2004-2005 RFP.doc.doc.doc


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

2004-2005 RFP.doc.doc.doc

  1. 1. Department of Instructional Technology Greg Rasmussen, Executive Director Alvin E. Morris Administrative Center 316.973.4455 FAX: 316.973.4770 201 North Water E-mail: grasmussen@usd259.net Wichita, Kansas 67202 December 1, 2004 To: Administrators and Staff in All Schools From: Greg Rasmussen, Executive Director, Instructional Technology Subject: Improving Learning Through Technology Grant – Request for Proposals The Instructional Technology Department is pleased to announce another Improving Learning Through Technology Grant opportunity. The purpose of these grants is to help jump start innovative project ideas for effectively integrating educational technology into the teaching and learning process in our schools. If you have a great idea but have lacked the funds to make it happen, we are looking for you. We plan to offer up to six (6) awards of up to $35,000 each. The applications are due on January 28 and must be submitted online no later than 4:30 p.m. on that date. Awards will be announced on February 10. The ten schools that received grants for the current 2004-2005 school year are not eligible to apply. Schools which have never been awarded an ILTT grant or which have been awarded one in 2002-2003 or 2003-2004 are eligible to apply. 2002-2003 or 2003-2004 winners, though eligible again this year, must submit a proposal for a new project. The following pages provide more details about the application process. If you have any questions or comments about the application, please e-mail them to grasmussen@usd259.net. The Request for Proposal (this document) as well as online submission information is available on the Instructional Technology Website: http://technology.usd259.com There will be two Grant Informational Meetings: December 6th, 9:00-10:00, ISC Room 225 OR December 6th, 4:00-5:00, ISC – 1st floor Library. I would strongly encourage interested parties to attend either of these meetings as many changes have been made to the RFP this year. Good luck and thank you for your support of all students. ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 1 of 16 Page 1 of 16
  2. 2. U.S.D. 259 Wichita Public Schools Instructional Technology Department Improving Learning Through Technology 2005-06 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) Your proposal must follow the General Instructions and the Grant Proposal Guidelines to be considered for funding. Awards: Up to six (6) awards of up to $35,000 each. You may request less. Deadline: Proposals must be submitted online by 4:30 p.m. January 28, 2005. Proposals not meeting this deadline will not be considered for funding. Awards will be announced on February 10, 2005. Eligibility: One proposal may be submitted from each school. The ten schools that received grants for the current 2004-2005 school year are not eligible to apply. Schools which have never been awarded an ILTT grant or which have been awarded one in 2002-2003 or 2003-2004 are eligible to apply. 2002-2003 or 2003-2004 winners, though eligible again this year, must submit a proposal for a new project. December 1 – Grant Announcement December 6 – Grant Informational Meeting – 9:00-10:00, ISC – Rm. 225 December 6 – Grant Informational Meeting – 4:00–5:00, ISC – 1st Floor Library January 28 – 4:30 p.m. Deadline for Online Submission of Grant Proposal January 28 - February 9 – Out of District Readers Evaluate Grants February 10 – Announcement of Awards February 18 – Grant Participant Meeting – 10:00-12:00 – AMAC 917 March 4 – Purchase Orders for Equipment are due to Instructional Technology July 26, 27, 28, 29 and August 1 and 2 - Grant Cadre Academy (See page 4 – 3b and 3c) July 26 –Equipment will not be available to grant awardees until this date. September – April -- Grant Cadres will meet one day per quarter for the 05-06 School Year January 2006 – Mid Term Progress and Budget Report Due April 2006 – Final Project Evaluation Report Due Project Purpose and Types of Appropriate Projects: The purpose of these grants is to provide educational professionals the opportunity to develop innovative, curriculum-based, technology integration projects suitable for replication in other schools. These projects must be aligned to the district standards and the school’s Campus Improvement Plan and must include meaningful professional development. Hardware can be purchased with grant funds, but must be integral to the project and its goals and objectives. Thus the intent of this grant is not to enable you to acquire hardware simply or only for the purpose of “acquiring hardware.” The intent is that the hardware purchased contributes to the school’s efforts to seamlessly integrate technology into teaching and learning. ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 2 of 16 Page 2 of 16
  3. 3. Projects must integrate the use of technology and may address any or all of the following areas: • The formation of unique classroom (single grade level or multiple-grade level) or school-wide projects incorporating technology • The development of innovative curriculum materials which integrate technology in specific areas • The initiation of a school-wide technology-based project which may be augmented with continued funding by the school in the future • The design of professional development programs incorporating technology General Instructions: 1. Read all materials carefully before you begin writing the proposal. 2. Only one application per school will be accepted. 3. We anticipate awarding up to six ILTT Grants for up to $35,000 each. Funds must be used for the project described in the funded proposal. 4. While the actual proposal will be submitted online at http://technology.usd259.com, you need to create it first in Microsoft Word or other word processing software. Make sure you have a backup copy of your document!! When complete, you can copy and paste into the online form from your MS Word document. The following print guidelines reflect the maximum length your proposal may be. A printed version of your proposal that is double-spaced, with 1” margins, using 12-point Times New Roman font should be no more than 10 pages. (Project Summary – 1 page, Narrative Section – 8 pages, and Budget – 1 page) 5. Teams from a school or entire school staffs may work together to develop the grant proposal and implement the grant project. We are not looking for proposals from individual teachers as we wish to see a broader, more extensive effort in making technology an integral part of education at your school. However, you should designate a primary grant contact from your team/school. The names of the primary contact, the principal, members of the grant cadre and student technology leadership contact will be requested on the online proposal submission. The act of providing names of the grant participants certifies a willingness to participate and serve as the focal point for the school’s project. Inclusion of the principal’s name certifies full knowledge of and support of the project and a willingness to assign additional resources to the project as may be identified in the proposal. Any proposal which does not include the names of these individuals will not be considered for funding. 6. Submit proposal online by going to this webpage: http://technology.usd259.com and following the instructions you find there. If you have questions or problems with the online submission system, contact Robin Surland at 3-4502 or rsurland@usd259.net. Given the unpredictable nature of technology, we suggest you not wait until the deadline to submit your application. ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 3 of 16 Page 3 of 16
  4. 4. Grant Proposal Guidelines/Requirements: 1. To ensure that the competition is as impartial as possible, all reviewers will be non- USD259 employees and each application will be scored by three reviewers. 2. You may use the funds to purchase technology (desktop, laptop or handheld computers, printers, scanners, digital cameras, whiteboards, projectors, clickers etc…), software, materials and supplies, pay consultants, pay stipends or addendums (remember you must also include benefits calculated at 8.8% for any stipends or addendums paid) to employees who are working outside their regular hours, or for any other expense directly related to your project. A minimum of 15% of the funds must be spent on professional development-related items including but not limited to: • Training materials • Stipends for training • Substitutes for training • Pay for facilitators and/or consultants 3. If awarded, your school will need to agree to do the following: a. Submit a Mid-Term and Final Project Report. b. Send three faculty members to the Grant Cadre Academy to be held from July 26-29 and August 1-2, 2005. Faculty will be paid a stipend for their participation. (Stipends will be covered by the Instructional Technology Department and do not need to be included in your grant budget) The purpose of the Academy is to build capacity for your sites by providing quality technology professional development for a cadre of teachers. The experience will be hands- on and project-based. Teachers will leave the Academy prepared to provide technology leadership at their sites. The same three staff members need to attend all sessions. c. Release the three-person Grant Cadre team to participate in four (4) additional days of technology professional development during the 2005-2006 school year. (Funding for substitutes will be covered by the Instructional Technology Department). d. Participate in a Student Leadership Program, organize a school-based technology student group and participate in district-wide student leadership events. This will be funded by the Instructional Technology Department. e. Share what you are doing with other schools across the district and the state. We will ask you to apply to present at state technology conferences and participate in local professional development activities. ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 4 of 16 Page 4 of 16
  5. 5. Formatting Your Grant for Online Submittal We recommend that you not create your proposal in the online form, but instead use MS Word or other word processing software to create and save your document. Files sometimes get corrupted or text accidentally gets deleted from them. Thus, as soon as you have a final draft of your proposal, make a backup copy of it to use in the online submission process. Open the backup copy of your proposal and copy text from it and paste it into the appropriate fields in the online form, one field at a time. It is easiest to keep both documents open and go back and forth between them copying and pasting. By working from the backup copy, you’ll still have a pristine copy of your proposal to use if you run into any problems. Graphs and tables cannot be placed in the online form fields. Special formatting such as tabs, bullets, numbered lists, bold, underlines and italics will not transfer correctly when pasting into the form fields. To overcome these limitations, the following alternative formatting methods are suggested. Bold—Use all capital letters. Italics—Use quotation marks. Tabs—Press enter twice between paragraphs instead of indenting them with tabs. Bullets—Use an asterisk (*) before your bulleted text and press enter after each bulleted item. Numbered Lists—Use the formatting shown below from the keyboard instead of from Microsoft Word’s numbered list tool. 1. First item in the list 2. Second item in the list 3. Third item in the list If Word starts to auto format your numbers or bullets, you need to turn this feature off. This can be done by going to Format > AutoFormat > click the Options button, and then on the AutoFormat as You Type tab, un-check the box next to Automatic numbered lists or Automatic bullets. If you want to see what your document will look like to the reviewers, cut and paste it into Notepad (not WordPad). Notepad is listed in your programs under accessories. Note: Your grant will not be rated on the formatting, but following these suggestions will make your proposal much easier for reviewers to read. ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 5 of 16 Page 5 of 16
  6. 6. U.S.D. 259 Wichita Public Schools Instructional Technology Department Improving Student Learning Through Technology Grant Cover Sheet THIS TEMPLATE IS PROVIDED ONLY AS A GUIDE - ALL APPLICTIONS WILL BE SUBMITTED ONLINE AT http://technology.usd259.com School Name: School Address: School Phone Number: Project Title: Primary Grant Contact’s Name: Primary Grant Contact’s School Phone: Principal’s Name: Principal’s School Phone: List Three (3) Cadre Members for July 2005-April 2006 Professional Development: List One (1) Student Leadership Organization Contact Person: ILTT Primary Grant Contact Certification Principal’s Certification By placing an X in the box below, I, as ILTT By placing an X in the box below, I, as the Primary Grant contact person, certify my school principal, certify my full knowledge of willingness to participate in and serve as the focal and support of the ILLT Grant project and a point for my school’s technology grant project. willingness to assign additional resources to the project as may be identified in the proposal. Place an X in box Place an X in box ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 6 of 16 Page 6 of 16
  7. 7. U.S.D. 259 Wichita Public Schools Instructional Technology Department Improving Student Learning Through Technology Grant Grant Contents THIS IS A TEMPLATE TO USE ONLY AS A GUIDE - ALL APPLICATIONS WILL BE SUBMITTED ONLINE AT http://technology.usd259.com **** COMPOSE IN MICROSOFT WORD AND THEN COPY AND PASTE INTO THE ONLINE FORM**** A. PROJECT SUMMARY - Please limit this to one double-spaced page or less. I. Name of Project and Project Summary (4 points) Summarize your project, including need, project description and plan for determining project success. This is your first opportunity to convince the ILTT Grant reviewers that you have a clearly identified need and an exciting, solid plan for addressing that need through the integration of technology into the teaching/learning process. Use it well! B. NARRATIVE SECTION – Please limit this section to eight double-spaced pages or less. II. Needs Statement (24 points) Describe the needs of the target audience that will be addressed by your proposed project. (For example, low student achievement, achievement gaps, lack of technology to carry out the established mission, lack of technology use to promote higher level thinking skills, etc.) Include the supporting data you used to determine the need. Include the number of students and/or teachers who will benefit from the project. III.Project Description (40 points) Describe your project. What are you trying to accomplish? Include your overall project goal(s) and specific, measurable objective(s). Be sure to explain how the project will meet the stated goals and objectives, integrates technology into the teaching/learning process, is aligned to the district standards (be specific) and your school’s campus improvement plan (reviewers will have access to your plan) and includes meaningful professional development. The “WDOP (What Distinguishes/Differentiates Our Project) Factor” - Given the requirement for technology integration, alignment to district standards and Campus Improvement Plans, it won’t be unusual to see proposals for projects that are similar in many respects. Thus as you describe your project, we’d like you to explain to reviewers what you believe distinguishes or differentiates your project from all the other ones that are submitted. Is there something especially innovative or creative about what you are doing, how the technology will be integrated, roles of “teachers” and “learners”, how learning crosses curricular boundaries, ways you will engage students, how students will demonstrate what they learn, etc.? You know what kids are like when they’re excited about learning…what about your project will excite them? What about this project excites you, the educators? (Note, the items listed in the previous three sentences are meant as “for examples” and are not intended to be an exhaustive list or ideas that limit what you talk about – you tell us what distinguishes or differentiates your project from all the ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 7 of 16 Page 7 of 16
  8. 8. others). To get the maximum points in this section you’re going to have to convince reviewers that there is something special or unique about your project. When reviewing your proposal, make reviewers exclaim, “Wow, this project is so good that it must to be one of those that are funded!” IV. Building Commitment (32 points) For change to occur, for technology to truly become integrated seamlessly into the teaching/ learning process in a school, commitment from everyone is required. Administrators and staff as well as students need to be involved, not only in project implementation but in project planning as well. We can only fund a limited number of ILTT grant projects and are interested in funding those we believe to have the greatest likelihood of impacting technology integration in a school and be scalable for the district. Describe your school’s commitment to this project--convince reviewers that awarding your school this grant will make a difference in the way education happens in your school. Explain how you involved administrators, staff and students in the planning of your project. What was the contribution of each? In project implementation, who will be involved and what are their roles (administrators, staff and students).What other resources (both monetary and staff time) will contribute to and assure the success of your project, both during the grant period and beyond? Note that commitment is demonstrated through action. It is not enough to say you are committed; what have you done and what will you do that demonstrates this commitment? As part of your response to this question, include a statement of commitment from the principal describing what he/she will do to support, encourage, and insure the success of this project. V. Activities/Timeline for Project (8 points) Describe the activities necessary to implement your project and the anticipated dates or time periods during which they will take place. The grant period will run from April 1, 2005 – April 30, 2006 though equipment will not be available until July 26, 2005. VI. Plan for Evaluating Project’s Success (16 points) Describe how you will determine the degree to which your project has been successful – how will you know your goals and objectives have been achieved? What data will you collect? What evidence of success will you look for? ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 8 of 16 Page 8 of 16
  9. 9. C. BUDGET SECTION VII. Project Budget Summary and Justification (12 points) –All Purchase Orders for equipment are due by March 4, 2005. Equipment will not be available until July 26, 2005. To assist you with budgeting, please use the following cost ESTIMATES for building the budget. We recognize that in some cases these technology items could or will cost less than the amount indicated below; however, please use the figures we’ve provided when developing your budget. When equipment is ordered, we will order similar equipment in a combined order.  PC Desktop Computer - $1100 (includes software licensing)  PC Laptop Computer - $1600 (includes software licensing)  Tablet PC Computer - $1850 (includes software licensing)  Wireless Cart - $1500  Wireless Access Points - $500  Extra Batteries - $100 each (recommended for PC wireless only)  Battery Charger - $1700 (recommended for PC wireless only)  Interactive Whiteboard (Smart or Interwrite) - $2200 installed  LCD Projector - $2000 installed  Digital Camera - $500  Digital Video Camera - $800  Handheld Computer (Palm) - $200  Clickers – Set of 24 - $1,500, Set of 36 - $2,000 Note: for Apple Computer pricing, please contact Lisa Nikkel at nikkel@apple.com Budget Summary - Provide a summary of how funds will be spent. Use whole dollars only. Check your math! Budget category Amount Personnel Costs $ Personnel Benefits $ Contracted Services $ Supplies and Materials $ Budget Equipment $ TOTAL Amount Requested $ Justification - Below the summary, explain in detail, the expenditures that will be made and how they will contribute to the achievement of your goals and objectives. As part of your explanation, be sure to identify the expenditures that will be for professional development. At least 15% of your budget must be spent on professional development. ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 9 of 16 Page 9 of 16
  10. 10. USD 259 Wichita Public Schools Instructional Technology Department Improving Student Learning Through Technology Grant Scoring Summary Each section of the proposal is worth the following maximum point values: I. Name of Project and Project Summary 4 pts. II. Needs Statement 24 pts. III. Project Description 40 pts. IV. Building Commitment 32 pts. V. Activities/Timeline for Project 8 pts. VI. Project Evaluation Plan 16 pts. VII. Project Budget Summary and Justification 12 pts. VIII.In addition to the points assigned to sections I-VII of the proposal, points will be awarded for overall proposal clarity, correctness of grammar and spelling. 8 pts. Total points possible 144 pts. ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 10 of 16 Page 10 of 16
  11. 11. USD 259 Wichita Public Schools Improving Learning Through Technology Grant Scoring Rubric Exemplary Commendable Limited Marginal Missing Weighting Score 4 3 2 1 0 Factor III. Project Description StatementII. Needs SummaryI. Project Clear summary of project Reviewer has a pretty Attempt at summarizing Reviewer has little No project Score x 1 including need, project good idea of what this project, but one or more idea what this summary. description, and plan for project is all about but of the following are project is all about, determining success of summary leaves some missing or unclear: need, is designed to project. Reviewer has no doubt question(s) in his/her project description, or accomplish or what about what this project is to mind. plan for determining the need is. accomplish. success. Strong evidence of need for Fairly good description of Either needs of target Needs of target No needs Score x 6 target audience and need and limited data to audience or supporting audience unclear and statement. description of need is clearly support it are provided. data missing. What is no data given to specified. Multiple sources of provided does not support need. appropriate data used to convince the reviewer of determine & support need. the need. Clear goals, specific Project includes goals, Proposal contains goals Technology seems No project Score x 10 measurable objectives and measurable objectives and objectives but they more like an “add description. clear explanation of how and an explanation of are stated vaguely and it on” rather than truly project will meet them. how project will meet is not clear how project integrated into the Evidence of effective them. Some evidence of will meet them. One or project. Goals and technology integration, technology integration, more elements objectives poorly alignment to district standards alignment to district (technology integration, stated or conceived and campus improvement standards and campus alignment to standards and are not plan, and meaningful improvement plan as well and campus improvement measurable. Little professional development. as professional plan, professional idea of what this Applicant has addressed the development. However, development) are missing project is trying to “WDOP Factor.” As a one or more of the above or limited. This project accomplish or how it reviewer, you believe this elements is not described has merit but isn’t a relates to the stated project must be funded. as clearly or completely “must fund” project. need. Little as it could be. While this distinguishes this project is strong, and project. deserves serious consideration for funding, applicant hasn’t quite convinced you that this is a “must fund” project ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 11 of 16
  12. 12. CommitmentIV. Building Strong evidence of Staff and administration Some evidence of Evidence of building No evidence of Score x 8 commitment. Reviewer is at this school are building commitment is commitment is building convinced that project will committed to the success present, though minimal. questionable. commitment. make a significant difference of this project though Administrators, staff and Involvement and No statement of in technology integration and evidence isn’t as strong students have had some contributions from commitment teaching/learning at this as it is for a score of “4”. involvement in the one or more of these and support school. It is clear that There is some evidence planning and will be groups from principal. administrators, staff and that administrators, staff involved in the (administrators, staff, students have all been and students have been implementation, but the students) are not involved in the planning and involved in the planning involvement or evident. Statement of each group’s contributions and will be in the contributions of one or commitment and have been described. It is also implementation. There is more of these groups support from clear that all three groups will a pretty strong statement seem minimal at best. principal is so be involved in project of commitment and Statement of commitment general that you’re implementation and the support from principal and support from not convinced that contributions of each have and some detail about principal is present there’s real been described. Strong what the principal will do though description of administrative statement of commitment and to demonstrate that what that support will be support for this support from principal. You support though more is is limited. project. are convinced that the needed. principal will do everything possible to assure project success and the support that will be provided has been clearly described. ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 12 of 16
  13. 13. Exemplary Commendable Limited Marginal Missing Weighting Score 4 3 2 1 0 Factor Activities are described in a Activities are clearly Activities are fairly well Project description is No activities or Score x 2 TimelineActivities/V. clear and detailed manner. The described but not with as described, but some disorganized and timeline explanation is convincing in much detail as a “4” important steps seem to does not inspire that the educators have clearly response. The educators be missing or timeline is confidence that it is documented how all of the state how all the steps not always realistic, thus well-conceived or project steps will be will be completed in the not quite convincing the thought out. successfully completed in the specified time. The reviewer that the goals specified time. The project is project is organized in and objectives can be organized in such a way as to such a way as to accomplished. maximize the opportunity to maximize the opportunity have goals and objectives met. to have goals and objectives met. Evaluation is clearly tied to Evaluation is tied to the Evaluation is only loosely Evaluation plan is No evaluation Score x 4 PlanEvaluationVI. project goals and objectives. project goals and tied to project goals and vague or poorly plan Evaluation methods enable the objectives, but it is not objectives. Evaluation conceived. educators to determine if clear that the evaluation methods will not allow project was successful. methods will allow the the educators to educators to determine if convincingly state if the project was successful. project was successful or not. ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 13 of 16
  14. 14. Spelling Grammar,VIII. Clarity, JustificationV1I. Budget & Budget Budget complete and items are Budget generally Budget is not very Budget is vague and No budget or Score x 3 clearly detailed. Budget items complete but is missing specific and contains poorly justified and/ budget are appropriate to support some details. Items either some questionable or contains justification project. At least 15% of the appear to support the items or not enough items mathematical errors. budget is being spent on project. At least 15% of to support the project. None of the budget professional development the budget is being spent Professional development is allocated for on professional expenditures are professional development identified but are less development. than 15% of budget. Proposal clearly written Vast majority of proposal Occasional lack of clarity Much of proposal Grammatical Score x 2 without grammatical errors or clearly written. in proposal. More than a vague. Numerous errors, misspellings. Grammatical errors, if few grammatical errors or grammatical errors misspelled present, are minor, misspelled words. and misspelled words, and lack misspelled words are few words distract of clarity make and do not distract the reader. understanding reader. of proposal questionable Total Score ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 14 of 16
  15. 15. Helpful Resources Articles/Publications • Applying Technology to Restructuring and Learning, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory Available online at http://www.sedl.org/tap • Key Building Blocks for Student Achievement in the 21st Century, CEO Forum Available online at http://www.ceoforum.org • Connecting Kids to Technology, by Tony Wilhelm, Delia Carmen, and Megan Reynolds, June 2002, Available online at http://www.aecf.org/publications/data/snapshot_june2002.pdf • Children Learning With Technology Beyond the School Bell and Building: What Do We Know Now?, by Amy L. Kuhlmann, Lawrence B. Friedman, Dec 2001, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory Available online at http://www.ncrel.org/tech/child/child.pdf • Planning into Practice: Resources for Planning, Implementing, and Integrating Instructional Technology, by Jeff Sun, Marilyn Heath, Elizabeth Byrom, Janet Phlegar, and K. Victoria Dimock, SEIR-TEC, 2000. Available online at http://www.serve.org/seir-tec/P2P.html • EnGauge, a web-based framework developed by NCREL with Metiri Group that identifies Six Essential Conditions—systemwide factors critical to effective uses of technology for student learning Available online at http://www.ncrel.org/engauge • Technology in American Schools: Seven Dimensions for Gauging Progress, by Cheryl Lemke and Edward C. Coughlin, Milken Exchange on Education technology, 1998. Available online at http://www.mff.org/publications/publications.taf?page=158 • The intent of National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) Project is to enable stakeholders in PreK-12 education to develop national standards for educational uses of technology that facilitate school improvement in the United States. The actual National Educational Technology Standards can be found at http://cnets.iste.org/. • Measure IT! Tools and Strategies for Gauging the Impact of Technology &Technology in Schools: A Range of Use, by the Metiri Group. Available online at http://www.metiri.com • The Digital Disconnect: The Widening Gap Between Internet-Savvy Students and Their Schools, prepared by Douglas Levin and Sousan Arafeh, American Institutes for Research for the Pew Internet & American Life Project, August 2002. Available online at http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=67 Websites • U.S. Department of Education – http://www.ed.gov ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 15 of 16
  16. 16. • CEO Forum – http://www.ceoforum.org • Institute for the Advancement of Emerging Technologies in Education (IAETE) – http://www.iaete.org • North Central Regional Education Laboratory – http://www.ncrel.org • WestEd – http://www.wested.org • Metiri Group – http://www.metiri.com • International Society for Technology in Education – http://www.iste.org • Closing the Gap: Computer Technology in Special Education and Rehabilitation – http://www.closingthegap.com ILTT RFP FINAL 12-1-04 Page 16 of 16