InTech 2000
Request for Proposals
General
Information
Eligible
Applicants: District 87 certified staff
may submit an application for no more than one of the following InTech 2000
project categories. The categories are
1) an individual classroom application, 2) a collaborative project
application. Collaborative project
applications must designate a lead teacher.
Previous
InTech recipients are NOT eligible.
Project
Timelines: This project will begin no
sooner than March 1, 2001.
Application
Deadline: The application must be sent
as an attachment to intech@district87.org
by the lead teacher, no later than 4:00 PM on February 1, 2001. Confirmation will be sent via email as the
application is received.
Contact
Person: For additional information
about this RFP, please contact Jim Peterson, Director of Technology,
828-7115. email: jim@district87.org
Fiscal
Information
District
87 staff chosen to participate in the project will receive the following
equipment, supplies and staff development:
·
Macintosh PowerBook laptop or Macintosh Cube
·
Digital Video Camera
·
CD Writer
·
Digital Video Editing Software
·
Microsoft Office 2001 Suite
·
30 hours of Staff Development to occur during the timeline.
Collaborative Projects: 2 or 3 certified staff submitting an application from the same or
different buildings will constitute a collaborative project. No additional equipment be provided for
collaborative projects. Funds will also
be provided to no more than one additional person on the team may to attend the
spring and summer training sessions at the District 87 rate of pay.
Participant
Responsibilities:
-
Recipients
will complete six 2-hour staff development activities occurring in the Spring
and Fall of 2001. (Appendix A)
-
Recipients
will complete one 3-day (18 hour) staff development
activities during the summer of 2001. (Appendix A)
-
Recipients
will fully participate in the staff development and assessment components of the
project.
-
Recipients
will implement a learning project during the 2001-2002 school year.
-
Recipients
will demonstrate the resulting project during a Technology Open House in the
2001-2002 school year.
Failure
to comply with any of the participant responsibilities will result in a review
by the Technology Focus Group and appropriate action will be taken.
This
project is funded by the Bloomington Public Schools, District 87 Technology
Plan.
What is the InTech 2000
Program
InTech
2000 is a staff development and technology distribution program funded by the
Bloomington Public Schools, District 87 Technology Plan. It is designed to assist District 87 staff
with integrating network technologies through the development of
student-centered, engaged learning projects.
What is the purpose of this
program?
The
intent of this program is to accelerate strategies to fully integrate
educational technology into the school curricula, so that all students become
technologically literate throughout all academic areas.
What are the program goals?
The
goals of the program are an accelerated effort to provide:
All
staff with the training and the support they need to help students learn
through computers and the Internet
All
staff and students with modern computers in their classrooms and work areas.
All
staff with access to the District 87
network and the Internet.
Effective
and engaged learning as an integral part of every school curriculum. The indicators of Engaged Learning are
provided in Appendix B.
What is the anticipated
impact of this program on the learning environment?
Advances
in technology and telecommunications create the potential for learning
environments that produce dramatic new ways to communicate complex ideas. Students learn more when they are actively
solving challenging problems and testing skills in meaningful contexts. New learning environments encourage teachers
to become leaders in a community of engaged learners that includes students,
parents, and other educators working with a variety of information
resources.
Interactive
technology applications have the potential to enrich and improve the learning
environment by instantaneously connecting the classroom to outside resources,
experts, new curricula and communication avenues. The benefits of these projects include:
·
immediate
access for learners to up-to-date, accurate, primary source data from a variety
of sources;
·
more
engaged learning, with students taking more active roles;
·
increased
contributions by students to the general knowledge base;
·
increased
relevancy of learning activities, relating concepts to real issues and real
results;
·
new
roles for learners in high-level problem solving and in working as teams;
·
increased
technical skills by learners and educators
·
increased
communication among and between educators, resulting in exchanges of lesson
plans, instructional approaches and curricular designs;
·
increased
knowledge at the classroom level of the learning potential inherent in
telecommunications;
Additional Note from RFP authors: In developing a proposal, it is suggested that the full breadth of tools are taken into consideration. This includes not only the package provided in the grant which allows for digital video projects, but also the tools and resources that are currently available in District 87 – those available on the Internet, email, space to post web projects, your buildings resources (personnel and otherwise), other building/classroom projects in which you are engaged (flower gardens, outdoor education, DARE – to name a few), etc. Therefore, it is advised to develop a proposal with a reasonable and meaningful project that can be achieved by students during the year – a project that will enhance what is being done in the classroom with the newly acquired technologies. We encourage pushing the envelope in how technology can be used in District 87, but we are also looking for projects that are attainable and have a greater chance for success to involve students in learning and creating.
What assistance will be
available to help with this RFP?
District
Technology will host an InTech 2000 Open Q&A session:
The
InTech 2000 RFP will be covered and time will be provided for questions. This is a come-and-go-as-you-wish event.
District Technology is also available to answer questions at 828.7115. Or via email at intech@district87.org
Proposal Format
Proposals
must be submitted as an attachment or a link to a website in the order and
format described below. After preparing
the required components, please use this as a checklist in assembling the
completed proposal. Incomplete
proposals will not be considered by the Technology Focus Group.
1.
Cover page (Attached):
-
This
page must be completed.
-
Building
principal signature is required of the lead applicant
-
Signatures
of all applicants must be provided if a collaborative project
2.
Proposal Abstract - Provide a summary of the
proposal - no more than one page.
3.
Proposal Narrative: Follow the narrative requirements listed below. This narrative
should not exceed 5 double-spaced pages.
4.
Evaluation Design: An evaluation design is required for all applications. Describe an evaluation process that will
ascertain the overall effectiveness of the technology project, including
criteria to be used and data to be collected.
This description should include an assessment of:
-
A
formative evaluation on how the project objectives have affected student
achievement and progress toward meeting the goals of the InTech 2000 program
and the school improvement plan.
-
Summative
evaluation that will provide information about how participation in the project
contributed to improvements in knowledge and skills, to changes in classroom
organization and/or approaches to learning and teaching, to integration of
technology applications into the curriculum, and other information relevant to
the project's outcomes.
Narrative Requirements:
An
applicant must prepare a narrative for the project that includes all the
information requested below. This narrative
cannot exceed 5 pages.
1.
Describe
a need for a project that will use the technology package and how it will
assist in achieving learning goals.
2.
Describe
how the project will utilize current building and district technology resources
- this may include but is not limited to existing technologies, including labs,
projection units, network services, and staff development opportunities.
3.
Describe
how the approaches to the learning process will contribute to successful
participation in the project. (This description could include evidence of such
strategies as use of theme units across curricular areas, cooperative learning
approaches, team teaching, or other innovative learning initiatives.)
4.
Describe
how students will benefit from participation in the InTech project.
Use the school improvement plan, the Illinois Learning Standards, and/or
classroom and curricular goals to support this description.
5.
Include
a general timeline of student activities for the proposed project.
6.
Describe how the resulting project will be
sustained after the end of the 2001-2002 school year.
Criteria for Review and
Approval of Applications
The
proposals will be reviewed by a group of readers in mid-February. Only the cover page with the applicant
information will be removed. It is the
intention of the District 87 Technology Task Force to fund projects that
reflect the range of grade levels and curricular areas. The Task Force will approve a proposal upon
determination of its merit in comparison with other proposals, using the
following criteria:
1.
The
proposal clearly demonstrates a need for the project and clearly relates the
anticipated benefits of the project to the school improvement plan, the
learning approaches and/or the educational goals.
2.
Sufficient
evidence is provided to determine that involvement in the project will enhance
the applicant's plan for the use of technology and its integration into the
curriculum, and that the project will be sustained. This evidence should include the applicant's current and/or past
experiences with innovative strategies or initiatives and demonstrate a strong
likelihood that the applicant will work successfully to implement the proposed
project.
3.
The
proposal presents well-developed strategies to engage students in project-based
activities based upon the engaged learning indicators. The proposal should
contain a general timeline for the activities.
4.
The
proposal includes a formative and summative evaluation plan.
Appendix A
InTech 2000 Project Timeline
December 2000
InTech 2000 Request for Proposals
released
January 12, 2001
InTech 2000 Workshop - Opportunity for District 87
staff to ask questions, seek collaborations, and gather technical information.
February 1, 2001
Proposal Submission Deadline. Proposals must be submitted via email as an
attachment or reference to a website to intech@district87.org. Proposals received after 12:00 midnight will
not be considered.
February – March 2001
Technology Task Force selects
participants for InTech 2000
February 15, 2001
Final Selections made - Recipient
contacted
Spring Session: April 7, 8:00 AM – Noon
First InTech session – Equipment distributed, training session and project outlines/timelines discussed. Participants must be able to attend the session.
Summer Session I: June 25-27, 2001
First Available Technology Training Session. Participants must choose this session or the
one below and be able to attend from 9:00-3:00 each day.
Summer Session II: July 16-18, 2001
Second Available Training Session.
Participants must choose this session or the one above and be able to
attend from 9:00-3:00 each day.
Equipment
allocated during the project must be in the classroom prior to the start of the
2001-2002 school year.
The
remaining after-school sessions will be determined during the summer training
sessions.
Description of Staff
Development
The
staff development will correlate directly with the technologies provided to
participants. This will include, but is
not limited to, training on a variety of network technologies, including
electronic mail, video conferencing, video production, web page design , and a
host of evolving web-based technologies.
Staff development will also include incorporation of engaged learning
strategies, evaluation methods and techniques, as well as ethical issues that
the integration of technology brings to the classroom.
Appendix B
Indicators of Engaged Learning
In
recent years, a strong consensus has been forming from research on the
importance of engaged, meaningful learning and on what constitutes engaged
learning in schools and classrooms. This emerging consensus on learning,
together with a recognition of the changing needs of the 21st century, has
stimulated the developmentof specific indicators of engaged learning. Jones, et
al. (1994), at NCREL, developed the indicators described below. These
indicators of engaged learning can act as a"compass" for reform
instruction - helping educators to chart an instructional course and maintain
an orientation based on a vision of engaged learning and what it looks like in
the classroom and community.
1.
Indicator: Vision of Engaged Learning
What
does engaged learning look like? Successful, engaged learners are responsible
for their own learning. These students are self-regulated and able to define
their own learning goals and evaluate their own achievement. They are also
energized by their learning; their joy of learning leads to a lifelong passion
for solving problems, understanding, and taking the next step in their
thinking. These learners are strategic in that they know how to learn and are
able to transfer knowledge to solve problems creatively. Engaged learning also
involves being collaborative, that is, valuing and having the skills to work
with others.
2.
Indicator: Tasks for Engaged Learning
In
order to have engaged learning, tasks need to be challenging, authentic, and
multidisciplinary. Such tasks are typically complex and involve sustained
amounts of time. They are authentic in that they correspond to the tasks in the
home and workplaces of today and tomorrow. Collaboration around authentic tasks
often takes place with peers and mentors within school as well as with family
members and others in the real world outside of school. These tasks often
require integrated instruction that incorporates problem-based learning and
curriculum by project.
3.
Indicator: Assessment of Engaged Learning
These
assessments involve presenting students with an authentic task, project, or
investigation, and then observing, interviewing, and/or examining their
artifacts and presentations to assess what they actually know and can do. This
is called performance-based assessment. This assessment is generative in that
it involves students in generating their own performance criteria and playing a
key role in the overall design, evaluation, and reporting of their assessment.
The best performance-based assessment has a seamless connection to curriculum
and instruction so that it is ongoing. Assessment should represent all
meaningful aspects of performance and should have equitable standards that
apply to all students.
4.
Indicator: Instructional Models &
Strategies for Engaged Learning
The
most powerful models of instruction are interactive. Instruction actively
engages the learner, and is generative. Instruction encourages the learner to
construct and produce knowledge in meaningful ways. Students teach others
interactively and interact generatively with their teacher and peers. This
allows for co-construction of knowledge, which promotes engaged learning that
is problem-, project-, and goal-based. Some common strategies included in
engaged learning models of instruction are individual and group summarizing,
means of exploring multiple perspectives, techniques for building upon prior
knowledge, brainstorming, Socratic dialogue, problem-solving processes, and
team teaching.
5.
Indicator: Learning Context of Engaged
Learning
For
engaged learning to happen, the classroom must be conceived of as a
knowledge-building learning community. Such communities not only develop shared
understandings collaboratively, but also create empathetic learning
environments that value diversity and multiple perspectives. These communities
search for strategies to build on the strengths of all of its members. Truly
collaborative classrooms, schools, and communities encourage students to ask
hard questions, define problems, lead conversations, set goals, have
work-related conversations with family members and other adults in and out of
school, and engaged in entrepreneurial activities.
6.
Indicator: Grouping for Engaged Learning
Collaborative
work that is learning-centered often involves small groups or teams of two or
more students within a classroom or across classroom boundaries. Heterogeneous
groups (including different sexes, cultures, abilities, ages, and socioeconomic
backgrounds) offer a wealth of background knowledge and perspectives to
different tasks. Flexible grouping, which allows teachers to reconfigure small
groups according to the purposes of instruction and incorporates frequent
heterogeneous groups, is one of the most equitable means of grouping and
ensuring increased learning opportunities.
7.
Indicator: Teacher Roles for Engaged
Learning
The
role of the teacher in the classroom has shifted from the primary role of
information giver to that of facilitator, guide, and learner. As a facilitator,
the teacher provides the rich environments and learning experiences needed for
collaborative study. The teacher is also required to act as a guide, a role
that incorporated mediation, modeling, and coaching. Often the teacher also is
a co-learner and/or co-investigator with the students.
8.
Indicator: Student Roles for Engaged
Learning
One
important student role is that of explorer. Interaction with the physical world
and with other people allows students to discover concepts and apply skills.
Students are then encouraged to reflect upon their discoveries, which is
essential for the student as a cognitive apprentice. Apprenticeship takes place
when students observe and apply the thinking processes used by practitioners.
Students also become teachers themselves by integrating what they've learned.
Hence, they become producers of knowledge, capable of making significant
contributions to the world's knowledge.
Reference:
Jones, B., Valdez, G., Norakowski, J., & Rasmussen, C. (1994), Designing
Learning and Technology for Educational Reform. North Central Regional
Educational Laboratory.
Rating the Proposals
Background
The intent of the InTech program is to accelerate the integration of technology into the school curricula, so that all students become technologically literate, with the academic skills essential for their success in the twenty-first century.
This technology program has four goals. They are 1) all certified staff will have the training and support they need to help students learn through computers and the Internet, 2) all certified staff and students will have modern computers in their classrooms / work areas, 3) every classroom / work area will be connected to the Internet, and 4) effective and engaged learning will be an integral part of every school curriculum.
Please refer to pages 2 to 5 of the RFP for additional information regarding the background and program specifications.
How to Rate an InTech Proposal
Using the following scale, circle the value that best describes the applicant’s response to each criterion in this RFP review.
10 Excellent The proposal completely addresses the RFP specification. The
response is clearly developed, highly detailed and shows that
exceptional planning has occurred for this specification.
8 Above Average The proposal addresses the RFP specification very well. However,
the response has been developed to a lesser degree for this
specification.
6 Average The proposal minimally addresses the RFP specification. The
response is missing several of the key planning details needed for
this specification.
4 Below Average The proposal only alludes to the RFP specification. The response
does not include details for this specification.
2 Poor The proposal’s response is not related to RFP specification, and it
is unacceptable.
0 Omitted The proposal does not address the RFP specification.
In addition, please consider each response carefully and write appropriate comments in the space provided for the specification.
InTech
Bloomington
Public Schools, District 87
Cover Page
Name of Proposal ______________________
Type of Proposal
_____ Individual ______
Collaborative
Applicants
Name:___________________ Signature:___________________ Building: ___________________
Name:___________________ Signature:___________________ Building: ___________________
Name:___________________ Signature:___________________ Building: ___________________
Building Principal's
Signature for Lead Applicant
Signature:___________________ Building: ___________________
Summer Training Date
_____ June 25-27, 2001 _____ July 16-18, 2001
This document is also
located on the web at
http://www.district87.org/intech