CHECKLIST FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION (Scroll down for the Scoring Rubric)
Requirements
|
Comments | |
Y N
|
Application submitted online by due date
|
|
Y N
|
Evidence of CLTA membership (minimum: this year and preceding year) – get E-mail confirmation from membership@clta.net
|
|
Y N |
Received this grant within the last four years
|
|
Y N
|
Completed application form submitted online
|
|
Y N
|
Brief professional resume/CV submitted with application
|
|
Y N
|
Three letters of recommendation, submitted with application
|
|
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. Please indicate intention in letter described below:
|
|
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 LanguagesOother than EnglishReviewer: If this checklist is complete (all requirements met), proceed to scoring rubric below.
- All Grant Applications must be submitted on line. Click here for the Online form.
- For awards questions, contact Alexis Frink at awards@clta.net or Tanya Zaccone 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 | = | |||
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 | = | |||
TOTAL | = | _____/96 | ||||||||
Also applying for a LangAbroD grant? YES NO (LangAbrod grants not available with Memorial Grant (formerly Mary DuFort); LangABroD not available for Italian scholarships for 2019 because travel funds are within California and are already included)_____________________________________ | Granted LangAbrod? YES NO |