Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/04/28/2015-09898/applications-for-new-awards-enhanced-assessment-instruments-grants-program-enhanced-assessment
Timestamp: 2018-04-27 07:35:59
Document Index: 71008440

Matched Legal Cases: ['arts 75', 'art 180', 'art 3485', 'art 200', 'art 3474', 'art 3', 'art 3', 'art 3', 'art 3', 'art 6', 'art 6', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 4', 'art 5', 'art 6', 'art 79', 'art 99']

Federal Register :: Applications for New Awards; Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grants Program-Enhanced Assessment Instruments
Applications for New Awards; Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grants Program-Enhanced Assessment Instruments
23507-23514 (8 pages)
Competitive Preference Priority 1—Implementing Internationally Benchmarked College- and Career-Ready Standards and Assessments
Invitational Priority 1—Developing Innovative Item Types
Competitive Preference Priority 2—Leveraging Technology To Support Instructional Practice and Professional Development
Invitational Priority 2—Leveraging Technology To Support Personalized Learning and To Improve Assessment Tools
Invitational Priority 3—Audit of State and Local Assessment Systems
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2015-09898 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2015-09898
Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grants Program—Enhanced Assessment Instruments.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: May 28, 2015.
States are continuing to improve their college- and career-ready assessment systems. These improvement efforts include initiatives to use technology to enhance the quality of assessments and timeliness and utility of the results, emphasize the leveraging of information gained from assessments in support of personalized learning, and survey existing State and local assessment frameworks to determine whether the assessment is serving its intended purpose to help schools meet their goals. For example, the Department appreciates that States need to continue developing new, innovative item types for use in summative assessments to find new, more authentic methods for collecting evidence about what a student knows and is able to do as it relates to State learning standards. Examples of this could include items that provide multi-step mathematics problems where students demonstrate their approach to solving each step; items that permit graphs or other visual response types; or simulated game environments where students interact with stimuli and interaction information is collected.
As technology continues to advance and become embedded in the classroom, assessment developers and educational leaders are looking for ways to leverage these advancements to improve the testing experience for students. For example, computer-adaptive tests could be used to capture a greater range of student performance. Leveraging technology could also improve the timeliness of reporting results, provide more options in the search for alternative ways to capture student knowledge and abilities, and improve the capability to automatically score non-multiple choice items.
These enhancements—improved assessments, faster assessment results, and alternative ways to capture student knowledge—are also important to support an initiative many States and school districts are pursuing, personalized learning for all students. Personalized classroom instruction is dependent upon having diagnostic, formative, interim, and summative assessments that produce reliable, valid, fair, and timely results in order to inform and tailor instruction for each student.
In addition, recently, there has been significant discussion about the amount of time students spend in formal testing, including classroom, district, and State assessments. Some State educational agencies (SEAs), local educational agencies (LEAs), and schools are currently in the process of reviewing assessments administered to students in kindergarten through grade 12 to better understand if each assessment is of high quality, maximizes instructional goals, has a clear purpose and utility, and is designed to provide information on students' progress toward achieving proficiency on State standards and assessments. The Department wants to invest in and recognize States that are reviewing and streamlining their assessments, including eliminating redundant and unnecessary assessments, for the purposes of identifying promising practices that could be followed by other SEAs, LEAs, and schools to maximize the utility of assessments to parents, educators, and students.
The Department also wants to invest in and support the development and enhancement of assessment systems to better measure the knowledge and abilities of all students, as is reflected in the priorities for this year's competition.
Priorities: This competition includes four absolute priorities, two competitive preference priorities, and three invitational priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), the absolute priorities are from section 6112 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. 7301a. The competitive preference priorities are from the Department's notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for discretionary grant programs, published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73425).
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2015 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet one or more of the absolute priorities.
Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2015 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition, these priorities are competitive preference priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), the Department awards up to an additional 15 points to an application depending on how well the application meets competitive preference priority 1 and up to an additional 15 points to an application depending on how well the application meets competitive preference priority 2, for a total of up to 30 points if both competitive preference priorities are addressed.
Projects that are designed to support the implementation of, and transition to, internationally benchmarked college- and career-ready standards and Start Printed Page 23509assessments, including projects in one or more of the following:
(a) Developing and implementing student assessments (such as formative assessments, interim assessments, and summative assessments) or performance-based tools that are aligned with those standards, that are accessible to all students.
(b) Developing and implementing strategies that use the standards and information from assessments to inform classroom practices that meet the needs of all students.
Projects that develop new, innovative item types for use in summative assessments to find new, more authentic methods for collecting evidence about a student's knowledge and abilities.
(a) Implementing high-quality accessible digital tools, assessments, and materials that are aligned with rigorous college- and career-ready standards.
(b) Using data platforms that enable the development, visualization, and rapid analysis of data to inform and improve learning outcomes, while also protecting privacy in accordance with applicable laws.
Projects that focus on leveraging technology to:
(a) Support personalized learning, including diagnostic, formative, interim, and summative assessments that can inform instruction;
(b) Develop new types of test items that use alternative or innovative methods to capture student knowledge and abilities; or
(c) Improve the capability to automatically score non-multiple choice items, such as to aid the development of computer-adaptive testing or improve the timeliness of reporting results.
Projects that propose exemplary approaches for reviewing existing assessments to ensure that each test is of high quality, maximizes instructional goals, has a clear purpose and utility, and is designed to help students demonstrate mastery of State standards.
Requirements: The following requirements for this competition are from the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program published in the Federal Register on April 19, 2011 (76 FR 21985).
An eligible applicant awarded a grant under this program must:
(b) Actively participate in any applicable technical assistance activities conducted or facilitated by the Department or its designees, coordinate with Race To The Top Assessment program in the development of assessments under this program, and participate in other activities as determined by the Department;
(c) Develop a strategy to make student-level data that result from any assessments or other assessment-related instruments developed under a grant from this competition available on an ongoing basis for research, including for prospective linking, validity, and program improvement studies; [1]
Definitions: The following definitions are from the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program published in the Federal Register on April 19, 2011 (76 FR 21985), the notice of final priorities, requirement, definitions, and Start Printed Page 23510selection criteria for this program published in the Federal Register on May 23, 2013 (78 FR 31343), and from the Department's notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for discretionary grant programs published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73425).
English learner means a child, including a child aged three and younger, who is an English learner consistent with the definition of a child who is “limited English proficient,” as applicable, in section 9101(25) of the ESEA.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7301a and 7842. Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program published in the Federal Register on April 19, 2011 (76 FR 21985). (e) The notice of final priorities, requirement, definitions, and selection criteria for this program published in the Federal Register on May 23, 2013 (78 FR 31343). (f) The Department's notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for discretionary grant programs published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73426).
Estimated Available Funds: $8,945,000-$17,870,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $1,000,000 to $6,000,000.
Applicants should submit a single budget request for a single budget and propose a project period of up to 48 months. Applicants should request a time period that is up to 48 months, based on a timeline that takes into account the urgency of the need of the final project findings and products to be accessible to the field. Subject to the availability of future years' funds, the Department may make supplemental grant awards to the grants awarded in this competition.
Applicants may not propose a budget for Invitational Priority 3, if addressed, of greater than $100,000.
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs as defined in section 9101(41) of the ESEA and consortia of such SEAs.
1. Address To Request Application Package: You can access the electronic grant application for the Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grants Program at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.368, not 84.368A). You can also obtain a copy of the application package by contacting the program contact, Erin Shackel, Enhanced Assessment Grants Program, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 3W111, Washington, DC 20202-6132. Telephone: (202) 453-6423 or by email: Erin.Shackel@ed.gov.
Page Limit: The project narrative (part 3 of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. You must limit the project narrative (part 3) to the equivalent of no more than 65 pages, using the following standards:
Use Times New Roman font no smaller than 11.0 point for all text in the project narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables figures, and graphs. Font sizes that are smaller than 11 but round up to 11, such as 10.7 point, will be considered smaller than 11.0.
The page limit applies to the project narrative (part 3), including the table of contents, which must include a discussion of how the application meets one or more of the absolute priorities; if applicable, how the application meets one or both of the competitive preference priorities; if applicable, how the applicant addresses the invitational priorities; and how well the application addresses each of the selection criteria. The page limit also applies to any attachments to the project narrative other than the references/bibliography. In other words, the entirety of part 3 of the application, including the aforementioned discussion and any attachments to the project narrative, must be limited to the equivalent of no more than 65 pages. The only allowable attachments other than those included in the project narrative are outlined in part 6, “Other Attachments Forms,” in Start Printed Page 23511the application package. Any attachments other than those included within the page limit of the project narrative and those outlined in part 6 will not be reviewed.
The 65-page limit, or its equivalent, does not apply to the following sections of an application: Part 1 (including the response regarding research activities involving human subjects); part 2 (two-page project abstract); part 4 (the budget sections, including the chart and narrative budget justification); part 5 (standard assurances and certifications); and part 6 (memoranda of understanding or other binding agreement, if applicable; copy of applicant's indirect cost rate agreement; letters of commitment and support from collaborating SEAs and organizations; and other attachments forms, including, if applicable, references/bibliography for the project narrative and individual résumés for project director(s) and key personnel). Applicants are encouraged to limit each résumé to no more than five pages.
We will be able to develop a more efficient process for reviewing grant applications if we have a better understanding of the number of applicants that intend to apply for funding under this competition. Therefore, we strongly encourage each potential applicant to notify us of the applicant's intent to submit an application for funding. This notification should be brief, and provide the applicant organization's name and the SEA the applicant will designate as the fiscal agent for an award. Submit this notification by email to Erin.Shackel@ed.gov with “Intent to Apply” in the email subject line or mail to Erin Shackel, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 3W111, Washington, DC 20202-6132. Applicants that do not provide this email notification may still apply for funding.
4. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to E.O. 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under E.O. 12372 is in the application package for this competition.
Applications for grants under the EAG competition, CFDA number 84.368A, must be submitted electronically using Start Printed Page 23512the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at www.Grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not email an electronic copy of a grant application to us.
If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked Start Printed Page 23513no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the application deadline date.
Address and mail or fax your statement to: Erin Shackel, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 3W111, Washington, DC 20202-6132. FAX: (202) 205-0310.
If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.368A), 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from EDGAR General Selection Criteria 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed in the application package. Specifically, the following general selection criteria apply to this competition: need for project, significance, quality of the project design, quality of project services, quality of project personnel, adequacy of resources, quality of the management plan, quality of the project evaluation, and strategy to scale.
4. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, the Department has developed four measures to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grants program: (1) The number of States that Start Printed Page 23514participate in Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grants projects funded by this competition; (2) the percentage of grantees that, at least twice during the period of their grants, make available to SEA staff in non-participating States and to assessment researchers information on findings resulting from the Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grants through presentations at national conferences, publications in refereed journals, or other products disseminated to the assessment community; (3) for each grant cycle and as determined by an expert panel, the percentage of Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grants that yield significant research, methodologies, products, or tools regarding assessment systems or assessments; and (4) for each grant cycle and as determined by an expert panel, the percentage of Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grants that yield significant research, methodologies, products, or tools specifically regarding accommodations and alternate assessments for students with disabilities and limited English proficient students. Grantees will be expected to include in their interim and final performance reports information about the accomplishments of their projects because the Department will need data on these measures.
Erin Shackel, Enhanced Assessment Grants Program, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 3W111, Washington, DC 20202-6132. Telephone: (202) 453-6423 or by email: Erin.Shackel@ed.gov.
1. Eligible applicants awarded a grant under this program must comply with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and 34 CFR part 99, as well as State and local requirements regarding privacy.
[FR Doc. 2015-09898 Filed 4-27-15; 8:45 am]