Request for Proposals (RFP)

February 15, 1996

I. PURPOSE OF THE INITIATIVE

The Common Knowledge: Pittsburgh (CK:P) project is one of four network testbeds funded by the National Science Foundation. CK:P represents a collaborative effort among the Pittsburgh Public Schools, the University of Pittsburgh and the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center. Its charge is to investigate the changes in the teaching environment of the Pittsburgh Public Schools as a result of introducing Internet technologies into classrooms.

During its first year - 1993 - the project began at four sites: McCleary Elementary School, Schenley International Studies Program, Westinghouse Science and Mathematics Program, and Woolslair Elementary Gifted Center. In 1994, Carrick High School, East Hills International Studies Academy, Frick International Studies Academy, Fulton Academy of Geographic and Life Sciences, Liberty International Studies Academy, Phillips Elementary, and Spring Hill Elementary came aboard. In 1995 Allegheny Middle School, Knoxville Middle School, and Schiller Middle School were added.

Each CK:P site has a specific curriculum project that uses the Internet as a resource and a hardware configuration that is unique to that particular building and project. To help teachers implement the curriculum activity at their site, they receive training and ongoing support from the CK:P staff.

The 1996 Request for Proposal - RFP - will identify 6 new high school sites. Proposals can be submitted by teams of teachers, students, administrators, parents, and support staff. The proposals will be reviewed by a committee of teachers, administrators, board members, parents and community representatives. This committee will make its selections based on the strength of the curriculum project being proposed, the team of educators who will implement the project, and the equitable distribution of network resources within the building.

Each school site chosen will receive wiring, network equipment, computers and support from the Common Knowledge staff. Schools should note that this is a limited installation that will not meet the needs of the entire school. CK:P will provide the foundation of a network infrastructure that is both scalable and sustainable.

II. CK:P PROJECT GOALS

Five goals were stated in the original grant proposal to NSF.
Teaching Environment: The network shall enhance the
teaching environment for all teachers in the Pittsburgh Public
Schools by expanding the personal contacts and information resources
available to these teachers.

Curriculum Development: The network shall be available to serve
the development of curricular activities of the Pittsburgh Public
Schools in all subject areas and at all grade levels.

Access to Information: The network shall provide information
services not currently available to the Pittsburgh school system.

School Restructuring: The network shall serve as a tool in the
restructuring efforts of the Pittsburgh Public Schools.

A National Model: The network and its associated curricular
activities shall serve as a national model for the implementation
of wide area networks in the K12 environment.

School proposals should be aligned with these goals.

III. TIMELINE FOR THE RFP

February 15, 1996 - RFP Mailed Out

February 15 - March 31 - Proposal Writing, Visit Existing Sites

March 29, 1996 - Proposals Due to CK:P

April 22, 1996 - Third Year Sites Announced

June 1, 1996 - Wiring Designs Finalized

July 1, 1996 - Equipment Ordered

Summer, 1996 - (Tentative Workshop)

January 1, 1997 - Full Implementation

IV. PRIORITIES FOR THE PROPOSALS

CK:P's experience indicates that the most powerful and successful proposals are those that are focused within a single department, theme or activity. Proposals written by staff that actually use the Internet in their classrooms increase the probability of success. Proposals written by single individuals generally do not have faculty ownership and therefore lessen the probability of success. Proposals must address three major topics: Curriculum, Teaming, and Equitable Distribution of Resources.

CURRICULUM

Our experience indicates that successful Internet projects thrive in environments that allow students and teachers to become partners in the learning process. Proposals must describe a focused curriculum activity, the necessary instructional procedures, and an assessment plan that is aligned with the curriculum goals.

¥ Network activities are by nature research oriented and
interdisciplinary. Projects need to be focused on
specific areas of the curriculum that take advantage of
network resources.

¥ The instructional procedures must describe a shift from a
teacher-centered paradigm to a research oriented
student-teacher partnership.

¥ The Internet project must be clearly integrated with the
school's Comprehensive Educational Improvement Plan (CEIP)
plan.

¥ Project goals need to be consistent with District
curriculum standards. Your project's curriculum
standards should be clearly stated and measurable.

¥ Technology should be viewed as a tool for curriculum
delivery.

TEAMING

Creating a school team that can both design and implement the proposed project is critical. Experience within CK:P indicates that projects that are designed by a single person are destined for failure.

¥ There must be evidence that the team has the support of
the administration, other teachers in the building and
the feeder-pattern community.

¥ Individual members must present their vision of the
activity. This should include the individual's commitment
to the proposal as exemplified by his/her willingness
to: modify classroom interactions, learn and implement a
new technology, and work collaboratively with colleagues.

¥ A description of how the school team will manage the
project needs to be part of the proposal.

EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES

In developing a proposal, school teams must consider the challenges the School District faces in educating its diverse population. Experience through CK:P indicates that teachers are eager to use this resource with gifted and talented populations, but are reticent with mainstream students. Our experience indicates that there is much to be gained by offering this resource to ALL students. Therefore, priority will be given to proposals that:

¥ focus on under-represented populations
(e.g. females in mathematics/science, African Americans
in accelerated classes ... ),

¥ come from schools that have little or no access to technology,

¥ propose to work with at-risk students,

¥ propose open access points such as libraries,

¥ demonstrate continuity within a school's feeder pattern.
(e.g. work with students from other CK:P sites).

V. PROPOSAL WRITING GUIDELINES

Each proposal will be read and scored by a Review Committee following the guidelines and criteria listed below. The maximum score is 100 points, (the score for each section is indicated in parentheses.) A tentative list of committee members is found at the end of this document. The committee will select six proposals to fund for the 1996-97 school year.

¥ Proposals must not exceed 10 pages, double spaced, with
one inch margins.

¥ The minimum type acceptable is 10 point.

¥ A Cover Page and an Introduction may be included; these
are not part of the 10 page limit.

¥ Letters of Support and the school's CEIP plan, must be
included as appendices.

¥ Each school must submit 25 copies of its proposal.

Part One - Curriculum Project (30 Points)

The project must be focused, taking into account both the complex nature of learning and traditional high school barriers such as scheduling, tracking, and teacher-centered models of instruction.

Problem Statement
¥ Define the learning problem that your
curriculum/network project addresses.

Curriculum Activity
¥ Describe the link between existing curricula and
the proposed activity.

Instructional Procedures
¥ Develop an instructional plan for using this tool
in the classroom.

Assessment Plan
¥ Describe how you will measure success both from
teacher and student perspectives.

Part Two - Design and Implementation Team (40 points)

The design team must be the group that implements the project. Ownership and accountability are keys to success.

Support and Vision
¥ Include a letter from each team member that
describes his or her motivation, goals and
responsibilities for the activity. Include letters of
support from school administrators. A maximum of
five additional letters of support from relevant
community members and school-support staff may
be included. (Submit as Appendix A.)

¥ Describe the members of the school team and
discuss each individual's responsibilities.

¥ Demonstrate that the proposal is not the work of
a single individual.

Management
¥ Describe how the team will manage the project in
the school.
¥ Designate a site coordinator.

Comprehensive Educational Improvement Plan (CEIP)
¥ Align your proposal with your school's CEIP
plan. (Submit the CEIP plan as Appendix B.)

Part Three - Equitable Distribution of Resources (30 points)

Common Knowledge: Pittsburgh is committed to placing its resources at schools with a clear need for network resources.

Statement of Need
¥ Describe why your school should receive this
resource.

Under-represented Populations
¥ Describe the particular needs of your students
and community.

¥ Discuss the effect of your project on at-risk students.

Continuity
¥ Work with existing CK:P sites in your feeder pattern.

VI. HELP WITH PROPOSAL WRITING

The CK:P Education staff is not part of the Review Committee, therefore we are available to help teams develop project ideas, explore the Internet, and help with proposal writing.

¥ The CK:P staff can demonstrate the network at your
school, provide workshops for your team at the Beta Site -
Woolslair, G8 - or work individually with team members.

¥ Teams can consult with the many Internet experts in the
school district.

¥ The winning proposals from Year Two and Three are online at:

/projects/ckp/curriculum/curriculum.html#action

School teams can visit the CK:P Beta Site during our weekly "Come Visit" sessions. CK:P staff will be available during these sessions for training or consultation. Please call or send email to let us know you are coming. If other times would be more convenient, call (622-5930) and we can make other arrangements. The following Come Visit sessions are scheduled:

Wednesday, February 21, 1996 form 3:20 - 5:00

Wednesday, February 28, 1996 from 3:20 - 5:00

Wednesday, March 6, 1996 from 3:20 - 5:00

Wednesday, March 13, 1996 from 3:20 - 5:00

Wednesday, March 20, 1996 from 3:20 - 5:00

Wednesday, March 27, 1996 from 3:20 - 5:00

EQUIPMENT and SUPPORT

Each Common Knowledge project site will receive the following:

¥ Networking equipment including a server, router, and
concentrator
¥ Internet Connectivity
¥ $50,000 worth of computer and peripheral equipment
¥ $12,500 worth of Local Area Network wiring
¥ Staff training by CK:P educational staff
¥ Technical support from both CK:P and PPS staff.

If the site has equipment - PC 486 DX or higher, MAC LCIII or higher - that is powerful enough to add to the LAN, CK:P will assist at getting this equipment placed on the school network.

Staff training will occur at the school on inservice days, at the CK:P beta site in an increment credit course, or at the school site at times convenient to the faculty. There is no money for paid staff development.

Schools should note that this is a limited installation that will not meet the needs of the entire school. CK:P will provide the foundation of a network infrastructure that is both scalable and sustainable.

FINAL NOTE

It is difficult to write a proposal using a resource that is only vaguely understood. We recommend that the site team get Internet accounts immediately. Please call CK:P at 622-5930 to request accounts.

In addition, the following people can help to answer questions that may facilitate your writing process.

Robert Carlitz - CK:P Project Director (624-9027)
Barry Check - CK:P Support Staff (624-5930)
Regine Fougeres - Teacher - Schenley (622-8200)
Priscilla Franklin - CK:P Support Staff (622-5930)
Kevin Barry - Teacher - Carrick H.S. (885-7700)
Kathy Olesak - Librarian - Schenley (622-8217)
Linda Savido - Librarian - Westinghouse (665-5022)
Richard Wertheimer - CK:P Support Staff (622-5930)
Mario Zinga - CK:P Support Staff (622-5930)

CK:P Review Process

All proposals will be read by a committee of educators. The committee will rate the proposals on the basis of curriculum, network team and statement of need. The committee will reach consensus on the schools to be selected. CK:P staff will facilitate the process, but have no input into the actual ratings.

Chair: Richard Wertheimer (Common Knowledge: Pittsburgh)
Facilitators: Barry Check (Common Knowledge: Pittsburgh)
Priscilla Franklin Common Knowledge: Pittsburgh
Mario Zinga Common Knowledge: Pittsburgh

CK:P REVIEW COMMITTEE (tentative list)

Lester Young, Principal, Westinghouse H.S.
Russ Olejniczak, Teacher, Allegheny Middle School
Paula Howard, Principal, Fulton Elementary School
Mary Lou Ruttle, Librarian, Carrick High School

Janet Bell, Area Supervisory Principal - E
Andrew King, Area Supervisory Principal - N/W
Anna McGuire, Area Supervisory Principal - E/C
Brian White, Area Supervisory Principal - S

Chip Burke, Grable Foundation
Representative, Parent Groups - E
Representative, Parent Groups - N/W
Representative, Parent Groups - E/C
Representative, Parent Groups - S
Alex Mathews, PPS Board
Phyllis Bianculli, PPS Board
Lynn Mariaskin, School Support Services
K. Cupples, School Support Services
Claudia Harper-Eaglin, School Support Services
Peter Camarda, Business Affairs

Janet Stocks, LRDC, University of Pittsburgh
Bob Carlitz, University of Pittsburgh
Peter Berger, Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center
Joe Kern, Common Knowledge: Pittsburgh