|
The February
TechWize had a story about the federal government's TOP grants,
and last month, I wrote about a different technology funding opportunity,
the Rural Utilities Service. In response, I had quite a number of
inquiries. Unfortunately, very few of the school districts that
contacted me were ready for grant writing.
Why? Because
they wanted computers. Or sometimes technology in general. And always,
they wanted money - usually lots of it.
Unfortunately,
those are keys to disappointment. This may amaze you, given the
titles of some of the programs, such as "Technology Opportunities
Program" (TOP), but there's no such thing as a technology grant.
It's a misnomer. What these grants are really about is improving
student achievement - enabling students to master challenging curriculum
aligned with standards. Technology is a vehicle, and a very good
one, for doing that, but it's a tool, not an end in itself. Anyone
who doesn't understand that and plans a project based on that principal
is, unfortunately, a poor candidate for a grant.
Given more
time, we might have been able to work with some of these districts
to plan a viable approach, but the deadline came and went so quickly
there just wasn't time. The RUS promises to bring a similar rush.
But fear not, there will be other opportunities - plenty of them
- and even TOP and RUS should be around for some years to come.
There are seven
key questions that most every grant application has to address.
If you have good answers to them, you're well on your way to grant
success. Let's focus on the first question, WHY DO YOU NEED THE
GRANT?
If you need
technology or money, forget it! Your need has to be student-based.
Here are some sellable arguments for an RUS grant, which supports
distance learning in rural schools:
- The instructional
staff is too small to provide the range of course offerings that
students need (e.g., no psychology, journalism, physics or advanced
placement).
- Too many
students have scheduling conflicts because classes are offered
in single sections (e.g., chemistry and band are both offered
only in Period 5).
- Teachers'
repertoires are so broad that they cannot adequately prepare for
all their classes (e.g., teachers have seven, eight or nine different
preparations in a year).
- They are
teaching classes for which they are not adequately trained (e.g.,
a teacher with a math endorsement also teaches a section of social
studies to fill out her load).
- Professional
development opportunities are limited because the nearest college
is too far to commute.
- Teachers
lack networking opportunities with peers because they are in one-member
departments.
- Special needs
providers spend more time behind their cars' windshields than
actually serving kids' needs.
You can't simply
make these claims. You have to prove them. For most small districts,
that's not hard to do - they operate under very trying circumstances.
I've run into situations such as a teacher with seven different
preparations in three disciplines who also was the basketball coach,
senior yearbook adviser and a substitute bus driver. Whew!
We have survey
instruments that can rapidly help you find your school's structural
weaknesses that are preventing students from achieving their full
potential. EarthWalk and other vendors have the products to improve
these conditions. Put it all together and you'll find that there
IS a grant waiting for you.
In case you've
been wondering, here are the other six critical questions. We'll
talk about them in future columns.
2. What are
the expected results of your project (goals and objectives)?
3. How are you going to achieve them (workplan)?
4. Who is going to do the work (staffing)?
5. How much is it going to cost (budget)?
6. How will you know if it's working (evaluation)?
7. How will you continue the project when the grant ends (sustainability)?
Michael Gershowitz
is President of Gershowitz Grant and Evaluation Services, and can
be reached at (515) 270-1718 or at gershowitz@mcleodusa.net.
Clients mentioning EarthWalk Communications receive 10% discount.
|