| |
FMU
Center of Excellence
Grant Proposal Narrative
2. Proposal Narrative
k. Collaborative Planning Efforts
As mentioned
in Section H, discussions about the desirability of a Center of
Excellence at Francis Marion University began at a lunch meeting
held in December, 2003. Shortly thereafter, a nine-member planning
committee was appointed by Ron Faulkenberry, Dean of the School
of Education. The members of the planning committee were: Mrs. Ashley
Bair, teacher, Royall Elementary School, Florence District One;
Dr. Ron Faulkenberry, Dean, FMU School of Education; Ms. Ada Harper,
Marion Intermediate School, Marion District One; Dr. Chris Johnson,
Chair, Department of English, FMU; Dr. Rainey Knight, Superintendent,
Darlington County School District; Dr. Tammy Pawloski, Associate
Professor, FMU School of Education, Dr. Tom Truitt, Executive Director,
Pee Dee Education Center, Mr. Thurmond Williams, Principal, Henry
Timrod Elementary School; and Dr. Lorin Anderson, consultant. The
panel met on two occasions, January 30, 2004, and February 6, 2004.
Each meeting lasted about 5 hours.
By mid-February,
a draft proposal was prepared and circulated via e-mail to all members
of the planning committee. Revisions were made based on the feedback
received. The revised proposal was submitted via e-mail to 20 people
who had agreed to review the proposal prior to tits submissions
to the Commission on Higher Education. Seven of the reviewers were
FMU faculty: Sam Broughton, Psychology; Ken Dye, Education; Bill
Fox, Mathematics; Lynn Hanson, English; Dorothy Harris, Education;
Jennifer Kunka, English; and Jeff Lee, Education. Eleven of the
reviewers were administrators and teachers from partner and participating
districts: Courtney Eshleman, Linda Graham, Henrietta Hall, Valeria
Harrison, Elizabeth Jackson, Keli Jones, Anita Maness, Ryan Newman,
Joni Tarte, Clint Wills, and Beth Wright. The final two reviewers
were Gayle Morris, South Carolina Department of Education, and Kevin
Swick, University of South Carolina, Columbia.
Based on input
from the reviewers, a third draft of the proposal was prepared.
After a final read through when minor corrections were made, the
proposal was submitted to the Commission on Higher Education.
|
|