New Hampshire Department of Education NH state seal
arrow graphic

Division of Instruction
NHEON :: Office of Ed Tech :: No Child Left Behind

No Child Left Behind: Title II Part D
Enhancing Education Through Technology

Contact: Cathy Higgins


With the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act in January 2002, a program was established within Title II Part D to provide federal funding to schools for educational technology. This program is called Enhancing Education Through Technology (E2T2). On this page, you will find links to information about current year funding. Previous year information may be found on the archives page.


Frequently Asked Questions
about NCLB Title II-D Applications for 2008-09

Districts are reminded to read the complete RFP, including the application forms and the accompanying review rubrics. Addressing the criteria in the rubrics and paying attention to the tips in the application forms can help increase your scores and thus your chances to be among the awardees. :)

Regarding Focus Area 3: Digital Tools, can you provide a project example related to the section in the application form and the reviewers rubric for focus area 3 that refers to creating 1:1 and greater than 1:1 classrooms?

Here is an example of a project design that accommodates an experimental and control group situation for the second half of 2008-09 and the first half of 2009-2010:

"Using a combination of existing resources plus new digital tools purchased with this grant, the ABC School will create teaching environments where some classes have 1:1 access while others have a 4:1 ratio of access to tools. During each morning of the week, two of our four science classes in the 7th grade will have access to digital tools at a ratio of 1:1 (one tool per student) because we will position the full compliment of tools in those classrooms. During each afternoon of the week, two more science classes will have a 4:1 access ratio to the tools because some of the tools will be in the science classes while others will be made available to our language arts, social studies, and unified arts classes. This will allow the impact of our project to be evaluated based on a control and experimental situation for the grant period (January 2009 through December 2010)."

Based on the above digital tools scenario, why couldn't we have a 1:1 ratio in all science and math classrooms and 4:1 in all language arts and social studies classrooms?

This would probably weaken your proposal scores and would definitely weaken the research design possibility. To have a good research project, you want to get as close as you can to minimizing the differences between the two groups, while being able to change the one factor that you think might make a difference. In this case, the question is whether increasing digital tools will have a positive impact on student learning. The ideal is to have only ONE thing that is different – in this case, the one thing that you want different is the number of tools available to teach. So if the teacher is the same, the grade level and content is the same, but there are simply less tools, you have minimal differences between the two groups. If you have teacher and grade level the same, but both the content AND number of tools are different, you have too many variables.

Why is the research design important?

The above scenario is a modestly constructed research design. Yet, it will allow New Hampshire to learn more about the impact of quantities of digital tools in our classrooms. The federal Title IID program has always emphasized the need to evaluate the impact of funding on student learning, and to conduct research on funded projects wherever feasible. We can all understand current budget limitations and we know that many NH classrooms have student to computer ratios of 5:1 or higher. It is important to create model classrooms within our state that will help educators and decision makers to see the impact of tools on student learning. If we can reach a delicate balance of modest purchases which yield significant impact on learning, we will have a compelling reason to consider budgeting for careful purchases of 21st century resources.

If we are applying for a digital tools grant and have to also apply for the tech leader training, is the latter budget an additional $3,000 on top of our digital tools budget?

We have corrected an error on the originally released RFP related to this question (see corrected RFP on the website). In the maximum amounts table for Focus Area 3 (digital tools - page 14 of the RFP) you’ll note that if you are applying for digital tools, you are also required to involve someone in the tech leader training. That $3,000 will count towards the 25% federal required minimum for professional development, but please take care not to double count the amount. Your tech leader application will show the $3,000 as well. You should include a notation in your digital tools budget that you applied for the tech leader training.

For example, ABC School is in the small school category so the are requesting $24,000 in equipment and supplies, $3,000 in tech leader training, and another $5,000 in other professional development related expenses. This is a total of $32,000 in funding of which $29,000 will appear on your digital tools application $24K plus $5K) and another $3,000 will be requested on the tech leader application, with a notation about the tech leader training placed on the digital tools application. Twenty-five percent of a $32,000 digital tools award is $8,000 for PD, which represents $3,000 tech leader plus $5,000 other PD.

Can we purchase adaptive/assistive technologies for our IEP students with these funds?

Yes, so long as the technology purchased is used for activities consistent with the guidelines of this RFP. For example, mini-grants which support project based learning might be implemented in a classroom where a student needs upgraded AT software to address visual impairment in order to fully participate. The mini-grant budget can include the cost of such software. The same is true for the digital tools grants, where AT equipment or software can enhance the learning experience for students who need it. Districts considering purchasing AT equipment might want to visit for more information about resources in New Hampshire.

Can we use these funds to purchase equipment for our Unified Arts classrooms?

It depends on the instructional activities intended with the funds. You will want to show how your project will strengthen your school's efforts to provide a solid foundation in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) and that the project creates a 1:1 environment for some classrooms. We suggest you read the RFP as well as the application form and rubric to be sure you've designed a project that covers the requested elements.

For example, you might focus on an integrated curriculum that is based in the Arts and Family/Consumer Science classrooms but that also involves the science and math teachers. The result would be stronger and more coherent overall curriculum alignment across all of these classrooms.

We want to apply for the digital tools project, but it requires that we also apply for the tech leader training. While we understand the importance of training to support a digital tools project, our teachers are concerned about the approximate 4 hours per week that they will be expected to spend on tech leader training activities. They are already very busy with many responsibilities related to federal and state requirements. Why are they expected to spend 4 hours per week on this training?

This program is intended to enhance participants' skills and expertise with ICT while also developing their skills as 21st century educational leaders. It was not intended that every teacher in the school participate in this extra training. Focus area 4 is intended to build capacity across the state, so that every school has at least one tech leader who provides leadership and collegial support to colleagues. In addition, the tech leader gain skills which will help her/him be a resource for district technology planning and professional development committees. It is important to have participants who are committed to the program and whose administration is fully supportive of their involvement.

The estimate of 4 hours per week is an average for the entire year of the project. There may be weeks when it is less and weeks when it is more. Some of these hours might be during the school day (e.g., tech leader meets with the professional development committee to map out a series of after-school tech training sessions), while other hours might be in the evening (e.g., tech leader participates in an online course to address digital citizenship efforts among teachers and students). Still other hours might be in a spring or summer face-to-face workshop or institute. We suggest that applicants think of this program as somewhat similar to a graduate degree program with a field-based practicum. Course work will be largely online while field based work will be within their own schools. In addition, participants who are part of a digital tools project will be using their tech leader training to support aspects of their school's digital tools project.

Can we use the $3,000 tech leader budget to pay a stipend to our teacher or to purchase a laptop for their use?

Yes, there is flexibility with the budget. You can use some of the budget for stipends. You can also use some of the budget for a laptop which is loaned to the teacher to support their leadership efforts. It is requested that you set aside $2,000 for travel, course, and meeting related expenses.

The RFP does not indicate where the tech leader training events will be held. How do we know that we will have enough travel funds to cover these expenses if events are not locally based?

We anticipate applicants from all regions of the state and that the Local Educational Support Center Network will be actively involved in this training effort. The few face-to-face events will likely be hosted by a center within about 30 miles of your school. If additional funds are available, it may be possible to allocate additional funds at a later date if a school has inordinately large travel expenses.

Why are we asked to budget $1,500 for the tech leader course and meeting expenses?

We anticipate that most of the face-to-face activities for the tech leader program will occur at the Local Educational Support Centers. The Centers need to cover their meeting and facilitation expenses, as they only receive limited funding directly from the NHDOE. Therefore, it makes more sense for you to build these expenses directly into your project budgets so that you will be able to pay these costs directly to the center that supports your area. Your applications will provide important information about the trainings and expertise participants may have already received, as well as the skills most needed. This information will inform the final training agenda for the year.

Our school already has someone we would consider a tech leader, but s/he expects to retire in a few years. Can we have two participants in this program in order to allow our current tech leader to mentor a new teacher into this role?

Yes, we'd love to support two people from your school in this way. You would have to share the same $3,000 eligible amount per school for both people's involvement. The other issue that might arise with this scenario is whether we will have the space and capacity to support twice as many people in the program. We hope to ensure that this is a possible scenario for those schools that might propose one tech leader and a second in the role of tech leader/mentor.

More questions and answers will be posted as they are received ...


Last updated 10/24/2008