Running head: GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER

Funding Paper

Alison C. Grava, Samantha Laraia, & Crystal Shub

ET 680 Role of the Technology Leader

Loyola University Maryland

Dr. David M. Marcovitz, Professor

GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 2

NEEDS FOR THE GRANT WITHIN THE SCHOOLS

Moving forward in the 21 Century in Education is a daunting task when bogged down by
st

the political climate and whims of county executives. In order to make headway in preparing

students to be both career and college ready, schools must not only provide opportunities for

students to work with the technology that they will face upon graduation, but also provide the

tech, time, and support for the teachers who are on the front lines of students educational

paths. As schools look ahead at the task, they should all recognize that they must begin to work

toward the 1:1 student: device ratio in order to help America compete on the global market.

Currently in our schools K-12, we make available laptop/Chromebook carts in order to

provide the students with the opportunity to work with the variety of educational technology

resources. These include but are not isolated to, Google Drive and Office 365/OneNote along

with all of their respective features, Smart Technologies and ActivInspire and their

corresponding boards: Smart Boards and Promethean respectively. We currently have an 8:1

Student: device ratio. If we are to prepare our students better, we must reduce this ratio more

with the intention of meeting their needs as well as the school systems path toward the eventual

1:1 program. By increasing the number of devices for our students, teachers will be able to

implement any number of open educational resources that will engage and inspire our students

on their educational path in hopes they will become lifelong learners and contribute to our

community.

Furthermore, with the increase in devices in the schools, we must prepare our teachers to

use and implement these devices with the purpose of achieving our goals of creating lifelong

learners. It makes no sense to get the technology into the schools without adequate training to

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 3

implement them in the classrooms. The teachers in our school come with varying levels of

technological knowhow. We will need to provide training on the devices and resources available

in our schools. This will require leadership, time, knowledge and skill. Funding for professional

development is not only about working outside of the school time, and could provide substitutes

so that the teachers can complete specialized training. By establishing a solid base of

understanding with the devices and resources available, the students will gain more exposure to

how the devices go beyond the gaming and socialization and into how they can translate into the

career and college realm of their educational paths.

ESA Foundation Grant

The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) Foundation has supported those

utilizing interactive technologies to benefit the lives of Americas youth for the past 15 years.

The ESA Foundation is committed to their mission of promoting programs and opportunities that

create meaningful opportunities to influence the lives of the youth in America. The foundation

aims to utilize the power that the interactive entertainment industry has in our communities to

benefit students in many ways. The ESA foundation also seeks to support diverse projects and

programs to benefit American children from all lifestyles.

The ESA Foundation provides support through grants yearly, but they are limited in the

number of projects that they can support. In order to apply for a grant from the ESA Foundation,

applicants must seek funding for a specific project or program that can be implemented in the

United States. In addition, the funding must benefit youth ages 7-18. Lastly, those applying for a

grant must provide programs and services that use technology and/or computer and video games

to educate Americas youth.

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 4

Grants are evaluated based on many things. First, applicants are evaluated on the

alignment with the ESA Foundations areas of interest. In addition, applicants must demonstrate

that the program their seeking funding for responds to a valid need in which is superior to other

competing programs or projects. Applicants must also demonstrate evidence of a previous

program or project that has been successful, or is likely to be successful in the future. Finally,

there needs to be sufficient evidence of accountability as it relates to the proposed program or

project.

The ESA Foundation provides many grants throughout the year, but the grant that we

decided to pursue was the Education Challenge Grant. This grant is an annual competition that

advances the use of computer and video games in the classroom by recognizing and rewarding

innovative educators across the country who integrate cutting-edge educational technology into

their curricula (ESAF, 2015). The programs goal is to connect the enthusiasm of playing

interactive video games into positive and meaningful outcomes that can improve the educational

experience for students across the United States. This grant awards up to a maximum of $40,000.

This grant would fund both of our needs. This grant would allow us to get closer to our 1:1 ideal

for students as well as provide professional development for the educators that would be

involved with the technology initiative. This grant is given yearly, and the deadline is in early

May. Unfortunately, we have missed the deadline for this year, but as it is a yearly grant, we will

have plenty of time to work on an application that will demonstrate the needs this grant will meet

as well and the positive impact it has on Americas youth.

There are three prizes awarded for this grant, and they are given to the three most

inventive admissions. The applications are evaluated based on the creativity of the lessons, and

impact that gaming can have on student learning. The judging panel for the grant have

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 5

backgrounds including education, computer and video game publishing, and media and arts. This

judging panel is diverse and understand the important role that games play in education.

There are many advantages and disadvantages to the Education Challenge Grant. One

positive of the grant is that it is researched based. "Based on research by the Federation of

American Scientists (FAS) and The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop, the

Education Challenge Grant encourages teachers to leverage interactive software in the classroom

and fosters a more unified movement around the value of computer and video games in keeping

students engaged in the learning process (ESAF, 2015). Furthermore, the ESA allows the grant

to be used for both acquiring hardware and professional development. In the ESAs frequently

asked questions section, it notes that the ESAF does not solely fund the purchase of hardware

and software unless it is integral to the project that is being proposed for the grant. This relates to

the discussions we have had in class about making the impact of the grant very clear to those

who will be evaluating it. It is imperative that applicants are clear on how acquiring the hardware

and software is an integral part of the program for which funding is needed. Another advantage

to the grant is that the grant allows programs to use funding for professional development. What

is mentioned by the ESAF concerning professional development is that those who are trained

must use their training to have a positive impact on Americas youth through the utilization of

technology and computer and/or video games.

There are some cons to this grant, though. When attempting to apply, many of the links to

get to the application did not work. This was displeasing, as we wanted to get more information

on the logistics of applying for the grant. Another disadvantage is that it is rather limiting in its

application. The Education Challenge Grant requires the utilization of gaming into the program

or project to be funded. This is limiting because it is possible that those applying for the grant

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 6

have other ways to use the technology in mind. However, research has demonstrated the benefits

of gaming on education, so for acquiring the technology and supporting students, taking that

direction to design a program would need to be something discussed by the schools technology

team to determine if this is the right grant to meet the technology needs of the school.

Overall, the Education Challenge Grant is a way for our schools to get closer to reducing

the device to student ratio and providing professional development for the staff who will be

integrating the technology. It is imperative that the technology team collaborates to ensure that a

clear project and program is demonstrated in the application to exhibit the need and impact the

grant will have on the children in our schools.

Donor Choose

Since our schools are in need of more technology, Donor Choose provides the

opportunity to get people involved in purchasing more Chromebooks and laptops. Through this

resource, our schools can create individual projects and have them funded/donated through the

website. Therefore, the amount of money for this resource is based on the needs that the school

puts on the website. The biggest drawback to this is that the donation request could go unfilled.

The benefit of Donor Choose is that every piece of technology we can get into the hands of our

students will help with our drive toward the 1:1 device program.

The main eligibility requirement is that we are a public school. The founders of this

resource were once teachers in the public school system and noted all of the money that teachers

were using from their own pocket. The idea was that if the public could see specifically what

their donation was going to purchase and for what purpose, they would be more apt to get in

order to expand the opportunities for the students. It is a more tangible way for donors to become

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 7

involved in the improvement of the educational system, rather than giving money to a foundation

that could filter that money to executives rather than those who are in need. Likewise, the

founders are the ones who take the money and make the purchase of the items that the school is

requesting, so the burden of follow-through is on Donor Choose not the school requesting the

donation.

All requests must use donations for student use or directly provide students with

experiences. The requests may not involve costs of labor, capital improvements to the school or

ground, vehicle purchases, salaries, or royalty/rental fees. The request must be appropriate for

the school, so it is important to be specific to the type of need. The request should be made with

the possible timeline of up to four months. If the requested materials are not available through

the vendor directory, then a special request project can be made.

The team vets all of the requests by schools for Donor Choose. Most of the members of

Donor Chooses team are former teachers. These team members are charged with the

responsibility of not only vetting the projects to be funded, but they seek out supporters and

vendors that include, Staples, Chevron, Google, Disney, The Paul G. Allen Family Foundation,

as well as many others. The supporters can also come from everyday folks that want to donate to

schools but have more of a say as to how their money is directed. These supporters can be from

the community where the school is located or from anywhere in the country.

The process is simple. The teacher picks out the materials that they need for their

classroom. In our case, we would want to fund another Chromebook cart of 32. Then, there are

some short essay questions about the project. A team of super-screeners then reviews the

project and after about three days, if the project receives approval, the project is posted. It can

remain there for up to four months. Once the project is fully funded, the materials are purchased

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 8

and shipped directly to the school. The materials are then the property and responsibility of the

school. Donor Choose does ask, that once the materials arrive, the teacher and students complete

the Thank-You Package, including write thank you letters to the donors, and impact letter from

the teacher, and share photos of the materials in action.

The pros of this program for our schools involve the acquisition of more technology to

enhance engagement and opportunity in order to gain skills needed to meet the 21 Century Skills
st

for both career and college readiness according to the Maryland Technology Literacy Standards.

While this program does not address our need for teacher professional development, it does

provide the opportunity for the teachers to request help in securing the technology in order to

implement more technology into their curriculum.

NEA Student Achievement Grant

The National Education Association (NEA) Foundation is a public charity that is

sustained by financial input from NEA educators dues, foundations, corporate sponsors, and

others who are interested in supporting public education initiatives. The NEA Foundations

mission is to harness its partnership with educators to advance student achievement by investing

in public education that will prepare each of America's children to learn and thrive in a rapidly

changing world (NEA, 2016). The NEA Foundation offers grants to NEA members to improve

student academic achievement in public schools in the United States and at public higher

education institutions. Grants are awarded to applicants whose proposed work engages students

in critical thinking and problem solving to deepen their knowledge of standards-based content. In

addition, the proposed work should improve students inquiry, autonomous learning, and

reflection.

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 9

The Student Achievement Grants provided by the NEA are only awarded to current

members of the NEA who are public school educators in PreK-12 grade, public school
th

education support professionals, or faculty and staff at public higher education institutions. The

grants are available in amounts of $2,000 and $5,000. Student Achievement Grant funds can be

used to supply resource materials, supplies, equipment, transportation, technology, or scholars-

in-residence. Some of the grant money can also be applied to support the professional

development required to implement the proposed project, although the majority of the grant

funds are required to be used for resources or educational experiences for students. Applications

can be submitted at any time during the year as they are reviewed three times per year. The three

deadlines for the year are February 1, June 1, and October 15. If a grant is indeed awarded to the

applicant, the grant will fund activities for 12 months from the date of the award.

Applications for the grant are quite extensive. The narrative of the grant must be

comprised of five detailed sections including a summary, goals, sustainability, student need, and

activities. The application must clearly describe the goals for student learning in measurable

terms. Likewise, the work must be standard driven. Applicants must also describe how the

project will be continued past the grant period and how it demonstrates a model for other

educators to use in the future. In the student need section of the narrative, applicants must

establish student need that first focuses on the academic need and subsequently identifying the

sociological, economic, emotional, and or cultural needs. In the final section of the narrative,

applicants must clearly describe the activities that students will participate in to reach the goals

outlined in the proposed work. In the description, applicants must address how the activities will

encourage students to be critical thinkers and problem solvers. Aside from the narrative,

applicants must provide an itemized budget for the proposed work totaling either $2,000 or

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 10

$5,000. The foundation also wants those applying to identify any additional support that will be

provided by other sources including those from the school or district. The NEA Foundation

suggests that the budget be as cost-efficient as possible to express how it is directly related to the

proposed work since it will be evaluated by how realistic, clear, and economical it is. This grant

seems very competitive, and the clearer and more detailed applicants are, the more likely they

will be to receive funds.

The Student Achievement Grants from the NEA Foundation can be used for our need of

increasing the number of student devices in our school as well as providing professional

development for staff involved in implementing the technology. There are many advantages in

this grant opportunity. Firstly, it is great that the grant can be used for resources and professional

development. It is imperative that with any new technology project, professional development is

provided to ensure success with technological change. Another positive aspect of this grant is the

focus it has on critical thinking, problem solving, to support standards-based instruction. By

utilizing this grant to increase the number of devices in our schools, we can definitely improve

students habits of inquiry and self-directed learning as stated in the NEAs mission. As noted

before, this grant has three deadlines per year, which provides flexibility to those applying for

the grant. This can be considered a major advantage.

There are also some disadvantages to this grant. Unfortunately, this grant opportunity

cannot be used to fund our project fully. With the two grant amounts being $2,000 and $5,000

respectively, we would need to apply for another grant to continue our vision to reduce the

device to student ratio to get closer to our 1:1 initiative. In addition, we would need more funds

to source adequate professional development for staff involved in the technological innovation.

Another disadvantage to this grant is that grant funds cannot be used to support after-school,

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 11

weekend or summer programs, or support conference fees for more than one person. This could

be limiting to some applicants. For the most part, the advantages significantly outweigh the

drawbacks of the NEA Foundation Student Achievement Grant. Through successful

collaboration with a technology committee, a detailed narrative, and clear and realistic budget,

the Student Achievement Grant can be a feasible opportunity to support our school and our

students to participate and flourish in a rapidly changing world.

MSET Grants

The Maryland Society for Educational Technology provides a yearly grant opportunity

for schools for up to $2,000 in order to promote innovative uses of instructional technology and

address digital learning skills to improve student achievement. This particular grant allows for a

wide range of ideas implemented in the schools and limited by the grant writers

imagination. The idea of personalizing education is not a new concept, but has become a focal

point through the ideas of differentiated instruction over the past decade. This grant requires the

use of iTunes U, which focuses the grant as a technology literacy focus as well as the content

taught. Since our schools will require more funding than the maximum $2,000, the grant also

requires that the schools provide details as to where more funding will be obtained.

We believe that the $2,000 grant will add to the schools opportunities to enhance the

number of educational resources within the school so that we can move closer to the 1:1 device

program by providing the teachers the training in order to use iTunes U, thus incorporating the

professional development needs for the schools. Having the experts come in and work with the

teachers has a tendency to influence their willingness and desire to implement new technology in

order to enhance engagement and scholastic achievement. This grant provides for the purchase of

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 12

Apps that would create more opportunities for the student to become more adept at using

technology as a foundational aspect of meeting the Common Core State Standards, as well as,

meeting the ISTE Standards for students.

This grant is driven by how the grant writer focuses on the standards as well as how to

assess if those standards are being met. Since this is a Maryland association, the standards they

are looking for are the Maryland College and Career Ready Standards, Maryland Teacher

Technology Standards, and Maryland Technology Literacy Standards for Students. By using

these standards to tether the focus of the grant, it ensures that the focus is data driven.

This grant is awarded yearly, so while the deadline has since passed for the 2016-2017

school year, we will be able to apply for it for the 2017-2018 school year. In order to be eligible

for the grant, the grant writers must be a MSET member as of December 1 of the application

year. The grant must be in by the December 1 deadline and MSET will notify the grants

applicants by December 19. The grant recipients must present a summary of the grant

implementation at a Promising Practices Poster Session at the Common Ground Conference at

the Ocean City Convention Center in May 2017. They will create an iLearn Maryland Course

using iTunes University, which they will receive training in order to implement.

The major drawback of this grant is that it is not a schoolwide opportunity and is only be

given to the grant writers. Regardless, it would still further our school technology goals because

once one person becomes proficient in the use of the iLearn and iTunes U; they will be able to

work toward encouraging other teachers to utilize the technology tools. Thus, this will enhance

the student engagement and achievement that we encourage. Likewise, this opportunity would

create more technology leaders within the schools.

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 13

The grant money may be used for software, apps, hardware, or peripherals needed to

complete the program, but not for salaries, curriculum development, student prizes, scholarships,

conference attendance, field trips, consumables, or the technology infrastructure of a school. This

is a drawback for what we need our schools to move forward in the 1:1 device program.

The MSET Application is very straightforward in what it requires from the grant writers.

With the focus on the various standards, it lends itself well to what the board of education is

looking for each school to move toward higher achievement for the students. There is a specific

section of the MSET Application solely focused is the impact that the grant writers proposal

will have on the students learning and how it will personalize their educational experience.

The rubric for the grant is relatively ambiguous in order to allow for creativity on the part

of the grant writers. However, it should be noted that the application should focus on the vision

as set forth by MSET Vision, in addition to, the clear and explicit curriculum connections in

order to offer the opportunities for personalized learning for students. Ultimately, it appears that

there are normally three to four MSET Grants every year. We feel that this grant would be a nice

addition to our grant pool in order to enhance the number of technology opportunities for our

students through supporting our need for professional development and moving toward the 1:1

device program.

Voya Unsung Heroes Grant

This grant caught our eye because of the simplicity. The company awards the grant to

educators who have big ideas but are short on money or do not have access to the funding

required to bring successfully their innovative ideas to life. The Voya Unsung Heroes grant

comes from the company Voya Financial (previously ING).

The winners of this grant received $2,000 to enhance or start their innovative ideas.

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 14

Additionally, three other winners are chosen for bigger monetary awards. One applicant from

each state, which applies, can be awarded the additional rewards. The Educators Advisory Board

chooses the three additional winners. Previous winners of this grant have done incredibly

creative and great things. For example, winners from 2015 had ideas and projects such as

projects related to theater, different subjects in science, collaborative learning, and STEM

classes. Each idea is incredibly detailed and well thought through.

An advantage of this grant is that it seems fairly easy and simple to apply. As long as you

have an idea that is creative and innovative, you can apply. This could also be a negative,

though. It seems easy to apply, but your ideas really have to be extremely well thought out and

very creative. Another negative is that there is no clear link to an application on the website.

Applicants must get in touch with other individuals within the organization in order to get more

information about applying.

Initially when we saw this grant, we thought it was a great idea that could really help our

vision. After really thinking about it and reviewing the information, do not think our vision is

specific enough to apply for this grant. We could most definitely apply but do not think we

would even be considered. The winners of this grant have ideas and projects much more detailed

and needing of assistance than our vision.

Digital Wishes Grants

This grant is for one-to-one computing through Digital Wish, which is a company that

focuses on supporting education with technology. This companys vision is to solve technology

shortfalls in classrooms. They believe that each child deserves a technology rich educational

experience. The foundation was started in 2006 after the creators children were in a school,

which was in direct need of help. Shortly after helping the childrens school, Digital Wish was

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 15

formed.

The focus of the foundation, and this grant, is to help schools who wish to implement a

1:1 program or to assist those already trying to implement a successful computing program.

There is no deadline for this grant application as they accept applications on a rolling basis

throughout the summer. Digital Wish believes that the summer is the best and most important

time to implement and rollout a 1:1 computing program.

Winning this grant does not provide a monetary award. Receiving this grant actually

provides technical support, training, grant searches, curriculum, and more. The application seems

very simple and not what we expected for a grant which has such a large reward. After our

discussions and activities in class relating to grants and grant writing, we expected something

more intense than just the simple application page on the website.

A major positive (pro) of this grant is the digital citizenship curriculum, which is

provided as part of the award. This curriculum makes it easy for educators to provide students

with the information needed in order to help them be successful and appropriate digital citizens.

Students growing up in this age of technology are rarely provided with lessons on how to behave

appropriately while using the Internet or any sort of technology. This curriculum sets students

and schools up for success. A negative of this grant is that there is no money awarded- it is all

training and resources provided through Digital Wish and the foundation. On one hand, this

could be a positive, but on the other hand, it is a negative. What if schools need more than just

training and resources? What if the school needs more computing devices? The grant does seem

like a great award, but it has its negatives as well.

After corresponding via email with Jennifer Miller, the community outreach member of

Digital Wish, our opinion of the grant changed a little. We asked Jennifer what success the

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 16

program has had and what schools have done who have won the grant. Jennifer said, We had

moderate success with this program. We received about 40 grant applications, choose five

schools to award the support grant and have had only two do the work required to assess their

program as the first step in the process of our assistance to them. The other three have not

started yet. There was no money given as part of the grant. It is technical support, curriculum,

training and grant finding tools. The two schools we are successfully working with will take a

while to complete the process of developing a 1 to 1 program, so our support will be provided

when they reach specific points along the way of developing their 1 to 1 program (J. Miller,

personal communication, June 22, 2016). This was somewhat discouraging to us because we

cannot imagine why schools would not take more advantage of this grant. Our opinion was also

changed because it is not a grant, which provides all of the rewards up front; you reach certain

checkpoints along the way and then get help.

This grant will meet many needs that will help with our visions for the schools. This

grant provides resources to help eliminate any confusion or questions that school staff may have.

Winning this grant sets up schools for success while piloting and promoting 1:1 technology

programs for students.

CONCLUSION OF GRANTS IMPACT ON THE SCHOOL NEEDS

Ultimately, our schools need to provide more opportunities to work with technology to

teachers and students in order to further the engagement and achievement of our students. This

must come through the acquisition of more technology in order to reduce the device to student

ration, and we must provide the teachers with the training, time, and skill to infuse their lessons

with the technology at their disposal.

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 17

The ESA Foundation Grant will provide our schools with the largest foundational

monetary platform to begin building our push toward the 1:1 device program and Donor Choose

supplement more devices. The NEA Student Achievement Grant supports both the addition of

more technology in the schools and support the professional development in order to augment

the use of the technology. The MSET Grants provide the opportunity to work with iTunes

University as another educational resource to enhance the student engagement and provide

professional development to support the teachers use of the technology. The Voya Unsung

Heroes Grant provides the opportunity to explore resources that are more educational and

provides development that is more professional. Finally, the Digital Wishes Grants continues to

support the teachers in their knowledge and skill in using the technology in the classroom.

Through the combination of all of these grants and programs, we can foster our schools growth

in technology to benefit the students.

RESOURCES

Best, C. (2016). DonorsChoose.org: Support a classroom. Build a future. Retrieved June 25,

2016, from https://www.donorschoose.org/

Chirtea, H., & Bird, E. (2009, August). Grants. Retrieved June 20, 2016, from

https://digitalwishes.wordpress.com/grants/

ESA Foundation Grant Application Information. (2013). Retrieved June 25, 2016, from

http://www.esafoundation.org/application.asp

Grants. (2016). Retrieved June 22, 2016, from http://www.msetonline.org/grants.html

27 June 2016
GRAVA, LARAIA, & SHUB: FUNDING PAPER 18

Student Achievement Grants. (2012). Retrieved June 25, 2016, from

http://www.neafoundation.org/pages/nea-student-achievement-grants/

Voya Unsung Heroes. (2016). Retrieved June 20, 2016, from

http://corporate.voya.com/corporate-responsibility/community-investment/childrens-

education/voya-unsung-heroes

27 June 2016