CLTA Study Grants Checklist and Scoring Rubric

CLTA Study Grants Checklist and Scoring Rubric

Please note that we will only be accepting Grant Applications by PDF files this and subsequent years.  You may submit these to past.president@clta.net.

Check one
____ Spanish Government Grant
____ French Government Grant (Reviewer check one: ____ Northern County, ____ Southern County)
____ Quebec Government Grant
____ Goethe Institute Grant (Grant for summer 2014)
____ Italian Government Grant
____ Chinese Government Grant
____ Japan Foundation Government 
____ Memorial Scholarship Grant (formerly Mary DuFort)
____ LangAbroad Grant
____ Centro MUNDOLENGUA Grant

Checklist for Consideration of Application

Requirements
Comments
Y N
PDF file sent by January 15, 2014
Y N
Evidence of CLTA membership (minimum: this year and preceding year) You can get E-mail confirmation from the membership chair membership@clta.net.
Y N
Has received/ Has not received this grant within the last four years?
Y N
Completed application form sent it PDF format to past.president@clta.net.
Y N
Brief professional resume/CV – PDF format.
Y N
Three letters of recommendation, submitted as PDF file.
Y N
Evidence that the nominee is currently employed as a teacher of WLOE*
Y N
Nominee lives in California or teaches in California
Y N
Assurance that upon completion of the travel and/or study, the recipient will
present a report to the Membership at CLTA’s Annual Conference or will
submit a written report for publication in the CLTA News.
Y N
A letter written by the candidate describing the following:
Y N
Motivation for applying for this grant
Y N
How the grant will help the applicant to improve his/her teaching skills
Y N
Projected impact on the applicant’s students and classroom activities
xxxx
*WLOE: World languages other than EnglishReviewer: If this checklist is complete (all requirements met), proceed to scoring rubric below.

Nomination sent as a single PDF file: January 15, 2014
Send Nominations/Applications to Norman Léonard, Awards Committee Chairperson, past.president@clta.net.
For awards questions, contact Norman Leonard at past.president@clta.net or Lorraine D’Ambruoso at exec-director@clta.net.

Scoring Rubric

Nominee’s Name or Number ______________________________

 

 Description

0

1
2
3
4
Points Awarded  Weight  Score
Motivation for applying for the grant No explanation of candidate’s motivation for applying for the grant Limited or vague  explanation of candidate’s motivation for applying for the grant, lacking detail Basic explanation of candidate’s motivation for applying for the grant, lacking detail  Clear explanation of candidate’s motivation for applying for the grant,  which may lack specific detail Clear, specific and detailed explanation of candidate’s motivation for applying for the grant  X
4
 =  
How the grant will help the applicant to improve teaching skills No explanation of how the grant will help the applicant to improve teaching skills Limited or vague explanation of how the grant will help the applicant to improve teaching skills Basic explanation of how the grant will help the applicant to improve teaching skills Clear explanation of how the candidate anticipates improving teaching practice Clear, specific and detailed explanation of how the candidate anticipates improving teaching practice  X

8

 =  
Impact on applicant’s students and activities No explanation of impact on applicant’s students and activities Limited or vague explanation of impact on applicant’s students and activities Basic explanation of impact on applicant’s students and activities Clear explanation of impact on applicant’s students and activities Clear, specific, detailed explanation of impact on applicant’s students and activities  X

8

 =  
Letters of recommendation support candidate’s participation in this specific grant No letters of recommendation – candidate not eligible Generic statement of support for candidate with no detail Generic statement of support for candidate which lacks significant detail relevant  to this grant program Current support for candidate’s motivation and anticipated outcome, which may lack specific detail Current specific and detailed support for candidate’s motivation and anticipated outcome  X
 4
 =  
 TOTAL  =   _____/96
Also applying for a LangAbrod grant? YES NO(LangAbrod grants not available with Sydney Gorman Grant) Granted LangAbrod? YES NO