Special Project Awards 
Special Project Proposals were sought from the UAS community early in the Spring and Fall semesters. A Proposal Review Committee of the TLTR reviewed the proposals and consulted other faculty, students, and technical staff to determine overall support and feasibility of the proposed projects. Their recommendations were brought to the TLTR for a first reading, additional information was requested if needed, and a second reading and determination by the TLTR took place. Projects were prioritized based on established criteria outlined in the Technology Fee Proposal. In FY 2004 the Proposal Review Committee consisted of Alice Tersteeg, Ashley Ahrens and Judy Mitchell.
Tech Fees are collected for every course in order to provide the most up-to-date equipment for learning.
Academic Year 2004-2005 Special Projects Soliciation Guidelines click here -->
What was the Special Project Award and how was it used?
The amount of money available in a given semester to fund special projects was identified prior to the application period. The Teaching, Learning and Technology Roundtable (TLTR) then solicited special project proposals from students, faculty and University departments in response to perceived technology problems not being addressed by the infrastructure spending described above. The proposals that received the highest priority were those that impacted as wide a portion of the student body as possible. Projects which affected a smaller portion of the student body were considered, however, if such proposals showed promise of benefiting the University in ways otherwise unachievable. For example, a proposal might have been for one time seed money to fund an experimental project that used technology to enhance a curriculum in new ways. Or, if fund balances allowed, requests to expand or enhance some classroom, lab or teaching facilities that serve only some students might have been considered on a rotational basis with projects that addressed the needs of other categories of students.
How were proposals evaluated?
Again, most proposals should have addressed one-time improvements that would have had an immediate positive impact for students. The Special Projects fund was not intended to replace the allocation of general fund revenue or lab fees budgeted annually to support ongoing technological expenses. The proposal form was intended to be self-explanatory, but it bears repeating that all proposals must have included an estimate of ongoing costs and identify potential sources of future funding. In summary, criteria for evaluating proposals included:
- How, and to what degree would services to students be improved?
- Had a genuine effort been made to research other sources of funding, cost sharing, or phased cost arrangements?
- Had proposals brought to the TLTR by a faculty member been first reviewed by the faculty chair?
- What Special Project funds were available?
The TLTR adopted new proposal guidelines and criteria for awarding special project funds in April 2002. We hoped these documents would assist UAS-Juneau students, faculty, and staff members in preparing successful Technology Fee Special Project proposals. All project proposals were reviewed by the Proposal Review Committee. The Committee evaluated all proposals for completeness, requested additional information as necessary, and made recommendations to the TLTR. The TLTR conducted two readings of project recommendations before awarding grants to projects.
View a history of project proposals.
