[Federal Register: June 11, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 112)]
[Notices]
[Page 35125-35129]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11jn03-215]
Download: 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Department of Education
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education--Evaluating State
Education Technology Programs Grant Competition; Notice
[[Page 35126]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[CFDA No. 84.318A]
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education--Evaluating State
Education Technology Programs Grant Competition--Notice Inviting
Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2003
Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program is to increase the
capacity of States to design, conduct, and procure high-quality
evaluations of educational technology. To do so, this competition
supports grants to States to: (1) Build their capacity to conduct
scientifically based evaluations of educational technology
interventions, by planning and conducting an experimental or quasi-
experimental evaluation of a State-selected educational technology
initiative; and (2) widely disseminate pertinent information, based on
what is learned about the evaluation methods, practices, analyses, and
instruments used, that will help other States enhance their ability to
conduct similar empirical evaluations.
States receiving awards will:
(1) Develop a plan to conduct a scientifically based evaluation of
an educational intervention that uses technology applications as a tool
to increase student achievement in one or more core academic subjects.
(2) Conduct the evaluation in a manner that tests the impact of the
intervention as well as the efficacy of the empirical methods,
practices, and instruments used to assess the impact of the
intervention on student achievement.
(3) Disseminate information about the evaluation plan, its
implementation, and the results to other States and to school districts
so they may learn from and replicate the approach.
For FY 2003, the competition for new awards focuses on projects
designed to meet the priority we describe in the Priority section of
this application notice.
Eligible Applicants: The Secretary seeks to fund applications that
are submitted by a State educational agency (SEA), or an SEA on behalf
of a consortium (partnership).
Eligible partnerships are comprised of an SEA (that must serve as
the fiscal agent) and at least one entity from among the following
entities:
(1) Institutions of higher education.
(2) Other public institutions.
(3) Research organizations.
(4) Not-for-profit organizations.
(5) For-profit organizations.
(6) Other State educational agencies (SEAs).
(7) Local educational agencies (LEAs).
(8) Regional educational entities.
Applications Available: June 11, 2003.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 28, 2003.
Estimated Available Funds: $4,200,000.
Estimated Range of Awards: $300,000 to $650,000 (per annum).
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $475,000 (per annum).
Maximum Award: We will reject any application that proposes a
budget that exceeds $650,000 for any of the three 12-month budget
periods.
Estimated Number of Awards: 6-9.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to 36 months.
Applicable Statute and Regulations: (a) Section 2421(c) of part D
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as reauthorized
by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB); (b) The Education
Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts
74, 75, 77, 80, 81, 82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 2421(c) of part D (Enhancing Education Through Technology
Act) of the ESEA authorizes the Secretary to award competitive grants
for technical assistance to States to carry out activities to achieve
the purposes of that part. Section 2402 (a)(7) of part D provides that
one of the purposes of the Act is ``To support the rigorous evaluation
of programs funded under this part, particularly regarding the impact
of such programs on student academic achievement, and ensure that
timely information on the results of such evaluations is widely
accessible through electronic means.''
The intent of this competition is to help States learn to conduct
and procure high-quality evaluations by making funds available to a
limited number of States to plan, conduct, and report such evaluations.
States receiving awards will be expected not only to benefit directly
from the experience, but actively share their work with other States.
Therefore, grant awards from this competition are for States, with
assistance from their grant partners or contractors, to: Plan and
conduct rigorous, scientifically based evaluations of technology-
enhanced educational interventions; test and refine the methods,
practices, analyses, and instruments used; document project activities
and outcomes; and to inform the evaluation efforts of other States by
making available to those States documented information about the
evaluation plan, its implementation, and results.
The Department expects that the projects it funds under this grant
announcement will yield the following outcomes:
(1) Increased capacity within recipient States to routinely design
and conduct scientifically based evaluations, particularly in carrying
out directed State technology grant competitions under title II, part D
of the ESEA.
(2) A body of knowledge that can inform other States about
effective methods, practices, instruments, and conditions for
conducting scientifically based evaluations, including:
a. Replicable methods, practices, analyses, and instruments States
and districts can use to conduct rigorous scientifically based
evaluations of educational interventions that use technology as a tool
to enhance teaching and learning.
b. Methodological frameworks States and districts can use to
identify technology-enhanced educational interventions that measurably
increase student academic achievement, improve instruction, and enhance
curriculum, including interventions that integrate new and emerging
technologies into the curriculum.
In addition, the Department expects the evaluation findings that
result from this competition will yield empirical evidence about the
conditions and practices under which educational technology is
effective in helping students meet challenging academic content
standards and in increasing student academic achievement.
The Department expects to have substantial involvement with
applicants that obtain grants under this competition. Therefore, the
Department will enter into a cooperative agreement with each grantee.
Under the agreement, the Department will work with the grantee to
refine the evaluation and dissemination plans proposed in the
application and will review plans and other deliverables before further
work proceeds. (The terms ``cooperative agreement'' and ``grant'' are
used interchangeably in this solicitation.)
In applying for awards under this announcement, applicants must
propose a plan to evaluate the impact of technology-based educational
interventions on student achievement in the core academic subjects. Of
particular interest to the Department are elementary and secondary
school technology interventions that are consistent with the mission
and goals of
[[Page 35127]]
the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, that is, interventions to help
students meet challenging State academic content standards and student
academic achievement standards and to close the achievement gap between
low-income and minority students and their peers. To identify and
select an intervention for evaluation applicants might consider, for
example:
(a) Innovative distance learning strategies that deliver,
particularly to high-need student populations, specialized or rigorous
academic courses and curricula through the use of advanced
technologies, including video conferencing and virtual instruction
strategies.
(b) Professional development programs to enable teachers to
integrate advanced technologies, including emerging technologies, into
curricula and instruction in order to prepare students to meet
challenging State academic content and academic achievement standards.
(c) Programs that use technology to connect schools and teachers
with parents and students in order to promote meaningful parental
involvement; foster increased communication (about curricula,
assignments, and assessments) between students, parents, and teachers;
and assist parents to understand the technology being applied in their
child's education, so that parents are able to reinforce at home the
instruction that their child receives at school.
(d) Classroom-based courses and curricula that include integration
of technology and are designed to help students meet challenging State
academic content and student academic achievement standards.
(e) Programs that use technology to help teachers meet the high
standards of teacher quality defined in ESEA.
(f) Programs that use technology to meet the educational needs of
students in rural areas.
Examples of evaluation activities that may be funded include, but
are not limited to:
(a) Studies that compare the achievement of students who take high
school virtual courses with the achievement of students who take the
same courses in regular classrooms in order to determine whether the
virtual courses result in the same or different levels of student
achievement as courses taught in the regular classroom;
(b) Studies to determine the relative effectiveness of various
locally adopted, technology-enhanced instructional programs in
increasing student achievement. These studies might compare the
academic achievement of students in classrooms or schools where one
instructional program or approach is being used with the academic
achievement of students in classrooms or schools where another
technology-enhanced instructional program or approach is being used; or
(c) Studies to determine the impact on student achievement of
technology-enhanced instruction in specific academic content areas
versus academic content area instruction without the use of technology.
Applicants, in developing their proposals, should detail:
1. The evaluation approach they propose to take, including the
methods, practices, and analyses for: (a) Selecting the intervention,
population, and problem for study; (b) choosing the sample; and (c)
collecting and analyzing data.
2. Provisions for assessing the efficacy of the evaluation approach
and making refinements as warranted.
3. Plans for documenting project activities and disseminating to
other States and school districts the knowledge gained over the course
of the grant about how and under what conditions similar evaluations
can be replicated. Proposed strategies should include, but not be
limited to, the use of the Internet and other emerging technologies and
venues. At a minimum, dissemination strategies should include the
establishment and maintenance of a project Website that will host
continually updated information about: (a) The technology intervention
being evaluated; (b) the evaluation methods, practices, and analyses
carried out, including the data collection plans and instruments used;
(c) any modifications that occurred during the implementation of the
project along with the rationale for those modifications; (d) the
processes and conditions necessary for other States and school
districts to replicate the approach; and (e) the evaluation results and
other project findings.
Priority
This competition focuses on projects designed to meet the following
priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), applications will receive up to
20 additional points depending on how well they meet the priority.
These points are in addition to any points the application earns under
the selection criteria.
Competitive Preference Priority
The project is designed to determine whether the program
implemented produces meaningful effects on student achievement or
teacher performance through a rigorous evaluation. Evaluations using an
experimental design are the strongest for determining program
effectiveness. Thus, the project preferably uses an experimental
design. An evaluation using an experimental design is one where
subjects (students, teachers, classrooms, or schools) are randomly
assigned to receive the program being evaluated or to be in a control
group that does not receive the program. Evaluations using an
experimental design will receive up to 20 points.
If random assignment is not feasible, the project may employ a
quasi-experimental design with carefully matched comparison conditions.
This alternative design attempts to approximate a randomly assigned
control group by matching program participants (students, teachers,
classrooms or schools) with non-participants possessing similar pre-
program characteristics. Evaluations of this type will receive up to 10
points.
Proposed evaluations that use neither experimental designs with
random assignment or quasi-experimental designs using a matched
comparison group will receive 0 points under the competitive preference
priority.
Data from reliable and valid measures of the intervention that the
program intends to implement and of the outcomes that the program
intends to effect should be collected before and after participation in
the program or the comparison condition.
Points awarded under this priority will be determined by the
quality of the proposed evaluation. In determining the quality of the
evaluation, we will consider the extent to which the applicant presents
a feasible, credible plan that includes: The type of design to be used
(random assignment or matched comparison); outcomes to be measured; a
discussion of how students, teachers, classrooms, or schools will be
assigned to the program or matched for comparison with other students,
teachers, classrooms, or schools; and a proposed evaluator, preferably
independent, with the necessary background and technical expertise to
carry out the proposed evaluation.
Selection Criteria
We will use the following selection criteria to evaluate
applications for new grants under this program.
The maximum score for all of these criteria is 100 points.
The maximum score for each criterion is indicated in parentheses.
(a) Significance (20 points). In determining the significance of
the
[[Page 35128]]
proposed project, the Secretary will consider the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the application supports the Department's
strategic interests embodied in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001:
greater accountability for student achievement, increased flexibility
and local control, more parental choice, and a focus on what works.
(2) The extent to which the application offers a reasonable and
sound plan that likely will produce outcomes, products, or publications
that will inform the field about evaluation practice to determine the
effectiveness of new and advanced technology tools and applications in
education, and that are easily exportable to different settings,
including urban, rural, and suburban communities.
(3) The extent to which the application proposes to disaggregate
evaluation results so that the impact of the intervention on the
academic achievement of sub-groups of students, such as students who
are ethnic or language minorities, rurally isolated, or from families
with incomes below the poverty line, can be determined.
(b) Quality of the project design (35 points). In determining the
quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary will
consider the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the methodology proposed is thorough,
feasible, and employs a methodologically sound experimental or quasi-
experimental design to determine the effectiveness of the educational
technology intervention under study.
(2) The extent to which the methodology proposed includes the use
of valid, reliable, and objective performance measures that are clearly
related to the intended outcomes of the intervention being evaluated.
(3) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build
evaluation capacity and practice that will extend beyond the period of
Federal financial assistance.
(4) The extent to which the design for implementing the proposed
evaluation, documenting evaluation activities, and disseminating
knowledge, will result in information to guide replication of project
activities or strategies, including information about the effectiveness
of the approach or strategies employed by the project.
(c) Quality of project personnel (15 points). In determining the
quality of project personnel, the Secretary will consider:
(1) The extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons without regard to race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability.
(2) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of the project director or principal investigator.
(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.
(d) Adequacy of resources (15 points). In determining the adequacy
of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary will consider the
following factors:
(1) The extent to which the partnership members contribute to the
activities assisted under the grant by providing substantial support in
the form of non-Federal funds and/or in-kind contributions, including
staff and facilities.
(2) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the
lead applicant organization.
(3) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
(4) The potential for the incorporation of project purposes,
activities, or benefits into the ongoing program of the agency or
organization at the end of Federal funding.
(e) Quality of the management plan (15 points). In determining the
quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary
will consider the following factors:
(1) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(2) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous
improvement in the operation of the proposed project.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking
Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), the
Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to
comment on proposed priorities and other program requirements.
Ordinarily, this practice would have applied to the competitive
priority, selection criteria, and requirements in this notice. Section
437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), however,
exempts rules that apply to the first competition under a new program
from this requirement. The competition covered by this notice is a new
activity under the National Technology Activities authorized by the
ESEA, as reauthorized by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The
Secretary, in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of GEPA, in order to
ensure timely grant awards, has decided to forego public comment with
respect to the competitive priority, selection criteria and program
requirements. The competitive priority, selection criteria, and
requirements of this grant notice will apply only to the FY 2003 grant
competition.
Application Procedures
The Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) of 1998, (Pub. L.
105-277) and the Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement
Act of 1999, (Pub. L. 106-107) encourage us to undertake initiatives to
improve our grant processes. Enhancing the ability of individuals and
entities to conduct business with us electronically is a major part of
our response to these Acts. Therefore, we are taking steps to adopt the
Internet as our chief means of conducting transactions in order to
improve services to our customers and to simplify and expedite our
business processes.
We are requiring that applications to the FY 2003 Evaluating State
Education Technology Programs Grant Competition be submitted
electronically using e-Application available through the Education
Department's e-GRANTS system. The e-GRANTS system is accessible through
its portal page at: http://e-grants.ed.gov.
Applicants who are unable to submit an application through the e-
GRANTS system may apply for a waiver to the electronic submission
requirement. To apply for a waiver, applicants must explain the
reason(s) that prevent them from using the Internet to submit their
applications. The reasons(s) must be outlined in a letter addressed to:
Enid Simmons, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
room 3E215, Washington, DC 20202. We must receive your letter no later
than two weeks before the closing date.
Any application that receives a waiver to the electronic submission
requirement will be given the same consideration in the review process
as an electronic application.
Pilot Project for Electronic Submission of Applications
In FY 2003, the U.S. Department of Education is continuing to
expand its pilot project for electronic submission of applications to
include additional formula grant programs and additional
[[Page 35129]]
discretionary grant competitions. The Evaluating State Education
Technology Programs Grant Competition is one of the programs included
in the pilot project.
The pilot project involves the use of the Electronic Grant
Application System (e-Application) portion of the Grant Administration
and Payment System (GAPS). Users of e-Application will be entering data
on-line while completing their applications. You may not e-mail a soft
copy of a grant application to us. The data you enter on-line will be
saved into a database. We shall continue to evaluate the success of the
electronic submission of applications and solicit suggestions for
improvement.
If you participate in e-Application, please note the following:
[sbull] When you enter the e-Application system, you will find
information about its hours of operation.
[sbull] You must submit all documents electronically, including the
Application for Federal Education Assistance (ED 424), Budget
Information--Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary
assurances and certifications.
[sbull] After you electronically submit your application, you will
receive an automatic acknowledgement, which will include a PR/Award
number (an identifying number unique to your application).
[sbull] Within three working days after submitting your electronic
application, fax a signed copy of the Application for Federal Education
Assistance (ED 424) to the Application Control Center after following
these steps:
1. Print ED 424 from the e-Application system.
2. The institution's Authorizing Representative must sign this
form.
3. Place the PR/Award number in the upper right hand corner of the
hard copy signature page of the ED 424.
4. Fax the signed ED 424 to the Application Control Center at (202)
260-1349.
[sbull] We may request that you give us original signatures on all
other forms at a later date.
[sbull] Closing Date Extension in Case of System Unavailability: If
you are prevented from submitting your application on the closing date
because the e-Application system is unavailable, we will grant you an
extension of one business day in order to transmit your application
electronically, by mail, or by hand delivery. For us to grant this
extension--
1. You must be a registered user of e-Application, and have
initiated an e-Application for this competition; and
2. (a) The e-Application system must be unavailable for 60 minutes
or more between the hours of 8:30 and 3:30 p.m., Washington, DC time,
on the deadline date; or
(b) The e-Application system must be unavailable for any period of
time during the last hour of operation (that is, for any period of time
between 3:30 and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time) on the deadline date.
The Department must acknowledge and confirm these periods of
unavailability before granting you an extension. To request this
extension you must contact either (1) the person listed elsewhere in
this notice under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or (2) the e-GRANTS
help desk at 1-888-336-8930.
You may access the electronic grant application for the Evaluating
State Education Technology Programs at: http://e-grants.ed.gov.
We have included additional information about the e-Application
pilot project (see Parity Guidelines Between Paper and Electronic
Applications) in the application package.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Enid Simmons, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3E215, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 708-9499 or via Internet: enid.simmons@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TODD), you may
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the program contact person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application
package in an alternative format by contacting that person. However,
the Department is not able to reproduce in an alternative format the
standard forms included in the application package.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:
http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/.
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6771(c).
Dated: June 5, 2003.
Eugene W. Hickock,
Under Secretary of Education.
[FR Doc. 03-14716 Filed 6-10-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P