interventions/NSF CREST Annual Conference
Welcome to our annual conference, a gathering where the knowledge of our scientific communities share what they have researched since we last met. If it is your first time attending, then thank you for stepping into our world! If you are a returning guest, then thank you for coming back! Whether you are attending for the first or the fourteenth, we treasure your trust in what we have to offer. We promise to make it worth your while.

As in years past, we have put together an energetic collection of seminars, deeper dives, speeches, posters, and workshops to whet your appetite for learning. 

We are delighted that you have chosen to attend the 2023 Annual Understanding Interventions (UI) Conference, in partnership with the NSF Centers for Research Excellence in Science and Technology (CREST) Program. 

### About the Conference 
This conference was established to facilitate dissemination and exchange of hypothesis-based research on interventions and initiatives that broaden participation in science and engineering research careers. The conference is designed to create a dialogue among behavioral/social science and education researchers, evaluators, and faculty in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields who participate in intervention programs. Workshops, sessions, and posters will communicate effective strategies from successful STEM intervention programs, present results from empirical research studies, and synthesize the translation of research findings into practice on STEM learning, undergraduate research, graduate education, and student retention.

Thank you again, and welcome! 
**[Download Program Agenda](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rTKTrWC2DOqnIF06po5xo4buAL3mPTqZ/view?usp=sharing)**

This conference was established to facilitate dissemination and exchange of hypothesis-based research on interventions and initiatives that broaden participation in science and engineering research careers. The conference is designed to create a dialogue among behavioral/social science and education researchers, evaluators, and faculty in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields who participate in intervention programs.

Enhancing Digital Learning Infrastructure at Coppin State University

Second Year Assessment of Perceptions of Institutional Inclusivity among Building Up Participants

Complex training interventions can benefit from the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adaptation, Implementation, Maintenance) program evaluation framework because it considers various implementation factors like settings, facilitators, and adaptations that lead to outcomes like broadening participation. We demonstrate how to use RE-AIM with a complex mentor-training program called SCOARE (Scientific Communication Advances Research Excellence) to improve understanding of how program implementation leads to improved mentor skills that help broaden participation in the biomedical research workforce.

Adapting RE-AIM to Evaluate and Improve Understanding of a Mentor Training Intervention

How can NSF Enhance Research Capacity and Research Training at Minority Serving Institutions?

**Introduction** 
Graduate bioscience programs in the United States are rapidly evolving to meet national priorities focusing on the holistic development and support for doctoral students aligned with rigorous evaluation (NASEM, 2018, AAMC 2021). Program evaluation centered on goals or objectives, coupled with visual representations such as logic models or program theory, can be a useful way to ensure that the appropriate measures are being taken. However, these approaches may be limited in unmasking “blind-spots” not linked to intended goals. 
 As part of measuring the effectiveness our prior evaluation protocols and instruments, we set out to (a) establish a general (or generalizable) set of priorities for doctoral life sciences graduate programs; (b) propose an aligned set of measures to capture data on the extent to which institutions meet those priorities; and, (c) identify gaps in our current evaluation protocols. In short, we wanted an objective approach to evaluate our evaluations.
 
**Methods** 
In order to outline a generalizable list of inputs that could be evaluated, we reviewed reports and recommendations (“white papers”), as well as invitations for funding applications (“request for applications” or RFAs), from some of the largest and most influential organizations impacting graduate bioscience education and training. We reasoned that these documents (a) reflected an integration of many published research studies and other work emanating from bioscience, STEM, or (more broadly) graduate education, and, (b) would have transformative impact given their influence on leaders of graduate bioscience education training programs. In our analysis, we also included relevant “internal” documents from our own institution, to assess the similarities and disparities between recommendations stemming from “external” and “internal” documents. In this way, we used a document analysis for “stakeholder mapping,” a process which could be conducted through other methods such as interviews (Ramadoss D, Bolgioni AF et al., 2022). 
For each document, we identified priorities and interventions and proposed measures. We identified major themes across these documents, consolidated and tabulated information before developing a logic model for each theme (Holliday 2014); thus generating useful template logic models that could be customized by institutions. 
For themes encompassing student-centered training, we also outlined approaches to conduct training evaluation built on the framework of Kirkpatrick’s model and considered how our institutional efforts met ideal standards (Praslova 2010).
 **Results** 
We identified six major organizations (e.g. the Council of Graduate Schools, CGS) relevant to our scope and evaluated their reports touching on STEM, bioscience, graduate and general education. We also included three additional reports worth considering - a conference proceeding and two institutional reports. In total, we surveyed 18 documents, with the largest number coming from CGS. 
Based on this analysis, we identified eight major themes (areas of focus) in graduate education. For this presentation, we focus on the single theme of “professional development” which was the largest 
By comparing these general evaluation metrics to our previously developed instruments, we identified areas worthy of expanding evaluation. For example, if it is a priority to de-stigmatize withdrawing from PhD programs, then our evaluations should ask about students’ perceived sense of this option, access to counseling on this, and the presence of administrative mechanisms to enable this (e.g. leaving with a terminal master’s degree). 
**Discussion** 
The approach of identifying general(izable) goals and evaluation metrics bolsters our central administrative team’s capacity to support data reporting and training for multiple stakeholders and has yielded templates which may be useful for others conducting an internal analysis of their efforts and interventions to identify “blind spots.”

Evaluation as Program Innovation Tool: Insights from a Post-Baccalaureate Research Education Program

Welcome and Opening Plenary I

EDU AD Plenary NSF Direction on Broadening Participation Programs

NSF CREST Center for Complex Materials Design (CoManD) for Multidimensional Additive Processing

This research aims to make a substantial contribution to the field of photonics by synergistically exploring the utilization of innovative multiferroic materials while pushing the boundaries of photonic device design. Drawing upon a robust foundation of preliminary data from prior modeling endeavors, this research seeks to realize a practical optical switch through the intricate interplay between multiferroic materials and both electric and magnetic fields. The proposed Anisotropic Photonic Crystal Slab promises to achieve complete photonic band gaps across all polarizations, unlocking a realm of extraordinary phenomena including self-collimation, negative refraction, and zero-index refraction. 

The architecture of the photonic device is designed using the CrystalWave numerical simulation suite, which empowers calculations employing the 3D Finite-Difference Time-Domain (FDTD) method across both spatial and frequency domains, alongside the Plane Wave Expansion method. Advanced equipment such as the Direct Laser Writer and E-Beam Lithography will be employed to manufacture prototypes. 

The current phase of the investigation has yielded several promising photonic structures, with a select few demonstrating favorable attributes. In collaboration with students from the Department of Material Science and Engineering, various types of multiferroic nanoparticles suitable for this project have been fabricated. Presently, ongoing efforts involve the exploration of the alteration of dielectric constants within diverse polymer-multiferroic nanoparticle blends under the influence of electromagnetic fields. 

The proposed research stands poised to drive substantial progress in the realm of Photonics, delivering noteworthy contributions to the evolution of pioneering devices for optical computing while potentially extending its sphere of influence to other scientific domains. These include the advancement of sophisticated photonic solar sails and biosensors.

Next from 15th Conference on Understanding Interventions 2023

Enhancing Digital Learning Infrastructure at Coppin State University

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES