1.3 - Policies, Procedures, Programs, & Funding
Candidates research, recommend, and implement policies, procedures, programs and funding strategies to support implementation of the shared vision represented in the school, district, state, and federal technology plans and guidelines. Funding strategies may include the development, submission, and evaluation of formal grant proposals. (PSC 1.3/ISTE 1c)
Artifact: Grant Proposal
Reflection:
The Grant Proposal was a class assignment in which I was asked to search for various sources of funding for a real or fictional need in our classroom or school. At the time I completed this mini-grant proposal, I applied for a $500.00 grant in order to purchase a digital microscope needed for the biology and biotechnology courses that were to be taught beginning in the fall of 2015. I worked with administrators to select an appropriate item to have funded and requested approval once I selected the item. I completed all research to choose a particular grant and the application individually.
In Standard 1.3, candidates are to demonstrate mastery of Policies, Procedures, Programs, and Funding by showing that they are able to “research, recommend, and implement policies, procedures, programs and funding strategies to support implementation of the shared vision represented in the school, district, state, and federal technology plans and guidelines. Funding strategies may include the development, submission, and evaluation of formal grant proposals” (PSC 1.3/ISTE 1c). The artifact in the portfolio demonstrates my ability to generate a formal grant proposal. In the creation of this artifact, I worked with administration to research and recommend an item needed in our program that would qualify for funding and I also worked individually to research district policies regarding the purchase of this type of equipment, as there are restrictions about what types of items can be funded and the amount allowed. In the creation of the artifact, I also researched various funding strategies, specifically grants, to meet the need. Ultimately, I chose to complete the fictional grant application due to the timeline needed to complete the assignment for class. If I were to complete an authentic grant application, I know that there are certain requirements for its implementation once the grant has been received. Many grants require updates on how the equipment or funds have been used and if the grant had been received I would work to ensure that those requirements were completed. In the case of the fictional grant application, an update on the project was to be submitted in May of the following year and included an analysis of student impact, the standards assessed in the use of the equipment, and the results of the project.
This learning experience was very meaningful for me. Though I completed a fictional mini-grant proposal, I ended up doing a lot of research into grants that would have funded the equipment needed for the lab. I acquired a lot of information about grants for education in this research and now, as an instructional technology specialist, make recommendations to other teachers when they seek funding for technology projects in their classroom. If I were to go back and complete the assignment again, I would try to begin earlier so that I could complete a real grant proposal and actually get the project funded.
In this case of this proposal, the impact on student learning would be easy to assess and actually a requirement of the implementation of the funding. This could be done by analyzing student work and interviewing students on how they felt working with the purchased equipment. The impact on faculty development and school improvement cannot be assessed by the artifact but more by the knowledge I gained during the process of researching grants and funding for various projects. Many teachers that I now work with have been able to acquire technology for student use in their classrooms by recommendations of funding sources I have provided, specifically Donors Choose. Teachers who have had their projects funded have made impact on both students and other teachers in their schools, who have in turn worked to obtain funding.
The Grant Proposal was a class assignment in which I was asked to search for various sources of funding for a real or fictional need in our classroom or school. At the time I completed this mini-grant proposal, I applied for a $500.00 grant in order to purchase a digital microscope needed for the biology and biotechnology courses that were to be taught beginning in the fall of 2015. I worked with administrators to select an appropriate item to have funded and requested approval once I selected the item. I completed all research to choose a particular grant and the application individually.
In Standard 1.3, candidates are to demonstrate mastery of Policies, Procedures, Programs, and Funding by showing that they are able to “research, recommend, and implement policies, procedures, programs and funding strategies to support implementation of the shared vision represented in the school, district, state, and federal technology plans and guidelines. Funding strategies may include the development, submission, and evaluation of formal grant proposals” (PSC 1.3/ISTE 1c). The artifact in the portfolio demonstrates my ability to generate a formal grant proposal. In the creation of this artifact, I worked with administration to research and recommend an item needed in our program that would qualify for funding and I also worked individually to research district policies regarding the purchase of this type of equipment, as there are restrictions about what types of items can be funded and the amount allowed. In the creation of the artifact, I also researched various funding strategies, specifically grants, to meet the need. Ultimately, I chose to complete the fictional grant application due to the timeline needed to complete the assignment for class. If I were to complete an authentic grant application, I know that there are certain requirements for its implementation once the grant has been received. Many grants require updates on how the equipment or funds have been used and if the grant had been received I would work to ensure that those requirements were completed. In the case of the fictional grant application, an update on the project was to be submitted in May of the following year and included an analysis of student impact, the standards assessed in the use of the equipment, and the results of the project.
This learning experience was very meaningful for me. Though I completed a fictional mini-grant proposal, I ended up doing a lot of research into grants that would have funded the equipment needed for the lab. I acquired a lot of information about grants for education in this research and now, as an instructional technology specialist, make recommendations to other teachers when they seek funding for technology projects in their classroom. If I were to go back and complete the assignment again, I would try to begin earlier so that I could complete a real grant proposal and actually get the project funded.
In this case of this proposal, the impact on student learning would be easy to assess and actually a requirement of the implementation of the funding. This could be done by analyzing student work and interviewing students on how they felt working with the purchased equipment. The impact on faculty development and school improvement cannot be assessed by the artifact but more by the knowledge I gained during the process of researching grants and funding for various projects. Many teachers that I now work with have been able to acquire technology for student use in their classrooms by recommendations of funding sources I have provided, specifically Donors Choose. Teachers who have had their projects funded have made impact on both students and other teachers in their schools, who have in turn worked to obtain funding.