Funding PaperDescription of Needs

This year, all students in the county took a computerized standardized test called

the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC

assessment). In order to prepare students for the PARCC assessment, teachers used online

technology resources such as Coreclicks, Tenmarks, and OpenEd as well as keyboarding

practices using Type to Learn. This required frequent checking out of laptops for classes

on a weekly basis. However, with a lack of resources for computers and laptops at our

school, it was very difficult to check out laptops for a class of 30 students on a daily

basis. Teachers had to negotiate, compromise, and work out a schedule for everyone to

have some technology time with their students using laptops. Especially during PARCC

and MAP testing times (Measures of Academic Progress assessment), laptops were

scarce. In one instance, several grade level teams planned technology projects, but were

unable to check out laptops due to testing. Even though having 240 laptops and 30

computers at a school may seem like a lot, it is not nearly enough for a school of 900

students. If Howard County Public School System is pushing toward technology

integrated classrooms and/or flipped classroom models, then we need the right tools to

meet those expectation.

Our other need for technology is tablets. Currently, we have no class set number

of tablets available at our school to use for learning with the students. Starting a “Bring

Your Own Device (BYOD)” program like other schools in the county is not an effective

option due to the demographic of our community. In the 2013-2014 school year, 48% of

our student population received Free and Reduced Meals, making our school a Title I

school. Many students come from families without access to computers and the Internet

at home. It would be highly unlikely for many of our students to bring tablets and/or

iPads to school. Nevertheless, teachers have been discovering educational applications

(apps) on iPads and tablets that are engaging for students. A lesson such as using Quick

Response (QR) code stations set up around the school is more convenient with mobile

tablets than laptops or computers. Many primary grades and special education teachers

find more need for using tablets for their students. In addition to access to laptops at our

school, we believe in the benefit of using tablets for learning.

    Lastly, if our school received more laptops and/or tablets, teachers would need

professional development on how to effectively use them in the classroom. The main

reason for our technology needs is to increase technology integration. We have to

encourage teachers to use the devices more frequently in their classrooms. During the

professional development sessions, technology leaders (grant recipient leading the project

or technology teachers) can provide technology resources and ideas for lessons. This

would require workshop wages and funding to pay technology leaders to teach the

teachers, and to pay teachers to attend the sessions and learn.

Grant Opportunities

1. Maryland Society for Educational Technology (MSET) - ($2,000 To use the money to

buy more tablets) http://www.msetonline.org/grants.html

The Maryland Society for Educational Technology (MSET) seeks grantees who

are focusing on personalized learning in their innovative work with technology. This

organization will offer up to $2,000 per grant. This will help a school to receive money to

buy more tablets to meet the personal needs of students. This grant from this organization

does have to be something with regards to technology and supports the 21st century

learning skills for students to achieve. As stated on the application, “grant funds may be

used for software, apps, hardware, or peripherals needed to complete this program.” It

does have some limitation on what the grant can be funded for such as field trips, salaries,

curriculum developments, scholarships, conference attendance, consumables, and student

prizes.

In order to be eligible for this grant, you have to be a member of MSET and use

the grant for technology purposes.  It would be beneficial to be apart of this organization

since it enriches its members of educational technology and provides conferences and

workshops to attend. Anyone with an interest in educational technology can become a

member of MSET. Members are able to network with other teachers across Maryland.

This group’s intention is to promote the use of computers in education. The MSET

constitution states, “The purpose of the Association shall be to promote the improvement

of the teaching-learning process through effective computer education program

development, to promote the integration of computer application into curricular areas,

and to foster and promote excellence in compute utilization in the schools of Maryland.

In June 2000, MICCA (now MSET) became an organizational affiliate of ISTE, the

International Society for Technology in Education. Now MSET can contribute to and

benefit from the international network associated with the leading organization for

educational technology professionals.”

Not only will it be useful for the school to receive the grant, it will be valuable if

members from the technology committee can be apart of MSET. However, it does cost

$25.00 to join and there are annual membership dues so some teachers may be hesitant

about joining. There was an email sent to the grants and scholarship point of contact,

Catherine Poling, asking if they give group rates and discounts so more teachers would

be willing to pay this membership fee at our school. Catherine Poling responded to the

email with exampling that there are no group rates for this but there is a group discount

available for Common Ground, which is a professional development conference held

each year. Along with the application, grant recipients are asked to explain the topic of

the grant proposal by creating an iLearn Maryland course through iTunes University. By

creating this account, it allows for teachers to collaborate with one another and provide

resources for professional development and classroom instruction.

This grant is offered for the 2015 to 2016 year. While looking at the timeline, all

grant applications are due by December 1, 2015. Educators must pay their membership

dues by this date in order to apply for the grant. This also allows plenty of time to write

the grant proposal, and there is a grant application and rubric in which to follow. By

December 19, 2015, the applicants are notified of the status of the grant application.

Then, during April 28 and 29, 2016, these educators are to present at the annual Common

Ground Conference. This will help to justify the reasons behind needing the grant. This

two-day conference provides workshops, presentations, exhibits, professional

networking, and featured speakers. All MSET members are able to attend this

conference. Finally, on May 15, 2016, these awardees are to submit verification of

expenses and a summary of the grant implementation to the MSET Grant Chairperson.

MSET is an active organization and currently has 2,500 members. As stated

before, you do have to be a member to apply for the grant so it is hard to say exactly how

many people are applying for a grant each year or who is only interested in continuing

their education. However, multiple educator grants are awarded each year. In chapter 6 of

Obtaining Resources for Technology in Education: A How-to Guide for Writing

Proposals, Forming Partnerships, and Raising Funds, the textbook discusses the

difference between highly competitive, moderately competitive, and noncompetitive

proposal-writing situations. I would suggest that this is a highly competitive situation. As

explained in the textbook, highly competitive situations consists of a larger number of

people who are eligible to compete for this grant with the MSET foundation. MSET

provided clear directions for how and when to submit the proposal and it is widely

publicized so teachers are aware of the expectations to receive this grant. It is assumed

that the grant resources will be awarded to best proposals they receive. It also explained

that the number of submitted proposals is usually many times the number that can be

funded. (Moursund, 2002) Also included in the email to Catherine Poling, was to find out

more information about how many applications they receive each year for a grant. This

will help justify the number of applications received with the number of people who

earned this grant. Catherine Poling responded to the email and described how each year is

different, but typically there are about 15 to 20 applications for grants.

This grant would definitely help to meet the specific needs at our school. As

explained above, many laptops are used for testing, but tablets are not needed for testing

so it will allow for more technology devices to be available for teachers to use to meet the

needs of 21st century learners. However, this grant only awards up to $2,000 grants so

only a small number of tablets and applications can be purchased. From this grant alone,

small groups would have to share one tablet. With this grant, applications on these

devices can be used in a small group in many ways, such as scanning QR codes and

answering higher-order thinking questions, videotaping one another and teaching a math

concept to show mastery of the skill, recording a song about a specific topic, and so on.

Mainly, this grant will help with meeting this specific need of having more tablets by

providing enough devices for small group learning, but it does not completely meet the

fulfillment of the 1:1 learning style.

Besides being a MSET member, another requirement for the grant proposal is that

only one application will be accepted per school. This could be a disadvantage for

applying for this grant since it will only allow a limited number of tablets. But, with the

help from a technology committee, this grant application can be possible since this

application requires a lot of work for just one person to complete. This consists of

attending the Common Ground Conference, making an iLearn Maryland course account,

and submitting verification to the MSET Grant chair. There should be a leader to speak

and create this account, but there needs to be members to support the leader. By

collaborating, one effective proposal can be written. By applying for this grant, it will

lead to teachers joining MSET, which will help with teachers continuing their education

in this department. Overall, I would suggest our school to apply for this grant, with the

help from the technology committee, as it will be beneficial for teachers to join MSET,

and to help receive more devices for the school.

Grants and Scholarships

Catherine Poling

cpoling@msetonline.org

2. Digital Wish (One-to-One Computing, $4,500 Support Grant)

http://www.digitalwish.com/dw/digitalwish/grants

The second grant I highly recommend for my school to apply for is the Digital

Wish grant organization. This specific grant is known as the One-to-One computing

support grant. The Digital Wish grant will offer $4,500 to help with this. It will help lead

professional developments about 1:1 programs. This will also encourage more teachers to

use the technology devices in their classrooms after attending these workshops and

professional developments because teachers will know how to effectively use them. As

explained on the website, experts will work with the people who receive this grant to

figure out a technology plan, equipment needs, budget options, curriculum

implementation, and technical needs.

This grant is offered on a regular basis. The 1:1 implementation advisors will

select up to four schools each month. With regards to specific deadlines, there is no

timeline to follow because grants are accepted on a rolling basis, and reviewed at the end

of each month. As explained on their website, “Digital Wish has implemented 1:1

computing in 28 schools developing an incredible library of expertise, evaluation tools

and sustainability tools that can help get your program off the ground.” This grant will

help with providing workshops during the implementation and planning process before

the 1:1 devices are put into place. Relating this to the Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow

(ACOT), this would be during the Entry stage, where teachers are just beginning to learn

how to adapt these devices into their classroom before actually using it with the students.

It will help teachers to start to feel more comfortable with incorporating them into their

teaching.

The grant award contributes to many different aspects. It consists of 10 hours of

technical support to evaluate and develop a 1:1 plan, which is a $2,000 value. It provides

a Sustainability Action Plan Tool, which is a $99 value. It also allows for educators to

video conference 1:1 trainers at a $150 value, free grant search using GrantStation at a

$249 value, and a Digital Wish's Complete IT Curriculum Package, which is a $2,000

value. There are also discounts for on-site Digital Citizenship and Cyber Safety training,

which would be useful to help monitor this development.

There are some requirements needed in order to apply for this grant. One positive

about this grant is the short the application process. It seems as if an entire technology

committee would not need to contribute to completing this, instead only a couple of

teachers with one lead teacher can complete this application for this grant. The

application requirements consists of a description of the school or district including the

number of students, demographics, grade range, and the school’s website. There also

needs to be an explanation of the progress made with technology including the ratio of

computers to students, a technology plan, and any technology infrastructures such as the

type of computers. The last requirement on the application is to describe any support for

technology in the district including supportive administration, how willing and

enthusiastic teachers are about this program being implemented into their teaching, and

any other available funding opportunities. This entire grant application can be done in a

short time period and seems very realistic. Also, this program is designated for a

kindergarten to eighth grade school range.

According to Obtaining Resources for Technology in Education: A How-to Guide

for Writing Proposals, Forming Partnerships, and Raising Funds, this grant would be

considered as highly competitive. It even lists on the website to “don’t wait to apply.”

Perhaps, a con could be how competitive this grant is. There was an email sent to the

grant coordinator, Jennifer Miller, to see how many educators apply for this grant.

Jennifer Miller responded to the email and described how there is an average of 20 to 30

applications per month and only four schools are awarded. She also explained how cash

money for computers is not awarded through this grant. Instead, she discussed how

Digital Wish is providing knowledge of 1:1 implementation as well as access to grant

opportunities through grant station with an annual subscription, assessment tools, and

curriculum based on a technology rich environment.  

There are many pros and cons for applying for this grant. It would be beneficial to

use this grant to help build a solid foundation for this program. With this grant, there is

plenty of assistance available to help guide this. However, this could be a lot of work for

just one person to learn about this program while teaching full-time. I would suggest this

grant to be started over the summer so the leading teacher only has to focus on this and

not other school related jobs. So, with this being said, there will have to be a teacher who

is willing to learn about this program over the summer. It would also be best if the lead

teacher from the technology committee could do it. This teacher would also need other

educators from his or her committee to go through these trainings and support sessions as

well.

Overall, I would still recommend our school to apply for this grant. This grant

application is very manageable for any teacher to complete. This grant will also let this

program allow teachers to receive the knowledge they need to know before implementing

it into their classroom. It will also help with any problems along the way. This definitely

meets the specific need at our school because there are not enough devices available for

each teacher to do 1:1, so this program will help this school prepare for this as it may

soon come in the future.

Contact Jennifer.miller@digitalwish.org for more information.

3. McCarthey Dressman Education Foundation ($10,000 for an unique project using

laptops- Students using laptops to collaborate using technology tools such as GaFE -

Google apps For Education) http://mccartheydressman.org/teacher-development-grants/

    The McCarthey Dressman Education Foundation was founded by Sarah McCarthey

and Mark Dressman, who are professors at The University of Illinois Champaign. They

both teach in a teacher preparation program. They created the foundation because of the

struggles that educators face due to budget cuts and increased technology prices. They

want educators to introduce new programs to students who need them the most.

The McCarthey Dressman Education Foundation offers Academic Enrichment

Grants. These grants are used to develop in-class and extracurricular programs to

improve student learning. The projects tend to be unique ideas that students are interested

in and fit the curriculum. The project must be original, connect to the community, and be

academically enriching for the students. This grant offers $10,000 every year for 3 years,

for a total of $30,000. To be eligible for the grant, the applicant must be a teacher who

has regular contact with students in grades PreK-12. The applicant also must teach at a

low-income school. If selected to receive the grant, teachers must be willing to work with

a trustee of the foundation when implementing the project. Although more than one

teacher can work on each project, the grant needs to be applied for in one teacher’s name.

The application for the grant is open from January-April each year. Although the

application for the grant is now closed, I believe that there is a strong possibility of the

grant being offered next year. From looking at the past awardees of the grant, it seems

like 2-5 projects are selected each year. When completing the application for the grant,

teachers are asked to write a description of the project, a description of the school and

students, and how the project meets the criteria that is set by the foundation. Applications

also require a timeline of the project, a budget form, and a section on how the project will

be evaluated. To find out more about the application process, we sent an email to the

foundation asking for a copy of the application. Currently, the online application was

unavailable since the deadline had passed. However, we found a preview of sample

questions.

Based on the information I learned while reading Obtaining Resources for

Technology in Education, this grant would be Highly Competitive grant. There are a lot

of teachers and schools that would be eligible for this grant, and will most likely submit

proposals.  

Over the three years that a teacher receives the grant, they will complete a

progress report in May of each year. The report asks questions about the goals of the

project, what progress has been made and ideas for improvement. The progress report

also asks about the budget and how the money awarded has been spent.

Since only one person can apply for this grant, it would work best if someone

from the technology committee was the applicant. The technology committee would

work together to complete the application and any other paperwork required by the

foundation.  

If awarded this grant, our school would be able to create a unique project that

would help improve student learning. For the project, we would use the money to

purchase more computers and tablets for student use. The students would then use the

new technology to collaborate with each other (using GAFE or a similar program) to

solve real world problems.

If our school received the grant, teachers from all grade levels would be able to

use the new technology in their classroom, as long as it is used to improve student

learning. There are a variety of different projects that teachers of every grade level and

subject could do. For example, a first or second grade teacher could have their students

collaborate on GaFE to come up with questions that they want to ask an author they have

been studying about. The class could brainstorm a list of a few questions, and then work

together to write and email a letter to the author. Students in the primary grades could

also use tablets or computers to make an organizer of living and non-living things during

science. Each student could be responsible for one thing and have to take or find pictures

to add to the class organizer. Students in the intermediate grades could use the new

technology to work on a whole-class project about the solar system. Each student would

be in a small group assigned to a planet and would be responsible for finding information

about the planet and creating a presentation. Then, the class could work together using

Google Slides to create a presentation of all the planets to give to younger students in the

school. Older students could also use Google Docs with the technology to co-write a

story.

There are many pros and cons to having our school apply for this grant. The major

pro is that this grant offers a large amount of money. Over three years, a school could

earn up to $30,000. This money could help to transform a technology program. Also, the

school has the choice to be a part of the grant for 1 year or all 3 years. Another pro of this

grant is that the individual who is awarded the grant gets to be paired with a mentor from

the foundation. This mentor can help the individual (and ultimately the school) create

goals for the program. This can help shape the educational technology program in the

most beneficial way for students. The last benefit of this grant is that there are not many

restrictions for how the money can be used. Teachers are free to create their own projects

and goals for how they want the program to function.

Although there are many pros of applying for this grant, I also see several cons if

my school were to apply for this grant. The biggest con is that only one person may apply

for the grant, even if a group of people would be implementing the project. Although the

technology committee can work together on the application, most of the work, such as

meeting with a mentor from the foundation and completing the progress report would

rely on one person. Another con of the grant is making sure the technology would be

used for the project and making sure that all teachers had equal access to the technology,

especially in the first year when the program is new. If a classroom teacher was the leader

of this program, observing other teachers during school hours would be difficult. The last

con in applying for this grant is that the application window is only open for 4 months.

The technology committee would have to work quickly to start the proposal and make

sure that it is completed within the 4 month timeline.

Overall, I would recommend that my school apply for this grant because the pros

outweigh the cons. The application for the grant seems doable, especially if a technology

committee was working together to complete it. This grant would be very beneficial to

my school’s technology needs.

4. NEA Foundation ($2,000 or $5,000 for engaging students in critical thinking)

http://www.neafoundation.org/pages/grants-to-educators/

The NEA Foundation is a charity that supports public education. To date, the

foundation has awarded over 4,500 grants to educators to help them improve their

instruction and prepare students for a changing world. The amount of the grants totals

$7.1 million over the last 10 years. The NEA Foundation has several types of grants

including student achievement grants, and learning and leadership grants. The grants can

be awarded in amounts of $2,000 or $5,000. I believe that the student achievement grant

would help meet the needs of the students at our school.  

    There are not many restrictions on who is eligible for a NEA Foundation grant.

Applicants must be teachers or support professionals at public schools teaching grades

PreK-12. Also, staff at public higher education institutions can apply. The NEA

Foundation encourages grant applications from members of the NEA and teachers who

have been teaching for less than 7 years. Grant applications for the foundation are

reviewed three times each year. To be reviewed, applications need to be submitted by

February 1, June 1, and October 15.

The money awarded from the grant should be used to help increase students’

critical thinking and problem solving skills. The funds should be used to purchase

materials, technology, or other supplies. The foundation states that while some of the

grant money can go towards professional development, the majority should go towards

the students. The money must be used in a one year period after the grant is issued.   

As part of the application process, there are several questions about the project

that must be answered. First, the applicant must describe the goals for the project and

what activities must be done to meet the goals. There is a section about student needs and

a section on how the project will be supported beyond the one year grant period. The

budget for how the money will be spent also needs to be included in the application.

Projects that are most likely to be chosen are the ones that have students using

critical thinking and problem solving skills, and are challenging for students. Also

projects that are collaborative among students and can be carried on into future years are

more likely to be chosen. Based on the information I learned while reading Obtaining

Resources for Technology in Education, this grant would be considered a highly

competitive grant. There are a lot of teachers and schools that would be eligible for this

grant and will most likely submit proposals.

If awarded the NEA Foundation grant, our school could use the award money to

buy tablets for students to use during instruction. Having tablets, even for students to use

within a small group, will help students use critical thinking and problem solving skills.

The tablets are very versatile and can be used in a variety of ways. They can also be used

for any subject for students at every grade level.

For example, students in math at any grade level can use the tablets and a

whiteboard app to show how to solve a math problem. When recorded, teachers can view

the recording to observe exactly how the students solve each problem. Students can also

share their thinking with their classmates and teacher. In addition, students can record

themselves completing a problem to share with other students using an app called

Aurasma. Groups of students can collaborate on GAFE apps to enhance their math

problem solving skills. Students can also use the tablets to work individually or in a small

group to help explain and discover different scientific theories. Students can take pictures

to record the life cycles of plants or animals, like a butterfly. When learning about

electricity, students can record what combinations make circuits work.

There are several pros and cons for my school when applying for the NEA

Foundation grant. The first pro is that the application process is “rolling.” There are 3

different deadlines throughout the year, so the application never closes. Also, the

application seems very straightforward and would be easy for a technology team to

complete together. Lastly, there is a significant amount of money that is awarded. This is

important because the work that the technology committee puts into toward earning this

grant would have a big reward if chosen to receive the grant.   

Although there are many pros to applying for the NEA Foundation grant, there are

also several cons. The first con is that when completing the budget portion of the

application, the proposed budget has to equal exactly $2,000 or $5,000. The budget can

not be an amount in between. When completing the application, the technology team will

have to price out everything exactly to improve their chances of receiving the grant.

Another con towards applying for the grant, is that the applicant has to be one teacher.

There can be other teachers that are “co-teachers,” but the grant has to be written in one

person’s name. The last con of the grant is that the money from the grant has to go

towards programs that promote critical thinking and problem solving skills. To make sure

that the school staff complies with this request, some of the grant money would need to

go towards professional development for the staff.

Overall, I believe that the NEA Foundation grant would be a worthwhile grant for

my school to apply for. Again, the pros of applying for the grant outweigh the cons of the

application process. The rolling application is a major pro, especially if we were not

ready to apply during one period, there will be another time to apply. Getting this grant

would be very beneficial for our school.   

5. The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Foundation - ($250 to

engineering and aerospace hands-on thinking) http://www.aiaa.org/Secondary.aspx?

id=4184

    One of the mission of the AIAA Foundation is to enrich student learning and advance

the future of Aerospace by funding grants for educational needs of students. According to

the AIAA Foundation Classroom Grant Guidelines, “...[the] program promotes aerospace

education activities in classrooms from kindergarten through twelfth grades. The program

encourages development of innovative aerospace activities within the prescribed

curriculum.” The AIAA Foundation awards a classroom grant of up to $250 to each year.

The grant has a list of eligibility requirements including a proposed project relating to

Science, Technology, Engineering, or Mathematics (STEM) with an emphasis on

Aerospace, and the applicant must be a teacher who is currently a member of the AIAA

Educator Associate, actively engaged in K-12 classroom education prior to receiving the

grant. The grant proposal itself must be a one-page description of the project including

how the project connects with the mission of the AIAA Foundation and aerospace. Also,

the applicant must include a lesson plan with curriculum standards (state or federal), how

the funds will be used, and the number of students that will be included in the activities

(minimum of 25 students are required, including 1, 2, and 5 year visions). In addition, a

budget of items for purchase must be included with the proposal.

    When researched into becoming an Educator Associate with the AIAA, it is a simple

process to become a member in order to be eligible for applying for the grant. There

seems to be a membership fee, but the amount was not posted on its website (the student

membership fee was $25 with discounts available for students in foreign countries). The

classroom grant is limited to up to two grants per calendar year for each school. The

timeline of the grant deadline was not listed on the website, so an email was sent to

Felicia Ayoub, grant coordinator, requesting for information. Grants are considered two

times per year and require about a month for review. When a school is chosen and

awarded, they receive a letter of commitment to be signed and sent back by the teacher

who applied for the grant. Then, the AIAA Foundation gives reimbursement for the items

purchased according to the proposal approved by the grant. It is noted that funds must be

spent on the proposed items and all purchases must be made within 30 days of receiving

the commitment letter from AIAA. Additionally, the applicant has to send the total

number of students benefited from the project.

    The AIAA Foundation also included a list of materials that are likely to be funded.

According to this list, our school can be funded for lesson topics such as Aerospace

Technology, Biological and Physical Research, Earth Science, and Space Science as well

as K-12 Math and Science software among other items and topics. These items meet our

school’s need because we can purchase online application for laptops and devices for

STEM week. If our school received funding from other grants to purchase tablets, we

would need additional funding to purchase software/apps for learning. During STEM

week, students can use apps related to Aerospace Technology or Space Science for a

project. This can be the proposed project for the classroom grant. However, the AIAA

Foundation also included a list of items that will not be funded through the classroom

grant. For instance, the grant can not be used toward hardware equipment such as

personal computers, SMART boards, or printers, and audio, visual, and recording

equipment like digital cameras. This means our school can not use the grant for

purchasing laptops or tablets. Also, the grant can not be used for teacher workshop fees

and wages (see the full list here on pg. 2). Essentially, our school could only use the

funding for educational apps for student learning.

    There are benefits and costs to applying for the AIAA classroom grant. One benefit I

observed was the short application process. Applying for this grant is doable by one

teacher since the requirement for the application process consists of three things: one-

page description of the project, budget list, and the proposal form. However, this grant is

not favorable compared to other grant opportunities due to the small amount of funding

(up to $250). Another disadvantage to applying for this grant is its specificity. The

proposed project must relate to aerospace and there are many other restrictions as

mentioned above. In addition, a project is likely to be chosen if it demonstrates

repeatability, where a school shows that the project can be continued or repeated in the

future. After researching about the AIAA Foundation Classroom Grant, I would

recommend our administration to not apply for it. The grant is too specific for our

school’s needs and the amount is too little.

References

About Us. (n.d.). Retrieved June 23, 2015, from http://www.msetonline.org/about-

us.html

AIAA Foundation Classroom Grant Guidelines. (2014, September 30). Retrieved June

23, 2015,

from http://www.aiaa.org/uploadedFiles/Education_and_Careers/STEM_K-

12_Outreach/Classroom%20Grant%20Guidelines_Revised_09_30_2014.pdf

Moursund, D.G. (2002). Obtaining resources for technology in education: A how-to

guide for

writing proposals, forming partnerships, and raising funds. Copyright (c) David

Moursund, 2002.