Innovation Grants Rubric 2014
-
Upload
lcdoyle403 -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
0
Transcript of Innovation Grants Rubric 2014
-
8/11/2019 Innovation Grants Rubric 2014
1/3
Georgia Educational Technology Consortium, Inc., Innovation Grants Program
Total Points Possible: 100
GRANTIDNUMBER___________________________ TOTALPOINTS ______________________________
PROJECTTITLE______________________________________ AMOUNT REQUESTED__________________
Project Title: (Clear, simple, and creative)
Grade Level(s) or Subject Area(s): Number / Characteristics of Students to BeServed by Project:
Project summary: (10 Points) A clear, brief description (summary) of plan including anoverview of proposed project.(Describe in no more than 300 characters or less, the project summary).
10-8 Points 7-5 Points 4-1 Points Score
The purpose, activities and expected
outcome(s) of the grant are clearlysummarized
The purpose, activities and
expected outcome(s) of thegrant are somewhatsummarized
Project summary provides
little information or ismissing.
Need for Project and Specific Evidence of Need (10 Points):Include data about Students
academic performance; make clear connections between the value of the proposed technology
and improved learning. (Describe in no more than 500 characters or less, the need for the project).
Student need for the project is
clearly stated. Supporting data isincluded.
Clear connection is madebetween the value of theproposed technology
innovation and improved learning.
Student need for the project isclearly stated. There is little or
no supporting data is included.No clear rationale is presentedshowing that the proposed
technology use wouldsignificantly improve learning.
Student need for the projectis confusing, not based on
student needs or not stated.No data is providedindicating how academic
goals are presently beingmet. Benefits of technology
use not established.
-
8/11/2019 Innovation Grants Rubric 2014
2/3
Project Goals and Objectives and How They Will Be Measured (10 Points): State standardsand innovation are considered in addressing need. Be specific.Describe the goals and specificmeasurable objectives you hope to achieve with this grant.(Describe in no more than 500characters or less, the project goals and objectives).
Goals for the project are clearly
described and thoroughlydocumented; proposal supportsthe Consortium goals andobjectives.Learning objective(s) are clearly
stated and supportEnglish/Language arts,mathematics, science and / or socialstudies content standards. It is clearhow / when the objective(s) will be
measured.
Projects purpose is stated and
some evidence of need isprovided. The proposal alignswith the Consortium goals andobjectives.Learning objective(s) are
clearly stated and supportEnglish/Language arts,mathematics, science and / orsocial studies content standards.It is not clear how / when the
objective(s) will be measured.
Projects purpose is unclear
or does not address statedConsortium goals andobjectives.Learning objective(s) areconfusing or not stated and
may not support clearlystated and supportEnglish/Language arts,mathematics, science and /or social studies content
standards.
Project Design: (20 Points)Describe the major tasks/activities (including timelines) to meet
the project objectives goals and specific measurable objectives you hope to achieve with thisrant. Develop lessons that will use technology in new and creative ways that involve students
higher-level learning. Grant activities must be completed within the school year. (Describe in nomore than 1000 characters or lessthe project design).
20 -16 Points 15-12 Points 11-8 Points Score
Strong, innovative and uniqueproject design with procedures and
activities that are well defined, fullyexplained, and link to project goals.Uses technology in a new way or
uses new technology to
appropriately address specifiedstudent needs. Describes howtechnology adds value to the
activities of the project.
Innovative and adequate projectdesign with procedures andactivities that are defined but
project is somewhat unclear.
Not clearly linked to projectgoals or lacks innovation.Uses technology in a new way
to support learning.
Project design is vague andnot clearly linked to projectgoals or innovative.The project is uninteresting.
Project Activi ties (10 Points): What will teachers and students do?Specific activities areclearly described and relate specifically to stated goals and objectives. Reasons are included forselecting activities.((Describe in no more than 800 characters or less, the project activities).
10-8 Points 7-5 Points 4-1 Points Score
Proposal clearly defines whatteachers will do and what students
will do.
Activities are appropriate anddirectly related to academic goalsand objectives.Use of technology directly supports
curriculum. Expectations arerealistic.
Specific student/teacher activitiesare described. The activities arealigned with the student learning
Most major activities bystudents and teacher are
enumerated.
Project activities focus onmeeting proven need forspecific student learning. Thecomprehensive activities plan
includes more than justacquisition and use of
technology.Specific student/teacheractivities are described. The
Proposal does not specify theroles of teacher and student
in this project. Limited or
nonexistent understanding ofscope of project is evident.There is little or nodescription of
student/teacher activities.
-
8/11/2019 Innovation Grants Rubric 2014
3/3
objectives. activities are loosely alignedwith the student learningobjectives.
Project Evaluation Plan (20 Points): Detail a plan for evaluating the effectiveness of theroject. Include expected impact on students, impact on school and/or colleagues. State clear
indicators for improvement: student learning/achievement, or instructional strategies, orteacher learning. (Describe in no more than 800 characters or less, the plan for evaluating theeffectiveness of the project).
20 -16 Points 15-12 Points 11-8 Points Score
Proposal includes a variety of
methods to assess participants andevaluate the project. Projectscomprehensive evaluation planincludes clearly-defined formativeand summative tools to yield
meaningful measurements.
Proposal includes at least one
method to assess participants orevaluate the project.More than one kind of data will
be collected, and some ofthe evaluation activities will
encourage adjustments duringthe project.
Proposal does not include
any methods to assessparticipants or evaluate theproject. No usefulevaluation activities areincluded to measure the
effect this project willhave on student
achievement.Project Budget (10 Points): Include components to be funded by the grant, other necessarycomponents and their availability. List all the items in no more than one page. The maximumamount that will be funded is $2,50010-8 Points 7-5 Points 4-1 Points Score
Budget is complete and contains all
required information. Budget is costeffective and linked to activities and
outcomes.Requested technologies are clearly
justified by project goals and
outcomes and include onlynecessary items.
Specific technologies are listed,aligned to project activities, and
sufficient to conduct projectactivities. Project expenditures donot exceed grant funding.
Budget is complete but is notcost efficient and/or related toactivities and outcomes.Specific technologies are listed,
but not aligned to projectactivities. Project expenditures
do not exceed grant funding.
Budget lacks required
information or includesunallowable expenditures.
Specific technologies are notaligned to project activitiesand insufficient to conduct
project activities, or none arelisted.
Project expenditures do notexceed grant funding.
Dissemination (10 Points):Applicant must be prepared to share the projects methods andresults within the school, the district, the county, and/or the state. Describe in no more thanone page, your plan for disseminating the results of this project with colleagues, community,
and Consortium. Recipients are required to present sessions at our annual GaETCConference. (Describe in no more than 300 characters or less, the dissemination plan).
Dissemination plans are clearlystated, detailed, and relevance to
the Consortium goals andobjectives.
Dissemination plans areincluded, but insufficient details
are mentioned and/or relevanceto the Consortium goals and
objectives.
Dissemination plans aremissing, unclear, or
incomplete.
Total Points