AGeS3 seeks to broaden participation, promote new collaborations, and build a sense of community within the field of geochronology. Through evaluation, we can measure the degree to which AGeS3 has achieved these goals by collecting data on the identities of students participating in the program, their networks of collaborators, and their trajectories in graduate school and careers. But more importantly, we measure this progress by collecting qualitative data - written reflections, answers to open-ended survey questions, responses in interviews and focus groups - to get at the nuance of the program’s effects. We can address questions such as: To what extent have the funding and broader support of AGeS3 affected students’ sense of belonging, their ability to complete their research projects, and their connections to the broader geochronology and geoscience community? What can be improved?


Information about you, your feedback, and your thoughts, whether positive, negative, or otherwise, are extremely important. They will be used by the project team to help improve the program for future students, and to help NSF understand whether the program is succeeding and whether or not its funding should be renewed or expanded to reach additional students. Evaluation is not about judging or grading students or faculty, or scoring AGeS proposals. It’s about measuring how the program itself works, and whether it’s accomplishing what it’s intended to accomplish. 


If you are a participant in AGeS-Grad, AGeS-DiG, or AGeS-TRaCE, you will be asked to complete one or more surveys, and you will be invited to provide additional comments in focus groups (3-6 people) or interviews (one-on-one), either in person or on Zoom. All responses will be anonymized before being reported to project leadership. 


If you have any questions about AGeS3 evaluation, or evaluation in general, please feel free to contact