HOPEWELL-LOUDON SCHOOL TECHNOLOGY LOTTERY

Request for Proposals

August 27th, 2008

Proposal Deadline:

Monday, September 15^th , 2008, 8:00 AM

For Additional Information contact:

Geoff Palmer, Superintendent

Steve Acton, Technology Supervisor

Or Your Building Principal

*Print this Document a guideline for your project*

GOALS

The goals of the Technology Lottery Program are to:

1. Increase the ability of teachers to strategically use technology to improve student learning.
2. Increase the use of student achievement data/information to improve student learning and teacher practice.
3. Increase access to hardware and software
4. Increase access to local and remote instructional and informational resources; and
5. Increase parental involvement in their schools through improved communications between the home and school regarding student learning.

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY

A total of $5000 dollars for classroom technologies and Five (5) wireless laptop computers, will be available this fall to teachers in the district for classroom use. It is understood these items remain property of Hopewell-Loudon School. Therefore, the use of the computer, access to our local network and the internet are subject to the terms and provisions of the District Acceptable Use Policy. 

ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES

Activities should be based on relevant research and designed to improve student achievement and/or teacher proficiency and help students meet the challenging state academic content standards.

Activities should relate to one or more of the areas provided below:

• Information-based decision making—Using technology to collect, manage and analyze student achievement data to improve student learning and teacher practice;
• Increasing access—Developing and/or expanding practices designed to increase access to hardware and software, courses, and information resources for students and teachers;
• Parental Involvement—Utilizing technology to develop or expand efforts to connect schools and teachers with parents and students to promote meaningful parental involvement and to foster increased communication; and
• Teacher leadership—Establishing teachers as leaders to serve as experts and trainers in the use of technology to transform the learning environment.

APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

Applicants must submit a description (maximum of three-pages, single spaced, in 12-point font or larger) of how the technology will be used to positively impact student academic learning and/or teacher practice. The description shall address areas such as:

• Needs, goals, and objectives
• Identify the school/classroom-based need(s) your application addresses.
• Identify at least one goal and at least one, but not more than two, measurable objectives for each goal to improve student achievement.

• Work Plan
• Describe which eligible activities your application addresses and how this/these will improve student achievement and/or teacher practice. Include:
• How will achieving the defined outcomes improve student achievement
• Which grade levels your application targets
• Which content standards will be addressed, if applicable
• Which software applications, online resources and/or other resources will be used.

• Evaluation Plan
• How will success be measured? Applications should evaluate the successful attainment of objectives, not whether activities have been completed.

• Budget Plan
• Get more than one quote for best pricing. Are there items in the classroom or building that may offset the costs?
• Have you evaluated the product by talking to other teachers in or out of the district.

EVALUATING THE APPLICATION

Evaluation Criteria

To be eligible for consideration, applicants must address the following areas of analysis.

1. Needs Identification, Goals and Objectives (4 points). Elements which must be addressed include:

· Identifying the nature and level of educational needs that will be met by this application.

· Statement of meaningful goals and measurable objectives, and

· Alignment of goals and objectives with identified needs.

2. Work Plan (4 points). Applicants will describe the strategies and activities through which the applicant intends to accomplish the stated goals and objectives. Elements to be addressed include:
• Software and other resources used.
• Proposed research-based strategies and activities and how they will help the applicant address identified needs.
• Timeline for program activities and process for implementation.

3. Project Evaluation (4 points). Applicants will describe the process and focus for evaluating the proposal. Elements to be addressed include:
• Link to goals and objectives
• Feasibility and value of evaluation process, and
• Nature and quality of data to be collected.

4. Budget Pan (4 points). Applicants will describe what product they chose and why other products were not chosen.
• Getting more of a product for your money.
• Utilization of building resources already available at Hopewell-Loudon Schools

EVALUATION RUBRIC

The Evaluation Rubric is provided to assist you as you write your proposal. The rubric will be fully completed by grant readers during the evaluation phase of the grant process.

2008 Hopewell-Loudon School

Technology Lottery

Reader Summary of Application Evaluation

Applicant __________________________________________

Recommendations	As Proposed	With Changes
Highly Recommended
Recommended
Not Recommended
Not Eligible

Maximum Pts Pts Awarded

1. Needs Identification, Goals, Objectives 4 __________

2. Work Plan 4 __________

3. Project Evaluation 4 __________

4. Budget plan 4 __________

TOTAL (16 POINTS MAXIMUM) __________

____________________________________ _____________________

Reviewer Date

1. Needs Identification, Goals and Objectives Max Pts Available 4

Pts Awarded ______

The ability to correlate this proposal to needs relating to increased student achievement and/or improved teacher practice will be key to an application’s success.

Level 1 1 Point	Level 2 2 Points	Level 3 3 Points	Level 4 4 Points
· There is no description of needs or how these needs were identified.	· There is a vague description of need, but it is not clear how these needs were identified, or the need is limited.	· There is a description of the need, but it is not clear how these needs were identified.	· There is a clear description of the need and how these needs were identified.
· Goals and objectives do not relate to the project need.	· Goals and objectives vaguely relate to project need.	· Most of the goals and objectives relate to the project need.	· Goals and objectives clearly relate to the project needs.
· Objectives are not specific or measurable. · Objectives are not related to improving student learning and/or teacher practice.	· Few of the objectives are specific and/or measurable. · Few of the objectives are related to improving student learning and/or teacher practice.	· Most of the objectives are specific and measurable. · Most of the objectives relate to improving student learning and/or teacher practice.	· Objectives are specific and measurable. · All objectives are clearly related to improving student learning and/or teacher practice.

2. Work Plan Max Pts Available 4

Pts Awarded ______

The work plan should describe the activities that will take place to successfully implement the project’s goals and objectives. The timeline should be accurate and achievable.

Level 1 1 Point	Level 2 2 Points	Level 3 3 Points	Level 4 4 Points
· The activities are vague, lacking in detail, and do not clearly benefit teachers and/or students.	· Some activities are lacking in detail. The benefit to teachers and students is unclear.	· Activities are described and appear to benefit teachers and students.	· Activities are well-planned and described in clear detail, and will clearly benefit teachers and students.
· A timeline is not presented for activities.	· The timeline for activities is incomplete and has gaps or questionable sequence.	· A timeline for activities is presented but may lack clarity and structure.	· The timeline for activities is methodical, clear and doable. Activities are appropriately sequenced and phased in.
· The project is technically confusing, not possible as described, and/or uses outdated strategies and/or technologies.	· The project is feasible but does not use the most appropriate strategies or technology.	· The project uses effective strategies and/or technology that are appropriate for the project.	· The project uses relevant strategies and/or technology that is explained in detail and builds on what is already in place.

3. Project Evaluation Max Pts Available 4

Pts Awarded ______

The evaluation plan should clearly indicate how the objectives, not activities or strategies, will be measured. The plan should describe how the findings will be achieved.

Level 1 1 Point	Level 2 2 Points	Level 3 3 Points	Level 4 4 Points
· The evaluation does not address changes in instruction and learning.	· The evaluation addresses little, if any, change in instruction and learning.	· The evaluation addresses some changes in instruction and learning.	· The evaluation addresses definite changes in instruction and learning, especially how the services provided under this project meet the needs of students and teachers.
· The evaluation measures whether activities are completed, not whether objectives are being met.		· The evaluation measures progress toward some, but not all, of the project’s objectives.	· The evaluation measures progress towards the project’s objectives.

4. Budget Plan Max Pts Available 4

Pts Awarded ______

The Budget Plan should include

Level 1 1 Point	Level 2 2 Points	Level 3 3 Points	Level 4 4 Points
· There is no research of cost of items requested.	· The applicant addresses very little to budget costs.	· Applicant has an estimated budget plan with one cost estimate.	· Applicant has detailed budget plan with more than one quote in order to research best price.
· No consideration of using existing building resources. Example: requesting a scanner when one exists in office.	· Applicant vaguely considers using building or classroom resources in place.