1. Investing in Innovation Program (i3) Mathematics and Science Partnership Conference March 22, 2011

2. Agenda ED’s Innovation Strategy i3 Background Summary of Applications Summary of Awards STEM in i3 Q&A 2

3. Department’s Innovation Goals Link Back to President’s Education Goals President’s Goals U.S. to become No. 1 in the world in the % of population with a college degree by 2020 U.S. to significantly reduce gaps in high school graduation and college access/success by 2020 Strategic Goals: Innovation 1.Accelerate innovations that address high priority needs 2.Use ED’s role as a market participant 3.Develop the infrastructure and context for continuing innovation Department’s Goal Accelerate the development and broad adoption of new programs, processes, and strategies required to achieve the President’s goals 3

4. Innovation Has Two Crucial Components 4 Innovation product, process, strategy, or approach that improves significantly upon the status quo and reaches scale Innovation product, process, strategy, or approach that improves significantly upon the status quo and reaches scale Invention Baseline Scale Greater Impact Trend 4

5. Agenda ED’s Innovation Strategy i3 Background Summary of Applications Summary of Awards STEM in i3 Q&A 5

6. 6 $4.35B - Race to the Top Fund, including $350MM for development of assessments $3.5B* - School Improvement Grants $650MM - Investing in Innovation Fund $650MM – Education Technology $300MM* - Teacher Incentive Fund $250MM - Statewide Data Systems * Includes regular FY 09 appropriations Note: These slides are intended as guidance only. Please refer to the official notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria in the Federal Register. i3 Was One Part of Unprecedented Direct Federal Investment in Education SFSF $48.6B Formula Grants $26B Race To The Top and Other Grants ($9.7B in FY2009 Funding) ARRA K-12 Investment Aligned with Four Assurances

7. 7 i3 Development Validation Scale-up Types of Awards Available Under i3 Estimated Funding Available Up to $5MM/awardUp to $30MM/awardUp to $50MM/award Evidence Required Reasonable - research findings or hypotheses, including related research or theories in education and other sectors Moderate – either high internal validity and medium external validity, or vice versa Strong – both high internal validity and high external validity Scaling Required Able to further develop and scale Able to be scaled to the regional or state level Able to be scaled to the national, regional, or state level Note: These slides are intended as guidance only. Please refer to the official notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria in the Federal Register.

8. Improve Achievement for High-Need Students Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Enhanced Data Systems College- and Career-ready Standards and Assessments Improving Achievement in Persistently Low- performing Schools Early Learning (0 or 1 point) Early Learning (0 or 1 point) College Access and Success (0 or 1 point) College Access and Success (0 or 1 point) Serving Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students (0 or 1 point) Serving Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students (0 or 1 point) Serving Students in Rural LEAs (0, 1, or 2 points) Serving Students in Rural LEAs (0, 1, or 2 points) i3 Priorities Note: These slides are intended as guidance only. Please refer to the official notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria in the Federal Register. Required for all applications Must address one Absolute Priority May address one or more Competitive Preference 8

9. Agenda ED’s Innovation Strategy i3 Background Summary of Applications Summary of Awards STEM in i3 Q&A 9

10. i3 Generated Enormous Interest 10

11. Agenda ED’s Innovation Strategy i3 Background Summary of Applications Summary of Awards STEM in i3 Q&A 11

12. Grantees Distributed Across Grant Types and Priorities 12

13. i3 Grantees Spread Across Much of the Country 13

14. i3 Matching Generated Significant New Investment in Innovative Projects Type of Contribution Total Match ($MM) Foundation Registry Members* ($MM) Other Matching Funders ($MM) New Cash $ 101.6$ 48.1$ 53.5 Repurposed Cash $ 9.1$ 7.2$ 1.9 In-Kind (Not Applicant or Partner) $ 19.5$ 0.3$ 19.2 In-Kind (Applicant or Partner) $ 8.3- TOTAL$ 138.6$ 55.6$ 83.0 Totals may not match due to rounding * Funding provided by members of the Foundation Registry, whether or not the funding occurred through the Foundation Registry. 14

15. Agenda ED’s Innovation Strategy i3 Background Summary of Applications Summary of Awards STEM in i3 Q&A 15

16. A Substantial Number of i3 Grantees Address STEM Education TypeApplicant Name 2 Project Title 2 Validation Smithsonian Institution -- National Science Resources Center, LASER The LASER Model: A Systemic and Sustainable Approach for Achieving High Standards in Science Education George Mason University --, Virginia Initiative for Science Teaching and Achievement (VISTA) ASSET Inc. (Achieving Student Success through Excellence in Teaching) --, ASSET Regional Professional Development Centers for Advancing STEM Education Development Saint Vrain Valley School District -- Priority Schools,St. Vrain Valley School District i3 Project Board of Education of the City of New York -- Division of Talent, Labor and Innovation, Office of School of One New York City Department of Education - School of One EDUCATION CONNECTION -- Center for 21st Century Skills, School Services Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education for the 21st Century (STEM21) Erikson Institute --, Achieving High Standards for Pre-K-Grade 3 Mathematics: A Whole Teacher approach to Professional Development The Regents of the University of California -- Education, CSE/CRESST The STEM Career Development Exploration System: Building Student Knowledge and Skills for STEM College and Career Success California Education Round Table Intersegmental Coordinating Committee --,Alliance for Regional Collaboration to Heighten Educational SuccessSTEM Learning Opportunities Providing Equity Bellevue School District -- Bellevue School District Re-imagining Career and College Readiness: STEM, Rigor, and Equity in a Comprehensive High School 16

17. Examples of Strategies for STEM Education in i3 Grants Systemic change: National Science Resources Center focuses on five key areas to build school district infrastructure: research- based curriculum; teacher competency; aligned assessments; materials support; school and community support Articulation across grade levels: St. Vrain focuses on foundation of literacy in elementary school and math skills in middle school to support STEM track and certification in high school Strategies for learning: Bellevue School District is using problem-based learning that requires substantial student collaboration and includes opportunities to work with mentors from industry 17

18. Resources for Learning More about i3 i3 Website http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/index.html http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/index.html Application Narratives for i3 Grantees http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/2010/applications.html http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/2010/applications.html Data.ed.gov http://data.ed.gov/grants/investing-in-innovation http://data.ed.gov/grants/investing-in-innovation

19. Agenda ED’s Innovation Strategy i3 Background Summary of Applications Summary of Awards STEM in i3 Q&A 19

20. BACKUP 20

21. i3 Selection Criteria and Points * Development grants will be judged in two tiers: all eligible applications will be scored on Criteria A, C, E, F, and G and the competitive preference priorities; then high-scoring applications will be scored on Criteria B and D by a different panel of reviewers. Note: These slides are intended as guidance only. Please refer to the official notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria in the Federal Register. The criteria may apply differently to different levels of grants. Selection CriteriaDevelopmentValidationScale-Up A.Need for the Project and Quality of the Project Design 252015 B.Strength of Research, Significance of Effect and Magnitude of Effect 10*1520 C.Experience of the Eligible Applicant 252015 D.Quality of the Project Evaluation 15*15 E.Strategy and Capacity to Bring to Scale or to Further Develop and Bring to Scale 51015 F.Sustainability 10 G.Quality of the Management Plan and Personnel 10 Total Points 100 21

22. A Wide Range of Funder Types Provided Matching Funds Totals may not match due to rounding * Total match represents funding submitted to and approved by the Department to count towards matching requirement ** The number of matches counts distinct matches to different projects from the same funder as separate matches Type of Private-Sector Funder Total Match ($MM)* Percent of Total Number of Matches** Applicant or Partner $ 22.116%19 Foundation (Non-corporate) $ 73.653%128 IHE (private) $ 0.60%7 Individual $ 3.53%52 Private Company or Corporation $ 22.516%89 Foundation (Corporate) $ 13.310%20 Other Private-Sector Entity $ 3.02%13 TOTAL $ 138.6100%328 22