Funding Science Education Ideas, Activities, and Projects

500

Funding Science Education Ideas9 Activities, andProjectsRobert E. YagerDepartment of Science EducationUniversity of IowaIowa City, Iowa 52242

^. . . the financial commitment for science educationimprovements has become impressive.^

Never before have so many sources existed for funding science education ideas,activities, and projects; nor has there been so much support available from the sources.The American public has decided that science education is once again in need ofattention and improvement. Perhaps this decision is part of a much broader concern foreducational reform which was brought into clear focus by the 1983 report by theNational Commission on Excellence in Education�A Nation At Risk, (NCEE, 1983).Nonetheless, the level of public support for improving science education has moved to alevel greater than was the situation in 1957 following the launching of the SovietSputnik (Yager, 1985). Leaders in government, industry, and foundations areresponding with programs and financial support.Even with spectacular increases caused by inflation since 1960, the financial

commitment for science education improvements has become impressive. It is importantthat this support be translated into new ideas, activities, and projects for which impactand improvement can be demonstrated. Unless this is done the support that is currentlyavailable will disappear�and sooner than it did during the support for the two decadesfollowing the launching of Sputnik.As professionals interested in addressing the peculiar needs of all students enrolled in

schools, we should stress the differences in aims of science education in the 80s incontrast to those of the 60s. The special commission established by the National ScienceBoard issued its comprehensive report late in 1983�some several months after the ANation At Risk report (NSF, 1983). This report included two key points which illustratemajor differences in science education improvements for the 80s and beyond. First ofall, it was agreed that science should be broadened to include a substantial technologicalcomponent. Secondly, it was established that a proper concern in a democracy is ascientific and technological literacy for all. These represent major differences from thesituation in the 60s when the definition of science was more restrictive and technologywas relegated to applied areas, such as industrial arts.These current directions have important implications for funding for science

education�and for funding science education in local schools. It is important to

maintain a broad view of science, especially if applications and/or technology are basicingredients of the total enterprise.

School Science and MathematicsVolume 88 (6) October 1988

Funding Science Education 501

We should remember that much of the current interest in science education reformfocuses upon science for all�not just the most motivated or the elite. In some ways, acontinued focus on the science motivated could limit funding potentials for programsdesigned to meet the special needs of only the nation’s most gifted and talentedstudents. Of course, many will argue that appropriate courses designed to meet specificstudent needs of all students will not be any different from those appropriately designedfor the most gifted and talented. However, consideration of such issues is reasonablewhen pursuing funding to accomplish specific tasks. It is important to define a context,i.e., a point of reference, when identifying funding sources and developing specificproposals.Funding Sources. Four categories are useful in elaborating on specific sources of fundsfor supporting ideas, activities, and projects designed for improving science education.These include government grants (federal and state), private foundations, industry, andcommunity collaboration. And, it may be important to consider the advantages increating linkages for various aspects of a given effort�perhaps using more than onesource. Personal contacts with officials involved with proposals and dispersal of fundsfor all categories of funding sources are highly desirable. Rarely does funding resultfrom a non-solicited proposal being sent through the mail to a general address.Grants from Government. Special programs at both the federal and state levels aredesigned to improve science education, especially in schools. Although there may beseveral dozen agencies, offices, and programs which might be tapped for funding, thetwo largest are the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation.The Department of Education (DEd)�with far the largest budget of the two�deals

with the states through its various institutes and laboratories and other on-goingprojects to a far greater degree than does NSF. Of interest, however, is the considerableinterest on the part of DEd to respond to the demands of the public for reform inscience education. One example is the special emphasis on science education for theSecretary of Education’s Discretionary Funds. A total of 20-30 awards for $50,000 to$150,000 each was targeted for science education for 1985 and 1986.

Congress has earmarked in excess of $80 million to support science educationimprovements through the National Science Foundation. Currently, major funds aredirected toward teacher enhancement activities�including those associated with newideas, activities, and programs in elementary and secondary schools.NSF for the first time is anxious to interact with teachers and direct funding to

schools, especially those involved in consortia, those associated with special cooperativeprojects, or those associated with recognized exemplary programs. However, the currentemphasis is upon cost sharing efforts where the limited NSF funds can be used forleverage in gaining initial and, over the long term, continuing support from othersources. A particularly exciting program is one which promotes communication andnetworking among individuals, professional groups and agencies, and a variety of otherfunding groups. Collaboration with industry, including publishers, is especiallyencouraged.

Officials within the Science and Engineering Education directorate welcome thechance to discuss ideas with persons prior to their submitting a formal proposal. Short(five page) pre-proposals are necessary for initiating such dialogue concerningnetworking proposals.


502 Funding Science Education

Funds for the Department of Education are available in the states where slightlydifferent schedules, interpretations, and priorities are often encountered. The new fundsavailable by means of the Education for Economic Security Act of 1984 provide a casein point. A formula determines how much of the total allocation in the state must go tolocal schools, higher education, to special groups for resolving issues identified by stateeducation leaders. Many states have established priorities and determined what activitieswill be supported; others wait for specific direction and clarification from Washington.Regardless of the category (i.e., local schools, higher education, or the state"discretionary" funds), ideas for use of such funds are always welcomed.Other federal funds available in each state are also earmarked for the talented and

gifted; TAG (Talented and Gifted) funding is available and often awaiting good ideasworthy of support. Generally a state official, selected to head TAG programs in thestate, should be contacted concerning procedures, dates, and funding levels. Specialscience efforts are particularly welcomed in many states�perhaps in response to thegreat public interest in and support for activities designed to improve science.The renewed interest in science education has resulted in initiatives in every state to

resolve the crisis in science education. Often these initiatives seem off-target asscholarship programs are estabished to attract more teachers; in-service programs arebegun to get non-science teachers certified; certification requirements are altered;graduation requirements are stiffened; and competency measures for students andteachers are legislated. Nonetheless, these initiatives can be used by creative teachers andprofessionals to respond to the needs in the area of expanded and higher qualityprograms and staff.

It is important for teachers with ideas for improving science education to know theleadership in the particular state. In most states, laws require that information andassistance be available to help teachers and districts with new state and federalprograms. If a state science consultant exists, this may be the place to begin. Contactshould be made in person or by telephone since in any bureaucracy it is easy to ignore aletter or to pass it endlessly from desk to desk. While one is not always sure whatquestions and issues to raise in a letter, personal conversation can usually find anappropriate opening and provide ideas for more formal contacts later.Private Foundations. Many private foundations identify science education activities ashigh priorities for new funding. The Carnegie Foundation of New York has fundedthree large projects at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in thefield of science education. Other major grants have been provided by corporatefoundations including DuPont, SOHIO, Exxon, and Phillips Petroleum. Many of thesefoundations prefer to fund projects in their immediate service areas or corporateheadquarters. Others prefer to identify with national organizations and the recognitioncoming from an association of named individuals and organizations.Almost all colleges and universities maintain an office that attempts to collect names

and addresses for private foundations as well as information about their currentinterests for projects to support. Graduates of a particular institution can easily makean appointment with appropriate science education staff or sponsored program officersfor specific information about foundations likely to have interest in a given area.Colleges and universities want to work with schools since collaborative efforts addstrength to any proposal. Often, some of the most innovative ideas, activities, andprojects include persons from a variety of places and professional sources.



The Taft Corporation of Washington, D.C., publishes a variety of materials forfund-raising and project management. Recently they released a valuable book entitledCorporate Giving Yellow Pages including 1,100 contact persons for corporate directgiving programs and corporate foundations. It provides an excellent source ofinformation for locating a corporate foundation with likely interests in science.

^One of the significant developments of the 80s is therenewed interest from industry for improved scienceeducation . . .^

Industry. One of the significant developments of the 80s is the renewed interest fromindustry for improved science education (PDK, 85/86). At times the reasons for thisinterest are clouded; often it is tied to a desire for more workers in industry with talentand personal traits deemed appropriate for potential employees. But, like in the case ofthe general public, this renewed interest has been transformed into greater willingness tohelp in terms of human as well as financial resources. Educators often find this newinterest and support uncomfortable; many do not know how to cope with it; theyfrequently question the motivation; they find it difficult to operate in a "business"world.

This new interest on the part of industry provides new challenges and the opportunityfor developing cooperative programs for all students enrolled�and those in sciencemost directly. There can be opportunity for financial support of specific programs.However, industrial leaders often accept the idea that science is for the elite and are notready for the new moves and philosophy of "science for all." Perhaps there can be agreater chance of success with gaining support from industry for ideas dealing withgifted and talented students. However, such good ideas are often the best ones for allstudents as well.The involvement of teachers, other school personnel, and students with industrial

contacts is an exciting development. It not only provides needed funds and expertise buta rich experience for all in the larger community, i.e., the real world of life.

Professional Societies. A variety of professional societies provide support for newprograms designed for talented science students. NSTA’s Space Shuttle program is agood case in point. NSTA’s cooperation with the Duracell Contest and the Discovermagazine essay contest are other examples. Science Services (Washington, D.C.) hassponsored a variety of programs for talented youth�often with government andindustrial support. The Westinghouse Science Talent Search is a case in point. (SeeAppendix 1 for addresses for many of these.)

Other sources of funds in almost every state exist through the State Academies ofScience. The Academies receive a "kick-back" of membership dues for the particularstate from the American Association for the Advancement of Science. These funds maybe used to support science research activities among secondary school students and, ifthere are too few applicants, research conducted by undergraduate science students incollege and universities in the state. Persons interested in stimulating science researchexperience for their students should contact academy presidents and executive directorsabout these funds and watch for annual announcements.

In many states special appropriations from the State Legislature or gifts from in-state



industries are routed to the Academies of Science to support research. In many instancesteachers and their most gifted students are given a priority in the awarding of suchfunds. Often the requests for help do not match the available funding.Community Collaboration. Every community includes parents and leaders who can beinvolved in a great variety of school projects and activities. Local businesses, industries,and professional groups can be most helpful in providing expertise, resources,opportunities, and funds for innovative ideas, activities, and projects. Many localindustries have a base in technology; also local engineering, allied health, agriculture,and other vocational/professional groups often advance their own special projects�alldesigned to help, improve, and extend school experiences. It is appropriate for teachersto seek out such help and resources. Too often teachers are comfortable in dealing withtheir students and feel ill at ease in dealing with community leaders. Such communityleaders are often members of the Board of Education or can influence such Boards togain support for school science.Some of the most impressive exemplary programs are those where this community

involvement and collaboration is most pronounced. For example, in Merritt Island HighSchool (Brevard County, Florida) a community group sponsors awards programs forscience students and helps sponsor research activities; it actually built a research facilityto be used by advanced students involved with scientific research.

In East High School (Salt Lake City, Utah) the community has been involved for 20years in supporting special science club excursions which have become extremely popularin the school and community and involve relatively large numbers of students.

In Dahlem Environmental Education Center (Jackson, Michigan) and Children’sMuseum of Hartford (West Hartford, Connecticut) special community organizationshave been created to provide enrichment experiences for more and more students as thescience programs are enriched and improved.Many service clubs are anxious to help recognize talented students; they are also ready

and willing to provide some financial support for special projects and activities. There isgreat power in such collaboration at the local level, providing an example of the conceptof community and the strength of cooperation for all. Such cooperation is an excellentmodel for youth learning to be adults and good citizens; they learn to work effectivelywith each other. Effective teachers must be effective citizens. Certainly to work in acollaborative way within a community improves communities and models citizenshipqualities which are desired in the students. It is also a way of gaining support forscience activities for gifted and talented students.Some Recommended Procedures. Much information about a variety of funding

sources and how they operate has been presented. But, what does this informationsuggest concerning specific procedures or actions? Some general guidelines may behelpful for those interested in funding for their specific plans for developing new andinnovative science programs.

Dealing with Contacts. It is important to remember that all persons dealing withpublic and private funding for educational projects are individuals interested in doing aneffective job distributing what each perceives to be an inadequate supply of funds. Mostdo not encourage proposals and plans that will merely complicate their work. Theyoften start with the assumption that proposals will not meet the criteria established�and those presumably publicized. Hence there is often a negative view concerning most

proposals and the motivation for writing them.Whenever possible it is desirable to interact with staff members regarding ideas for



possible funding and interpretation of guidelines which are available from possiblefunding sources. Each person with an idea for funding should be able to outline itclearly, briefly, and interestingly. Too often persons seem to be searching for moneyand recognition, first, rather than trying to solve a problem. While it is important to beseen as a person with ideas and credibility, it is important to know about the agency,company, or foundation. Similarly, it is important to be familiar with materialsdesigned to help persons develop proposals for the particular group as well as with thetype of projects supported in the past and their levels of funding. Successful personsmust have an original idea and be knowledgeable of particular funding agencies�theirinterests, procedures, and schedules. Having a "fuzzy" idea and proceeding with a"fishing expedition" with possible funding groups is an invitation for rejection andfailure.At the same time it is important that every procedure is not set prior to interaction

with a potential funding organization. Most like to help with the development of a plan;this gives such persons a sense of ownership and development. It exemplifiescooperation and the ability to grow beyond one’s own thinking and a single idea at agiven point in time. If a proposer already knows all the questions and the necessaryactions to get answers, few are attracted to it as possible collaborators and funders.As much time should go into studying funding patterns, organizations, the persons

involved, and the specific guidelines or directions for preparing proposals as goes intothe proposal idea. Persons with ideas and the need for outside funds must be goodstudents of people and organizations, thinking beyond their own ideas, vantage points,and strategies for implementation. In a sense such a person is a salesperson; but, it isimportant to remember that a good salesperson not only knows the product but thecustomer as well! It is all too easy to develop an idea�to package an excellentproduct�and then to spend a lifetime trying to sell it. Such persons are poor studentsof other people, of society, and of the market.

Formalizing Requests. Specific proposals should be developed�after communicationwith persons associated with the funding organization�with careful attention to specificguidelines. This attention should center upon any information given concerning criteriafor judging proposals and/or any special weight given to the various parts of theproposal itself. Many times a funding unit is extremely explicit in what will be funded,how the proposal should be prepared, how it will be evaluated, and the relativeimportance of different parts of the proposal. Successful proposal writers are goodstudents of such guidelines.

Just as in interviewing for a position, one should present oneself and ideas in the bestpossible light. A problem, a need, and/or a reason should be demonstrated. This is like"knowing-the-territory." The idea should be developed clearly and interestingly�beingsure that it seems unique and novel�not just a restatement of the generalities whichexist in the guidelines or statements of direction. If previous contacts have been madewith the particular organization, reference to the information/advice should be madewith some finesse. One does not want to use such contacts as a means of pressure orapparent unfair advantage.

Proposals should be clear and to the point, free of jargon and technical language.Familiarity should be shown with other projects, with research, with a general field ofwork. Proposals should not be a collection of sample materials, staff resumes,committee listings, and superfluous enclosures.



When pre-proposals are encouraged or permitted, the final proposal should relate toearlier drafts�illustrating how ideas grew and developed and how advice and ideasfrom such contacts were utilized. It is often important to emphasize that the work isunfinished, that there are unanswered questions, and that there is a willingness to adjustthe program as new information is secured.

^Many funding organizations are anxious to joinforces . . /?

Many funding organizations are anxious to join forces with others if a given efforthas every appearance of being successful. For this reason gaining the first support issometimes the most difficult. Successful proposals often specify a particular niche for aspecific funding organization�that is a part of a comprehensive effort. In someinstances, however, funding organizations like to be "sole" supporter and to considerthe particular idea "uniquely theirs." Investigating the preferences of funding groups inthis area can be important�prior to completion of the proposal.Many organizations have preference for cooperative efforts to the point of being

negative about a single idea from a single person. Often an idea seems more significantand worthy of support if a variety of persons from several places and institutions areinvolved. Many are now aware that some of the most interesting developments ineducational settings seem to occur when professionals within an institution collaborate,when persons from differing institutions communicate, when persons from various levelsof education and professional backgrounds plan together. Such was surely the case asNSTA’s Search for Excellence programs were identified and studied. In each case anidea emerged�almost always from a single source. However, this idea was internalizedby others�teachers, school leaders, and persons from the communities. The richness ofthe program was made possible by the richness of ideas from a variety of sources andthe feeling of ownership on the part of many. Such general involvement, support, andevaluation over time is often impressive to funding agencies. It illustrates that the ideahas general appeal and value�beyond one person and one place.Forming Non-Profit Organizations. Many have found that existing institutions,employing units, and business offices can get in the way of good ideas and potentialfunding agencies. Many have policies about funding to individuals, to schools, to

colleges/universities, to private vs. public institutions, and almost any other division orstructure. Some of the most successful programs have moved toward informal andformal organizations�often non-profit corporations�in order to handle funds and inorder to accomplish expanded goals�those beyond a single idea, person, or school. Attimes such organizations have been established as a sub-unit of a state teachers’organization or a cooperative effort from two or more other units.The NSTA Chapters and Affiliated Groups (CAGs) Council has provided much

information concerning the formation of such groups. While the laws vary slightly fromstate to state, it is fairly easy to draw up a legal document and to submit it to a districtoffice of the Internal Revenue Service for approval. The formation of such a structureprovides a ready mechanism for receiving funds, for carrying out tasks, for simplifyingpayments and the need for ever-rising indirect costs (especially in the case of collegesand universities). Such organizations also make it easy to move across a spectrum ofdistricts and institutions free of the procedures and regulations of any one.The Science Olympiad is a case in point (see reference list). Once the formal



organization was established, working beyond state boundaries, employing people,accepting funds from the military and industries, and operating a national serviceorganization have been simple. Gerard Putz, Co-director of the Science Olympiad(Macomb Intermediate School District, 44001 Garfield Road, Mt. Clemens, Michigan48044), is an excellent contact for information about such efforts. Otis Smith(Supervisor, K-12 Science and Math, Deer Park Public Schools, 204 Ivy, Deer Park,Texas 77536), was instrumental in organizing the CAG Council and has furtherinformation and insights about organizing new non-profit groups.As readers look for external funding for ideas, activities, and projects to enhance

science education, the following procedures should be considered:* Develop a precise idea where specific funds are needed (Or, identify specific fundswhich can be demonstrated as necessary in order to implement a particular idea!);

* Survey all possible funding sources;* Identify one to three sources for personal contact after careful review of

guidelines/information;* Make personal contacts with persons at these agencies; illustrate a willingness towork with such persons as the idea develops;

* Consider collaborating with others; remove the chance that someone will reject theidea because it is too much "yours";

* Be a good student of salespersons as well as the market;* Consider building special structures that can serve your interests in carrying outyour ideas and gaining funding;

* Let your ideas grow, change, develop; welcome the involvement of others duringthis period; assume that all ideas and projects will change and grow from the verybeginning; watch too much personal involvement and feelings of ownership;

* Persevere as more contacts are made�both in terms of the ideas and possiblefunding sources.

REFERENCES

Specific references cited are listed as sources for further information. Other basicreferences are also included for those interested in more specificity and/or indepthinvestigations of specific topics not covered in this paper.

Corporate Giving Yellow Pages. 1985. Taft Group, 5125 MacArthur Blvd., N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20016.

Duracell, Inc., Berkshire Industrial Park, Bethel, Connecticut 06801.Gurin, M. G. Confessions of a Fund Raiser: Lesson of an Instructive Career. TAFT

Corporation. 5125 MacArthur Blvd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016. 1985.How to Get Corporate Grants. Public Management Institute, 358 Brannan Street, San

Francisco, California 94107. 1986.Lautman, K. P., and Goldstein, H. Dean Friend: Mastering the Art of Direct MailFund Raising. TAFT Corporation, 5125 MacArthur Blvd., N.W., Washington, D.C.20016, 1984.

National Science Foundation, Educating Americans for the 21st Century: A plan ofaction for improving mathematics, science and technology education for all Americanelementary and secondary students so that their achievement is the best in the worldby 1995. A report to the American People and the National Science Board. NSF,Washington, D.C. 20550, 1983.



Phi Delta Kappa. Exemplary Practice Series: Center on Evaluation, Development,Research, School and Business Partnerships. Phi Delta Kappa, P.O. Box 789,Bloomington, Indiana 47402, 1985.

Phi Delta Kappa. How to Start a School/Business Partnership. Phi Delta Kappa, Eighthand Union, Box 789, Bloomington, Indiana 47402. 1985.

Pritchard, J. H. There’s Plenty . . . of Money for Nonprofit Groups Willing to EarnTheir Share. Cornucopia Publishing, 1984.

Quick Proposal Workbook. Public Management Institute, 358 Brannan Street, SanFrancisco, California 94107, 1986.

Schneiter, P. H., and D. T. Nelson. The Thirteen Most Common Fund-RaisingMistakes and How to Avoid Them. TAFT Corporation, 5125 MacArthur Blvd.,N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016, 1982.

Science Fair International, Science Service, 1719 North Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.20036.

Science Olympiad, 5955 Little Pine Lane, Rochester, Michigan 48064.Shamos, M. H. Expanding the meaning of "science" for purposes of general education.

Proceedings of Iowa Curriculum Update Conference, Science Education Center, TheUniversity of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242. 1980.

Successful Fund Raising Techniques. Revised Edition. Public Management Institute, 358Brannan Street, San Francisco, California 94107. 1986.

Taft Group, 5125 MacArthur Blvd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016.Taft Special Report. Corporate Philanthropy in America: New Perspectives for the

Eighties. TAFT Corporation, 5125 MacArthur Blvd., N.W., Washington, D.C.20016. 1984.

The National Commission on Excellence in Education. A Nation At Risk: TheImperative for Educational Reform. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,D.C. 20402. Stock No. 065-000-00277-2. 1983.

The National Institute of Education. Planning Grants and Institutional Grants forEducational Research and Development Centers. NIE, U.S. Department ofEducation, Washington, D.C. 20208.

The New Grants Planner. Public Management Institute, 358 Brannan Street, SanFrancisco, California 94107. 1986.

The Proposal Writer’s Swipe File: 15 Winning Fund Raising Proposals. Third Edition,TAFT Corporation, 5125 MacArthur Blvd., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20016, 1984.

United States Department of Education. Partnerships in Education: Education Trends

of the Future. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Deputy Under Secretary for Planning,Budget and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Education, 1984.

Westinghouse Talent Search, Ted Sherbune, 1709 North Street, N.W., Washington,D.C. 20036.

Yager, R. E. The attitudes of the public toward science and science education.Submitted to the Iowa Science Teachers Journal. 1985.

# ^ #


Documents

Funding Science Education Ideas, Activities, and Projects