DRC’s Evaluation Form for Teaching
and Learning Enhancement Travel Support Grant
A- Importance of the conference (10 points)
1- On a scale of 1 to 3 rank the importance of the conference to the discipline as identified by the department:
3: The conference is one of the top tier conferences in the field of Teaching and Learningas identified by the department.
2: The conference is second top tier conferences in the field of Teaching and Learning as identified by the department.
1: Other conference in the field of Teaching and Learning.
Rationale/Comments:
B- Professional Development (10 points)
2- The applicant expressed the value of the proposed travel to his or her professional developmentas a teacher.
0: Did not state how the conference/event will benefit the applicant’s professional development as a teacher.
1: Relevance of the conference/event to the applicant’s professional development as a teacher is unclear or under-developed.
2: The conference/event may be irrelevant or tangentially related to the applicant’s professional development as a teacher.
3: The applicant explains the importance of this conference/event to his or her professional development as a teacher; however, the explanations may be slightly ambiguous or unclear and may contain some incompleteness in representation.
4: The applicant provides a clear but general explanation of how the conference/event promotes his or her professional development as a teacher.
5: The applicant provides specific details, such as topics, concepts and issues, and clearly explains how these details are related to his or her professional development as a teacher.
Rationale/Comments:
C- Description of Work (10 points)
In the abstract or else where in the application, the applicant explained the work that s/he will be presenting at the conference/event andhow his/her participation in the conference would enhance the quality of teaching and learning at AUC.
0: No description of work provided.
1: The description is unclear or under-developed and no evidence of impact on teaching and learning at AUC.
2: The description is reasonable but no evidence of impact on teaching and learning at AUC.
3:The description is reasonable and there is a minimal evidence of impact on teaching and learning at AUC.
4: The description is good. There is a good evidence of impact on teaching and learning at AUC and within the department best interest.
5:The description is excellent. There is a great evidence of impact on teaching and learning at AUC and within the department best interest. The work to be presented has been explained in clear and precise terms that non-experts can understand.
Rationale/Comments:
D- Budget (10 points):
0: The applicant does not provide a budget.
1: The budget does not follow the grant guidelines (e.g., the applicant requests more perdiem than s/he should, no evidence for the registration fees while s/he is requesting a registration fees, etc…).
2:The budget follows the grant guidelines but does not reflect efforts to secure external funding and does not reflect efforts to find the cheapest alternatives (e.g. asking for the maximum perdiem with no explanation).
3: The budget is clear, reasonable, follows the general grant guidelines and reflect efforts to find the cheapest alternatives but does not reflect efforts to secure external funding.
4: The budget is clear, reasonable, follows the grant guidelines, the applicant provides detailed explanations for the amount requested, reflects efforts to find the cheapest alternatives and reflects efforts to secure external funding.
Rationale/Comments:
E- Use of Previous TLETG Funding (10 points)
Did not meetExceeding
Expectations______Expectations
012345
Rationale/Comments:
Special Circumstances/Factors: Identify any special circumstance/factor taken into account in your assessment of this application(e.g., career interruptions/delays career responsibilities, etc.):