Upload
hamish-cummings
View
40
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Mathematics and Science Partnership Grants. Title II, Part B No Child Left Behind. Technical Assistance Meeting March 16, 2006. Overview of grant Partnerships Eligibility Professional development Application Evaluation Budget Review Frequently asked questions. General Purpose. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
11
Mathematics and Science Partnership Grants
Title II, Part B
No Child Left Behind
2
Technical Assistance MeetingMarch 16, 2006 Overview of grant Partnerships Eligibility Professional development Application Evaluation Budget Review Frequently asked questions
Overview 3
General Purpose
To improve academic achievement of students in mathematics and science by strengthening the quality of mathematics and science instruction
Overview 4
General Purpose (continued)
Encourage partnerships between institutions of higher education and high-needs schools encouraging institutions of higher education to
assume greater responsibility for improving mathematics and science teacher education.
Overview 5
Specific purpose for 2006-2007 Michigan proposal Design a program to prepare a
mathematics or science teacher at a school to provide professional development to other mathematics or science teachers at the school and to assist beginning and other teachers at the school (Title II, Part B, Mathematics and Science Partnership, Section 2202, (c) )
6
Rationale Fund a coherent, more sustainable
professional learning plan for schools
Research seems to support the following: Learning communities allow for in-depth and
sustainable professional development Site-based teacher specialists can facilitate
the learning and teaching of mathematics and science in a school
7
Targeted Activities Preparing and qualifying mathematics and/or
science to provide professional development to other mathematics or science teachers at the school; and
Provide school with information on establishing and supporting learning communities within their buildings; and
Establish and maintain a structured communication for teacher leaders
teachers
administrators
network
Overview 8
ProposalThere will be two RFPS:Part A: The designing of a teacher leader program development
This is the current RFP
Part B: The selection, development and support of site-based teacher leaders at high-needs schools.
This application will be written in conjunction with the developer of the teacher leader program
Partnerships 9
Partnerships must include
An institution of higher education science, technology, engineering, or mathematics department (STEM), at 2 or 4 year institutions.
A high-need local educational agency- district, school
Partnerships 10
Partnerships Encouraging institutions of higher
education to assume greater responsibility for improving mathematics and science teacher education is a major focus of this grantSTEM can be an agent of change in schools
and vice versa.Fosters improved dialogue and understanding
between K-12 and Higher Education regarding systemic reform.
Partnerships 11
Partnerships STEM can be an agent of change in
schools and vice versa.As such we be looking for a description of
how the partners will share the work and how their work will be integrated into the on-going work of both the local schools and the STEM faculty
STEM faculty must be a member of the science, technology, engineering or mathematics departments but may be a member of the Education department
Partnerships 12
Partnerships may include
Another higher education institution, department;
Additional LEAs, charter schools, public or private schools, or a consortium of schools;
A business; or An organization dedicated to improving the
quality of math/science teachers.
Partnerships 13
In Michigan….
Proposals that involve Mathematics and Science Centers will receive priority in the selection.
Eligibility 14
Eligible Applicants Part A:
Any Institution of Higher Education or any other organization or agency with the ability to develop, deliver and sustain high quality professional development to regional centers across the state of Michigan
Part B: High needs districts and schools
Criteria 15
MDE Expectations Expect that the grant application will take
into account the quasi-experimental design and evaluation desires of the USDoE
Expect that the project will be able to accommodate eligible LEAs from across the state.
Criteria 16
MDE Expectations Expect that the grant application will
describe a proposal for a teacher leader development module If accepted may be asked to make
modifications to plan and budget If accepted will have time to develop materials
and protocols before implementation
17
Criteria 18
Project Criteria Active and unambiguous partnership between
STEM faculty and schools/districts Priority points given for active and unambiguous
partnership with Math/Science Center Aligned to the Michigan’s Mathematics or
Science Content Standards. Aligned with the Michigan Professional
Development Vision and Standards
Professional Development
19
It is the vision of the Michigan Department of Education that quality professional development results in the improvement of student learning. Quality professional development is characterized by meaningful, collegial dialogue that:
Explores current content knowledge, inquiry learning processes, and student thinking.
Contributes to a school culture that promotes learning at high levels for both students and educators.
State Board of Education
August 28, 2003
Professional Development
Professional Development
20
National Staff Development Council Standards (2001) www.nsdc.orgMore information can also be found at michigan.gov/mde>educators>
professional preparation>professional developmentCheryl Poole [email protected]
Professional Development Standards
Application 21
Letters of Intent Not mandatory, but appreciated Submit electronically: ([email protected])
by March 31 Should include:
Brief description of proposalAnticipated partnersApproximate amount of grant $’s
Application 22
Application Requirements
Cover page, assurances, partner sign-offAll in MEGS
Abstract - allow readers to get an overview of the proposal
Application 23
Application Requirements Program Narrative (limit to 20 pages)
Plan of Work Research or Evidence BaseManagement CapabilityPartnerships Evaluation
Application 24
Plan of Work
clearly describes in detail the goals and objectives of the program
clear and detailed description of the professional development activities
Application 25
Plan of Work
clearly describes in detail the roles and responsibilities of each partner; shows evidence of strong relationship with STEM faculty in all aspects of grant
timeline of activities and who is doing what
Application 26
Management Capability
Project leaders have the capability of managing a state-wide project
Staff delivering the PD are qualified Description of how the partners will share
the work
27
Research Use research to justify proposal and
selection of activities This project will add to the body of
knowledge surrounding the proposed activities.
Evaluation 28
Evaluation
Each party will have a role in the evaluation planning, implementation and reporting.
The grantee will also be responsible for reports to MDE and USDoE outside of the statewide evaluation.
Within the proposal, the grantee should indicate a commitment and capacity to do these things.
Evaluation 29
Role of State EvaluatorMoore & Associates, Inc. will conduct an
evaluation of this project for MDE with the cooperation of the grantee.
Plan and conduct the project evaluation for MDEMeet with grantee(s)Design an evaluation planWork with grantee(s) to select instruments
and develop a data collection plan Data analyses and reporting
Evaluation 30
Role of Grantee in Evaluation Complete all reporting requirements of the
USDoE (see Project Profile on MSP website) Meet and consult with Moore & Associates staff
during the development of the evaluation plan, and as needed throughout the project
Help with the selection of instruments Develop tools for documentation of professional
development progress Provide required data and/or facilitate its
collection by others
Evaluation 31
Project Planning Considerations for Evaluation How can the goals and objectives of the project
be measured? How can the impact on STEM faculty and their
institutions be measured? How can the impact on teacher leaders be
measured? How can the impact of teacher leaders on
teachers be measured? How will this impact student achievement and
how can that be measured?
Evaluation 32
Budget Considerations
Plan for 5% of your total budget to be devoted to evaluation costs, such as staff time to meet with Moore & Associates and MDE staff, time devoted to review of instruments and development of tools for documenting ongoing progress.
Application 33
Budget Budget from 8/1/06-8/1/08 Funds can be spent on:
Expenses associated with delivery of PD including salaries, travel expenses, workshop expenses, evaluation
Materials are limited to those necessary for delivery of PD –cannot buy classroom sets of materials
Application 34
BudgetMatch from partners
Not required but often considered by reviewers when looking at sustainability and dedication to PD by stakeholders
Application 35
Professional Development Packet
Include components necessary for replication of the professional development activities
Products developed with Title IIB monies do not have proprietary rights
36
Appendix
Must have:Resumes of key facultyLetters of interest from STEM faculty
Narrative is limited to 20 pages so use the appendix for charts, references, etc.
Application 37
Electronic Application Submission Application must be submitted through
MEGS – (Michigan Electronic Grants System)
Due date is May 26, 2005, by 11:59 pm Notification of selection in July MDE may negotiate program and budget
issues
Application 38
How to access MEGS http://
megs.mde.state.mi.us/megsweb
MDE has MEGS support system in placeJudy Byrnes,
517.241.3895
Application 39
MEGS – Two types of data collection
Input
Upload
Application 40
MEGS Application should be available April 1. Some sections will pertain only to the
continuation grants
Review 41
Review Grants will be awarded through a
competitive process An expert panel will review proposals using
the rubricScheduled for June 14
After the initial review modifications may be required
Review 42
Scoring Rubric Proposals will be scored with a conjunctive
modelrequires the applicant to attain a minimal level of
performance on all attributes assessed. All the criteria in Part 1 must be met. If met, then scored with 1, 2 or 3 with 1 indicating
a poor rating and 3 indicating an ideal condition. Further points can be earned in Part II, for a
total of 200 points. Reviewers will be required to explain in detail
reasons for their scores.
43
MSP is not your grandfather’s grant anymore…(Not a Traditional State Grant)
More interactive with MDE and others MDE supports the development of quality PD
Provides ongoing technical assistance Will establish a Michigan MSP library as a
resource for educators.
44
Frequently Asked Questions
Can we work with our local mathematics or science education faculty? Yes, but you must also include faculty from
the STEM departments.
45
Frequently Asked QuestionsHow important is the research design
aspect of this grant?Extremely- improvement must be attributable to
the professional development Data must be gathered related to pre-and post-
intervention for both teachers and students. Designs need to use experimental(control groups) or
quasi-experimental (comparisons groups)The information learned from these grants will
have impact on future PD for mathematics and science teachers in this state.
46
Frequently Asked Questions
What mathematics and science benchmarks will be used to guide the content focus?Use the most recent version of the Michigan
Curriculum Framework Content Standards and Benchmarks.
47
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the parameters on administrative costs? Indirect costs are 8% for IHEs; restricted
indirect for LEAs/ISDsAdministrative costs must be reasonable and
directly linked to the grant activities and costs
48
Frequently Asked Questions
Who can serve as the fiscal agent for the grant? Any one of the partners, they must be able to
show capacity to manage the finances and work promised.
49
Frequently Asked Questions
Are there restrictions on allowable costs for teacher stipends, consultant fees? There is no federally imposed limit. However
the test of “reasonable and necessary” will be used as a guide for readers.
50
Frequently Asked Questions
How much of a match is required?There is no set amount, however, the readers
will look for a financial commitment of the partners
51
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a consortium be developed to deliver services?Yes, as long as the intent of the grant is met.
52
Frequently Asked Questions
Can tuition be paid for teachers from grant funds?No.
Teachers may receive a stipend to participate, which they can use for any number of purposes, including tuition if taking the course for credit. Matches are encouraged from the partners; this is an area where a tuition waiver can be included as a match.
53
Thanks for your InterestFor additional assistance, contact:
Ruth Anne Hodges [email protected]
(517) 241-2219 Rodger Epp
(517) 373-1931
Michigan MSP website:
www.michigan.gov/mspartnership