2020-13737.pdf

38122 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices

1 Applicants should note that other laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; 28 CFR part 35) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may require that State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) provide captioning, video description, and other accessible educational materials to students with disabilities when these materials are necessary to provide equally integrated and equally effective access to the benefits of the educational program or activity, or as part of a ‘‘free appropriate public education’’ as defined in 34 CFR 104.33.

102–3.140 and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments or statements to the Board about its mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this virtual public meeting. Written comments or statements should be submitted to Mr.

Pointon, the committee DFO, or Mr.

Riley, a committee ADFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the addresses listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section in the following formats: Adobe Acrobat or Microsoft Word. The comment or statement must include the author’s name, title, affiliation, address, and daytime telephone number. Written comments or statements being submitted in response to the agenda set forth in this notice must be received by the committee DFO or ADFO at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that they may be made available to the Board for its consideration prior to the meeting.

Written comments or statements received after this date may not be provided to the Board until its next meeting. Please note that because the Board operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, all written comments will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection.

Verbal Comments: Members of the public will be permitted to make verbal comments during the virtual public meeting only at the time and in the manner allowed herein. If a member of the public is interested in making a verbal comment at the open virtual meeting, that individual must submit a request, with a brief statement of the subject matter to be addressed by the comment, at least three business (3) days in advance to the committee DFO or ADFO, via electronic mail, the preferred mode of submission, at the addresses listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The committee DFO and ADFO will log each request to make a comment, in the order received, and determine whether the subject matter of each comment is relevant to the Board’s mission and/or the topics to be addressed in this public meeting. A 15-minute period near the end of the meeting will be available for verbal public comments. Members of the public who have requested to make a verbal comment and whose comments have been deemed relevant under the process described above, will be allotted no more than three (3) minutes during this period, and will be invited to speak in the order in which their requests were received by the DFO and ADFO.

Thomas Patrick Smith, Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division, Directorate of Civil Works, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.

[FR Doc. 2020–13543 Filed 6–24–20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Applications for New Awards;

Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals With Disabilities Program—Stepping-Up Technology Implementation

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2020 for Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities—Stepping-up Technology Implementation, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 84.327S. This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number 1820–0028.

DATES:

Applications Available: June 25, 2020.

Deadline for Transmittal of

Applications: August 14, 2020.

Date of 84.327S Pre-Application

Meeting: OSERS will conduct a pre-application meeting specific to these competitions via webinar on July 6, 2020, at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. In addition, no later than June 30, 2020, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) will post a pre-recorded informational webinar designed to provide technical assistance to interested applicants. Information about the teleconference and the pre-recorded webinar may be found at www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/ new-osep-grants.html.

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019- 02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Terry Jackson, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5128, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–5076.

Telephone: (202) 245–6039. Email:

Terry.Jackson@ed.gov.

If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description Purpose of Program: The purposes of the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program are to (1) improve results for children with disabilities by promoting the development, demonstration, and use of technology;

(2) support educational activities designed to be of educational value in the classroom for children with disabilities; (3) provide support for captioning and video description that is appropriate for use in the classroom;

and (4) provide accessible educational materials to children with disabilities in a timely manner.1

Priorities: This competition includes two absolute priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), these priorities are from allowable activities specified in sections 674(c)(1)(D) and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 1474(c)(1)(D) and 1481(d).

Absolute Priorities: For FY 2020 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, these priorities are absolute priorities.

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet either Absolute Priority 1 or Absolute Priority

2. Applicants may apply under both absolute priorities but must submit separate applications.

These priorities are:

Absolute Priority 1—Providing

Technology-Based Professional Development to Trainers of Special Education Teachers to Support Children With Disabilities.

Background:

Technology has enhanced professional development learning opportunities for teachers by expanding

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Jun 24, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1jb el l o n

D S

K

JL

S W

7X 2P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html mailto:Terry.Jackson@ed.gov

38123 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices

2 Section 8002 of Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended (ESEA) (2015).

3 Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a framework that identifies key project components of the proposed project (i.e., the active ‘‘ingredients’’ that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical and operational relationships among the key project components and relevant outcomes. See 34 CFR 77.1.

access to information and resources that support their content expertise and pedagogy and promote their professional growth. As an alternative to face-to-face professional development that can be expensive or impracticable (e.g., during an emergency), professional development facilitated by technology has the potential to more efficiently shape and impact teaching practices.

Some examples of the technologies that can be used to support teacher learning include virtual coaching, in which a coach interacts electronically with teachers to improve teaching skills;

learning management systems (LMS) that allow sharing of documents and data in one central location; and gamification, which involves bringing elements associated with video games into the learning environment to increase engagement and making tasks challenging.

McAleavy et al. (2018) noted that using technology to support teachers’ professional learning can promote collaboration through professional learning communities and communities of practice. In addition, technology that can be used to build the skills of teachers and related services personnel in rural or remote areas may be more cost-effective than face-to-face trainings and will offer flexibility that allows teachers to train at a time and place that suits them.

However, regardless of the delivery, effective professional development must go beyond learning new materials and skills; it must also support teachers and related services personnel in improving classroom instruction and student learning (Gess-Newsome et al., 2003).

Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) indicated that effective professional development should have the following features: (1) Be content focused, (2) incorporate active learning utilizing adult learning principles, (3) support collaboration, (4) use models and modeling of effective practices, (5) provide coaching and expert support,

(6) offer opportunities for feedback and reflection, and (7) be of sustained duration.

The Department therefore intends to fund three cooperative agreements to (a) identify strategies needed to implement and integrate an existing technology-based tool or approach, based on at least promising evidence,2 into the provision of teacher in-service training; and (b) provide ongoing technology-based professional development and coaching for in-service trainers in the use of technology to, and understanding of how the technology may, support teachers to improve classroom and remote learning environment instruction and learning outcomes for children with disabilities in pre-kindergarten through grade 12 (PK–12) settings.

Projects must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent with nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution and Federal civil rights laws.

Priority:

To be considered for funding under this priority, applicants, at a minimum, must—

(a) Build partnerships with LEAs, at least one of which is in a rural location and that includes public and nonpublic schools, to support teacher in-service trainers in the understanding, use, and delivery of a technology-based tool or approach that will support teacher in-service training for instruction of children with disabilities in PK–12 instructional settings, including classrooms and remote learning environments;

(b) Increase the capacity of teacher in-service trainers to effectively use and implement a technology-based tool or approach that supports teacher classroom and remote learning environment instruction and professional growth;

(c) Develop an implementation package of products and resources that will help teacher in-service trainers to use a technology-based tool or approach; and

(d) Evaluate the effectiveness of the in-service training conducted using the technology-based tool or approach.

In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the following application and administrative requirements in this priority:

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Significance,’’ how the proposed project will—

(1) Address the need for a technology-based tool or approach and identify specific gaps and weaknesses, infrastructure, or opportunities to support teacher in-service training. To meet this requirement the applicant must—

(i) Identify a fully developed technology-based tool or approach that is based on at least promising evidence;

(ii) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach will improve teacher in-service training and the capacity of teachers to deliver instruction or services for PK–12 children with disabilities;

(iii) Present applicable national, State, regional, or local data demonstrating the need for the identified technology-based tool or approach in teacher in-service training to support children with disabilities;

(iv) Identify current policies, procedures, and practices used by teacher in-service trainers that incorporate technology-based tools or approaches to meet their training needs;

(v) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or challenges, including challenges using the identified technology-based tools or approaches in providing teacher in-service training; and

(vi) Describe the potential impact of the identified technology-based tool or approach on teacher in-service trainers, teachers, families and children with disabilities.

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Quality of project services,’’ how the proposed project will—

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for ongoing coaching and supports;

(ii) Identify potential strategies to provide recipients of the in-service training with the flexibility to personalize their own learning and coaching supports; and

(iii) Ensure that products and resources meet the needs of the intended recipients of the grant;

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide—

(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and

(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model 3 or conceptual framework by which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project;

(3) Use a logic model or conceptual framework (and provide a copy in Appendix A) to develop project plans and activities describing any underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Jun 24, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1jb el l o n

D S

K

JL

S W

7X 2P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S

38124 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;

Note: The following websites provide more information on logic models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/ logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/ resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.

(4) Be based on current research. To meet this requirement, the applicant must—

(i) Describe how the proposed project will align to current research, policies, and practices related to the benefits, services, or opportunities that are available using the technology-based tool or approach;

(ii) Describe how the proposed project will incorporate current research and practices to guide the development and delivery of its products and resources, including accessibility and usability;

and

(iii) Document that the technology tool used by the project is fully developed, based on at least promising evidence, and addresses, at a minimum, the following principles of universal design for learning (UDL):

(A) Multiple means of presentation so that information can be delivered in more than one way (e.g., specialized software and websites, screen readers that include features such as text-to-speech, changeable color contrast, alterable text size, or selection of different reading levels).

(B) Multiple means of expression that allow knowledge to be exhibited through options such as writing, online concept mapping, or speech-to-text programs, where appropriate.

(C) Multiple means of engagement to stimulate interest in and motivation for learning (e.g., options among several different learning activities or content for a particular competency or skill and providing opportunities for increased collaboration consistent with UDL principles).

(5) Develop new products and resources that are of high quality and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must—

(i) Provide a plan for recruiting and selecting a wide range of settings where children with disabilities are served, which must include the following:

(A) Three development sites.

Development sites are the sites in which iterative development of the products and resources intended to support the implementation of technology tools will occur. The project must start implementing the technology tool with one development site in year one of the project period and two additional development sites in year two.

(B) Four pilot sites. Pilot sites are the sites in which try-out, formative evaluation, and refinement of the products and resources will occur. The project must work with the four pilot sites during years three and four of the project period.

(C) Ten dissemination sites.

Dissemination/scale-up sites will be selected if the project is extended for a fifth year. Dissemination/scale-up sites will be used to (a) refine the products for use by educators, and (b) evaluate the performance of the technology tool.

Dissemination/scale-up sites will receive less technical assistance (TA) from the project than development and pilot sites. Also, dissemination/scale-up sites will extend the benefits of the technology tool to additional students.

To be selected as a dissemination/scale-up site, eligible sites must commit to working with the project to implement the technology tool.

(D) A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e., development, pilot, dissemination/scale-up).

(E) A minimum of three of the seven development and pilot sites must be in settings other than traditional public elementary and secondary schools and include at least one rural site. A minimum of four of the 10 dissemination/scale-up sites must be in settings other than traditional public elementary and secondary schools and include at least one rural site. These non-traditional and rural sites must otherwise meet the requirements of each category listed above.

(ii) Provide information on the development and pilot sites, including student demographics and other pertinent data (e.g., whether the settings are schools identified for comprehensive or targeted support and improvement in accordance with section 1111(c)(4)(C)(iii), (c)(4)(D), or (d)(2)(C)–(D) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA));

(iii) Provide its plan for dissemination, which must address how the project will systematically distribute information, products, and services to varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination strategies, to promote awareness and use of the project’s products and resources;

(iv) Provide its plan for how the project will sustain project activities after funding ends; and

(v) Provide assurances that the final products disseminated to help sites effectively implement technology tools will be both open educational resources (OER) and licensed through an open access licensing authority.

(c) In the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Quality of the project evaluation,’’ include an evaluation plan for the project as described in the following paragraphs.

The evaluation plan must describe measures of progress in implementation, including the criteria for determining the extent to which the project’s products and resources have met the goals for reaching the project’s target population; measures of intended outcomes or results of the project’s activities in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the goals or objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic model, have been met. The applicant must provide an assurance that, in designing the evaluation plan, it will—

(1) Provide a logic model or conceptual framework that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, project evaluation, methods, performance measures, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project;

(2) Provide a plan to implement the activities described in this priority;

(3) Provide a plan, linked to the proposed project’s logic model or conceptual framework, for a formative evaluation of the proposed project’s activities. The plan must describe how the formative evaluation will use clear performance objectives to ensure continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project, including objective measures of progress in implementing the project and ensuring the quality of products and resources;

(4) Describe a plan or method for assessing—

(i) The development and pilot sites’ current teacher in-service training uses and needs, any current in-service technology investments, and the knowledge and availability of dedicated on-site in-service training personnel;

(ii) The readiness of development and pilot sites to pilot or try-out the technology-based teacher in-service training, including at a minimum, their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity;

(iii) Whether the technology-based tool or approach has achieved its intended outcomes for teacher in-service trainers and PK–12 teachers; and

(iv) Ongoing training needs of in-service trainers to implement with fidelity;

(5) Collect formative and summative data from the in-service training to refine and evaluate the products;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Jun 24, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1jb el l o n

D S

K

JL

S W

7X 2P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework

38125 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices

(6) If the project is extended to a fifth year—

(i) Provide the implementation package of products and resources developed for the technology-based tool or approach to no fewer than 10 additional school sites, one of which must be rural, in year five; and

(ii) Collect summative data about the success of the project’s products and resources in supporting implementation of the technology-based tool or approach in teacher in-service training sites; and

(7) By the end of the project period, provide—

(i) Information on the products and resources, as supported by the project evaluation, including any accessibility features, that will enable other sites to implement and sustain implementation of the technology-based tool or approach;

(ii) Information in the Technology Implementation Report, including data on how in-service trainers used the technology-based tool or approach, and how the technology-based tool or approach was implemented with fidelity;

(iii) Data on how the technology-based tool or approach changed in-service trainers’ practices; and

(iv) A plan for disseminating or scaling up the technology-based tool or approach and accompanying products beyond the sites directly involved in the project.

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel,’’ how—

(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;

(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project’s intended outcomes;

(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities; and

(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits.

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Quality of the management plan,’’ how—

(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project’s intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and

(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;

(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve the project’s intended outcomes;

(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and resources provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to recipients; and

(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of perspectives, including those of families, educators, researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.

(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant must include—

(1) In Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the narrative; and

(2) In the budget, attendance at the following:

(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, or virtually after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) project officer and other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period.

Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the grantee’s project director or other authorized representative.

(ii) A two and one-half-day project directors’ conference in Washington, DC, or a virtual conference during each year of the project period.

(iii) Two annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP.

(iv) A one-day intensive OSEP review meeting during the last half of the second year of the project period.

Cohort Collaboration and Support

OSEP project officer(s) will provide coordination support among the projects. Each project funded under this priority must—

(a) Participate in monthly conference-call discussions to share and collaborate on implementation and project issues;

and

(b) Provide information annually using a template that captures descriptive data on project site selection and the processes for installation and use of the technology-based tool or approach (i.e., the implementation process).

Note: The following website provides more information about implementation research:

https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementation-research-network.

Fifth Year of Project The Secretary may extend a project one year beyond the initial 48 months to work with dissemination/scale-up sites if the grantee is achieving the intended outcomes of the project (as demonstrated by data gathered as part of the project evaluation) and making a positive contribution to the implementation of a technology-based tool or approach based on at least promising evidence with fidelity in the development and pilot sites. Each applicant must include in its application a plan for the full 60-month period. In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fifth year, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and will consider—

(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of the OSEP project officer and other experts selected by the Secretary. This review will be held during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(b) The success and timeliness with which the requirements of the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the project; and

(c) The degree to which the project’s activities have changed practices and improved outcomes for PK–12 children with disabilities.

References

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development. Learning Policy Institute. https:// learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/ teacher-prof-dev.

Gess-Newsome, J., Blocher, J.M., Clark, J., Menasco, J., & Willis, E.M. (2003).

Technology infused professional development: A framework for development and analysis.

Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(3). https:// citejournal.org/volume-3/issue-3-03/ general/technology-infused-professional-development-a-framework-for-development-and-analysis.

McAleavy, T., Hall-Chen, A., Horrocks, S., & Riggall, A. (2018). Technology-supported professional development for teachers:

Lessons from developing countries.

Education Development Trust. https:// eric.ed.gov/?id=ED593386.

Absolute Priority 2—Improving Social Skill Development for Students with Disabilities Through the Use of Socially Assistive Robotics (SAR).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Jun 24, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1jb el l o n

D S

K

JL

S W

7X 2P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-prof-dev https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-prof-dev https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-prof-dev https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementation-research-network https://citejournal.org/volume-3/issue-3-03/general/technology-infused-professional-development-a-framework-for-development-and-analysis https://citejournal.org/volume-3/issue-3-03/general/technology-infused-professional-development-a-framework-for-development-and-analysis https://citejournal.org/volume-3/issue-3-03/general/technology-infused-professional-development-a-framework-for-development-and-analysis https://citejournal.org/volume-3/issue-3-03/general/technology-infused-professional-development-a-framework-for-development-and-analysis https://citejournal.org/volume-3/issue-3-03/general/technology-infused-professional-development-a-framework-for-development-and-analysis https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED593386 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED593386

38126 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices

4 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘settings’’ include general education classrooms; special education classrooms; charter schools; high-quality early childhood programs; private schools, including parochial schools; home education; after school programs; juvenile justice facilities; remote learning environments and any other settings in which students may receive services under IDEA.

5 Technology should meet current industry standards and guidelines for accessibility (e.g., Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 AA and section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act). For additional information on WCAG 2.0 please refer to www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.

6 Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a framework that identifies key project components of the proposed project (i.e., the active ‘‘ingredients’’ that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical and operational

Background:

For students with disabilities, interpersonal skills, such as active listening, effective communication, and recognizing and understanding the points of view of others, are important to the development of healthy relationships and successful placement into the least restrictive environment.

The lack of appropriate social skills can negatively impact student learning, can result in poor peer social interactions, and may lead to suspension, expulsion, and dropping out of school (Murry, 2018). Programs that support social skill development in school settings are important to ensure children do not learn in isolation, promote positive relationships, facilitate improved learning outcomes, and provide crucial skill sets that allow children to work alone and with others in the school setting (Connolly et al., 2016).

Implementing social skill development in a systematic, school-wide approach is more beneficial than fragmented approaches, as it allows students’ social skills to be cultivated along with academic skills and creates a common climate and culture throughout the school (DePaoli et al., 2017).

Making technology and SAR part of learning and social skill development for children with disabilities has become more prevalent over the years.

Technology-based interventions, such as humanoid robots controlled by a human trainer and robotic therapeutic interventions that target repetitive behaviors and affective states in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), have been found to be beneficial for improving a wide range of skills and behaviors, including social and emotional skills, communication skills, academic skills, and challenging behaviors. Recent advancements in SAR have created an alternative educational approach to providing social skills supports for students with ASD. With machine learning, robots can predict a child’s engagement based on their eye contact, dialogue, and other behavioral cues and then react and reengage them to help lengthen the time the child stays engaged in the therapeutic activity (Jain et al., 2020; Hao, 2020). SAR can help to provide an affordable, accessible, and personalized intervention and reduce the need for human interventions for students with ASD (Jain et al., 2020).

Furthermore, SAR provide opportunities for students to learn through non-threatening, three-dimensional inanimate objects, while also providing opportunities to learn through imitation and interactions that encourage autonomous social behavior (Tennyson et al., 2016).

The Department therefore intends to fund two cooperative agreements to identify strategies needed to implement and integrate SAR to (a) help improve the social skills of children with disabilities; and (b) provide ongoing professional development and coaching for educators, students, or families in the use and understanding of how the technology can improve social skills and learning outcomes for children with disabilities in PK–12 settings.4

Projects must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent with nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution and Federal civil rights laws.

Priority:

To be considered for funding under this priority, applicants, at a minimum, must—

(a) Increase the capacity of educators, students, and families to effectively understand and implement SAR (referred to as a technology-based tool or approach in the remainder of the priority) to instruct and support social skills development for children with disabilities;

(b) Improve the social skill interactions of students with disabilities as a result of using a technology-based tool or approach;

(c) Develop an implementation package of products and resources that will help educators and school sites to understand and use a technology-based tool or approach;

(d) Evaluate the impact of a technology-based tool or approach on achieving the intended outcomes; and

(e) Ensure that a technology-based tool or approach meets the accessibility 5 and usability needs of the intended users.

In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the following application and administrative requirements in this priority:

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Significance,’’ how the proposed project will—

(1) Address the need for the technology-based tool or approach and identify specific gaps and weaknesses or opportunities to support teachers in the instructional setting, including classroom and remote learning environments. To meet this requirement the applicant must—

(i) Identify a fully developed technology-based tool or approach that is based on at least promising evidence;

(ii) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach will improve the social skills of PK–12 children with disabilities;

(iii) Present applicable national, State, regional, or local data demonstrating the need for the identified technology-based tool or approach in classrooms and remote learning environments to support the development of social skills in PK–12 children with disabilities;

(iv) Document that the technology-based tool or approach used by the project is fully developed and based on at least promising evidence and how the technology-based tool or approach will better enable teachers to deliver instruction or services across subject areas for PK–12 children with disabilities;

(v) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or challenges, including challenges with the use of the identified technology-based tool or approach, faced by schools and teachers; and

(vi) Describe the potential impact of the identified technology-based tool or approach on schools, teachers, families, and children with disabilities.

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Quality of project services,’’ how the proposed project will—

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for ongoing coaching and professional development supports; and

(ii) Ensure that products and resources meet the needs of the intended recipients of the grant;

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide—

(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and

(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model 6 or conceptual framework by which the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Jun 24, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1jb el l o n

D S

K

JL

S W

7X 2P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag

38127 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices relationships among the key project components and relevant outcomes. See 34 CFR 77.1.

proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project;

(3) Use a logic model or conceptual framework (and provide a copy in Appendix A) to develop project plans and activities describing any underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;

Note: The following websites provide more information on logic models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/ logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/ resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.

(4) Be based on current research. To meet this requirement, the applicant must—

(i) Describe how the proposed project will align to current research, policies, and practices related to the benefits, services, or opportunities that are available using the technology-based tool or approach;

(ii) Describe how the proposed project will incorporate current research and practices to guide the development and delivery of its products and resources, including accessibility and usability;

and

(iii) Document that the technology tool used by the project is fully developed, based on at least promising evidence, and addresses, at a minimum, the following principles of UDL:

(A) Multiple means of presentation so that students can approach information in more than one way (e.g., specialized software and websites, screen readers that include features such as text-to-speech, changeable color contrast, alterable text size, or selection of different reading levels).

(B) Multiple means of expression so that all students can demonstrate knowledge through options such as writing, online concept mapping, or speech-to-text programs, where appropriate.

(C) Multiple means of engagement to stimulate interest in and motivation for learning (e.g., options among several different learning activities or content for a particular competency or skill and providing opportunities for increased collaboration consistent with UDL principles).

(5) Develop new products and resources that are of high quality and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must—

(i) Provide a plan for recruiting and selecting a wide range of settings where children with disabilities are served and that must include the following:

(A) Three development sites.

Development sites are the sites in which iterative development of the products and resources intended to support the implementation of technology tools will occur. The project must start implementing the technology tool with one development site in year one of the project period and two additional development sites in year two.

(B) Four pilot sites. Pilot sites are the sites in which try-out, formative evaluation, and refinement of the products and resources will occur. The project must work with the four pilot sites during years three and four of the project period.

(C) Ten dissemination sites.

Dissemination sites will be selected if the project is extended for a fifth year.

Dissemination sites will be used to (a) refine the products for use by educators, and (b) evaluate the performance of the technology tool. Dissemination sites will receive less TA from the project than development or pilot sites. Also, dissemination sites will extend the benefits of the technology tool to additional students. To be selected as a dissemination site, eligible sites must commit to working with the project to implement the technology tool.

(D) A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e., development, pilot, dissemination).

(E) A minimum of three of the seven development and pilot sites must be in settings other than traditional public elementary and secondary schools and include at least one rural site. A minimum of four of the 10 dissemination sites must be in settings other than traditional public elementary and secondary schools and include at least one rural site. These non-traditional and rural sites must otherwise meet the requirements of each category listed above.

(ii) Provide information on the development and pilot sites, including student demographics and other pertinent data (e.g., whether the settings are schools identified for comprehensive or targeted support and improvement in accordance with section 1111(c)(4)(C)(iii), (c)(4)(D), or (d)(2)(C)–(D) of the ESEA);

(iii) Provide its plan for dissemination, which must address how the project will systematically distribute information, products, and services to varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination strategies, to promote awareness and use of the project’s products and resources;

(iv) Provide its plan for how the project will sustain project activities after funding ends; and

(v) Provide assurances that the final products disseminated to help sites effectively implement technology tools will be both OER and licensed through an open access licensing authority.

(c) In the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Quality of the project evaluation,’’ include an evaluation plan for the project as described in the following paragraphs.

The evaluation plan must describe measures of progress in implementation, including the criteria for determining the extent to which the project’s products and resources have met the goals for reaching the project’s target population; measures of intended outcomes or results of the project’s activities in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the goals or objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic model, have been met.

The applicant must provide an assurance that, in designing the evaluation plan, it will—

(1) Provide a logic model or conceptual framework that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, project evaluation, methods, performance measures, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project;

(2) Provide a plan to implement the project activities described in this priority;

(3) Provide a plan, linked to the proposed project’s logic model or conceptual framework, for a formative evaluation of the proposed project’s activities. The plan must describe how the formative evaluation will use clear performance objectives to ensure continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project, including objective measures of progress in implementing the project and ensuring the quality of products and resources;

(4) Identify and develop resources and products that create accessible learning opportunities for all children, including children with disabilities and children with high needs, and make possible the sustained implementation of the selected technology tool. Development of the products must be an iterative process beginning in a single development school and continuing through repeated cycles of development and refinement in the other development sites, followed by a formative evaluation and refinement in the pilot sites. The products and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:15 Jun 24, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1jb el l o n

D S

K

JL

S W

7X 2P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework

38128 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices resources must, at a minimum, include—

(i) An instrument or method for assessing—

(A) The site staff’s current technology uses and needs, current technology investments, firewall issues, and the knowledge and availability of dedicated on-site technology personnel;

(B) The readiness of development and pilot school sites to pilot or try-out the technology-based tool or approach, including at a minimum, their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity;

(C) Whether the technology-based tool or approach has achieved its intended outcomes for the end-user(s); and

(D) Ongoing training needs of teachers, students, or families to implement the technology-based tool or approach with fidelity;

(5) Collect formative and summative data to refine and evaluate the products;

(6) If the project is extended to a fifth year—

(i) Provide the implementation package of products and resources developed for the technology-based tool or approach to no fewer than 10 additional school sites; and

(ii) Collect summative data about the success of the project’s products and resources in supporting implementation of the technology-based tool or approach; and

(7) By the end of the project period, provide—

(i) Information on the products and resources, as supported by the project evaluation, including any accessibility features, that will enable other sites to implement and sustain implementation of the technology-based tool or approach;

(ii) Information in the Technology Implementation Report, including data on how teachers, students, and families used the technology-based tool or approach, and how the technology-based tool or approach was implemented with fidelity;

(iii) Data on how the technology-based tool or approach changed teacher practices; and

(iv) A plan for disseminating or scaling up the technology-based tool or approach and accompanying products beyond the sites directly involved in the project.

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel,’’ how—

(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;

(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project’s intended outcomes;

(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities; and

(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits.

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Quality of the management plan,’’ how—

(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project’s intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and

(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;

(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated and how these…