District Application Cover Page

District: Alton Date: Nov 6, 2009 Project Manager: Pamela McLeod Position Title: Director of Technology Mailing Address: PO Box 910, Alton, NH 03809 Email Address: [email protected] Phone: (603) 875-0394

BE SURE TO READ ALL OF THE FOLLOWING

I hereby certify that:

1. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this application is correct, and the school board of the district named above has authorized me as its representative to submit this application. 2. The District has submitted to the New Hampshire Department of Education (NHDOE) a General Assurances signature page for the current year. 3. The District has consulted with the appropriate non-public schools during the design and development of this Ed Tech project prior to all decisions that affect the opportunities of private school children to participate in the program. 4. All funding for this project will be obligated and reported no later than the quarterly report ending 3/31/2011 and expended and reported no later than quarterly report ending 6/30/2011. 5. The grant funds expended will supplement, not supplant, funds from non-federal sources. 6. The District will keep records and provide information to the NHDOE as may be required for program evaluation, consistent with responsibilities under NCLB Title II-D as outlined within the Grant Request for Proposals (e.g., surveys, reports, ARRA monthly reports). 7. The schools to be funded by this program are compliant with the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) because the district employs a filtering mechanism for student access OR because Ed Tech funds referenced in this application will NOT be used to purchase computers used to access the Internet or pay for direct costs associated with accessing the Internet.

Superintendent of Schools (blue ink preferred) Date

Please also snail mail a signed original of ONLY this page to:

Dr. Cathy Higgins, Office of Educational Technology New Hampshire Department of Education 101 Pleasant Street, Concord, NH 03301 Name of Applicant District: ALTON

Application Form for 21st Century Classrooms Project

District ALTON Digital Tools Indicate the primary configuration of digital tools that will be used in your project classrooms to create a 1:1 environment (CHOOSE ONLY ONE): X Sub-notebooks/ mini-laptops / netbooks Standard laptops Handheld computers (e.g., Palm, Nintendo DS, iTouch, etc.) Combination of laptops, cameras, and other tools X Other computer configurations (please describe briefly: thin clients) Number of Indicate the classrooms involved in this project: Classrooms There will be 2 classrooms in grade(s) 7-8 configured with a 1:1 environment. There will be 3 classrooms in grade(s) 7-8 used as control groups, with ratios greater than 1:1. Teachers Indicate the teachers that will be involved (add as many lines as necessary): Last Name First Name Email McNeil Melissa [email protected] Brooks Kristen [email protected] Major Mike [email protected] Administrators Last Name First Name Email McLeod Pamela [email protected] Leggett Sydney [email protected] Evaluation Provide the names AND email addresses of 2 representatives who can Workshop attend the grants workshop in December, if awarded: Attendees Last Name First Name Email McLeod Pamela [email protected] Leggett Sydney [email protected] Project Abstract (10 Points) We will implement 1:1 computing in two (2) of our middle-school classrooms, using netbooks in one classroom and thin clients in the other, focusing on writing, math, and science, and will compare 1:1 classrooms to those having no tools or fewer than 1:1 tools. We will also use this grant to pilot multiple ways of implementing 1:1 computing so that may make informed decisions about classroom design and furniture selection for a 21st Century Classroom.

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 2 Name of Applicant District: ALTON

Project Description (30 Points) Alton Central School is a K-8 school having approximately 590 students and located in the Lakes Region of NH. We have a strong need to improve growth in writing and mathematics in Grades 7 and 8, which we call our "middle school" grades. Our goal is to change teachers' instructional practices and support differentiated instruction through extensive professional development, the effective use of 1:1 Computing, Web 2.0 and online tools, and interactive whiteboards. We are moving towards a major building renovation in the next few years, and we will use this grant to pilot multiple ways of implementing 1:1 computing so that may make informed future decisions about classroom design and furniture selection for a 21st Century Classroom.

Goals: with these grant monies, we will implement 1:1 computing in two (2) of our seven (7) middle-school classrooms, using netbooks in one classroom and thin clients in the other, focusing on writing across the curriculum, with a research design which ensures that we are able to compare 1:1 classrooms to those having no tools or fewer than 1:1 tools. Our objectives are:

 measurable improvement in students' writing skills in Grades 7 and 8 due to changes in instructional tools and practices resulting from 1:1 classrooms;  measurable growth in teachers' technology skills resulting from intensive, targeted professional development and the ability to have their own laptop;  measurable growth in mathematics skills amongst a specific population of middle school students who need the most intervention in this subject area;  measurable growth in Grades 7/8 science skills resulting from integration of technology, the application of virtual manipulatives, and digital tools at 2:1 levels.

Needs Assessment - Student Growth:

Mathematics: we have concerns about our student growth in the areas of mathematics, writing, and science inquiry, as measured by annual NECAP and NWEA assessments. We did not make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in Mathematics in 2009, and are in danger of becoming a School in Need of Improvement (SINY) if we do not make AYP. Although we traditionally have just two (2) teachers of mathematics in Grades 7 and 8, we tried something innovative for the 2009-10 school year, which was to assign three sections of mathematics to a dynamic language arts teacher who is particularly skilled at accommodating students' learning styles and differentiating instruction. Her classes are independent of grade level, and she is teaching more of a hands-on, real-world-driven math course than our traditional math curriculum. We have a strong interest and need to increase digital tools in our middle school math courses to help make mathematics relevant to our struggling learner; however, our two math teachers were not interested in this grant application. Since Mrs. McNeil will have the 1:1 tools for her LA classes, we feel that this course will be an excellent place to try these tools in the math environment, as well.

Measurable Goal: growth in mathematics skills amongst a specific population of middle school students who need the most intervention in this subject area;

Writing: in the area of Language Arts, we are only about 50% proficiency in Writing. Writing in the 21st century world of work rarely involves a pencil and paper, yet we are still teaching kids to do it this way. Writing has also become more collaborative, and technology enhances this ability. Some of our teachers are still confusing teaching grammar with teaching writing, and the teachers for this grant are ready to teach writing. Writing is the most complex skill to teach, since it requires verbal, kinesthetic, visual, interpersonal, intrapersonal, logical, and even sometimes musical abilities. Moving towards a more global world means that communication, though always important, is going to become even more crucial to an individual’s success in the workplace.

Alton Central School is adopting a new K-8 writing program next year, and we have already begun the process of mapping out our curriculum in Writing using TechPaths software. We will be able to make writing a focus across the curriculum and allow teachers to develop specific writing assignments that will serve as benchmarks for each grade level. We will also begin to funnel these assignments into the ICT portfolio. With

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 3 Name of Applicant District: ALTON the adoption of the new writing program, we will try to create a culture focused on the importance of writing through the six-traits model. Six-traits will be enhanced with technology use specifically in the following areas: integrated lesson planning, collaboration, organization, research, revision strategies, project-based learning, and publishing in print as well as online. Several projects online have approached this particular concept as the 6 + 1 Traits of Writing (technology integration is, obviously, the +1)

Technology helps teachers to become better at their craft and relate to more students. Since such a wide variety of learning styles can be enhanced through technology (all of the multiple intelligences) then one-on- one technology will ease the burden of the teacher to relate to so many different students at once. This is especially true for learning disabled students, who may benefit from the kinesthetic and visual aspects of whiteboard technology in addition to those who may need assistive devices. In this way, writing can be approached as a more formative process by allowing to meet each students where they are and move on from there.

Measurable Goal: improvement in students' writing skills in Grades 7 and 8 due to changes in instructional tools and practices resulting from 1:1 classrooms;

Based on assessment data, we are focusing on writing across the curriculum, school wide, as well as on the teaching of mathematics. It is in these two areas in which we hope that the use of netbooks will stimulate students’ interest in school, motivation for school work, and use of free online practice tools which they will use at home. Presently, we are monitoring and reviewing our math programs in all grades, and the transitions made between these programs.

Needs Assessment - Class Sizes, Building Issues, and Impact on Technology: in Grades 7 and 8, we currently have abnormally large numbers of students in each grade level, 75 and 80 students respectively. Our school typically expects to have 60-65 students per grade level. We have a team of seven (7) core teachers for these two grade levels, teaching Reading, Language Arts, Math, Science, and Social Studies, with most classes having 25-29 students. Our shared computing spaces / carts have 12, 21 and 24 seats, and are used by all teachers in the building. Our full-time teacher provides either integrated or pull-out instruction in all grade levels K-8, which gives us a strong technology teaching program, but also means that our computer lab is in use an average of five periods per day. We have a new, 30-seat Macbook cart, but we expect it to be used extensively for creative projects in our Enrichment, Art, Music, and Computer instruction areas. Because our building is at capacity, we have no spaces available for our additional shared labs.

Staffing is also an issue - we do not have supervision available for the computer labs, so teachers may not send students to the labs during a study hall. We have proposed a paraprofessional lab aide position for the 2010-11 budget, but we do not know if this position will survive the budget process.

Our aged building also contributes to teachers' technology frustrations - although we have a relatively modern (9 years old), fiber / CAT 5E backbone, switches, and servers, we have just one network drop per classroom, and insufficient electrical circuits or edge-of-room space to provide additional student computers in these rooms. Our building issues resulted in budget "freezes" and cuts for the past two years, we have fallen behind on our computer replacement cycle and do not have local monies available to expand our numbers of workstations. Our town's budget committee is currently pushing for a zero budget increase again next year. However, we have approached these budget restrictions with some creativity, experimenting with thin client and nComputing technologies, and purchasing some refurbished equipment to reduce the cost per seat. While our School Board is committed to maintaining our replacement cycle, and supported an expansion of our computer-to-student ratio in our 2009-12 Technology Plan, it currently appears as if the expansion will not be possible until the economy rebounds.

As Technology Director, the complaint I hear most often from teachers is "there are not enough computers for all of my students", followed by "it's too hard to reserve the lab/cart - it does not work with my teaching times, or is reserved by other teachers all of the time", and, "there is no staff available to supervise students if we want to send them down to work on projects." Our lab sizes also affect our ability to carry out NWEA MAP testing in an efficient manner - it is difficult to schedule every student in Grades 3-8 for all three subject areas, and the testing schedule impacts the entire school schedule for a period of approximately three weeks each Spring. We gave up fall testing this year, after having a two-year fall baseline, partly because of its impact on

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 4 Name of Applicant District: ALTON schedules and instructional time.

Another need in our building is a lack of teacher laptops. To date, we have not purchased laptops for teachers due to budget restrictions. When a teacher does not own or use a dedicated laptop on a daily basis, they have difficulty navigating the ins and outs of wireless connections, synchronizing files, and other tech skills which come naturally to those who regularly use a laptop. However, we are unusual in that we do support teachers who wish to bring personal laptops into our building, and we do this because we find that teachers' technology growth is exponential when they have their own laptop.

Scope of Work: Three middle school teachers will be participating in this project :

 Kristen Brooks: o Grade 8 Language Arts: two (2) sections (out of 3) o Grade 7 Language Arts: two (2) sections (out of 4); o Maximum class size: 28 students.  Melissa McNeil: o Grade 7 Language Arts: two (2) sections; o Grades 7/8 Middle School Math Concepts: three (3) sections (3 sections each of Grade 7 and 8 mathematics are taught by other teachers) o Maximum class size: 17 students.  Mike Major: o Grade 8 Science: three (3) sections (out of 3); o Grade 7 Science: two (2) sections (out of 3); o Maximum class size: 29 students.

Because this type of project involves commitment and intense professional development, it was important for us to select teachers who showed an interest in participating in the grant. All teachers in the building were given the opportunity, so long as they focused on our areas of greatest academic need, and these three teachers stepped up with enthusiasm and commitment. All are experienced teachers and have a great connection with their students. These teachers are also passionate about technology integration, even if they experience the same frustrations as other teachers when attempting to access computing seats in our building.

The project team will be led by Technology Director Pam McLeod, who is in her sixth year in this position at Alton Central School, and has participated in two other Title IID Digital Tools grants and has guided teachers through three (3) Mini Grants in the past few years. Also guiding the project team will be our new Director of Instruction, Sydney Leggett. Mrs. Leggett is a former Language Arts teacher and SMART board user herself, and is a valuable addition to this team, particularly from the curriculum integration, professional development, and evaluation perspectives. Please see the Capacity section for more information about the project team.

In two Language Arts classrooms, we will implement 1:1 computing, in addition to one wall-mounted SMART board, document camera, digital camera with video capability, a printer, and the SMART board-integrated student response systems ("clickers"). As we plan for future technology growth, it is important for us to compare netbooks to thin clients as the two most ideal 1:1 strategies, so we will provide netbooks for one classroom (McNeil) and thin clients for the other (Brooks). Within each classroom, some classes will have access to the tools, and some will, so that we may compared the students for research purposes. Language Arts classes are heterogeneous in our school. In Grade 7, each participating teacher teaches two sections of Language Arts, so each teacher will use the tools with one of their sections and not with the other. Two classes will have the tools, and two will not. In Grade 8, three sections are taught, one by a teacher who is not participating in the grant. Therefore, both of Mrs. Brooks' sections will have the tools, and the third section, taught by a non-participating teacher (Mr. Brown) will not. Although Mr. Brown does use the existing laptop cart on a regular basis, he uses word processing and internet research almost exclusively, and does not make use of web 2.0 tools, assistive/adaptive tools, or the SMART board.

The following table illustrates our plan. It is important to note that we teach Reading separately as a different course, to all students in Grades 7 and 8.

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 5 Name of Applicant District: ALTON Grade Teacher Participating? 7 McNeil No 7 McNeil Yes 7 Brooks No 7 Brooks Yes 8 Brown No 8 Brooks Yes 8 Brooks Yes In Mrs. Brooks' classroom, we will pilot a full classroom (28) of thin clients, with special tables designed to "flip" from a flat table to a computing station. Our District is proposing a major building renovation within the next few years, and we will use this project to examine the effectiveness of this flexible furniture in a 21st Century classroom. We have seen these tables in use in Fremont and were very impressed with the flexibility they afforded the classroom teacher. Student may choose freely whether to work on computer or to work on a flat table, and whether to take notes on paper or online. Mrs. Brooks' classroom will also have both electrical service and ethernet wiring upgrades back to the server room, and will have a switch installed in the classroom to serve the thin clients. Although thin clients do come with wireless capabilities, and we will test these capabilities, we do not want to rely on wireless with graphic-intensive flash websites.

Mrs. McNeil will use 1:1 netbooks, in addition to one wall-mounted SMART board, document camera, digital camera with video capability, a printer, and the SMART board-integrated student response systems ("clickers") with these math students.

Grade-Level Teacher No. Students Participating 7C Brown 14 No 7B Lafreniere 24 No 7A Lafreniere 24 No 8A Lafreniere 26 No 8B Lafreniere 24 No 8C Lafreniere 15 No 7-8 McNeil 12 Yes 7-8 McNeil 1 Yes 7-8 McNeil 12 No

Mrs. McNeil will use a subscription to Gizmos.com, which is a research-based set of online virtual manipulatives and simulations to help students grasp difficult concepts in Math and Science. These tools are ideal for the SMART board and helpful for students to access from home.

Science: because we want to emphasize writing across the curriculum, because we have a dynamic Science teacher who already has a Title IID-funded SMART board in his classroom, and because we emphasize Inquiry, we are including Mr. Major's classes at a level less than 1:1 implementation. He will implement the Student Response Systems ("clickers"), digital camera w/ video, document camera, and

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 6 Name of Applicant District: ALTON printer, and will receive fifteen (15) netbooks for his class sizes of up to 29 students, which will be up to a 2:1 ratio of students to tools. Mr. Major will use the tools with two (2) of three (3) Grade 8 science classes, and with his two (2) Grade 7 Science classes.

Grade Teacher No. Students Participating? 7 Major 23 Yes 7 Griggs 27 No 7 Major 25 Yes 8 Major 25 Yes 8 Major 28 No 8 Major 29 Yes

Mr. Major's participating classes will have access to Gizmos for Science simulations, and will be assessed on both Writing across the Curriculum and their growth in Science.

GLE’s and Curriculum Connections:

W:C:7.1 and 8.1 - Using online grammar tools and software for better writing skills.

W:EW and IW:7.1,2, and 3 and EW:8.1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 and IW:8.1, 2, and 3- Using word processing, interactive boards, and publishing sites to produce high quality works of narrative writing and poetry.

W:HW:7.2 - Developing the habit of writing extensively and in a variety of formats

W:RC:8.1 and 2 - Being able to use writing as a vehicle to respond to other text and communicate clearly in a wide array of forms for multiple audiences.

W:SL:7.1 and 8.1- Using online software, especially the under-utiized Word program to improve collaboration in writing, editing, and revising for structures of language.

S:ESS4 EARTH SPACE SCIENCE ~ The growth of scientific knowledge in Earth Space Science has been advanced through the development of technology and is used (alone or in combination with other sciences) to identify, understand and solve local and global issues. (8) S:LS5 LIFE SCIENCE ~ The growth of scientific knowledge in Life Science has been advanced through the development of technology and is used (alone or in combination with other sciences) to identify, understand and solve local and global issues. (7)

S:PS4 PHYSICAL SCIENCE ~ The growth of scientific knowledge in Physical Science has been advanced through the development of technology and is used (alone or in combination with other sciences) to identify, understand and solve local and global issues. (6)

Mathematics:

 Manipulating complex fractions  Solving multistep equations and inequalities  Completing real-world computation  Calculating using decimals  Working with distance, rate, and time

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 7 Name of Applicant District: ALTON  Solving pre-algebraic equations with and without variables

All of the alternative math students struggle with number fluency; they are number "counters", and as a result, have very little understanding of simple mathematical concepts. Without this basic "infrastructure", math has become a point of contention for them. Unfortunately, 99% of them have developed a hatred and self- conscious relationship with most math subjects. Working with computers will provide them with a new "mathematical experience". Working one on one with computers will enable them to semi-autonomously diversify their learning needs along; peer pressure and embarrassment is no longer at the forefront.

In the alternative Math program, students would substantially enhance their skills. Technology offers a wealth of innovative as well as effective digital tools that cater to "alternative" skills. On Gardner's MI test, the population of students in these classes scored high in spatial, musical and kinesthetic intelligences. Access to technology will provide them with mathematical tools and programs that will not only interest them, but will also challenge them within the realm of their particular learning styles.

Technology Infrastructure and History:

Grade Four Laptop Grant: in 2008-09, we were awarded, and implemented, a Title IID Digital Tools Grant in Grade Four, the focus of which was 1:1 netbooks and wall-mounted SMART boards. That project is ongoing, and we will build upon its success in other grade levels and apply lessons learned to make this an even more successful implementation. The laptops are Dell Mini 9 netbooks with Ubuntu Linux. These lessons are:

Successes:

 Win-win for students and teachers - no one regrets the project, and all appreciate it.  Increased technology skills for students and teachers;  Increased student engagement;  Two wireless access points support 63 simultaneous netbooks without issue;  Students in this grade level are respectful of their privilege and do not abuse internet access.  Linux devices are fine overall at this grade level - students have adapted well to Open Office and daily systems and processes are in planning and running smoothly .

Lessons Learned:

 Linux devices cannot utilize existing student file storage on server unless we license them with Windows Server CALs;  Linux devices have some unique printing issues - we currently connect them to printers by IP address, which is a manual process for the students;  Linux devices cannot run NWEA MAP assessment - this is a big issue.  We are relying more on Microsoft Share Point (MOSS) as an internet, course management, and ePortfolio storage tool, and Linux browsers are not completely compatible with MOSS.  Most other teachers in the building are frightened of Linux and reluctant to try a new OS - the success of the Grade 4 program depends largely on the teachers who are involved!  Need to purchase headphones and USB flash drives to use the netbooks efficiently in a classroom.  Need to purchase extended warranties.  Need to hire additional technical help to assist with the very manual process of setup, imaging, etc.

Although we did wish to extend the Grade 4 netbook program into Grade 5, we felt that the need to have technology tools in Middle School to support student growth in writing and math overrode the needs in Grade 5. It is also important to have teacher-buy-in for our target classrooms, and our Grade 5 team declined the opportunity to participate in this application at this time.

Netbooks: since seeing the potential of netbooks in 2008, we at Alton Central School have amassed

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 8 Name of Applicant District: ALTON significant experience with this platform, which uniquely positions us for a successful implementation of netbooks for this project. In addition to the Grade Four project, we have purchased several netbooks for Special Education students through IDEA funds and ARRA funds for Special Education and Title I, both for general use and for 1:1 use as an assistive technology. During this year's computer replacement cycle, we replaced a small number of workstations with netbooks for selected Guidance Counselors who volunteered to pilot a staff netbook. And, we have accommodated a Special Education student who brings a personal netbook to school, something many schools are reluctant to do for security reasons.

Our Technology Director, Pam McLeod, has attended multiple workshops on netbook implementation, both from a technical perspective and from a teaching perspective, and has helped to negotiate netbook "package deals" on behalf of NHSTE (the New Hampshire Society for Technology in Education). This fall, Ms. McLeod presented a workshops on our Grade Four netbook implementation at a NHSTE event, and will present another at Christa McAuliffe Technology Conference (CMTC) in early December. She is also teaching the "Integrating your Netbook into the Curriculum" PSDC session at CMTC.

Netbook technology changes rapidly, and Ms. McLeod has kept pace with the netbook evolution for the past year. We have a strong idea of the types/models of netbooks we wish to purchase for this project, and we will be ready to hit the ground running.

Thin Clients / Terminal Services: in 2008, we responded to local budget freezes and utilized REAP funds to pilot a thin client implementation in our shared computing labs. These labs had very old (8-9 years) hardware and were no longer functional. For these labs, we purchased low-end HP t5135 thin clients and a Windows Server 2003 R2 Terminal Server. In researching this implementation, we talked with many other schools which have moved towards thin clients, including Franklin, Fremont, and Bow. In 2009, we purchased a second terminal server running Windows 2008 Server, with unfrozen end-of-year funds and asked most of our administrators and office staff, as well as a few teaches, to accept HP t5145 thin clients as their primary machine. We currently have nearly 50 thin clients in our building, and at the date of this writing, we are preparing to purchase one additional server from the local budget, to implement one additional Terminal Server.

We are becoming well-versed in the implementation of thin client technology here at Alton Central School. The advantages of this approach include

 centralized server configuration;  ease of maintenance  quick client deployment;  the need to install software only in one location;  reduced energy usage on the client; and  speed.

To realistically implement thin client technology, one needs to also realistically consider:

 the server must have very robust hardware;  the netbook backbone needs to be robust, as well;  if the server goes down, everyone goes down;  low-end thin clients do not process Flash websites or streaming video very well because they do not have graphics cards.

We are proposing one classroom of thin clients for this project, and we will be "stepping up" our thin clients from the low-end version to slightly higher models with added support for graphics and flash websites. We are currently evaluating thin client hardware and added software which specifically helps to boost multimedia from the client to the server.

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 9 Name of Applicant District: ALTON Digital Tools

Netbooks: we have enough experience with netbooks in our school to know that they are a viable technology. We also know that we cannot predict even 3 months in advance which model we will choose, and of course, they need to go through a big process. We have priced these netbooks at $500 apiece so that we may afford to have extended, 3-year, warranties; webcams; wireless n; and Bluetooth. 6-cell batteries may or may not be possible at this price point. We are currently leaning towards aluminum-shelled models offered by HP, or the new Latitude models offered by Dell, because we feel that they will be more robust than a netbook developed for a home user.

We put a great deal of thought into the storage of these devices for our Grade Four project. We have a laptop cart in our school, but have never been impressed with its size and usability, not to mention the high cost. After some research and networking with other technology coordinators in the state, we discovered a louvered bin storage system and large bins which will hold 7-8 netbooks each. Combined with power strips and an electrical timer, we plan to create a custom wall-mounted or table-top charging/storage unit which considers the limited space available in these classrooms and also works with our standard 20-Amp circuits. A school in Michigan created a similar system, but on a rolling cart, with parts from the same distributor [ Michigan Association for Computer Users in Learning. http://maculspace.ning.com/forum/topics/612492:Topic:28107]. These systems are much less expensive than lockable laptop carts, have been approved by our Maintenance Director, and highly customizable. Teachers will have the choices of the wall-mounted system or the rolling cart, and we do have a cart from the Grade Four project which we use only in the summer to store their netbooks - it could easily be used for another classroom set of netbooks.

The netbooks will have Windows 7 or XP Professional installed from volume license media. We have a schoolwide Microsoft School Agreement, and we will license the netbooks in 2010 with these grant funds. We will ask the community to support an increase in our licensing agreement in 2011 to accomodate the additional computing seats; if they do not agree to do so after the project period ends, we will be able to downgrade them to a Linux operating system if absolutely necessary.

The netbooks will need to connect to our local-area network via wireless. We have a centralized Aruba wireless controller, and have budgeted for four additional enterprise-class Aruba wireless access point to support this project, two near each classroom. In our Grade Four project, two access points provide sufficient wireless coverage for 66 netbooks in three classrooms. We are nearing the upper limit of access points which will work with our controller, so we will upgrade our Aruba Controller to support additional access points and the wireless n standard, as we would like to evaluate the advantages of wireless n in our school. Aruba currently has an upgrade promotion which ends January 31, offering the upgrade at 50% off the normal list price.

Thin Clients: we are currently evaluating models of thin clients, and feel that our $535 budget per thin client + LCD monitor will allow us to purchase a model offering additional support for graphics and Flash sites. This classroom will have a wiring upgrade from CAT5E to CAT6 cabling from the server room to the classroom (~120 feet) to ensure sufficient bandwidth, along with associated raceway. The labor will be done by in- house staff. This classroom also will require an electrical upgrade, and we have included funds for two new 20-Amp electrical circuits. An HP ProCurve 48-port switch will be placed in the classroom, and the budget includes the necessary patch cables.

The Windows 2008 Terminal Server for the thin clients in already in our current budget and we be purchased regardless of the grant result. It will have at least 12GB of RAM and will be able to support these additional thin clients.

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 10 Name of Applicant District: ALTON Computing Accessories: through the Grade Four project, we learned that headphones and USB Flash drives will be helpful. The headphones will help with the noise level in the classroom, and the flash drives will be given to students to carry their files. Although we have server-based file storage and will use Share Point as an online classroom portal, some students may prefer to take files home on flash drives. We will also purchase inexpensive optical mice to work with the netbooks, although we find that not all students will need or want them.

SMART boards: In addition to netbooks, our project will also study the use of interactive whiteboards to increase engagement and appeal to students of differing learning styles. We are developing a strong SMART board culture at our school, and we have standardized on the SMART board brand because of its touch capability. Alton Central School hosted an ISTE Webinar in Fall, 2008, which demonstrated how Spaulding Youth Center is using interactive whiteboards to teach their autistic children in all the content areas. We are also fortunate to have on staff a Special Education teacher who formerly worked with SMART boards at Spaulding. Through these two sources, we have heard and seen a tremendous amount of anecdotal and video evidence which supports the value of interactive whiteboards in including students of varying learning styles and disabilities, increasing engagement, and promoting higher order skills. This topic does not appear to be widely studied, and the results of the Spaulding study are not yet published, so we hope that our project will provide value to other districts who are considering SMART boards for the same purpose. We worked with Spaulding’s consultant, Kathleen McClaskey of Ed Tech Resources, to provide us with school-wide training last year. We also brought in Randy Wormald, local SMART board trainer, for several trainings last year under various grants, and plan to continue contracting with Randy for this project. Finally, we have a newly-certified SMART board certified trainer, Susan Bailey, on staff; although Susan does not have Randy's level of experience, she is wonderful to have in the building for working with teachers who are just getting started on the IWBs.

Through grants and the local budget, we now have eleven (11) SMART boards in classrooms throughout our school, and are truly developing a "SMART board culture" in our building. Only one of our SMART boards is portable and it is currently being shared by the entire elementary population of ~19 classroom teachers in Grades PreK-5. While the portable board is an asset, we have a significant need for more wall-mounted boards in classrooms. Our own SMART board usage in the school clearly shows that teachers prefer wall- mounted boards, as they eliminate cables running across the floor and do not require daily setup. We are requesting SMART board 680i’s with Unifi integrated projectors, because ceiling-mounted projectors are not a possibility at our school due to the hope of a building renovation in the near future – we do not have electrical outlets on the ceilings.

At the school and district administrative levels, we will use this project to evaluate the impact of SMART boards in the classroom, and this project will give us our first study of the use of SMART boards with math students. We will observe the students’ engagement with SMART boards as outlined in the Evaluation section, and will also work with our Special Education and Title I Departments to determine their impact on students with learning disabilities or need for intervention. We will use the results to plan for SMART board purchases in future years.

Student Response Systems: SRS, or "clickers" are extremely valuable for formative assessment and student feedback. We selected the SMART brand, SMART Response, to interface with our SMART boards. Additionally, Randy Wormald can provide training for us, and Mrs. Leggett has used them in her classroom when she was a high school teacher.

Digital Cameras with Video: we planned for the purchase of one digital camera with video capability for each classroom, so that students and teachers may document their work and record reflections. We prefer to purchase the same model of Canon camera we have for checkout in our library and have purchased for other teachers so as to standardize on the memory cards and operation of the camera. Because the camera has very nice video capability, we do not feel that a video camera is necessary - most students prefer to take video on the camera itself. Additionally, those with netbooks will have webcams available for video. The cameras will be used for documenting projects and ICT artifacts, and the video for reflections and writing

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 11 Name of Applicant District: ALTON support.

Document Camera: we budgeted for an entry-level document camera for each classroom, with pricing based on inquiries of other Technology Coordinators. We do not have a document camera in our school, so this purchase will require some research before we select the right model for our needs. We expect the document camera to be used extensively in the Science classroom for display of 3D objects.

Printer: we budgeted for a network-capable laser printer for each classroom. Teachers love to have printers in their classrooms, and will appreciate having one at their disposal. Mrs. McNeil will benefit the most, as her classroom is in a modular.

Software: our plan is to use freely available and web 2.0 tools for the majority of our learning software, including Blogs, and Wikis. However, three paid software tools stood out for our teachers and are included in the budget: Gizmos, Visual Thesaurus, and Criterion for Write Source. Because the 2010-11 budget has already been submitted, we budgeted for two years of each tool to give us time to recommend the tools for the 2011-12 budget. Additionally, we have a school-wide license of TextHelp, which is a tremendous writing and resource support tool which we can run on any Windows computer.

Extensive on-site professional development for both Gizmos and Criterion for Write Source is included in the Professional Development budget.

 Gizmos (http://www.explorelearning.com ): three science teachers in Grades 4-8 have all requested this tool at some point or another, and Kathy McClaskey has recommended it to me in several situations. Gizmos visualizes difficult math and science concepts to reach learners of different learning styles. The are online and accessible from home, tied to NH GLEs, provide online worksheets and assessments, and have extensive on-site and virtual professional development. This will be an ideal tool to support our struggling math students, to use on our SMART boards in modeling difficult concepts, and to emphasize both math and science concepts to students of different learning styles. We budgeted for Gizmos to support all students in Grades 4-8, and will offer it to teachers outside of the grant, as well.  Visual Thesaurus (http://www.visualthesaurus.com/): The Visual Thesaurus is an interactive dictionary and thesaurus which creates word maps that blossom with meanings and branch to related words. Its innovative display encourages exploration and learning. You'll understand language in a powerful new way.  Criterion for Write Source : Mrs. Leggett, our Director of Instruction and a former Language Arts teacher herself, selected this tool as an online "textbook" of sorts for our writing classes. The tool is "an instructional writing practice and evaluating tool that provides an instant, holistic score and diagnostic feedback for students’ essays.

Transformative Strategies: We are excited that this project will have several "firsts" for our school/district:

 First take-home teacher laptop program: with three (3) teachers having take-home netbooks, we expect the result to be increased technology integration ability, and improved attitude towards technology integration on the part of our teachers. We will measure these criteria through Teacher Attitudes Towards Computers (TAC, http://www.tcet.unt.edu/research/survey/tacdesc.htm) surveys pre- and post-project. We also will use the pilot results to inform our administrative decisions to support teacher laptop projects in the future, and to develop a policy about take-home laptops to provide to other schools and districts.  First 1:1 Classroom: although our building is far from ideal for supporting technology, outfitting Mrs. Brooks' classroom with thin clients and, more importantly, the furniture to support the thin clients, will be an important pilot for our district. Many other types of "flip up" furniture exist which are more expensive, but also more flexible, than the tables we selected for this pilot. We will look carefully at the teacher's and students' feedback about the tables when planning our school renovation. Professional Development (20 points)

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 12 Name of Applicant District: ALTON We are excited about the professional development opportunities this project will bring to our teachers. First and foremost, our PD choices will provide fast, immediate orientation to the software and hardware tools that we have selected. On-site training in Gizmos and Criterion for Write Source will be scheduled immediately.

Training in technology integration and web 2.0 tools will also be offered, including the NHSTE Spring event for the TLC, and a major conference of the teacher or staff member’s choice. We will encourage teachers to attend ISTE10 this summer, but they may choose another conference as long as they attend in groups of at least two teachers. Through NHSTE/CMTC bundles and OpenNH courses, we will provide plenty of opportunities for teachers to attend trainings of their choice throughout the year.

A key component will be technology integration, and we will bring in three expert integrators to work with teachers: Chris Nelson, former Director of GMPDC, will co-teach with the Language Arts teachers approximately once per month. Randy Wormald of Shaker Regional will provide SMART board training. And Stacie Green of Harvard University will be on-site for integration training and some inspirational speaking to all teachers.

Finally, we are offering an Atomic Learning subscription to each teacher, plus our Director of Instruction, for any necessary training on basic software tools.

Some of our training will be open to other teachers to encourage connections with other grade levels. For example, there are funds here for two science teachers to attend a conference together.

 Conferences. 6 people @ $2,000 each (average) = $12,000. Teachers are encouraged to attend a conference of their choosing, including NECC/ISTE10.  Spring NHSTE Event. 10 teachers/admins @$100 = $1,000. We would like to send a large group of administrators and teachers to this event.  NHSTE/CMTC Bundle. 10-pack NHSTE events and 10 days @ CMTC = $1,395.  OpenNH. 5 teacher-pack = $450.  OpenNH Science. 2 science teachers, special bundle = $450.  Gizmos Training, on-site. 2 days @ $1,500/day = $3,000.  Gizmos Online. 2 teachers, 3 week course = $200.  Technology Integration. o Chris Nelson. 10 days, on-site @ $800/day = $8,000. o Stacie Green (Harvard). 1 day @ 1,000/day = $1,000. o Randy Wormald (SMART), 1.5 days @ $1,200/day = $1,800.  Atomic Learning. 4 teachers @ $300 each = $1,200  Criterion for Writing, on-site. $7,000. Capacity for Success (15 points) NH STaR Chart: We have made tremendous progress in Technology and Technology Integration over the past six years, since becoming a K-8 (rather than a K-12) school. While we scored a “3” (Proficient) in most areas of Infrastructure for Technology, we are solidly a “2” (Developing) in the areas of “Teaching & Learning”, “Professional Development”, and “Administration & Support”. Sadly, until we can provide more computing seats and digital tools for our students, we will not improve in some of these areas; however, these results are eye-opening for us. Interestingly, many teachers in our building feel that we are “too aggressive” in technology implementation, and we continually try to bring them along more moderately while also supporting the teachers who want more tools and capabilities!

Previous Experience: as a school, we have participated actively in Title IID grant projects and Mini Grants in the past four years, including our 2009 Digital Tools Grant in which we implemented netbooks – an emerging technology – and SMART boards in Grade Four classrooms. That project and our other previous experiences have prepared us well for a research project of this size, in that

a) we understand that this is a research project; b) we have refined our wishes and needs for specifying netbook characteristics; and

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 13 Name of Applicant District: ALTON c) our Technology Director understands the technologies well.

Technical Experience: Technically, our infrastructure is in good shape for a project of this size and scope. Our Active Directory network is solid, and we already have a wireless controller and enterprise wireless in place within the school. We have used digital cameras and video cameras, most obtained through past Title IID or REAP grants, and our Enrichment Teacher (2008 NH Technology-Using Teacher of the Year!) is very creative and supports teachers in creating video in the classroom. We have an active and robust ICT plan which is currently in its third year, and these teachers already produce digital artifacts with their students. We have recently implemented Microsoft Office Share Point Server (MOSS) as an ICT storage and intranet communications platform. We have a team of three stipended teachers who support our Technology Director and Technology Assistant with tech support needs.

Netbook technology changes rapidly, and our Technology has kept pace with the netbook evolution for the past year. We have a strong idea of the types/models of netbooks we wish to purchase for this project, and we will be ready to hit the ground running. She has been very active with NHSTE in helping to educate NH Schools about netbooks and in negotiating pricing with vendors. She has attended multiple workshops on netbook implementation, both from a technical perspective and from a teaching perspective, and she uses a netbook herself when she travels to meetings. This fall, she presented a workshops on our Grade Four netbook implementation at a NHSTE event, and will present another at Christa McAuliffe Technology Conference (CMTC) in early December. She is also teaching the "Integrating your Netbook into the Curriculum" PSDC session at CMTC.

We have also implemented Terminal Services / Thin Client technologies at our school and currently have approximately 50 thin clients throughout our building. We have eleven (11) SMART boards, and everyone from our Technology Director to our Maintenance staff understand the details of quoting, ordering, installing, and integrating wall-mounted SMART boards.

Administrative Support: everyone from our School Board to our Principal is supportive of our grant projects, particularly when they put tools directly in the hands of our students. Our Superintendent will assure that teachers complete the requirements of this project, and our Director of Instruction has agreed to assist with curriculum integration, SMART board integration, professional development, and evaluation. We are truly looking to this project to provide us with future direction for our technology program.

From past grants, we know that these project can really impact our Technology staff. Including the Director of Instruction will help tremendously with the professional development, curriculum integration, and evaluation areas of the project. We have also included in the budget some monies for additional hourly technical support during the setup of the project and/or during the summer – most likely, this will be a teacher with technician-level capabilities who will help with some of the physical cabling, thin client setup, or netbook imaging.

Project Team: Because this type of project involves commitment and intense professional development, it was important for us to select teachers who showed an interest in participating in the grant. All teachers in the building were given the opportunity, so long as they focused on our areas of greatest academic need, and these three teachers stepped up with enthusiasm and commitment. All are experienced teachers and have a great connection with their students. These teachers are also passionate about technology integration, even if they experience the same frustrations as other teachers when attempting to access computing seats in our building.

The project team will be led by our Technology Director, who is in her sixth year in this position at Alton Central School, and has participated in two other Title IID Digital Tools grants and has guided teachers through three (3) Mini Grants in the past few years. Also guiding the project team will be our new Director of Instruction, who will be extremely valuable from the curriculum integration, professional development, and evaluation perspectives. She is a certified teacher in English from Grades 5-12 and has been a SMART board – using teacher, and has worked extensively with troubled students. The three participating teachers all teach Grades 7 and 8, including Language Arts, Math, and Science – all are dynamic teachers who work

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 14 Name of Applicant District: ALTON well with students of various learning styles and are passionate about technology integration.

Evaluation (15 points) Through our evaluation process, we will seek to discover how students and teachers are making growth in this project, and the effectiveness of the tools we are piloting. We will form an evaluation team consisting of our Director of Instruction, Technology Director, parent, and the fourth grade teachers. This team will meet quarterly to examine data, review results, and adjust the evaluation plan. This team will meet in early January to develop the specific rubrics and observation instruments used in this study, and will also review the Grade Four project so that we may apply any lessons learned. All evaluation instruments will be modeled after existing 1:1 studies such as those referenced in this proposal, and customized for our areas of focus. At the close of the study, collected data will be shared with the State of NH in our Evaluation Report, as well as with our staff, administration, and School Board, and posted on our website for the community so that the future planning for both instruction and technology can be incorporated into the District's goals and budgeting. Additionally, the teaching team will use the study results to plan their own future use of these netbook devices and technology integration. We are excited that the State will have a collaborative evaluation effort, as we feel this will be highly beneficial to us, as well as for the State’s ARRA reporting requirements. The Director of Instruction and Technology Director will attend all evaluation meetings and workshops. Observations – Teachers and administrators will carry out observations, to assess factors such as1 (due to space constraints, not all criteria are listed)  Engagement  Working in groups vs. alone  Student writing with pencil  Teacher-led whole-group instruction  Student at a desk  Teachers working with individuals  Student writing with laptop  Working on the web  Paper present  Teacher giving technical assistance  Pencil present  Laptop present

Surveys – Four sets of surveys will be given, in January, June, September, and December. Separate surveys will be developed for Teachers, Students, and Parents, and will assess factors such as technology skills, access to educational resources, perception of schoolwork, difficulty of schoolwork, motivation to do schoolwork, interest in school, and time spent on computers.

Data – Traditional data will be included in this project evaluation, including o Grades o Attendance data for these children, before & after o NWEA language survey test at the start & end of each semester o NECAP / Performance Pathways Students will be followed for one additional year after completion of the project to provide continuity in the data.

To evaluate our writing, we have budgeted some monies to organize an objective group of local teachers (from surrounding districts), and will pay them to periodically evaluate writing samples and assessment from the technology group as well as the control group. We would track progress through their grades by using the state-sponsored 6-point rubric for writing.

We will also use integrated assessments from the online software tools, including Gizmos and Criterion for Write Source, for both formative and summative assessments. And, this will be the ideal project in which to use Assessment Builder.

1 Russell, M., Bebell, D., & Higgins, J. (2004). Laptop Learning: A Comparison of Teaching and Learning in Upper Elementary Classrooms Equiped with Shared Carts of Laptops and Permanent 1:1 Laptops. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 30 (4), 313-330.

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 15 Name of Applicant District: ALTON Practical Considerations – We will make a concerted effort to identify both positive and negative aspects of learning with netbooks and SMARTboards, from the technology and teaching standpoints. For example, teachers may become frustrated with students using their netbooks inappropriately, or the technology may prove to be unreliable after a period of time.

Comparison of Tools – we will develop a means to tracking tech difficulty levels between the netbook classes and the thin client class in order to assessing which provides fewer productivity glitches. We will do this through our Help Desk ticket system and ask the teachers and Students to submit all issues to the Help Desk.

Post-Project – the teaching teams will create the following at the completion of the grant project period:  Team presentation to faculty and/or school board regarding project  Sample lesson plans integrating the technology  A co-teaching commitment in which they will work with one other teacher on one lesson plan related to this project. Budget Narrative (10 points)

Budget (Describe as appropriate) TOTAL Hardware $63,540  Netbooks. 40. 22 Netbooks for LA/MATH classroom (1:1). 22 @ $500 = $11,000. 15 Netbooks for Science classroom (2:1). 15 @ $500 = $7,500. 3 Netbooks for teachers. 3 @ $600 = $1,800  Thin clients w/ monitors, LA classroom. 28 @ $535 = $14,980.  SMART boards w/ integrated projectors. 2 @ $3,500 = $7,000. This includes the board, the projector, and misc. cables and graphics cards.  Student Response Systems. 2 @ $2000. 1 @ $1,600. = $5,600. “Clickers” for all three classrooms.  Digital Cameras. 3 @ $170 = $510. One camera per classroom, incl. video capability.  Document Cameras. 3 @ $750 = $2,250.  Printers. 3 @ $400 = $1,200.  HP Switch, 48-port, Gigabit = $2,500. This web-managed switch is for the LA classroom with thin clients.  DCGraves carts/bins for netbook storage = $1,000  Aruba Wireless Controller (upgrade) = $5,200 Upgraded controller to support more AP’s and wireless-n.  Aruba Wireless Access Points = 4 @ $500 = $2,000 Two access points for each of the two classrooms with netbooks.  Headphones, flash drives, optical mice = $1,000 Headphones to control noise levels, flash drives for file transfer, optical mice for students who require them. Connectivity $2,000  Electrical Circuits, 2 @ $1,000 = $2,000. Thin client pilot classroom with required upgraded electrical service. Software: while most software will be free and online web 2.0 tools, we have $14,542 identified three critical pieces of software for this project. Each is an online subscription. A two-year subscription is required because we have already submitted the 2010-11 budget.  Gizmos. $2,995/year, two year subscription = $5,990. This tools provides animated modeling, lesson plans, worksheets, and assessments for difficult concepts in math and science. We have budgeted for the minimum amount allowed by the company. At $7/student, which will support 427 students, school-wide.  Visual Thesaurus. $576/year, two year subscription = $1,152. This site license will provide all of our students with a wonderful visual tool for examining writing.

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 16 Name of Applicant District: ALTON  Criterion for Write Source. $12/student * 155 students * 2 years = $3,720. This online site provides writing feedback, evaluation, and assessment.  Terminal Services CALS. 31 @ $20 = $620. These client-access licenses are required for thin clients connecting to a Windows Terminal Server.  Microsoft School Agreement Licenses. 68 devices @ $45 = $3,060. This licenses each client device for access to all of our servers, Share Point, etc. Materials & Supplies $600  Cat6 cable in bulk, 300-ft (2 drops) = $100. Upgraded service to the thin client pilot classroom (2 drops at 150 each – one drop for teacher computer, one for students).  Cat6 Patch Cables = $400. Patch cables for within the thin client pilot classroom.  Raceway = $100. To secure cabling to the wall and make it look neat. Professional Development (in-house) $15,295  Conferences. 6 people @ $2,000 each (average) = $12,000. Teachers are encouraged to attend a conference of their choosing, including NECC/ISTE10.  Spring NHSTE Event. 10 teachers/admins @$100 = $1,000. We would like to send a large group of administrators and teachers to this event.  NHSTE/CMTC Bundle. 10-pack NHSTE events and 10 days @ CMTC = $1,395.  OpenNH. 5 teacher-pack = $450.  OpenNH Science. 2 science teachers, special bundle = $450. Professional Development (contracted services) $22,200  Gizmos Training, on-site. 2 days @ $1,500/day = $3,000.  Gizmos Online. 2 teachers, 3 week course = $200.  Technology Integration. o Chris Nelson. 10 days, on-site @ $800/day = $8,000. o Stacie Green (Harvard). 1 day @ 1,000/day = $1,000. o Randy Wormald (SMART), 1.5 days @ $1,200/day = $1,800.  Atomic Learning. 4 teachers @ $300 each = $1,200  Criterion for Writing, on-site. $7,000. Evaluation $15,000 Must be 10% of your project for the statewide evaluation. Furniture $10,000  14 “Smart” tables @ ~$700 each = $10,000 . These tables are for the thin client pilot classroom and are flat tables which “flip up” an LCD monitor. Professional Services $5,000  Scorers for writing assessment @ $25/hour, inclusive. = $2000 .  Technical support, hardware setup, etc. @ $24/hour, inclusive = $3,000 . Substitutes $1,170  18 days (6 per teacher) @ $65/day = $1,170. Indirect Cost (per approved 2009-2010 district rates posted at N/A http://www.ed.state.nh.us/education/data/misc.htm) TOTAL $149,347

NCLB Title II-D Competitive Grants 2009-10 (ARRA) Page 17