Options for “Rich Media” in the Application Process

Mitch BoretzUniversity of California, Riverside

May 13, 2014

1

Is FDP ready to begin looking ahead to a time when proposals will consist of more than static words and pictures?

• If so, we need to address– Technical issues.– Policy issues.– Proposer and user preferences.– Security, ADA, and related questions.

2

A few assumptions going in…

• Our purpose is not to advocate for including “rich media” in proposals. It is to advocate for preparedness.

• Rich media is more than video. Most notably, and maybe most useful, will be hyperlinks and interactivity – features that word processors and PDF have now.

3

The bigger picture: We should be looking for ways to make the entire proposal process more efficient.

From a senior physics professor in California: The funding system is the US is broken, as it takes so much of our time that the work itself suffers. … If we want a better system for allocating research funds, it should be one that reduces the burden on [the] PI’s time, while still allowing for an unbiased peer review. For example, what about a 5 page limit? What about a program that is accomplishment-based for senior researchers, along with a program that helps all new assistant profs to get started? Making the proposals fancier will not help.

4

Even people who aren’t looking forward to using rich media believe its arrival is inevitable.

• Roughly equal numbers are looking forward to using rich media (33%) as are hoping it never happens (29%).

• 38% aren’t enthusiastic but believe it is inevitable.

5

A closer look at what people think: No bright lines are emerging in terms of rank...

PositionLooking

forward to it

Inevitable, but not looking

forward to it Keep out

Assistant Professor 5 2 5Associate Professor 2 4 1Professor 2 8 7

Non-tenure-track 3 1 0Staff 2 2 0

6

…or field of research. (If a respondent identified two fields, the comment was counted in both fields.)

FieldLooking

forward to it

Inevitable, but not looking

forward to it Keep out

Computer science 2 3 1

Engineering 5 6 6Humanities 1 2 0

Life sciences 5 3 2Medicine 1 0 0

Physical sciences 1 3 7Social sciences 2 1 1

7

Did you notice how many people said they are using video and rich media in proposals already?

We have the opportunity to manage the transition before it becomes a pressing problem.

Zero!

8

If FDP does decide to take this on, we have an array of technical and policy issues to consider.

• Technical– File and image size.– Duration of videos.– Submission standards and formats.

• Policy– When, why, how.

9

Overall, the technical issues seem to be less daunting.

• File size limits?• Video duration limits?• Screen/window size for video?• Formats and compatibility?• Rich media other than video.• Submission methods?

10

From the users’ perspective, technical matters cause the most hesitation.

11

Just to underscore the file size question, here are multiple versions of the same 2-minute video.

12

A few observations from the questionnaire about technical matters.

13

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=clo9qcC4kMcejM&tbnid=T1oyspG-pUBIFM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://hugh.thejourneyler.org/2012/providing-corporate-logos-to-partners/&ei=hylUU7JUyYvIBKqHgtAI&bvm=bv.65058239,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNE-gdx2UjsIn-l1zE92GJm3paqTeQ&ust=1398110976552012http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=clo9qcC4kMcejM&tbnid=T1oyspG-pUBIFM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://hugh.thejourneyler.org/2012/providing-corporate-logos-to-partners/&ei=hylUU7JUyYvIBKqHgtAI&bvm=bv.65058239,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNE-gdx2UjsIn-l1zE92GJm3paqTeQ&ust=1398110976552012http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=DIEef2nM-8-B_M&tbnid=p9W0x5ytELCeDM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.brandsoftheworld.com/logo/microsoft-powerpoint&ei=uClUU4aLMcOQyATr-oDwBQ&bvm=bv.65058239,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNF8iFWa5Ig1gqlYVGScSLuJHkuHmw&ust=1398111019448012http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=DIEef2nM-8-B_M&tbnid=p9W0x5ytELCeDM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.brandsoftheworld.com/logo/microsoft-powerpoint&ei=uClUU4aLMcOQyATr-oDwBQ&bvm=bv.65058239,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNF8iFWa5Ig1gqlYVGScSLuJHkuHmw&ust=1398111019448012

Accessibility for the reviewer is another technical concern.

• We must protect the reviewer’s identity and privacy.

• >80% of reviewers sometimes or often are doing their reviews off-line.

• Conclusion: Rich media must be submitted with the proposal, not made available on the proposer’s site or a third-party site.

14

Policy more than technical limitations will drive decisions on other rich media features.

• Mouseovers: for example, integrating a budget and budget justification.

• Interactive compliance matrices, linking the review criteria to passages in the proposal.

• Layered data in text or figures.• Tagging for ADA compliance.

15

An example of interactivity that uses Microsoft Word’s bookmark feature (which translates to PDF).

• Give me a page for this, and I can make the reviewer’s job easier and the proposal more effective.

16

Other policy questions might take longer to resolve (or evolve).

• Under what circumstances should video be allowed in a proposal? Does it contribute to the message, or just add snap-crackle-pop? Who decides?– Remember the physics professor’s comment:

“Making the proposals fancier will not help.”• Should we re-evaluate the whole process?

More pre-proposals, fewer full proposals?

17

We can all agree that “filmstrips” are less effective at communicating than video.

18

Here is the same information in video form.

19

By contrast, here is a content-rich but confusing video that might be better as a static diagram.

20

Further discussion?

21

Options for “Rich Media” in the Application ProcessIs FDP ready to begin looking ahead to a time when proposals will consist of more than static words and pictures?A few assumptions going in…The bigger picture: We should be looking for ways to make the entire proposal process more efficient.Even people who aren’t looking forward to using rich media believe its arrival is inevitable.A closer look at what people think: No bright lines are emerging in terms of rank...…or field of research. (If a respondent identified two fields, the comment was counted in both fields.)Did you notice how many people said they are using video and rich media in proposals already? If FDP does decide to take this on, we have an array of technical and policy issues to consider.Overall, the technical issues seem to be less daunting.From the users’ perspective, technical matters cause the most hesitation.Just to underscore the file size question, here are multiple versions of the same 2-minute video.A few observations from the questionnaire about technical matters.Accessibility for the reviewer is another technical concern.Policy more than technical limitations will drive decisions on other rich media features.An example of interactivity that uses Microsoft Word’s bookmark feature (which translates to PDF).Other policy questions might take longer to resolve (or evolve).We can all agree that “filmstrips” are less effective at communicating than video. Here is the same information in video form.By contrast, here is a content-rich but confusing video that might be better as a static diagram.Further discussion?