Dickinson Summer Seminars on Teaching Physics
Using Interactive Teaching Methods on Computers
Return to Table
of Contents
Previous Page
VI. Funding
Many respondents reported that they applied for funding to
support implementation of ITMC. Nearly three quarters of all
respondents reported making requests for support to purchase
equipment (72%). Twenty-five respondents only made their equipment
support requests from their own institution (27%), 13 applied
for external funds only (14%), and 27 made requests from both
internal and external sources (29%). Requests for support
for renovation lab and classroom space, and for personnel
costs (e.g., release time) were far fewer in number (see
Chart 26).
Funding was requested from a wide variety of sources,
as indicated on the pie chart, below (see
Chart 27).
In addition to the funding streams identified in the pie
chart, external funding was also
applied for from the following
sources (see Table 6):
|
Table 6: Elaboration on Funding: Other External Sources
listed
|
| NSF ILI grants (3) |
Board of Regents
State of Louisiana
(LEQSF) (2)
|
Millikan Foundation
|
| Hamline |
Dickinson |
Fred Meyer trust |
|
Parent-faculty association, Hampton Alliance for
Education
|
NASA-Project NOVA and Sherman Fairchild
Foundation
|
Champlin Foundation |
| Interna |
Tech-Prep Consortium |
Alden Trust |
| AT&T |
Lilly Endowment |
Georgia Lottery |
| VATEA (State Funds) |
PASCO and Vernier |
PHYSLAB fund |
The following chart
indicates how much funding was requested
and how much was actually received. It is interesting to note
the high percentage of internal funding requested that was
actually granted. "Self-selection" may be a possible
explanation for the high rate of success, here. That is, it
may be that internal funding is only asked for if it is likely
to be forthcoming. In addition, some of this funding may be
diverted from standing budgets rather than being the result
of new, specific requests.
Another "self-selection" process might be at
work regarding which participants actually come to the seminar.
All applicants to the summer program are required to solicit
letters of support from administrators at their home institutions.
Consequently, only those individuals who have already notified
administrators of their intentions and received, in turn,
a vote of confidence, ultimately take the seminar. Administrators
not open to suggestion about future funding requests for ITMC
implementation are less likely to support the individual with
a letter of support in the first place, and vice versa.
Regardless of what combination of dynamics explains the
result, it should be encouraging for those interested in applying
for institutional support to know that success rates are relatively
high. This is true, to a slightly lesser degree, with external
funding requests as well. Overall, about $4.6 million was
applied for and more than $3.3 million dollars has been granted
to former ITMC seminar participants for ITMC implementation
(see Chart 28).
Return to Table
of Contents
Next Page
|
