NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Division of Instruction

Office of Educational Technology

 

 

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

 

 

No Child Left Behind, Title II-D

Enhancing Education Through Technology (E2T2)

Round 7 (2008-09)

Competitive Grants to Districts

 

Release Date: 10/1/08

Technical Assistance Sessions: 10/7/08 and 10/14/08

Application Due Date: 11/10/08

Anticipated Awards Date: 12/8/08

 

The New Hampshire Department of Education (NHDOE) will issue a total of approximately $1.2 million in competitive grants to districts from the Enhancing Education through Technology Program (commonly known as No Child Left Behind, Title II-D Program) in 2008-09 to support the following activities:

Focus Area 1: Portfolio Assessment Rubrics for Middle School - Districts may apply to sponsor one individual per middle school to participate in this statewide collaborative effort to develop a common set of assessment rubrics. (Approx. $60,000 reserved for this effort)

Focus Area 2: Classroom Technology Mini-Grants - Districts may apply to sponsor one team per district to either replicate an exemplary mini-grant project (up to three mini-grants per region for total of 18) or propose a new project (one mini-grant per region for total of 6) (Approx. $170,000 reserved for this effort)

Focus Area 3: Digital Tools Projects - Districts may apply to conduct one digital tools project per district to put engaging technology into the hands of students. (Approx. $600,000 reserved for this effort)

Focus Area 4: Tech Leader Training - Districts may apply to sponsor one educator per school to participate in this statewide effort to bolster technology leadership within schools. (Approx. $400,000 reserved for this effort)

This document is the official “Request for Proposals” used to outline the application process. It contains important information on the background of the federal program and its requirements. All districts, regardless of high need status, are invited to submit applications to participate. Those districts with high need eligibility status per Appendix A are eligible to receive funding under this competition. Please review all pages of this document to learn how to apply for an NCLB Title II-D 2008-09 Competitive Grant. Applications must be submitted according to the guidelines described in this document and using the application forms available at www.nheon.org/oet/nclb. The application deadline is 11/10/08.

 

Contact

Dr. Cathy Higgins, NCLB Title II-D Program Manager

Office of Educational Technology, Division of Instruction

New Hampshire Department of Education, 101 Pleasant St, Concord, NH 03301

Voice: 603.271.2453 *** Email: chiggins@ed.state.nh.us 

Applicants are strongly advised to regularly visit the ETNews Blog at www.nheon.org/oetb and use the RSS feed to ensure timely receipt of information.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Part A: PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS.. 3

Enhancing Education Through Technology. 3

Maximizing Impact 3

Current Need. 4

Eligibility Status. 4

Technology Plans. 5

Technology Surveys. 5

Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) 5

Partnership Applications. 6

Equitable Participation. 6

Professional Development 6

Allowable Activities. 7

Required Evaluation Data and Reports. 7

Project Meetings. 8

Required Budget Forms & Reports. 8

Part B: WRITING A SUCCESSFUL PROPOSAL. 9

Important Project Dates. 9

Focus Areas 1: Portfolio Assessment Rubrics. 10

Focus Areas 2: Classroom Tech Mini-Grants. 11

Focus Areas 3: Digital Tools Projects. 13

Focus Areas 4: Tech Leader Training. 15

Resources. 16

APPENDIX A: Report of Current U.S. Census Data. 17

APPENDIX B: Application Format & Content 22

APPENDIX C: Rubrics for Application Reviews. 23

 

 

 

Part A: PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

Enhancing Education Through Technology

With the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, Congress appropriated funds in 2008-09 for NCLB Title II Part D, the Enhancing Education Through Technology (Ed Tech) Program. NHDOE is releasing this RFP to address the goals of this program.

The primary goal of the federal Enhancing Education Through Technology Program is to improve student academic achievement through the use of technology in elementary and secondary schools.

In addition, the program is designed to:

(a)    assist every student to become technologically literate by the end of eighth grade, regardless of race, ethnicity, income, geographical location, or disability, and

(b)    encourage effective integration of technology with curriculum development and high quality professional development to promote research-based instructional methods.

NHDOE encourages applications that also have the potential to further the Follow The Child Initiative. This initiative was designed to help schools and teachers foster student aspirations to promote student achievement through an emphasis on personalized learning and assessment. Expanding upon the spirit of No Child Left Behind, Follow The Child focuses on measuring growth in the personal, social, physical, and academic facets of each student’s life and defining the necessary support systems needed for each child’s success.

Maximizing Impact

In September 2008, the State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA) released the second paper of the Vision 2020 Action Plan for Education Series, “Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematic (STEM)” which addresses the need to provide all children with an education that includes a solid foundation of rigorous science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) instruction.

According to the report, “the students in kindergarten this year will graduate in 2020. It is our responsibility to ensure that our children are prepared to lead our country in the 21st Century and compete in the global marketplace. In order to do that, we need to provide our children with an education that includes a solid foundation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) … [and] to encourage the students of today to pursue careers in STEM-related fields. The opportunity cost for not addressing this challenge is too high for our country to ignore.

According to a 2007 report titled “Maximizing the Impact: "The Pivotal Role of Technology in a 21st Century Education System," our schools must also “offer more rigorous, relevant and engaging opportunities for students to learn—and to apply their knowledge and skills in meaningful ways. Used comprehensively, technology supports new, research-based approaches and promising practices in teaching and learning.”

(Visit www.setda.org to download both reports.)

This RFP seeks proposals that can strengthen efforts in New Hampshire schools to provide a solid foundation of STEM instruction and maximize technology’s impact by responding to the need to support innovative teaching and learning in K-12 education.

 

Current Need

 

Multiple studies indicate that the technology gap between student and teacher perceptions of technology use in classrooms is widening, leading to predictions that students’ engagement in their own learning may decrease as the gap widens.

 

·         Levin, D. & Arafeh, S. (2002). The digital disconnect: The widening gap between Internet-savvy students and their schools. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved 5/1/07 from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/67/report_display.asp

 

The need for putting digital tools in the hands of kids is great. According to the New Hampshire School Technology Survey for the past two years, significant numbers of New Hampshire schools have limited digital tools available for classroom use, while tech support and professional development are both still areas in need of attention.

 

The results of the 2006 – 2007 in combination with the 2007 – 2008 technology surveys indicate:

  • On average, only 1 in 5 instructional rooms has a digital projection unit for large screen display.
  • On average, only one in ten students has access to some kind of digital handheld tool (i.e., cameras, portable keyboards, GPS units, scanners, science probes).
  • The majority of our districts have tech support staff that covers multiple buildings.
  • Less than half of all schools report using rubrics for assessment.  
  • About half of all schools report that their students create digital portfolios. 

 

Likewise, the need for professional development for teachers that support technology integration is high.  The data from the technology surveys indicates areas of priority for districts center around reading and writing literacy, and mathematics instruction, but not necessarily improvement of science instruction or the improvement of best teaching practices. Over 50% of districts reported basic technology skills for teachers (includes various topics to integrate digital tools) are important, but not a priority. While 65% considered improving instruction, writing, reading and literacy skills to be a high priority in their district, and 65% considered the improvement of math instruction specifically to be high priority, only 42% considered improving science instruction to be a high priority in their district. About 50% generally felt best practices like differentiated instruction, multiple intelligences, and understanding by design were important, but not a high priority. The same was true for classroom management interventions like Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS). Only 78% of districts reported providing professional development around technology support and integration for teachers during the normal school hours. Clearly putting digital tools in the hands of students and providing professional development for teachers in the STEM areas is a critical need for New Hampshire districts.

 

Anecdotal evidence indicates there is still only modest use of digital tools occurring in classrooms on a daily basis in various content areas. This observation is supported by data such as that collected from the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) which suggests “that classroom use of technology in mathematics classes remains modest.” Possible explanations for this include limited access to hardware and support, limited time for technology-related professional development and accompanying follow-up.

 

 

Eligibility Status

NHDOE encourages all districts, regardless of high need status, to submit applications to participate in the activities described in this RFP, with the understanding that grant funding can only be awarded to high need districts. Please read further:

According to NCLB Title II-D federal program guidelines dated March 11, 2002 (p.12) (see www.ed.gov/programs/edtech/legislation.html), funding should be targeted toward “high need districts” which are those districts:

(a) With the highest numbers or percentages of children from families with incomes below the poverty line (see www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe) AND

(b) That have either one or more “schools in need of improvement” or a substantial need for assistance in acquiring and using technology.

Based on updated information from the USDOE program managers, the Title II-D high need districts list has been updated for the 2008-09 academic year (see Appendix A).

If you can answer YES to the following questions, your district is eligible to request Title II-D grant funding for the activities described within this RFP:

  1. Is your district a high need school district according to Appendix A?
  2. Does your district have a current district technology plan approved by the NHDOE?
  3. Did your district complete the annual school and district technology surveys in 2007-08?

If you answered NO to the above questions, your district is not eligible to request Title II-D grant funding. However, in an effort to reach as many districts as possible with the variety of activities described in this RFP, your district is encouraged to apply to participate using local funds instead. If you have any questions about ways to participate, please consider attending the Technical Assistance Sessions or contact Cathy Higgins directly.

Technology Plans

Districts receiving Title II-D funds must have budgets and planned activities that are consistent with their technology plans. Federal law requires districts to have an approved district technology plan on file to receive Title II-D funds. Districts must have a new or updated long-range strategic technology plan that aligns with the guidance contained in the New Hampshire Technology Planning Guide (www.nheon.org/oet/tpguide) and is consistent with the objectives of the State Educational Technology Plan. Districts should keep in mind that these federal funds are intended to “supplement and not supplant” the use of local funding.

Districts are required to inform the NHDOE whenever significant modifications are made to a local technology plan. Check the Tech Plan Status List at http://nheon.org/oet/erate/TPStatus.htm to ensure that your plan is current. For approval criteria, districts should refer to the elements described in the current Technology Plan Approval Rubric, available from the home page of the Guide.

Technology Surveys

The NHDOE conducts an annual technology survey as part of its obligation to monitor and collect data about the impact of the Title II-D program. While all districts are encouraged to complete the survey, districts that received grants last year were required to submit an Annual District Technology Survey, as well as School Technology Surveys for each school in the district. Districts that did not submit their school and district technology surveys in 2007-08 may apply to participate in this grant but are ineligible to receive funding for this round. Visit www.nheon.org/oet/survey to check the list of surveys submitted. Please contact Cathy Higgins if you have questions about your district survey submissions.

Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA)

Successful grantees will be asked to certify on their grant signature page the conditions that are met by their district relative to the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) requirements. Districts must be CIPA compliant in terms of their Internet filtering if they are purchasing any equipment that will be used by students to access the Internet.

Partnership Applications

Federal guidelines permit eligible districts to submit either a Single District Application for their district alone or a Partnership Application for more than one district. The focus of all applications for funding must be on addressing the needs of the high-need LEA(s).

Federal guidelines allow additional partners, including institutions of higher education, educational service agencies, libraries, or other educational entities appropriate to provide local programs. Only districts may be fiscal agents for partnership applications. The total amount requested for partnership grants cannot exceed the sum of the individual eligible amounts. Partnership Applications should include unique letters of support (no form letters, please) from each partner.

The Local Educational Support Centers are funded as partnership grants. Proposals submitted in response to this RFP from districts that sponsor a LESCN site will, therefore, include a greater amount of detail regarding the activities that will occur at LESCN sites. If you are submitting a single district proposal, it is important for you to consult with your nearest center for purposes of budgeting and statewide planning.

Equitable Participation

According to federal guidelines, as a district, you must provide an opportunity for local non-public schools within your locality to consult with you when you write your proposal. Contact them to discuss ways they might be included in your project. If they are not interested in partnering with your district, you are not required to include them in your project activities, but you do need to offer them the opportunity. For a list of non-public schools and their contact information, visit this page on the NHDOE website and click on the link to the non-public schools list: http://www.ed.state.nh.us/education/doe/organization/instruction/boip.htm

IMPORTANT: According to federal guidelines, if a private school is part of your application, any equipment purchased with the grant remains the property of the public school. It is permissible to loan equipment to the private school, if needed, to carry out the project. It is the responsibility of the district receiving the grant to inventory and maintain any equipment purchased by the grant.

Professional Development

§       25% Requirement – Federal program guidelines require that districts use at least 25% of their total grant funds for ongoing, sustained, intensive, high-quality professional development. Districts may budget more than 25% for professional development, as appropriate, within the proposed project.

Such professional development should be focused on the integration of advanced technologies, including emerging technologies, into curriculum and instruction and in using those technologies to create new learning environments.

§       For more information about how professional development can support integration of advanced technologies and student mastery of 21st century skills, districts are encouraged to visit the Route 21 website, created by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, located at www.21stcenturyskills.org.

§       Alternatives – According to federal guidelines, this 25% professional development requirement can be waived only if the district can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the NHDOE that it already provides ongoing, sustained, intensive, high-quality professional development, based on a review of relevant research, to all teachers in core academic subjects. Districts should keep in mind that these federal funds are intended to “supplement and not supplant” the use of local funding.

Within the parameters of this RFP, the only focus area that a district might have the potential to request a waiver for would be the Digital Tools Projects. Any district considering such a waiver should contact Cathy Higgins to discuss this possibility before submitting the proposal.

§       Using LESCN for PD services - When planning professional development activities for Mini-Grants and Digital Tools Projects (Focus Area #2 and #3), districts are required to contact their nearest Local Education Support Center to schedule appropriate PD services connected to your proposed project. Alternative PD resources may also be used if deemed more appropriate to your project proposal. LESCN sites are strategically located in Keene, Claremont, Manchester, Exeter, Capital Area/Penacook, and Gorham in order to cover all regions of the state (see www.nheon.org/centers).

Allowable Activities

The four focus areas described within this RFP are designed to address critical needs that have emerged within New Hampshire in a way that is consistent with allowable activities under the Title II-D program. Part B of this RFP contains a description of each focus area, significant dates, timelines, research and other resources. District applications to participate, with or without funding, must be submitted according to the instructions within each focus area description.

Required Evaluation Data and Reports

Federal guidelines require that districts have a means of evaluating the extent to which Title II-D activities are effective in (1) integrating technology into curricula and instruction; (2) increasing the ability of teachers to teach; and (3) enabling students to meet challenging state standards.

Because the Title II-D program is a state-administered program, NHDOE is responsible for ensuring that districts comply with statutory requirements. Therefore, districts are required to submit updated budgets, data for performance reports, and other reasonable data to the NHDOE before being awarded funds in subsequent years.

The following data reports are required of districts receiving Title II-D funds for all focus areas:

§       NH School Technology Survey – A survey must be submitted for each building in the district as well as the district as a whole in order for the district to be eligible for funding next year. The online surveys will be available for data entry from early January through the end of February 2009. State data from previous tech surveys may be viewed at www.nheon.org/oet/survey. 

§       LoTi Survey – This online survey is available at www.lotilounge.com throughout the school year and should be completed by a majority of district staff at about the same time each year. Aggregate results from schools across the state provide valuable data for statewide planning. Instructions for taking the survey are here: http://www.loticonnection.com/lotitake.html

§       Case Studies Report – This is a short form to report progress on district project activities midway through the project (summer 2009) and again after the project is completed (spring 2010). The case studies form is available as a downloadable Word document and an online survey at www.nheon.org/oet. Previously submitted case studies are available at www.nheon.org/ictliteracy.

Districts awarded funds for Digital Tools Projects will also be required to attend a “Collaborative Evaluation Workshop” to consider ways to use the above data sources as well as other data collection instruments. Applicants should also refer to the resource “Collaborative Evaluation led by Local Educators” (www.neirtec.org/evaluation/) for help in developing their evaluation plan, paying particular attention to the “Gathering Together and Planning” section.

 

Project Meetings

Grantees receiving funds for focus area #3 (Digital Tools Projects) will be required to send two representatives to attend a Collaborative Evaluation Workshop on either December 16 or 18, 2008 at the NHDOE in Concord. There is no cost for this workshop. The proposal should indicate the names of the two project team members that will attend this full-day workshop.

This workshop will allow grantees to share knowledge and ideas about their projects, review reporting guidelines and evaluation materials, and discuss data collection and dissemination methods. Additional technical assistance workshops (virtual or face-to-face) may be scheduled for the spring, summer, and fall, based on project needs and interests of participants.

Required Budget Forms & Reports

OBM Form 1

·    An OBM Form 1 should be submitted with the application narrative. This form is used to authorize all federal projects issued by the NHDOE. When completing this federal projects budget form, it is important that you double check all entries with your business manager before submitting to the NHDOE. (In many districts, the form is normally completed by the business manager.) Sending the form with errors can result in delays in processing your grant. Common errors include missing or incorrect project start and end dates, missing fiscal agent name in “make checks payable to” box, or incorrectly calculated indirect cost amounts. For detailed instructions on indirect cost calculations and other instructions related to OBM Forms, visit the NHDOE Integrated Programs website at: www.ed.state.nh.us/education/doe/organization/instruction/boip.htm

·    If submitting funding requests for more than one Focus Area, please list items according to Focus Areas on the bottom half of page two of the Form 1. This will also be an important tracking strategy if you have any unanticipated changes in expenditures over the project period.

·    See Project Dates section regarding the project start and end dates to be entered on the Form 1.

Obligation and Disbursement Reports

FY 2009 Title II-D projects may remain open until 3/31/10. Funding obligations for awarded projects must be reported by a school district no later than the quarterly report which ends March 2010, with final disbursements reported on the quarterly reports due July 10, 2010. Budget OBM Forms 3 and 4 from the NHDOE are used for these reports.

Failure to submit obligation and disbursement reports to the NHDOE Office of Business Management by July 10, 2010 will result in the forfeiture of any outstanding obligations.

 

Part B: WRITING A SUCCESSFUL PROPOSAL

Step 1. Read all sections of this document to understand the grant requirements.

Step 2. Review the application format (see Appendix B), which describes which information should be included within each section of your proposal, and review the scoring rubric which will be used to score your proposal.

Step 3. Decide which grant activities your district will support. (You may choose more than one.)

Step 4. Enter your contact information and intent to apply (go to www.nheon.org/oet/nclb).

Step 5. Write your proposal using the application form provided on the website. Then read this guidance document again to be sure you have covered all the required information. Ask someone unfamiliar with the project to read your proposal to assess it for clarity and completeness.

Step 6. Follow the Submission Instructions to submit your proposal.

VISIT THE WEBSITE OFTEN FOR INFO TO HELP YOU WITH YOUR GRANT.

www.nheon.org/oet/nclb

Important Project Dates

10/1/08       Request for Proposals released

10/7/08       Technical Assistance Sessions: Webinars at 8 AM, 10 AM, and 12 Noon
Reserve your seat from the registration link available at www.nheon.org/oet/nclb

10/14/08     Technical Assistance Session: Face to Face at 9 AM in Room 15 NHDOE
Reserve your seat from the registration link available at www.nheon.org/oet/nclb

11/10/08     Electronic version of application and budget files must be received by this date (see Submission Instructions section). Signed copy of OBM Form 1 budget document with signed application cover page should be mailed on this date.

12/8/08       Grant awards are expected to be announced on or before December 8, 2008.

12/16/08     Initial project evaluation workshop dates for successful grantees are scheduled for 12/16/08 and 12/18/08 at the NHDOE in Concord. Please mark one of these dates on your calendar if you are applying for a Digital Tools Project.

12/15/08     Project period begins on December 15, 2008.

3/31/10       Project period ends March 31, 2010.

 

Focus Areas 1: Portfolio Assessment Rubrics

Focus Area 1: Portfolio Assessment Rubrics for Middle School - Districts may apply to sponsor one individual per middle school to participate in this statewide collaborative effort to develop a common set of assessment rubrics. [Approximately $60,000 is reserved for this effort. As the work of the team unfolds during the grant period, additional funding, if available, may be used to provide further support for this effort.]

Maximum Funding to High Need Districts = $2,000 per middle school

A statewide team of approximately 24 educators will be assembled from all regions of the state (up to 4 from each of the 6 center regions). The intent of this initiative is to enhance current portfolio implementation efforts of all schools by developing a common set of assessment rubrics that can be used by all middle schools to assess digital portfolios of 7th and 8th grade students. Completion of this work will increase statewide capacity to understand the level of preparedness of our New Hampshire 8th grade students for increasingly complex skills in high school.

Those team members selected through this application process will participate in an ongoing effort as outlined below. It is important for team members to understand that the process and product will unfold and adjust as the statewide team articulates current practices with portfolios across the state and documents recommendations for future practices. Members are advised to become familiar with the 21st century skills (see www.21stcenturyskills.org) which this statewide team will be expected to model during the development, implementation, and dissemination process.

Phase I – Development
(December 2008 through March 2009)

Phase II – Implementation (April 2009 through August 2009)

Phase III – Dissemination (Fall and Winter 2009)

Sharing current efforts at participating districts (resources currently in use, status of current implementation, perceived needs for next steps) will begin this collaborative effort.

Common readings will help establish a common language for group communications. Team members will participate in a customized version of the OPEN NH course “BP-01 Creating and Using Meaningful Rubrics that Assess Student Work.” Co-facilitators will be Dr. Cathy Higgins and Stan Freeda and guest speakers. Selected team members should budget $100 for course registration. Teams should expect to spend 3-5 hours each week working online (asynchronously). An extensive body of literature will be utilized for this effort, some of which will be online and others will be hard copy publications.

A spring Face to face session will also be scheduled where assessment rubrics using new NETS-S framework will be shared and further revised.

Online course ends and piloting of rubrics among participating team members’ schools begins

Summer Institute – Three days of calibrating rubrics, preparing for fall launch

Implement common rubrics at all interested middle schools via wide dissemination of information about rubrics availability and assistance by team members as needed.

Next steps activities

Districts requesting funds for Focus Area 1 should articulate how funds will be used to support the work of the team member. Allowable expenses include travel to team meetings, substitute teachers, course registration fees, summer stipend for 2-day institute, and other expenses directly related to supporting an individual’s participation on the statewide team.

Be sure to review the Focus Area #1 Rubric in Appendix C before you write your application.

 

Focus Areas 2: Classroom Tech Mini-Grants

Focus Area 2: Classroom Technology Mini-Grants - Districts may apply to sponsor one team per district to either replicate an exemplary mini-grant project (up to three mini-grants per region for total of 18) or propose a new project (one mini-grant per region for total of 6). [Approximately $170,000 is reserved for this effort. As the work of this initiative unfolds during the grant period, additional funding, if available, may be used to provide further support for this effort.]

Maximum Funding to High Need Districts = $7,000 per district

The purpose of the mini-grant program is to improve the level of technology integration within classrooms in core content areas through specific project-based learning units. High need school district teams (see Appendix A) may apply for mini-grants in the amount of $7,000 per team. Up to $5,000 of the project budget may be used for hardware, software, supplies, and training to support the proposed project and an additional $2,000 should be budgeted for required professional development activities (i.e., video training, presentations, Celebration Day, etc.) provided through the Local Educational Support Center Network (LESCN). Budgeting for substitutes is not encouraged but is allowable with sufficient justification. A budget detailing all proposed expenditures must be accompanied by a narrative explaining why each budgeted item is necessary and supports the goals of the grant. Narrative should indicate that the budget reflects an effort to maximize the purchasing potential of the grant.

Create a Team: Form a team of 2 to 4 members from within one or multiple schools in NH. At least 80% of your team members must be employed as teachers in the New Hampshire PreK–12 education system. Each mini-grant application must identify a primary and secondary content area of focus. Proposals must be aligned to the NH State Frameworks and recognized national standards.

Choose your project idea:

1.       Choose one of the previous years’ mini-grant project ideas that your team would like to replicate. Information about these projects may be found online at www.nheon.org/oet/nclb.  (Note that there will be more replication awards than awards for new projects.)

2.       Or choose a primary STEM content area of focus to develop a new project idea. Additional interdisciplinary areas are encouraged.

Participation Requirements: Teams selected for this initiative are required to meet all of the participation requirements listed below. Failure to meet these requirements will require the return of funds and/or equipment to the NHDOE.

1.       Begin implementing your project in a classroom on or about 1/5/09 and complete implementation by 5/15/09. Awarded mini-grant teams (with at least 2 team members present) must attend two evening sessions at a LESCN site to work on their project and to receive technical support relating to the technology being employed. Work sessions will be held from January through April.

2.       Participate in the mini-grant online community. Participation means posting and replying asynchronously, not a live chat.

3.       Prepare a team presentation of your project which includes a 3 minute documentary video (Moviemaker or iMovie format) that provides an overview of project activities and outcomes. Appropriate release forms must accompany the video. If SAU or district policy does not permit students to be included in a video, the mini-grant team is permitted to use only adults. Required accompanying materials (lesson plans, assessment rubrics, project resources) must also be submitted in MS-Word or other compatible format for posting to the web. Projects and accompanying materials (videos, lesson plans, rubrics, etc.) must be completed by 5/15/09.

4.       Teams will use their presentation materials for the following:

·         Celebration Day – Teams will present at this event only if their project is selected as an exemplary project. The event will be held at Church Landing in Meredith in late May or early June (final date TBD). This year the event will be scheduled as an afternoon/early evening reception from 3 to 7 PM. The tentative agenda includes a 90 minute showcase of projects, a 30 minute case study panel discussion, and a 60 minute keynote speaker. ALL TEAMS MUST RSVP by no later than 5/1/08 regarding the number of team members and guests who will attend. All teams are invited, regardless of whether they have been selected for showcase presentation at this event.

·         Fall 2009 Showcases – Teams are required to present their projects (all members required) at one of the Mini-Grant Showcase Events, which will be held at each LESCN site. These events are expected to be widely attended by other educators who are interested in applying for the next round of projects and to learn from current team’s experiences.

·         Teams are also required do a project presentation to faculty within their own district.

·         Teams must ensure that at least one presentation of the project is also made (by at least one team member) at an annual state conference such as:

·         NH Teachers of Mathematics Conference (www.nhtm.org)

·         NH Council of Teachers of English (www.nhcte.org)

·         NH Council for Social Studies (www.nhcss.org)

·         NH Science Teachers Association (www.nhsta.net)

·         NH Music Educators Association (www.nhmea.org)

·         NH Art Educators Association (www.nhaea.org)

·         Other conferences as appropriate to content

5.       Participate in post-project evaluations (online surveys and phone interviews) to help with future program improvement.

Be sure to review the Focus Area #2 Rubric in Appendix C before you write your application.

 

 

 

Focus Areas 3: Digital Tools Projects

Focus Area 3: Digital Tools Projects – High need districts may apply for one Digital Tools Project per district to put engaging technology into the hands of students. [Approximately $600,000 is reserved for this effort. As the work of project teams unfolds during the grant period, additional funding, if available, may be used to provide further support for this effort.]

Maximum Funding to High Need Districts

·         Small districts (under 400 students) may apply for up to $29,000 (plus $3,000 tech leader)

·         Intermediate size districts (between 400 – 1200 students) may apply for up to $45,000 (plus $3,000 tech leader)

·         Large districts (over 1200 students) may apply for up to $61,000 (plus $3,000 tech leader)


Many types of digital tools can be used effectively in schools to engage students and improve student achievement. Districts applying for funds for digital tools projects are encouraged to first review current research on tools that can have a positive impact, and then design a project to acquire specific tools and engage teachers in professional development activities to effectively use the tools within their classrooms.

Your proposal for this project must demonstrate the following characteristics:

·         strong and active administrative support;

·         indications of how the local district budget will also support the project;

·         indications that pertinent research studies were reviewed;

·         on-going, sustainable, integrated professional development for teachers in STEM;

·         must utilize adequate digital tools (e.g., handhelds, laptops, IWBs) to ensure a 1:1 ratio of students to tools;

·         must have a goal of producing a solid foundation for students in science, technology, engineering, and/or mathematics (STEM); and

·         must include sound evaluation plans for program improvement and effectiveness.


About the Instruction

Your proposal should have a strong focus on STEM, but can be designed to incorporate other content areas as well. Interdisciplinary projects are encouraged. Your project design should address at least one of the key recommendations given in the SETDA Vision 2020 Action Plan for Education paper, “Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematic (STEM).”  The recommendations for greatest STEM impact that would be applicable to your digital tools project would be to obtain societal support for STEM, to expose students to STEM Careers, and to provide ongoing, sustainable professional development in STEM. As part of the professional development requirements of this focus area, you must also budget for one teacher tech leader and apply for focus area #4 (tech leader training).

When writing proposals, you should also consider ways to design a project that can later be replicated across the district and at other schools. Proposals will be reviewed with the intent to fund those that show potential to demonstrate effectiveness and to be replicated in subsequent years with additional federal, state, or local funds.

About the Tools

Proposals should describe a project centered on individual classrooms that provide each student in the classroom with a digital tool (1:1). Identify each teacher and classroom, including grade levels, current technology available to those classrooms, how many and what type of tools (i.e., all laptops, combination of laptops and handhelds, etc.) will be purchased to reach a 1:1 scenario. Indicate how the tools are expected to impact student instruction, engagement, and achievement.

In May, 2008, four Title II-D competitive grants were awarded to districts to sponsor similar pilot projects in selected classrooms (see www.nheon.org/oet/nclb/May2008). The table below shows one example of how your project might construct a 1:1 project for several classrooms at modest cost (based on 5 sets of tools for classroom of 20 students). A variation of this set might be one interactive white board with a classroom set of student response systems or perhaps a set of Nintendo DS handhelds with appropriate educational software.

Each Student Set Includes
(based on groups of 4 students for class of 20)

Total Tools Needed per Classroom

Cost per Unit

Total Cost per Classroom

1 laptop / desktop (3 yr warranty)

5

450

2250

1 digital camera (8 MP)

5

100

500

1 flip camera

5

100

500

1 iPod

5

230

1150

4 thumb drives

20

10

200

 

40

$890

$4,600

About the Research and Evaluation

It is important to match digital tools to instructional purpose and to review the research behind the potential impact a particular digital tool may have in your classrooms. A few links to research and other resources are included in the Resources section below. You are encouraged to search for more.

Each Digital Tools Project will be required to participate in the Collaborative Evaluation Workshop planned in December 2008 where data collection efforts to determine project effectiveness will be discussed. All projects will be required to collect quantitative and qualitative data from students and teachers during the project period, and to submit an interim and final Case Studies Report.

About the Professional Development

Proposals should also describe the professional development activities that will assist teachers in effectively implementing the digital tools in their instruction. Remember to also apply for focus area #4 (tech leader training for $3,000) to ensure that at least one teacher per project site school participates in the leadership training in order to provide support for other teachers. Your professional development budget must be at least 25% of your total grant award. (Note: In order to avoid duplicate funding requests for the $3,000 required for Focus Area 4, do not include the tech leader training amount within your digital tools budget. Applications for digital tools will be read simultaneously with corresponding applications for tech leaders.)

 

A summary of the allowable budget limits and expectations for districts according to size is given in the table below.  NOTE: This table contained incorrect amounts in the original release of the RFP.

CORRECTED AMOUNTS

 

District Size

 

Maximum Number of 1:1 Classrooms Allowable by Grant

Maximum Digital Tools Project Budget Allowable

Maximum Project amount for Equipment and Supplies

Required Project PD: Other

Required PD: Tech Leader at Project Site (Focus Area 4)

Small
< 400 Students

4

$29,000

$24,000

$5,000

$3,000

Intermediate
400 – 1199 students

6

$45,000

$36,000

$9,000

$3,000

Large
> 1200 students

8

$61,000

$48,000

$13,000

$3,000

 

Be sure to review the Focus Area #3 Rubric in Appendix C before you write your application.

 

Focus Areas 4: Tech Leader Training

Focus Area 4: Tech Leader Training - Districts may apply to sponsor one educator per school to participate in this statewide effort to bolster technology leadership within schools. [Approximately $400,000 is reserved for this effort. As the work of training participants unfold during the grant period, additional funding, if available, may be used to provide further support for this effort.]

Maximum Funding to High Need Districts = $3,000 per school

Tech Leader Training will consist of a series of professional development opportunities for current and future school technology leaders. These will be delivered using a combination of face-to-face and online formats, allowing tech leaders to be immersed in content addressing the National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (NETS-T) and for Students (NETS-S).

Tech leaders in this program will engage in ongoing, sustained activities from January to December 2009 (estimated at 4 hours per week). Part of these hours will include opportunities for tech leaders to work with their principals and other local administrators on change efforts to create 21st century learning environments. Instructors will vary according to location and content. Dates, times, and locations for bi-monthly face to face sessions will be determined based on participant locations.

Training will emphasize the use of free and low-cost resources for professional development, curriculum planning, Internet safety, and interactive simulation software for student engagement (e.g., Thinkfinity, Think.com, CyberSmart, Alice, Scratch, and more). District tech plans and the NH Tech Planning Guide will be referenced to determine the professional development that needs strengthening within the plans and in actual practice. Resources on 21st century skills, Web 2.0 tools, policies and practices, as well as organizational change, will be a large focus of this program.

The ultimate goal of this focus area is to support a statewide cadre of skilled, informed teacher leaders who are empowered to support their colleagues in creating truly 21st century learning environments.

District applications will nominate individuals to participate, who will describe any previous technology training experiences they have had, their perceived current professional development needs, as well as perceived needs within the school they intend to influence. This information will be used to tailor the training program to best meet the needs of the cadre of tech leaders.

Be sure to review the Focus Area #4 Rubric in Appendix C before you write your application.

 

Resources

§       NHDOE Office of Educational Technology – www.nheon.org/oet

§       NH Local Educational Support Center Network – www.nheon.org/centers

§       NHEON Professional Development Resources – www.nheon.org/prof_dev

§       New Hampshire ICT Literacy Toolkit – www.nheon.org/ictliteracy

§       NETS the Next Generation – Includes standards and related resources for students and teachers: http://www.iste.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=NETS

§       NEIRTEC Collaborative Evaluation led by Local Educators - http://www.neirtec.org/evaluation

§       Information about the Ed Tech Program on the U.S. Department of Education website at http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/os/technology/index.html

§       Information about the Children’s Internet Protection Act -- http://www.sl.universalservice.org/reference/CIPA.asp

§       Warschauer, Mark. (2006) Laptops and Literacy: Learning in the Wireless Classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.

§       The inTASC group at Boston College has a collection of several research studies on laptops and wireless learning at: http://www.bc.edu/research/intasc

§       Harris Stefanakis, Evangeline (2002). A Window into the Learner's Mind: Multiple Intelligences and Portfolios. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann & Boynton Cook Publishers.

§       Kelly, M.G., Haber, J. (2006). National educational technology standards for students: Resources for student assessment. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

§       Palfrey, J., Gasser, U. (2008). Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. New York, NY: Basic Books.

§       Research on Classroom Response Systems: Vanderbilt Bibilography - http://www.vanderbilt.edu/cft/resources/teaching_resources/technology/crs_biblio.htm

§       Research on IWBs: UK Primary Schools research - http://partners.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=pv&catcode=_pv_ip_fa_03&rid=14422

§       Research on Personal Digital Devices: Becta 1:1 Interim Report – http://partners.becta.org.uk/index.php?section=rh&catcode=_re_rp_02&rid=14204

§       ISTE Research Resources: http://caret.iste.org

 

 

APPENDIX A: Report of Current U.S. Census Data

New Hampshire “High Need” School Districts

 

According to NCLB Title II-D federal program guidelines dated March 11, 2002 (p.12) (see www.ed.gov/programs/edtech/legislation.html), funding should be targeted toward “high need districts.” These would be districts whose numbers or percentages of children from families with incomes below the poverty line are above the state median (43 and 6.9% respectively) (see www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/) AND who have either one or more “schools in need of improvement” OR a substantial need for assistance in acquiring and using technology. The “eligible for funds” column in the table below indicates whether your district may request funds for your proposed participation.

 

District

Total Population

Total Kids 5-17

Total Kids in Poverty 5-17

Poverty %

Urban / Rural

District Size

Eligibility

ALLENSTOWN

5220

977

67

6.9%

U

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

ALTON

4909

762

80

10.5%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

AMHERST

11325

1936

57

3.0%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

ANDOVER

2273

372

36

9.7%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

ASHLAND

2039

210

22

10.5%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

AUBURN

4964

1015

31

3.1%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

BARNSTEAD

4238

747

73

9.8%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

BARRINGTON

7933

1541

156

10.2%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

BARTLETT *

2934

428

55

12.8%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

BATH

926

166

6

3.7%

R

Small

Not Eligible

BEDFORD

19218

3891

109

2.9%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

BERLIN *

10576

1506

245

16.3%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

BETHLEHEM

2286

186

35

18.9%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

BOW

7693

1823

36

2.0%

R

Large

Not Eligible

BRENTWOOD

3391

283

11

3.9%

U

Small

Not Eligible

BROOKLINE

4397

647

22

3.5%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

CAMPTON *

2906

342

43

12.6%

R

Small

Eligible by Both

CANDIA

4149

768

37

4.9%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

CHESTER

4025

850

43

5.1%

U

Intermediate

Eligible by Number

CHESTERFIELD

3697

673

29

4.4%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

CHICHESTER

2410

421

20

4.8%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

CLAREMONT

13911

2165

256

11.9%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

COLEBROOK *

3148

498

88

17.7%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

CONCORD

39318

6022

487

8.1%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

CONTOOCOOK VALLEY

18661

3771

390

10.4%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

CONWAY *

10684

1606

217

13.5%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

CORNISH

1769

326

20

6.2%

R

Small

Not Eligible

CROYDON

699

111

9

8.2%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

DEERFIELD

3901

824

55

6.7%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Number

DERRY

36088

7726

420

5.5%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

DOVER

28508

3967

429

10.9%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

DRESDEN

11255

626

21

3.4%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

DUNBARTON

2399

419

19

4.6%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

EAST KINGSTON

1892

215

14

6.6%

U

Small

Not Eligible

EPPING

5809

1087

75

6.9%

U

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

EPSOM

4334

721

42

5.9%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

ERROL *

371

40

8

19.4%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

EXETER

14912

1237

86

7.0%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

EXETER REGIONAL COOP

30590

2764

118

4.3%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

FALL MOUNTAIN REGIONAL

12307

2078

248

12.0%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

FARMINGTON *

7649

1515

116

7.7%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

FRANKLIN

9059

1508

259

17.2%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

FREEDOM

1404

155

11

7.1%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

FREMONT

3723

704

25

3.6%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

GILFORD

7367

1188

70

5.9%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Number

GILMANTON

3333

557

42

7.6%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Percent

GOFFSTOWN

17803

2941

124

4.3%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

GORHAM *

3618

565

60

10.7%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

GOSHEN LEMPSTER COOP

1811

315

40

12.7%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

GOV WENTWORTH REGIONAL

17783

2847

296

10.4%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

GRANTHAM

2292

307

3

1.0%

R

Small

Not Eligible

GREENLAND

3403

622

53

8.6%

U

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

HAMPSTEAD

8799

1879

71

3.8%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

HAMPTON

15845

1708

115

6.8%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

HAMPTON FALLS

1994

268

11

4.2%

U

Small

Not Eligible

HANOVER

11255

567

16

2.9%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

HARRISVILLE

1118

192

8

4.2%

R

Small

Not Eligible

HAVERHILL COOP *

4907

795

61

7.7%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

HENNIKER

4778

639

16

2.6%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

HILL

1069

213

13

6.2%

R

Small

Not Eligible

HILLSBORO-DEERING COOP *

7366

1448

118

8.2%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

HINSDALE

4260

766

70

9.2%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

HOLDERNESS

2002

229

25

11.0%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

HOLLIS

7377

968

17

1.8%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

HOLLIS/BROOKLINE COOP

11774

1025

30

3.0%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

HOOKSETT

12631

2024

113

5.6%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

HOPKINTON

5819

1117

39

3.5%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

HUDSON

24112

4763

240

5.1%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

INTER LAKES

8952

1375

115

8.4%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

JACKSON

900

102

6

5.9%

R

Small

Not Eligible

JAFFREY-RINDGE COOP

11405

1896

187

9.9%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

JOHN STARK REGIONAL

12956

683

41

6.1%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

KEARSARGE REGIONAL

14710

2219

107

4.9%

R

Large

Eligible by Number

KEENE

23550

3148

201

6.4%

R

Large

Eligible by Number

KENSINGTON

2008

216

7

3.3%

U

Small

Not Eligible

LACONIA

17948

2670

311

11.7%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

LAFAYETTE REGIONAL

1808

135

13

9.7%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

LANDAFF

392

59

3

5.1%

R

Small

Not Eligible

LEBANON

13039

1878

247

13.2%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

LINCOLN-WOODSTOCK

2500

363

25

6.9%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

LISBON REGIONAL

2151

359

35

9.8%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

LITCHFIELD

7740

1773

49

2.8%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

LITTLETON

6058

1010

126

12.5%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

LONDONDERRY

24648

5848

219

3.8%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

LYME

1742

307

12

4.0%

R

Small

Not Eligible

LYNDEBOROUGH

1657

190

5

2.7%

R

Small

Not Eligible

MADISON

2138

373

25

6.8%

R

Small

Not Eligible

MANCHESTER

112536

18190

2510

13.8%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

MARLBOROUGH

2097

315

21

6.7%

R

Small

Not Eligible

MARLOW

780

122

7

5.8%

R

Small

Not Eligible

MASCENIC REGIONAL

8056

1766

163

9.3%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

MASCOMA VALLEY REGIONAL

10088

1607

120

7.5%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

MERRIMACK

26417

5560

184

3.4%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

MERRIMACK VALLEY

16249

2823

222

7.9%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

MILAN *

1489

267

30

11.3%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

MILFORD

14234

2770

183

6.7%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

MILTON

4145

801

110

13.8%

U

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

MONADNOCK REGIONAL

15043

2572

153

6.0%

R

Large

Eligible by Number

MONROE

787

136

10

7.4%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

MONT VERNON

2139

366

11

3.1%

U

Small

Not Eligible

MOULTONBOROUGH

4831

728

34

4.7%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

NASHUA

91079

15705

1331

8.5%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

NELSON

662

116

10

8.7%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

NEW BOSTON

4352

942

70

7.5%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

NEW CASTLE

1071

135

1

0.8%

U

Small

Not Eligible

NEWFIELDS

1645

200

4

2.0%

U

Small

Not Eligible

NEWFOUND AREA

9762

1610

140

8.7%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

NEWINGTON

822

140

11

7.9%

U

Small

Eligible by Percent

NEWMARKET

8515

1263

106

8.4%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

NEWPORT

6632

1191

252

21.2%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

NORTH HAMPTON

4518

608

19

3.2%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

NORTHUMBERLAND

2441

458

82

18.0%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

NORTHWOOD

3859

753

32

4.3%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

NOTTINGHAM

3926

775

23

3.0%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

OYSTER RIVER COOP

19422

2532

166

6.6%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

PELHAM

11478

2344

102

4.4%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

PEMBROKE

7436

1363

86

6.4%

R

Large

Eligible by Number

PEMI-BAKER REGIONAL

17237

734

59

8.1%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

PIERMONT

735

113

8

7.1%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

PITTSBURG *

1162

158

21

13.3%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

PITTSFIELD

4239

816

82

10.1%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

PLAINFIELD

2359

407

14

3.5%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

PLYMOUTH

6100

467

62

13.3%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

PORTSMOUTH

22047

2526

256

10.2%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

PROFILE

4094

310

48

15.5%

R

Small

Eligible by Both

RAYMOND

10262

2115

145

6.9%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

RIVENDELL INTERSTATE

1132

152

16

10.6%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

ROCHESTER

30177

5125

674

13.2%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

ROLLINSFORD

2804

475

42

8.9%

U

Intermediate

Eligible by Percent

RUMNEY

1535

199

37

18.6%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

RYE

5497

893

40

4.5%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

SALEM

29820

5266

284

5.4%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

SANBORN REGIONAL

10768

2036

102

5.1%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

SEABROOK

8416

874

89

10.2%

U

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

SHAKER REGIONAL

9461

1622

119

7.4%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

SOMERSWORTH

12169

2124

242

11.4%

U

Large

Eligible by Both

SOUHEGAN COOP

13464

930

31

3.4%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

SOUTH HAMPTON

895

162

5

3.1%

U

Small

Not Eligible

STARK

514

96

14

14.6%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

STEWARTSTOWN

1013

158

14

8.9%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

STODDARD

969

134

13

9.8%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

STRAFFORD

3837

851

37

4.4%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

STRATFORD

943

153

39

25.5%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

STRATHAM

6741

742

23

3.1%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

SUNAPEE

3232

536

34

6.4%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

TAMWORTH

2701

422

26

6.2%

R

Intermediate

Not Eligible

THORNTON

1916

216

26

12.1%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

TIMBERLANE REGIONAL

24496

4604

197

4.3%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

UNITY

1619

215

35

16.3%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

WAKEFIELD

4581

779

76

9.8%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

WARREN

906

155

23

14.9%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

WASHINGTON

947

144

16

11.2%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

WATERVILLE VALLEY

267

40

4

10.0%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

WEARE

8178

1414

77

5.5%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

WENTWORTH

828

117

15

12.9%

R

Small

Eligible by Percent

WESTMORELAND

1823

255

7

2.8%

R

Small

Not Eligible

WHITE MOUNTAIN REGIONAL

7925

1286

155

12.1%

R

Large

Eligible by Both

WILTON

3936

465

26

5.6%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

WILTON-LYNDEBORO

5594

441

24

5.5%

U

Intermediate

Not Eligible

WINCHESTER

4325

724

101

14.0%

R

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

WINDHAM

11360

2360

78

3.4%

U

Large

Eligible by Number

WINNACUNNET COOP

30773

1116

77

6.9%

U

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

WINNISQUAM REGIONAL

11508

2079

141

6.8%

R

Large

Eligible by Number

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ACADEMY FOR SCIENCE & DESIGN

Charter

32

2

6.3%

 

Small

Not Eligible

COCHECO ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY

Charter

67

7

10.5%

 

Small

Eligible by Percent

CSI CHARTER

Charter

20

2

10.0%

 

Small

Eligible by Percent

FRANKLIN CAREER ACADEMY

Charter

37

4

10.9%

 

Small

Eligible by Percent

GREAT BAY eLEARNING

Charter

96

4

4.2%

 

Small

Not Eligible

NH EQUESTRIAN ACADEMY

Charter

21

2

9.6%

 

Small

Eligible by Percent

NORTH COUNTRY ACADEMY

Charter

55

7

12.8%

 

Small

Eligible by Percent

SEACOAST CHARTER

Charter

52

3

5.8%

 

Small

Not Eligible

STRONG FOUNDATIONS

Charter

55

4

7.3%

 

Small

Eligible by Percent

SURRY VILLAGE

Charter

53

6

11.4%

 

Small

Eligible by Percent

PROSPECT MOUNTAIN

JMA

468

48

10.3%

 

Intermediate

Eligible by Both

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX B: Application Format & Content

 

Pages provided within appendix B are for reference only. Please download the actual application forms, including the application cover page and individual focus area applications from www.nheon.org/oet/nclb.

 

District Application Cover Page

 

 

District:

 

Enter district name here

 

Date:

 

     

Project Manager:

Enter project manager name here

Position Title:

Enter your position title here

Mailing Address:

Enter school/district mailing address here

Email Address:

Enter project manager's email address here

Phone:

Enter project manager's phone number here

 

BE SURE TO READ ALL OF THE FOLLOWING

 

I hereby certify that:

 

1.      To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this application is correct, and the school board of the district named above has authorized me as its representative to submit this application.

2.      The District has submitted to the New Hampshire Department of Education (NHDOE) a General Assurances signature page for the current year.

3.      The District has consulted with the appropriate non-public schools during the design and development of this Ed Tech project prior to all decisions that affect the opportunities of private school children to participate in the program.

4.      All funding for this project will be obligated and reported no later than the quarterly report ending 3/31/2010 and expended and reported no later than quarterly report ending 6/30/2010.

5.      The grant funds expended will supplement, not supplant, funds from non-federal sources.

6.      The District will keep records and provide information to the NHDOE as may be required for program evaluation, consistent with responsibilities under NCLB Title II-D as outlined within the Grant Application Guidance (e.g., annual tech survey, case study report).

7.      The schools to be funded by this program are compliant with the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) because the district employs a filtering mechanism for student access or because Ed Tech funds referenced in this application will NOT be used to purchase computers used to access the Internet or pay for direct costs associated with accessing the Internet.

 

                                                         

Superintendent of Schools (blue ink preferred)               Date

 

We are submitting applications for the following Focus Area(s) and amounts:

 

Applying for?

Focus Area

Amount Requested

Yes     No

1: Portfolio Assessment Rubrics

$0.00

Yes     No

2: Classroom Tech Mini-Grant

$0.00

Yes     No

3: Digital Tools Project

$0.00

Yes     No

4: Tech Leader Training

$0.00

 

TOTAL GRANT FUNDS REQUESTED:

$0.00

 

 

 

Application Form for Focus Area 1

 

You may delete this intro paragraph after you read it: Provide a narrative of no more than 4 single spaced pages with font sizes 10 – 12 (including budget). PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONFORM TO THESE REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

Focus Area 1: Portfolio Assessment Rubrics for Middle School

Districts may apply to sponsor one individual per middle school to participate in this statewide collaborative effort to develop a common set of assessment rubrics.

District

ENTER YOUR DISTRICT NAME (not your SAU number) HERE

Name of Proposed Team Member (One per middle school)

Last Name, First Name

Email

Project Abstract (5 Points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Include a clear and concise abstract (75 word maximum) that describes where your school is with respect to implementing digital portfolios and assessing them in your district. You should also explain your goals as a district for participation in this effort, and how your district can help contribute to this statewide effort.

Program Description (40 Points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Describe (two page maximum) your willingness to participate in the development of statewide rubrics and what your district team member can contribute to it. Clearly articulate:

·         your goals for participation on this statewide collaborative team

·         your understanding that the scope of work will be largely determined by the team during the initial phases of the collaboration and willingness to be a part of this collaboration

·         the extent to which your middle schools are currently assessing students’ competencies in each of the following areas and how you are accomplishing this:

o        Technology operations and concepts

o        Digital citizenship / Social, ethical, & human issues

o        Creativity & innovation / productivity tools

o        Communication and collaboration / communication tools

o        Research & information fluency / research tools

o        Critical thinking, problem solving & decision-making

 

Capacity for Success  (45 points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Describe (two page maximum) why participation in this statewide collaborative effort is appropriate for your district(s), and what structures, policies, and/or procedures are already in place or planned to support digital portfolios and their assessment in your district. Discuss the abilities and expertise of the team member(s) selected to represent your district in this collaboration. Demonstrate capacity for success by providing strong evidence that the person responsible is willing and able to conduct the work, is supported by the district and able to participate in the meetings, face to face and online, as well as the online course and the summer institute. If participant is a member of a statewide professional organization, be sure to include a description of how the team member might work with the organization to help disseminate the results of this statewide effort.

 

Budget Narrative (10 points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Maximum Funding to High Need Districts = $2,000 per middle school

Format your budget (one page maximum) with the narrative in left column and total amounts in right column. Within the narrative, describe a logical connection to your district goals. The narrative should include:

·         Estimated cost of the summer institute ($500 per middle school includes meals, lodging, and support materials)

·         Team Member stipends should include participation in the development, implementation, and dissemination efforts as determined by the collaborative group.  See RFP for more details on the phases.

Budget (Describe as appropriate)
Add your narrative below each category title and show how you calculated your total amount proposed for the budget category.

TOTAL

Team Member Support

This can include substitute teachers for meetings, stipends, and related support for the team member to effectively participate.   

 

Travel

Includes travel to meetings, summer institute, etc.

 

Course Registration Fees

This should include $100 OPEN NH course registration fee and $500 summer institute registration fee per team member.

 

Other

Use this budget category to itemize and describe any purchases or expenses that do not align well to the above categories.

 

Indirect Cost (per approved 2008-09 district rates posted at http://www.ed.state.nh.us/education/data/misc.htm)

 

TOTAL

 

 

 

Application Form for Focus Area 2

 

You may delete this intro paragraph after you read it: Provide a narrative of no more than 6 single spaced pages with font sizes 10 – 12 (including budget). PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONFORM TO THESE REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

Focus Area 2: Classroom Tech Mini-Grants

Districts may apply to sponsor one team per district to either replicate an exemplary mini-grant project from one of the previous years’ mini-grant projects or propose a new mini-grant project.

District

ENTER YOUR DISTRICT NAME (not your SAU number) HERE

Project Type

Which project are you proposing?

 This project is REPLICATED from (replace this text with the original project title, district name, and year of the project you are replicating).

 This is an ORIGINAL project idea.

Team Members (maximum 4)

Team Leader:
Last name, First

Email

Phone

School

Content Area & Role

Member:
Last name, First

Email

Phone

School

Content Area & Role

Member:
Last name, First

Email

Phone

School

Content Area & Role

Member:
Last name, First

Email

Phone

School or Other

Content Area & Role

Project Abstract (15 Points)

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Include a clear and concise abstract (75 word maximum) that describes your mini grant project and your overall goals for implementing it in your school. You should describe how this project would fit into your school/district curriculum as well as advance the achievement of your students. The proposal abstract includes an essential question which probes for deeper meaning and broader understanding of the content addressed by this project, fostering the development of higher order thinking and problem solving.

Project Description (40 Points)

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Describe your project in general terms and indicate whether it is a replicated project or an original project. 

·         If your project is replicated, review the project video, lesson plan, and other materials. Then describe the changes you intend to make to the project idea and how they will improve the project in order to be appropriate for your situation. Include specific goals and objectives that relate to the essential question, and explain how those goals will be achieved by the project.

·         If your project is original, describe how the project is appropriate for your current situation. Include specific goals and objectives that relate to the essential question, and explain how those goals will be achieved by the project.

Generally discuss how implementing this project will improve technology integration within your classrooms and in the core content areas.  In your discussion, indicate the need for technology integration in your school or district. Describe the determination of need for this project and include one or more examples of data that support the rationale of need for the project, such as NECAP assessment or other data. This explains to the reviewer why the project is worthy of funding as it relates to student achievement.

Describe the individual content areas involved in the project, and connect each content area to the appropriate state and local standards that the project supports.

Describe in detail each of the project based learning units that will encompass your project.  Interdisciplinary projects that start with science, technology, engineering, or mathematics but expand to other areas to become larger in scope are encouraged. Indicate how the project develops students’ cognitive proficiencies in literacy, numeracy, problem solving, decision making, and/or spatial literacy, and how the activities are aligned to the state ICT Literacy standards, including the creation of specific digital artifacts that can be included in student portfolios.

 

Training Goals and Attention to Detail (There are no additional points for the following, but proposals WILL BE rejected if the following items are missing.):

·         Identify and explain at least three specific learning goals the team would like to have addressed during the two evening training sessions they will attend.

·         Submit a signed letter of support from the superintendent AND the principal (electronic copies will be accepted). Each letter must acknowledge that he/she has read the RFP, understands the requirements, and will allow the applying team to fulfill the requirements, if they are awarded the grant.

·         Additional letters of support from the local school board, community members or students are welcome but not required; they must specifically address this project.

 

Capacity for Success  (35 points)

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Demonstrate capacity for success by providing strong evidence that your school/district and the individual team members are willing and able to conduct the scope of work involved in implementing this project. 

 

Describe why participation in this statewide collaborative effort is appropriate for your district(s), and the capacity your school or district has that will insure the success of the project.

 

Describe any structures, policies, and/or procedures already in place in your school or district that supports the project and the project-based learning philosophy.

 

Discuss the abilities and expertise of the individual team members with respect to their ability to collaborate, organize, schedule, and deliver a successful project to their students.

 

Discuss team member, and district/administrative support with respect to:

·         implementing the project in your classrooms,

·         supporting the professional development opportunities necessary to successfully participate in the Mini-Grant program,

·         participating in any face to face and online meetings that will be scheduled,

·         producing the 3 minute documentary video for presentation,

·         preparing the lesson plans and materials necessary for sharing with other,

·         attending the Mini-Grant celebration day and informational Mini-Grant Showcases,

·         presenting the project to the faculty of the district and at an annual state conference, and

·         participation in post-project evaluations for program improvement.

 

Discuss the Extent of Impact within the School – indicate the anticipated number of staff that will be directly and indirectly impacted by the project, as well as the number of students that will be directly and indirectly impacted, along with supporting explanations for each.

 

Discuss the Extent of Impact to Other Schools – Describe how the project will involve or include outreach to multiple schools, or multiple districts, in order to increase the impact of the project.

 

Budget Narrative (10 points)

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Maximum Funding to High Need Districts = $7,000 per district

Format your budget with the narrative in left column and total amounts in right column. Within the narrative, describe a logical connection to your district goals and show how you calculated your costs.

Budget (Describe as appropriate)

Add your narrative below each category title and show how you calculated your total amount proposed for the budget category.

TOTAL

Hardware

 

 

Software

 

 

Supplies

 

 

Professional Development Activities  

$2,000 for mini-grant professional development provided by LESCN sites (includes video training, ongoing support, showcases, and celebration event)

$2,000

Additional Training to Support the Project

 

 

Indirect Cost (per approved 2008-09 district rates posted at http://www.ed.state.nh.us/education/data/misc.htm)

 

TOTAL

 

 

 

Application Form for Focus Area 3

 

You may delete this intro paragraph after you read it: Provide a narrative of no more than 10 single spaced pages with font sizes 10 – 12 (including budget). PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONFORM TO THESE REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

Focus Area 3: Digital Tools Projects

 

Districts may apply to conduct one digital tools project per district to put engaging technology into the hands of students.

District

ENTER YOUR DISTRICT NAME (not your SAU number) HERE

District Size

Indicate the size of your district:

 Small district (under 400 students)

 Intermediate size district (between 400 – 1200 students)

 Large district (over 1200 students)

Digital Tools

Indicate the primary configuration of digital tools that will be used in your project classrooms to create a 1:1 environment (CHOOSE ONLY ONE):

 Sub-notebooks/ mini-laptops

 Standard laptops

 Handheld computers (e.g., Palm, Nintendo DS, iTouch, etc.)

 Combination of laptops, cameras, and other tools

 Other computer configurations (please describe briefly:      )

Number of Classrooms

Indicate the classrooms involved in this project:

There will be       classrooms in grade(s)     .

Tech Leader

Indicate the tech leader(s) proposed for the training in Focus Area #4:

Last Name, First Name

Email

Last Name, First Name

Email

Evaluation Workshop Attendees

Provide the names AND email addresses of two representatives who can attend the grant evaluation workshop in December, if awarded:

Last Name, First Name

Email

Last Name, First Name

Email

Project Abstract (10 Points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

 

Include a clear and concise abstract (75 word maximum) that describes your digital tools project (including the primary configuration of tools that will be used) and your overall goals for implementing it in your school. Your abstract is your “sound bite” to be used for the awards announcement. It is also the first thing that reviewers will read. Proposals without abstracts will not be considered.

Project Description (30 Points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

 

Describe what your district will do with the funds if received, matching the digital tools to the instructional purpose. Include specific research citations to support your project description. Be sure that your project is focused on creating a 1:1 scenario with some combination of digital tools for use by students. Districts should write proposals which envision a combination of 1:1 and greater-than-1-to1 ratios using existing resources plus the new tools purchased by the grant. This will allow all projects in this statewide effort to be evaluated based on a control and experimental situation for an appropriate period of time, after which time the school is free to reconfigure the location of the tools.

 

For example: A school purchases enough tools to add to their existing digital resources to create 1:1 classrooms in a 3rd and a 4th grade classroom, while outfitting their other 3rd and 4th grade classrooms with enough tools to create a 5:1 ratio of students per tools.

 

A clear description of the activities to be undertaken should include:

 

Goals - Clear articulation of measurable proposal goals linked to local Tech Plan.

 

Scope of Work – Specific list of the work to be performed and the products and outcomes of the project clearly articulated. Identify the teachers and classrooms, grade levels, intended purchases, and instructional focus.

 

Digital Tools – Identify which digital tools will be the focus of this project and how the tools are intended to support project goals.

 

NH Standards – Describe how this proposal supports student achievement by addressing specific NH curriculum standards and ICT Literacy program standards. Include which standards and which grade levels will be involved in project activities.

 

Needs Assessment – Describe the needs that led you to develop this proposal and include how you identified the needs. Identify the teachers and classrooms, grade levels, and current technology available.

 

** Note that the table with “allowable budget limits” in the RFP refers to the maximum number of 1:1 classrooms the grant funds will equip. This maximum does not include additional classrooms which might also be equipped at higher ratios.

 

Professional Development  (20 points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

 

Describe the professional development activities that will support the project goals and what improvements you expect to see as a result of that professional development.

 

Indicate who will participate in the tech leader program (see Focus Area #4) and how their participation will support their colleagues as the project unfolds this year and in the future. Also include other professional development activities that are needed to support this project.

 

Include such items as:

 

·         Clear articulation of measurable goals of the proposed professional development.

·         Standards that are a foundation for your professional development plans (i.e. ISTE, NSDC) and specific reference to research that supports the proposed professional development.

·         The type, quantity, focus, target audience for, and follow-up for the professional development.

·         The number and/or percent of teachers expected to participate this year.

·         How the professional development program is expected to influence student performance improvements.

 

Capacity for Success  (15 points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

 

Describe why this is the right kind and size of project for your district(s), and what structures, policies, and/or procedures are in place or planned that support this proposal. We suggest referring to the NETS Essential Conditions. Include such items as:

 

·         Who (describe roles, not individual names please) will be responsible for conducting the work.

·         What structures, resources, policies, and procedures are already in place or proposed that will support this project and/or enhance its sustainability.

·         Evidence that this plan is realistic and that the school or organization has the capacity to achieve its objectives.

 

Evaluation (15 points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

 

Describe the process you will follow to evaluate this grant, referring to the Collaborative Evaluation Guide at www.neirtec.org/evaluation. Indicate who will attend the evaluation workshop and who will help with the local evaluation process. Projects will be expected to conduct local evaluation activities as well as participate in the statewide evaluation of all digital tools projects. Include such items as:

 

·         What critical questions do you want to answer about the impact of your project?

·         Who will be involved in order to complete the evaluation?

·         Who within your school community needs to learn about your evaluation findings and what difference might the knowledge make?

·         How will you plan for and collect relevant data?

·         How will you make sense of your findings and use those finding to make improvements?

 

Budget Narrative (10 points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

 

Maximum Funding to High Need Districts = see chart in RFP

 

Format your budget with the narrative in left column and total amounts in right column. Within the narrative, describe a logical connection to the project goals. Provide enough specifics to give reviewers an idea of what you intend to purchase and why it is needed for the project. The budget does not need to identify brand names of equipment or include “to the penny” prices. Applications that primarily request hardware without identifying the needs to be met will not be considered for funding. The narrative should include:

 

·         Justification for the major expenditures proposed, especially salaries.

·         Explanation of any items on the budget sheet that might not be completely clear to a reader.

 

Format your budget with the narrative in left column and total amounts in right column. Within the narrative, describe a logical connection to your district goals and show how you calculated your costs.

 

Budget (Describe as appropriate)

Add your narrative below each category title and show how you calculated your total amount proposed for the budget category.

TOTAL

Hardware

Add narrative here of items, costs, calculations, etc.

 

Software

Add narrative here of items, costs, calculations, etc.

 

Professional Development

Include $3,000 for each tech leader (one per school) participating in tech leader training as described in Focus Area 4.

Include other professional development expenses according to the activities described in the PD section of your proposal. The total PD amount should be approximately 25% of your total digital tools project amount (see table of allowable budget limits within the RFP).

 

Other Expenses

Use this budget category to itemize and describe purchases that do not align well to the above categories.

 

Indirect Cost (per approved 2008-09 district rates posted at http://www.ed.state.nh.us/education/data/misc.htm)

 

TOTAL

 

 

 

Application Form for Focus Area 4

 

You may delete this intro paragraph after you read it: Provide a narrative of no more than 4 single spaced pages with font sizes 10 – 12 (including budget). PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONFORM TO THESE REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

Focus Area 4: Tech Leader Training

Districts may apply to sponsor one educator per school to participate in this statewide effort to bolster technology leadership within schools.

District

ENTER YOUR DISTRICT NAME (not your SAU number) HERE

Name of Proposed Tech Leader (One per school)

Last Name, First Name

Email

School

Name of Tech Leader’s Principal (One per school)

Last Name, First Name

Email

School

Project Abstract (10 Points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Include a clear and concise abstract (75 word maximum) that describes the status of your school district in terms of technology implementation within all classrooms and how involvement in this focus area is intended to bolster technology leadership within your schools.

Program Description (40 Points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Describe (two page maximum) your district’s willingness to support participation of one or more tech leaders in this Tech Leader Training Program. Clearly articulate the needs of your district in terms of professional development and technology leadership and how this program might address specific goals of your district technology plan. Indicate your district’s understanding of the following and articulate any additional information that might be helpful to proposal reviewers:

·         the specific training activities will be partly determined by the needs articulated by the participants, but all training activities will require both face to face and online participation

·         activities will begin in January 2009 and continue through December 2009, with participants expected to spend an estimated 4 hours per week between online and face to face activities related to the program

·         the principal at each tech leader’s school will be required to participate in a modest (occasional) amount of activities, either face to face or online, in order to become familiar with the program and work with the tech leader to develop a plan for advancing technology implementation within the school to create 21st century learning environments

·         district technology plans, the NH Tech Planning Guide, national ed tech standards, and other key materials will be utilized

 

Capacity for Success  (40 points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Describe (one page maximum) why participation in this statewide effort is appropriate for your district(s). Describe previous technology training experiences of the proposed tech leaders, their perceived professional development needs, and how the program can help them address the perceived needs of the school they intend to influence. This information is important, as it will be used to tailor the training program to best meet the needs of each tech leader cohort.

 

Examples of previous training experiences would include local workshops or tech leader programs at LESCN sites, state or national conferences, as well as nationally known training programs, such as Thinkfinity, MarcoPolo, Intel Teach to the Future, ISTE programs, and others.

 

Budget Narrative (10 points)

 

Delete all the text in this box and replace it with your response.

Maximum Funding to High Need Districts = $3,000 per school

Format your budget (one page maximum) with the narrative in left column and total amounts in right column.

Budget (Describe as appropriate)
Add your narrative below each category title and show how you calculated your total amount proposed for the budget category.

TOTAL

Tech Leader Support

Includes flexibility for substitute teachers for meetings, stipends, and related support for the tech leader to effectively participate  

Up to $1,000

Travel

Includes travel to meetings, conferences, etc.

$500

Registration Fees

Includes costs for registering for online courses, conferences, etc.

$1,500

Indirect Cost (per approved 2008-09 district rates posted at http://www.ed.state.nh.us/education/data/misc.htm)

 

TOTAL

$3,000


 

APPENDIX C: Rubrics for Application Reviews

 

Pages provided within appendix C are for reference only. These are the rubrics which will be used by reviewers when they read and score applications.

 

Scoring Rubric for Focus Area 1

Portfolio Assessment Rubrics for Middle School

Last revision date:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Criteria

No Basis

Poor

Average

Above Average

Excellent

 

Comments

 

Project Abstract (5 points)

0

2

3

4

5

 

Abstract is clear and concise, no more than 75 words, and describes the main focus areas, activities, and desired outcomes of your project.

 

Project Description (20 points)

0

12

15

17

20

 

Willingness to participate in the development of statewide rubrics and what your district team member can contribute to it is described.

 

Your goals for participation on this statewide collaborative team are described.

 

Your understanding that the scope of work will be largely determined by the team during the initial phases of the collaboration are described.

 

Your willingness to be a part of this collaboration is discussed.

 

Description includes the extent to which your middle schools are currently assessing students’ competencies in each of the following areas and how you are accomplishing these:
o Technology operations and concepts
o Digital citizenship / Social, ethical, & human issues
o Creativity & innovation / productivity tools
o Communication and collaboration / communication tools
o Research & information fluency / research tools
o Critical thinking, problem solving & decision-making

 

Capacity to Implement (65 points)

0

39

49

55

65

 

Describe why participation in this statewide collaborative effort is appropriate for your district(s), and what structures, policies, and/or procedures are already in place or planned to support digital portfolios and their assessment in your district.

 

Discuss the abilities and expertise of the team member(s) selected to represent your district in this collaboration.

 

Demonstrate capacity for success by providing strong evidence that the person responsible is willing and able to conduct the work, is supported by the district and able to participate in the meetings, face to face and online, as well as the online course and the summer institute.

 

If participant is a member of a statewide professional organization, be sure to include a description of how the team member might work with the organization to help disseminate the results of this statewide effort.

 

Budget (10 points)

0

6

8

9

10

 

Format your budget ((one page maximum) with the narrative in left column and total amounts in right column. Within the narrative, describe a logical connection to your district goals. The narrative should include:

 

• Estimated cost of the summer institute is $500 per middle school, which would include meals, lodging, and support materials.

 

• Team Member stipends should include participation in the development, implementation, and dissemination efforts as determined by the collaborative group.  See RFP for more details on the phases.

 

TOTAL SCORE (MAX is 100):

0

0

0

0

0

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scoring Rubric for Focus Area 2

Classroom Tech Mini-Grants

Last revision date:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Criteria

No Basis

Poor

Average

Above Average

Excellent

 

Comments

 

Project Abstract (15 points)

0

6

9

12

15

 

Include a clear and concise abstract (75 word maximum) that describes your mini grant project and your overall goals for implementing it in your school. You should describe how this project would fit into your school/district curriculum as well as advance the achievement of your students. The proposal abstract includes an essential question which probes for deeper meaning and broader understanding of the content addressed by this project, fostering the development of higher order thinking and problem solving.

 

Project Description (40 points)

0

24

30

34

40

 

Describe your project in general terms and indicate whether it is a replicated project or an original project. 
• If your project is replicated, review the project video, lesson plan, and other materials. Then describe the changes you intend to make to the project idea and how they will improve the project in order to be appropriate for your situation. Include specific goals and objectives that relate to the essential question, and explain how those goals will be achieved by the project.
• If your project is original, describe how the project is appropriate for your current situation. Include specific goals and objectives that relate to the essential question, and explain how those goals will be achieved by the project.

 

Discuss how implementing this project will improve technology integration within your classrooms and in the core content areas.  In your discussion, indicate the need for technology integration in your school or district. Describe the determination of need for this project and include one or more examples of data that support the rationale of need for the project, such as NECAP assessment or other data. This explains to the reviewer why the project is worthy of funding as it relates to student achievement.

 

Describe the individual content areas involved in the project, and connect each content area to the appropriate state and local standards that the project supports.

 

Describe in detail each of the project based learning units that will encompass your project.  Interdisciplinary projects that start with science, technology, engineering, or mathematics but expand to other areas to become larger in scope are encouraged. Indicate how the project develops students’ cognitive proficiencies in literacy, numeracy, problem solving, decision making, and/or spatial literacy, and how the activities are aligned to the state ICT Literacy standards, including the creation of specific digital artifacts that can be included in student portfolios.

 

Training Goals and Attention to Detail (There are no additional points for the following, but proposals WILL BE rejected if the following items are missing.):
• Identify and explain at least three specific learning goals the team would like to have addressed during the two evening training sessions they will attend.
• Submit a signed letter of support from the superintendent AND the principal (electronic copies will be accepted). Each letter must acknowledge that he/she has read the RFP, understands the requirements, and will allow the applying team to fulfill the requirements, if they are awarded the grant.
• Additional letters of support from the local school board, community members or students are welcome but not required; they must specifically address this project.

 

Capacity to Implement (35 points)

0

21

26

31

35

 

Demonstrate capacity for success by providing strong evidence that your school/district and the individual team members are willing and able to conduct the scope of work involved in implementing this project.

 

Describe why participation in this statewide collaborative effort is appropriate for your district(s), and the capacity your school or district has that will insure the success of the project.

 

Describe any structures, policies, and/or procedures already in place in your school or district that supports the project and the project-based learning philosophy.

 

Discuss the abilities and expertise of the individual team members with respect to their ability to collaborate, organize, schedule, and deliver a successful project to their students.

 

Discuss team member, and district/administrative support with respect to:
• implementing the project in your classrooms,
• supporting the professional development opportunities necessary to successfully participate in the Mini-Grant program,
• participating in any face to face and online meetings that will be scheduled,
• producing the 3 minute documentary video for presentation,
• preparing the lesson plans and materials necessary for sharing with other,
• attending the Mini-Grant celebration day and informational Mini-Grant Showcases,
• presenting the project to the faculty of the district and at an annual state conference, and
• participation in post-project evaluations for program improvement.

 

Discuss the Extent of Impact within the School – indicate the anticipated number of staff that will be directly and indirectly impacted by the project, as well as the number of students that will be directly and indirectly impacted, along with supporting explanations for each.

 

Discuss the Extent of Impact to Other Schools – Describe how the project will involve or include outreach to multiple schools, or multiple districts, in order to increase the impact of the project.

 

Budget (10 points)

0

6

8

9

10

 

Format your budget with the narrative in left column and total amounts in right column. Within the narrative, describe a logical connection to your district goals and show how you calculated your costs.

 

A narrative is below each category title and show how you calculated your total amount proposed for the budget category.

 

TOTAL SCORE (MAX is 100):

0

0

0

0

0

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scoring Rubric for Focus Area 3

Digital Tools Projects

Last revision date:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Criteria

No Basis

Poor

Average

Above Average

Excellent

 

Comments

 

Project Abstract (10 points)

0

6

8

9

10

 

Include a clear and concise abstract (75 word maximum) that describes your digital tools project (including the primary configuration of tools that will be used) and your overall goals for implementing it in your school. Your abstract is your “sound bite” to be used for the awards announcement. It is also the first thing that reviewers will read. Proposals without abstracts will not be considered.

 

Project Description (30 points)

0

18

24

27

30

 

Describe what your district will do with the funds if received, matching the digital tools to the instructional purpose. Include specific research citations to support your project description. Be sure that your project is focused on creating a 1:1 scenario with some combination of digital tools for use by students. Districts should write proposals which envision a combination of 1:1 and greater-than-1-to1 ratios using existing resources plus the new tools purchased by the grant. This will allow all projects in this statewide effort to be evaluated based on a control and experimental situation for an appropriate period of time, after which time the school is free to reconfigure the location of the tools.

 

A clear description of the activities to be undertaken should include:
• Goals - Clear articulation of measurable proposal goals linked to local Tech Plan.
• Scope of Work – Specific list of the work to be performed and the products and outcomes of the project clearly articulated. Identify the teachers and classrooms, grade levels, intended purchases, and instructional focus.
• Digital Tools – Identify which digital tools will be the focus of this project and how the tools are intended to support project goals.
• NH Standards – Describe how this proposal supports student achievement by addressing specific NH curriculum standards and ICT Literacy program standards. Include which standards and which grade levels will be involved in project activities.
• Needs Assessment – Describe the needs that led you to develop this proposal and include how you identified the needs. Identify the teachers and classrooms, grade levels, and current technology available.

 

Professional Development (20 points)

0

12

16

18

20

 

Describe the professional development activities that will support the project goals and what improvements you expect to see as a result of that professional development.

 

Indicate who will participate in the tech leader program (see Focus Area #4) and how their participation will support their colleagues as the project unfolds this year and in the future. Also include other professional development activities that are needed to support this project.

 

Include such items as:
• Clear articulation of measurable goals of the proposed professional development.
• Standards that are a foundation for your professional development plans (i.e. ISTE, NSDC) and specific reference to research that supports the proposed professional development.
• The type, quantity, focus, target audience for, and follow-up for the professional development.
• The number and/or percent of teachers expected to participate this year.
• How the professional development program is expected to influence student performance improvements.

 

Capacity for Success (15 points)

0

9

11

13

15

 

Describe why this is the right kind and size of project for your district(s), and what structures, policies, and/or procedures are in place or planned that support this proposal. We suggest referring to the NETS Essential Conditions. Include such items as:
• Who (describe roles, not individual names please) will be responsible for conducting the work.
• What structures, resources, policies, and procedures are already in place or proposed that will support this project and/or enhance its sustainability.
• Evidence that this plan is realistic and that the school or organization has the capacity to achieve its objectives.

 

Evaluation (15 points)

0

9

11

13

15

 

Describe the process you will follow to evaluate this grant, referring to the Collaborative Evaluation Guide at www.neirtec.org/evaluation. Indicate who will attend the evaluation workshop and who will help with the local evaluation process. Projects will be expected to conduct local evaluation activities as well as participate in the statewide evaluation of all digital tools projects. Include such items as:
• What critical questions do you want to answer about the impact of your project?
• Who will be involved in order to complete the evaluation?
• Who within your school community needs to learn about your evaluation findings and what difference might the knowledge make?
• How will you plan for and collect relevant data?
• How will you make sense of your findings and use those finding to make improvements?

 

Budget (10 points)

0

6

8

9

10

 

Format your budget with the narrative in left column and total amounts in right column. Within the narrative, describe a logical connection to the project goals. Provide enough specifics to give reviewers an idea of what you intend to purchase and why it is needed for the project. The budget does not need to identify brand names of equipment or include “to the penny” prices. Applications that primarily request hardware without identifying the needs to be met will not be considered for funding. The narrative should include:

 

• Justification for the major expenditures proposed, especially salaries.

 

• Explanation of any items on the budget sheet that might not be completely clear to a reader.

 

TOTAL SCORE (MAX is 100):

 

 

 

 

 

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scoring Rubric for Focus Area 4

Tech Leader Training

Last revision date:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Criteria

No Basis

Poor

Average

Above Average

Excellent

 

Comments

 

Project Abstract (10 points)

0

6

8

9

10

 

Includes a clear and concise abstract (75 word maximum) that describes the status of your school district in terms of technology implementation within all classrooms and how involvement in this focus area is intended to bolster technology leadership within your schools.

 

Project Description (40 points)

0

24

32

36

40

 

Describes your district’s willingness to support participation of one or more tech leaders in this Tech Leader Training Program. Clearly articulates the needs of your district in terms of professional development and technology leadership and how this program might address specific goals of your district technology plan. Indicate your district’s understanding of the following and articulate any additional information that might be helpful to proposal reviewers:

 

• the specific training activities will be partly determined by the needs articulated by the participants, but all training activities will require both face to face and online participation
• activities will begin in January 2009 and continue through December 2009, with participants expected to spend an estimated 4 hours per week between online and face to face activities related to the program
• the principal at each tech leader’s school will be required to participate in a modest (occasional) amount of activities, either face to face or online, in order to become familiar with the program and work with the tech leader to develop a plan for advancing technology implementation within the school to create 21st century learning environments
• district technology plans, the NH Tech Planning Guide, national ed tech standards, and other key materials will be utilized

 

Capacity for Success (40 points)

0

24

32

36

40

 

Describes why participation in this statewide effort is appropriate for your district(s). Describe previous technology training experiences of the proposed tech leaders, their perceived professional development needs, and how the program can help them address the perceived needs of the school they intend to influence. This information is important, as it will be used to tailor the training program to best meet the needs of each tech leader cohort.

Examples of previous training experiences would include local workshops or tech leader programs at LESCN sites, state or national conferences, as well as nationally known training programs, such as Thinkfinity, MarcoPolo, Intel Teach to the Future, ISTE programs, and others.

 

Budget (10 points)

0

6

8

9

10

 

A  narrative is below each category title and shows how you calculated your total amount proposed for the budget category.

 

TOTAL SCORE (MAX is 100):

 

 

 

 

 

0