11

Mathematics and Science Partnership Grants

Title II, Part B

No Child Left Behind

2

Technical Assistance MeetingFebruary 25, 2005

Overview of grant Eligible schools Criteria Application Professional development Evaluation/Research-based Review Frequently asked questions

3

Overview

General Purpose To improve academic achievement in

mathematics and science by encouraging partnerships between State educational agencies, institutions of higher education, local educational agencies, and schools.

Overview 4

Specific Outcomes

Increased content knowledge and teaching skills in mathematics and science for teachers; HQT

Increased student achievement in mathematics and science

Identification of successful PD and curriculum models

Overview 5

Targeted Activities

Opportunities for enhanced and on-going professional development to improve mathematics or science subject matter knowledge

Establishing summer workshops and institutes with follow-up training

Overview 6

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

Overview 7

Partnerships

The partnership between STEM faculty and LEA’s 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.

Overview 8

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 of demonstrated effectiveness in

improving the quality of math/science teachers.

Overview 9

In Michigan….

The Mathematics and Science Centers involvement will receive priority in the selection.

Eligible Schools 10

Eligible Schools Low/unchanging scores/AYP Teachers with limited mathematics or

science content knowledge Over 35% low-income (SES) students REAP score of 6 or higher High drop-out rates or high drop-out

predictor levels

Eligible Schools 11

Eligible schools (cont.)

Each proposal must provide adequate data summaries and analyses which clearly and thoroughly substantiate the extent of the need within the schools’/districts’ project setting.

Criteria 12

Project Criteria Focus on mathematics or science –not both Participating schools should not be involved in a

mathematics/science reform initiative. Districts with successful programs that need to be

expanded and validated are encouraged to apply. Others must clearly articulate how these projects will

integrate with each other to develop a positive/useful PD experience for teachers.

Research based design

Criteria 13

Project Criteria Aligned to the Mathematics or Science Content

Standards in the Michigan Curriculum Framework.

Aligned with the Michigan Professional Development Vision and Standards

Active and well-defined partnership between STEM faculty and schools/districts

Priority points given for active partnership with Math/Science Center

Application 14

Letters of Intent Submitted electronically

(hodgesra@michigan.gov) by March 14 and should include:Continuing/new projectAn outline of proposed training modelExpected number of schools, STEM faculty,

teachers and students involvedApproximate amount of grant $’s

Application 15

Electronic Application Submission Application must be submitted through MEGS –

(Michigan Electronic Grants System) Due date is May 2, 2005, by 11:59 pm Notification of selection in June MDE may negotiate program and budget issues Monies awarded in September

Application 16

MEGS In order to use MEGS

you must first obtain a MEIS account.

MEIS-Michigan Education Information System.

This can be done by going to the following URL and clicking Create a MEIS Account:

Your MEIS account must be entered in MEGS by your authorized official (level 5).

http://meis.mde.state.mi.us/userman/

Application 17

How to access MEGS If your MEIS account is entered

in MEGS, you can log in:http://megs.mde.state.mi.us/megs

Your Level 5 person will allow you a level of access to your application These people will guide you

through MEGS

MDE has MEGS support system in place Judy Byrnes,

byrnesj@michigan.gov517.241.3895

18

MEGS – User Flow

Authorized Official (Level 5)

Initiates Application (Opens)

Assigns Users to Application (At least one Level 4 user)

Grant Administrator (Level 4)

Completes Application

Authorized Official (Level 5)

Submits Application

Authorized Official - Level 5Authorized Official - Level 5

Grant Administrator - Level 4Grant Administrator - Level 4

INITIATESApplication

ASSIGNSLevel 4 User

COMPLETESApplication

NOTIFIESLevel 5 of

Completion

SUBMITSApplication

Authorized Official - Level 5Authorized Official - Level 5

Application 19

ADDING NEW USERS TO MEGS

Authorized Officials (level 5’s only)

All new users must be entered into the MEGS system

Select the Add Users to MEGS link

Key in the MEIS number (up to ten users can be added)

Click on Verify If the information is correct, click

on Save

Application 20

MEGS – basic look

Information

General Information

Budget Pages

Program Information

Management Activities

Application 21

MEGS – Two types of data collection

Input

Upload

Application 22

Application Requirements

Cover page, assurances, partner sign-off

Abstracts

Project

Evaluation

Application 23

Application Requirements

Program Narrative Demonstration of NeedResearch or Evidence BasePlan of WorkManagement CapabilitySustainability

Application 24

Demonstration of Need

Eligible schools prior efforts to improve teacher content

knowledge and student achievement in mathematics or science and how this program will relate to those efforts

how various on-going grants will coordinate with each other.

Application 25

Plan of Work

clearly describes in detail the goals and objectives of the program

clear and detailed description of the professional development activities

Application 26

Plan of Work

includes a list of the corresponding school improvement goals of each participating school how this professional development program is integrated into that goal

Application 27

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 28

Plan of Work

Align to MCF content standards and benchmarks

Align to NSDC Staff Development Standards

Professional Development

29

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

30

National Staff Development Council Standards (2001) www.nsdc.orgMore information can also be found at michigan.gov/mde>educators>

professional preparation>professional developmentCheryl Poole poolecl@michigan.gov

Professional Development Standards

Professional Development

31

Professional DevelopmentProfessional development must: Start with student learning data Be content-based Be practice-based Be grounded in pedagogical content Be research or evidence-based(will look for this under Plan of Work)

Professional Development

32

Successful mathematics resources Handout has a list of websites where you

can find information or links to professional development ideas

See also links on MSP page

Professional Development

33

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

34

National Staff Development Council Standards (2001) www.nsdc.org

Professional Development Vision and Standards for Michigan Educators

Professional Development Standards

Professional Development

35

Professional DevelopmentProfessional development must: Start with student learning data Be content-based Be practice-based Be grounded in pedagogical content Be research or evidence-based(will look for this under Plan of Work)

Professional Development

36

Successful mathematics resources See MSP webpage for links to professional

development information More information can also be found at:

michigan.gov/mde>educators>

professional preparation>professional development

Cheryl Poole

poolecl@michigan.gov

517.241.4546

Application 37

Plan of Work (continued)

how the activities will help build “a rigorous, cumulative, reproducible, and usable body of findings” and what you will produce to put in our library

Application 38

Management Capability

Project leaders have the capability of managing the project

Staff delivering the PD are qualified Description of how the partners will share

the work and how it will be integrated into the school

Application 39

Sustainability

Continued PD after the project ends

Effect on student achievement

Application 40

Budget Budget from 9/1/05-8/31/07 Funds can be spent on:

Expenses associated with delivery of PD including salaries, travel expenses, workshop expenses

Materials are limited to those necessary for delivery of PD –cannot buy classroom sets of materials

Application 41

BudgetAlso budget for: Independent evaluatorState and national meetings:

3-4 state meetings for lead people and evaluator One national meeting for project director and

evaluatorMatch from participating districts

Not required but often considered by reviewers when looking at sustainability and dedication to PD by stakeholders

Evaluation 42

Research-based Evaluation Design

Purpose of an Evaluation Design:

Attribution of effects of the PD program to the processes of the PD program

Internal and External Validity

Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Design Campbell & Stanley, 1991

Evaluation 43

Evaluation Guide

It is often helpful to identify the project’s independent evaluator early on and involve them in developing your evaluation plan in your proposal

(MDE has retained Moore & Associates to assist projects with their evaluation design and operations).

Evaluation 44

Program evaluation standards Project evaluation design should consider:

Utility (stakeholder interests)

Feasibility (possible? Control v Comparison)

Propriety (Ethics, confidentiality)

Accuracy (scientific – research based)

The Program Evaluation Standards 2nd Ed. ISBN: 0-8039-5732-7

Research-based Evaluation Design

Evaluation 45

Describe the design (experimental or quasi-experimental) in enough detail to determine how it measures the impact of the project on participants in relation to project goals specified.

Research-based Evaluation Design

Evaluation 46

List characteristics/elements used to match comparison and treatment groups.

Consider and present methods which control or minimize “contamination” of treatment and comparison groups.

Control/Comparison Groups

Evaluation 47

What instruments will be used to determine possible impact?

What is the validity and reliability of instruments and data collection procedures?

Are the data collection procedures feasible and appropriate?

Data Collection

Evaluation 48

Instruments to measure the effects of PD include:

SAMPI (http://www.wmich.edu/sampi/)

Survey of Enacted Curriculum (http://facstaff.wcer.wisc.edu/jsmithson/secwebhome.htm)

Learning Mathematics for Teaching (http://www.soe.umich.edu/lmt/)

Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) (http://physicsed.buffalostate.edu/AZTEC/RTOP/RTOP_full/)

Data Collection

Evaluation 49

In reviewing your evaluation plan ask yourself:

Does the pre assessment and post assessment instrument measure the intervention?Will the pre assessment be administered BEFORE the intervention and the post assessment AFTER the intervention?Will I be able to compare the pre data with the post data and arrive at a meaningful information?

If the answer to any of these questions is “no,” revise the plans before including them in your proposal.

Evaluation Review

Evaluation 50

Provide a general timeline for key evaluation activities.

Describe the roles of key staff and the independent evaluator in relation to all evaluation activities planned.

Evaluation Review

Review 51

Review Grants will be awarded through a

competitive process An expert panel will review proposals using

the rubricScheduled for May 23

After the initial review modifications may be required

Review 52

Scoring Rubric The rubric has 7 parts, reflecting the sections in

the project narrative, for 200 total points Points vary among the parts, reflecting relative

emphasis Some parts will state a minimum needed for grant

approval

30 priority points for Math - Science Centers above the 200

53

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.

Cohort groups form learning communities Share results What content and pedagogy worked

54

Thanks for your Interest

For additional assistance, contact: Ruth Anne Hodges hodgesra@michigan.gov

(517) 241-2219 Rodger Epp

eppr@michigan.gov

(517) 373-1931