Cleveland State University - Ohio Educator Preparation Provider … · 2019-02-08 · Cleveland...

2018Ohio Educator Preparation Provider Performance Report

Cleveland State University

Institution Profile(Data Source: Cleveland State University)

Located in downtown Cleveland, Ohio, CSU enrolls nearly 17,500 students, most of whom are Ohioresidents. Law and graduate students account for 33% of total enrollment, while undergraduates comprisethe remaining 67%. The student-faculty ratio of 19:1 promotes much faculty-student interaction. CSU’sselection as one of America's Best Colleges by U.S. News & World Report underscores the University'scommitment to academic excellence. Its current Carnegie Classification is that of a Doctoral-granting,Research University with high research activity.

College of Education and Human Services

The College of Education & Human Services enrolls approximately 2,500 students every term (1,000undergraduates and 1,500 graduate students). At the undergraduate level, we attract a sizeable transferstudent population that includes many nontraditional students who attend school on a part-time basis. At thegraduate level, established professionals study alongside those who are pursuing newly chosen professions.Through internships, fieldwork, student teaching, and clinical practica, nearly all of our academic programsplace empiric, on-site training at the center of student learning

Report Overview

The Ohio Department of Higher Education gathers data annually from multiple sources to report the followingperformance metrics in the Educator Preparation Provider Performance Reports:- Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Results for Ohio Teachers Prepared by an Ohio Educator PreparationProvider- Ohio Principal Evaluation System Results for for Ohio Principals Prepared by an Ohio Educator PreparationProvider- Field and Clinical Experiences Required by Ohio Educator Preparation Provider Candidates- Licensure Test Results for Ohio Educator Preparation Provider Program Completers- Value-added Data for K-12 Students Taught by Ohio Teachers Prepared by an Ohio Educator PreparationProvider- Demographic Information for Schools in Which Ohio Educator Preparation Provider-Prepared Teacherswith Value-Added Data Serve- Academic Measures Used to Inform Admissions Decisions at Ohio Educator Preparation ProviderPrograms- Survey Results of Pre-Service Teacher Candidates Enrolled in Ohio Educator Preparation ProviderPrograms- Survey Results of Ohio Resident Educators Who Were Prepared by Ohio Educator Preparation Providers- Survey Results of Ohio Principal Interns Enrolled in Ohio Educator Preparation Provider Programs- Survey Results of Mentors Serving Principal Interns Enrolled in Ohio Educator Preparation ProviderPrograms- Survey Results of Employer Perceptions of Ohio Educator Preparation Provider Programs- Ohio Educator Preparation Provider National Accreditation Status- Persistence in the Ohio Resident Educator Program of Teachers Who Were Prepared by Ohio EducatorPreparation Providers- Ohio Educator Preparation Provider Excellence and Innovation Initiatives



Ohio Teacher Evaluation System (OTES) Results for Ohio Teachers Preparedby an Ohio Educator Preparation Provider at Cleveland State University

Reporting Period from Sept 1, 2017 to Aug 31, 2018(Data Source: Ohio Department of Education)

Description of Data:Ohio's system for evaluating teachers (Ohio's Teacher Evaluation System) provides educators with adetailed view of their performance, with a focus on specific strengths and opportunities for improvement.The system is research-based and designed to be transparent, fair, and adaptable to the specific contextsof Ohio's school districts. Furthermore, it builds on what educators know about the importance of ongoingassessment and feedback as a powerful vehicle to support improved practice. Teacher performance andstudent academic growth are the two key components of Ohio's evaluation system.

An apparent dip in evaluations for the most recent "Initial License Effective Year" cohort comes from theperception that any given year's evaluation results is actually a chronological view of evaluations. Rather,it's a view of the evaluations from that school year, showing four different cohorts of licensed educators.The most recently licensed cohort will eventually have more evaluation results in its second year as moreeducators find employment as teachers or principals.

Limitations of the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System (OTES) Data:1. The information in the report is for those individuals receiving their licenses with effective years of 2014,2015, 2016, and 2017.2. The teacher evaluation data in this report are provided by the Ohio Department of Education.3. Due to ORC 3333.041(B), annual results must be masked for institutions with fewer than 10 completerswith OTES data.

Associated Teacher Evaluation Classifications

Initial LicensureEffective Year

# Accomplished # Skilled # Developing # Ineffective

2014 30 55 13 N<10

2015 33 60 16 N<10

2016 21 56 18 N<10

2017 10 31 25 N<10



Ohio Principal Evaluation System (OPES) Results for IndividualsCompleting Principal Preparation Programs at Cleveland State University

Reporting Period from Sept 1, 2017 to Aug 31, 2018(Data Source: Ohio Department of Education)

Description of Data:Ohio's system for evaluating principals (Ohio's Principal Evaluation System) provides building leaders with adetailed view of their performance, with a focus on specific strengths and opportunities for improvement.

The Ohio Principal Evaluation System (OPES) data reported here are limited in that the information in thereport is for those individuals receiving their licenses with effective years of 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017.

An apparent dip in evaluations for the most recent "Initial License Effective Year" cohort comes from theperception that any given year's evaluation results is actually a chronological view of evaluations. Rather,it's a view of the evaluations from that school year, showing four different cohorts of licensed educators.The most recently licensed cohort will eventually have more evaluation results in its second year as moreeducators find employment as teachers or principals.

Associated Principal Evaluation Classifications

Initial LicensureEffective Year

# Accomplished # Skilled # Developing # Ineffective

2014 N<10 N<10 N<10 N<10

2015 N<10 N<10 N<10 N<10

2016 N<10 N<10 N<10 N<10

2017 N<10 N<10 N<10 N<10



Field and Clinical Experiences for Candidates at Cleveland State University

Reporting Period from Sept 1, 2017 to Aug 31, 2018(Data Source: Cleveland State University)

Description of Data:Ohio requires that educator candidates complete field and clinical experiences in school settings as part oftheir preparation. These experiences include early and ongoing field-based opportunities and the culminatingpre-service clinical experience commonly referred to as "student teaching." The specific requirementsbeyond the requisite statewide minimums for these placements vary by institution and by program. Theinformation below is calculated based on data reported by Ohio Educator Preparation Providers.

Teacher Preparation Programs

Field/Clinical Experience Element Requirements

Require edTPA National Scoring from candidates in teacher preparation programs at theinstitution

Y

Minimum number of field/clinical hours required of candidates in teacher preparation programsat the institution

60

Maximum number of field/clinical hours required of candidates in teacher preparationprograms at the institution

410

Average number of weeks required to teach full-time within the student teaching experience atthe institution

14

Percentage of teacher candidates who satisfactorily completed student teaching 91.21%

Principal Preparation Programs

Field/Clinical Experience Element Requirements

Total number of field/clinical weeks required of principal candidates in internship 30

Number of candidates who started internship 164

Number of candidates who completed internship 156

Percentage of principal candidates who satisfactorily completed internship 95.12%



Ohio Educator Licensure Examination Pass Rates at Cleveland State University

Reporting Period from Sept 1, 2016 to Aug 31, 2017(Data Source: USDOE Title II Report)

Description of Data:Ohio educator licensure requirements include passage of all requisite licensure examinations at the statedetermined cut score. The reported results reflect Title II data, and therefore represent pass rate data solelyfor initial licenses. Further, because the data are gathered from the Title II reports, there is a one year lag inaccessing the data. Teacher licensure pass rate data are the only reported metric for which the data do notreflect the reporting year 2017-2018.

As of 2013, the Ohio Assessments for Educators replaced the Praxis subject assessments for initiallicensure. Some Praxis II assessments are still being reported because recent program completers tookthose tests in or before 2013.

Teacher Licensure Tests

Summary Rating: Effective

Completers Tested Pass Rate

213 87%

Ohio Principal Licensure Examination Pass Rates at Cleveland State University


Description of Data:Ohio requires that principal candidates pass the requisite state examination to be recommended forlicensure. The 2017-2018 program completer pass rates are reported by each Ohio educator preparationprovider.

Principal Licensure Tests

Completers Tested Pass Rate

99 86%



Value-Added Data for Students Taught by Teachers Prepared byOhio Educator Preparation Providers at Cleveland State University

Reporting Period from Sept 1, 2017 to Aug 31, 2018

Description of Data:Ohio's value-added data system provides information on student academic gains. As a vital component ofOhio's accountability system, districts and educators have access to an extensive array of diagnostic datathrough the Education Value-Added Assessment System (EVAAS). Schools can demonstrate through value-added data that many of their students are achieving significant progress. Student growth measures alsoprovide students and parents with evidence of the impact of their efforts. Educators and schools further usevalue-added data to inform instructional practices.

Limitations of the Value-Added Data:1. The information in the report is for those individuals receiving their licenses with effective years of, 2014,2015, 2016, and 2017.2. The value-added data in this report are those reported by Ohio's Education Value-Added AssessmentSystem (EVAAS) based on Elementary and Middle School Tests (Grades 4-8) and End-of-Course Tests forhigh school credit.3. For Educator Preparation Providers with fewer than 10 linked teachers or principals with value-addeddata, only the number (N) is reported.

Value-Added Data for Cleveland State University-Prepared TeachersInitial Licensure Effective

Years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017Associated Value-Added Classifications

Employedas Teachers

Teacherswith Value-Added Data

Most Effective Above Average Average ApproachingAverage

Least Effective

N=11 N=7 N=46 N=18 N=36383 118

9% 6% 39% 15% 31%



Demographic Information for Schools where Cleveland StateUniversity-Prepared Teachers with Value-Added Data Serve

Teachers Serving by School Level

Elementary School Middle School Junior High School High School No School Level

N=34 N=25 N=1 N=56 N=2

29% 21% <1% 47% 2%

Teachers Serving by School Type

CommunitySchool

Public School STEM School EducationalService Center

Career-Tech No School Type

N=21 N=95 N/A N/A N=2 N/A

18% 81% N/A N/A 2% N/A

Teachers Serving by Overall Letter Grade of Building Value-Added

A B C D F NR

N=37 N=5 N=19 N=4 N=51 N=2

31% 4% 16% 3% 43% 2%

Teachers Serving by Minority Enrollment by Quartiles

High Minority Medium-High Minority Medium-Low Minority Low Minority No Minority Quartile

N=73 N=22 N=18 N=3 N=2

62% 19% 15% 3% 2%

Teachers Serving by Poverty Level by Quartiles

High Poverty Medium-High Poverty Medium-Low Poverty Low Poverty No Poverty Quartile

N=61 N=24 N=14 N=17 N=2

52% 20% 12% 14% 2%

* Due to the preliminary nature of the data and staffing at ESC/district level, certain demographic variables have not beenreported for some schools.



Value-Added Data for Cleveland State University-Prepared PrincipalsInitial Licensure Effective

Years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017Principals Serving by Letter Grade of Overall Building Value-Added

Employed asPrincipals

Principalswith Value-Added Data

A B C D F

N=4 N=3 N=2 N/A N=921 18

22% 17% 11% N/A 50%

Demographic Information for Schools where Cleveland StateUniversity-Prepared Principals with Value-Added Data Serve

Principals Serving by School Level

Elementary School Middle School Junior High School High School No School Level

N=15 N=2 N/A N=1 N/A

83% 11% N/A 6% N/A

Principals Serving by School Type

CommunitySchool

Public School STEM School EducationalService Center

Career-Tech No School Type

N=1 N=17 N/A N/A N/A N/A

6% 94% N/A N/A N/A N/A

Principals Serving by Overall Letter Grade of School

A B C D F NR

N=1 N=2 N=7 N=5 N=3 N/A

6% 11% 39% 28% 17% N/A

Principals Serving by Minority Enrollment by Quartiles

High Minority Medium-High Minority Medium-Low Minority Low Minority No Minority Quartile

N=10 N=2 N=4 N=2 N/A

56% 11% 22% 11% N/A



Principals Serving by Poverty Level by Quartiles

High Poverty Medium-High Poverty Medium-Low Poverty Low Poverty No Poverty Quartile

N=9 N=1 N=8 N/A N/A

50% 6% 44% N/A N/A



Cleveland State University Candidate Academic Measures

(Data Source:Cleveland State University)Reporting Period from Sept 1, 2017 to Aug 31, 2018

Undergraduate Admission RequirementsCumulative grade-point average GT/EQ to 2.75 with completion of at least 30 undergraduate credit hours;grade of B- or better in college-level English course; grade of B- or better in college-level Math course(options are available to take the ACT, SAT, or Praxis CORE in English, Math, and Reading/Writing in placeof a B- or better in an English or Math course); submission of a valid BCI/FBI background check with nodisqualifying results; satisfactory intake interview.

Post-Baccalaureate Admission RequirementsBaccalaureate degree with a 2.75 cumulative grade-point average or better; submission of a valid BCI/FBIbackground check with no disqualifying results; satisfactory intake interview. At CSU, post-baccalaureatestudents are admitted and enroll as undergraduates.

Graduate Admission RequirementsBaccalaureate degree with overall GPA GT or EQ to 3.0; submission of a valid BCI/FBI background checkwith no disqualifying results. Students who do not meet GPA requirements may still gain admission uponcompletion of 12 credits of graduate coursework at CSU, including Educational Research (EDB 601), with a3.0 GPA. Where required by program, concentrated coursework in teaching field (e.g., math) with GPA GT orEQ to 2.75 plus acceptable essay and interview.

Description of Data:The data in this section are the average scores of candidates on academic measures reported by theprovider. If a measure is not applicable to a level of delivery (undergraduate, post-baccalaureate, graduate)the table reflects "N/A". In the "Dispositional Assessments and Other Measures" portion, if the providerdid not indicate using a measure, OR if the institution does not offer a program at the designated level ofdelivery, the table reflects "N".


U=Undergraduate P=Post-Baccalaureate G=Graduate

Candidates Admitted Candidates Enrolled Candidates Completing

AcademicMeasure

RequiredScore

NumberAdmitted

AverageScore

NumberEnrolled

AverageScore

NumberCompleted

AverageScore

ACT CompositeScore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

ACT EnglishSubscore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

ACT MathSubscore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

ACT ReadingSubscore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

GPA - Graduate U=N/AP=N/A

G= 3.00

U=N/AP=N/AG=22

U=N/AP=N/A

G= 3.67

U=N/AP=N/AG=42

U=N/AP=N/A

G= 3.70

U=N/AP=N/A

G=N<10

U=N/AP=N/A

G=N<10GPA - High School U=N/A

P=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

GPA - Transfer U= 2.75P=N/AG=N/A

U=47P=N/AG=N/A

U= 3.22P=N/AG=N/A

U=157P=N/AG=N/A

U= 3.19P=N/AG=N/A

U=49P=N/AG=N/A

U= 3.20P=N/AG=N/A



Candidates Admitted Candidates Enrolled Candidates Completing

AcademicMeasure

RequiredScore

NumberAdmitted

AverageScore

NumberEnrolled

AverageScore

NumberCompleted

AverageScore

GPA -Undergraduate

U= 2.75P= 2.75G= 3.00

U=131P=32G=41

U= 3.27P= 3.36G= 3.29

U=307P=65

G=109

U= 3.26P= 3.33G= 3.25

U=67P=18G=28

U= 3.23P= 3.42G= 3.31

GRE CompositeScore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

GRE QuantitativeSubscore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

GRE VerbalSubscore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

GRE WritingSubscore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

MAT U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

Praxis CORE Math U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

Praxis COREReading

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

Praxis COREWriting

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

Praxis I Math U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

Praxis I Reading U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

Praxis I Writing U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

Praxis II U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

SAT CompositeScore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

SAT QuantitativeSubscore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

SAT VerbalSubscore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

SAT WritingSubscore

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

U=N/AP=N/AG=N/A

Other Criteria Undergraduate Post-Baccalaureate Graduate

Dispositional Assessment N N N

EMPATHY/Omaha Interview N N N

Essay N N N

High School Class Rank N/A N/A N/A

Interview Y Y N



Other Criteria Undergraduate Post-Baccalaureate Graduate

Letter of Commitment N N N

Letter of Recommendation N N N

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator N/A N N

OAE Content Assessment N/A N/A N

Portfolio N N N

Prerequisite Courses Y N N

SRI Teacher Perceiver N/A N/A N

Superintendent Statement ofSponsorship

N/A N/A N

Teacher Insight N N N



Principal Program Admission RequirementsVaries by program. M.Ed with license: Baccalaureate degree with overall GPA GT or EQ to 3.0. Studentswho do not meet GPA requirements may still gain admission upon completion of 12 credits of graduatecoursework at CSU, including Educational Research (EDB 601), with a 3.0 GPA. Post-master's with license:Graduate GPA GT or EQ to 3.0. Where required by program, satisfactory recommendations, essay and/orinterview.

Principal Preparation ProgramsCandidates Admitted Candidates Enrolled Candidates Completing

AcademicMeasure

RequiredScore

NumberAdmitted

AverageScore

NumberEnrolled

AverageScore

NumberCompleted

AverageScore

GPA -Undergraduate

3.00 24 3.37 81 3.44 40 3.41

GPA - High School N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

GPA - Graduate 3.00 65 3.75 144 3.77 70 3.78

ACT CompositeScore

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

ACT MathSubscore


ACT ReadingSubscore


ACT EnglishSubscore


SAT CompositeScore


SAT QuantitativeSubscore


SAT VerbalSubscore


SAT WritingSubscore


Praxis I Reading N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Praxis I Math N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Praxis I Writing N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Praxis II N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

GRE CompositeScore


GRE VerbalSubscore


GRE QuantitativeSubscore


GRE WritingSubscore


MAT N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A



Other Criteria

Dispositional Assessment N

EMPATHY/Omaha Interview N

Essay Y

Interview Y

Letter of Commitment N

Letter of Recommendation Y

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator N

Portfolio N

Prerequisite Courses N

SRI Teacher Perceiver N

Superintendent Statement of Sponsorship N

Teacher Insight N



Pre-Service Teacher Survey Results


Description of Data:To gather information on student satisfaction with the quality of preparation provided by their educatorpreparation programs, the Ohio Department of Higher Education administers a survey aligned with the OhioStandards for the Teaching Profession (OSTP), Ohio licensure requirements, and elements of nationalaccreditation. All Ohio candidates receive an invitation to complete the survey during their professionalinternship (student teaching). The results of this survey are reflected here. A total of 3,451 respondentscompleted the survey statewide for a response rate of 74 percent.

Cleveland State University Survey Response Rate = 73.98%

Total Survey Responses = 145

1=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree 3=Agree 4=Strongly Agree

No. Question InstitutionAverage

StateAverage

1 My teacher licensure program prepared me with knowledge of research on how studentslearn.

3.35 3.50

2 My teacher licensure program prepared me to recognize characteristics of gifted students,students with disabilities, and at-risk students in order to plan and deliver appropriateinstruction.

3.21 3.32

3 My teacher licensure program prepared me with high levels of knowledge and the academiccontent I plan to teach.

3.22 3.34

4 My teacher licensure program prepared me to identify instructional strategies appropriate tomy content area.

3.31 3.46

5 My teacher licensure program prepared me to understand the importance of linkinginterdisciplinary experiences.

3.28 3.41

6 My teacher licensure program prepared me to align instructional goals and activities withOhio's academic content standards, including Ohio's Learning Standards.

3.50 3.64

7 My teacher licensure program prepared me to use assessment data to inform instruction. 3.27 3.46

8 My teacher licensure program prepared me to clearly communicate learning goals to students. 3.37 3.48

9 My teacher licensure program prepared me to apply knowledge of how students learn, toinform instruction.

3.37 3.53

10 My teacher licensure program prepared me to differentiate instruction to support the learningneeds of all students, including students identified as gifted, students with disabilities, and at-risk students.

3.21 3.44

11 My teacher licensure program prepared me to identify strategies to increase studentmotivation and interest in topics of study.

3.23 3.37

12 My teacher licensure program prepared me to create learning situations in which studentswork independently, collaboratively, and/or a whole class.

3.44 3.59

13 My teacher licensure program prepared me to use strategies for effective classroommanagement.

3.18 3.31

14 My teacher licensure program prepared me to communicate clearly and effectively. 3.50 3.54




StateAverage

15 My teacher licensure program prepared me to understand the importance of communicationwith families and caregivers.

3.50 3.55

16 My teacher licensure program prepared me to understand, uphold, and follow professionalethics, policies, and legal codes of professional conduct.

3.57 3.67

17 My teacher licensure program prepared me to use a variety of diagnostic, formative, andsummative assessments.

3.43 3.54

18 My teacher licensure program prepared me to communicate high expectations for all students. 3.49 3.62

19 My teacher licensure program prepared me to understand students' diverse cultures,language skills, and experiences.

3.47 3.51

20 My teacher licensure program prepared me to treat all students fairly and establish anenvironment that is respectful, supportive, and caring.

3.66 3.73

21 My teacher licensure program prepared me to use technology to enhance teaching andstudent learning.

3.30 3.42

22 My teacher licensure program prepared me to collaborate with colleagues and members ofthe community when and where appropriate.

3.42 3.51

23 My teacher licensure program collected evidence of my performance on multiple measures tomonitor my progress.

3.45 3.52

24 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Ohio Licensure Programstandards for my discipline (e.g. NAEYC, CEC, NCTM).

3.12 3.23

25 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the operation of Ohio schoolsas delineated in the Ohio Department of Education School Operating Standards.

2.94 3.08

26 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the requirements for theResident Educator License.

2.90 3.00

27 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Ohio Standards for theTeaching Profession.

3.38 3.35

28 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Ohio Standards forProfessional Development.

3.23 3.21

29 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Ohio Academic ContentStandards, including Ohio's Learning Standards.

3.45 3.59

30 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Value-added GrowthMeasure as defined by the Ohio State Board of Education.

2.78 2.93

31 My teacher licensure program provided field experiences that supported my development asan effective educator focused on student learning.

3.66 3.67

32 My teacher licensure program provided field experiences in a variety of settings (urban,suburban, and rural).

2.98 3.42

33 My teacher licensure program provided student teaching experience(s) that supported mydevelopment as an effective educator focused on student learning.

3.54 3.68

34 My teacher licensure program provided cooperating teachers who supported me throughobservation and conferences (face-to-face or via electronic media).

3.61 3.65

35 My teacher licensure program provided university supervisors who supported me throughobservation and conferences (face-to-face or via electronic media).

3.64 3.62

36 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to work with diverse students (includinggifted students, students with disabilities, and at-risk students).

3.46 3.52




StateAverage

37 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to understand students' diverse cultures,languages, and experiences.

3.52 3.50

38 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to work with diverse teachers. 3.30 3.26

39 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to interact with diverse faculty. 3.31 3.31

40 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to work and study with diverse peers. 3.37 3.34

41 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program demonstrated in-depth knowledge of theirfield.

3.52 3.63

42 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program used effective teaching methods thathelped promote learning.

3.41 3.51

43 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program modeled respect for diverse populations. 3.54 3.63

44 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program integrated diversity-related subject matterwithin coursework.

3.40 3.53

45 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program used technology to facilitate teaching andlearning.

3.41 3.54

46 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program conducted themselves in a professionalmanner.

3.52 3.63

47 My teacher licensure program provided clearly articulated policies published to facilitateprogression to program completion.

3.13 3.42

48 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to voice concerns about the program. 3.06 3.20

49 My teacher licensure program provided advising to facilitate progression to programcompletion.

3.23 3.41



Statewide Survey of OHIO Resident Educators'Reflections on their Educator Preparation Program


Description of Data:To gather information on alumni satisfaction with the quality of preparation provided by their educatorpreparation programs, the Ohio Department of Higher Education administers a survey aligned with the OhioStandards for the Teaching Profession (OSTP), Ohio licensure requirements, and elements of nationalaccreditation. All Ohio Resident Educators who completed their preparation in Ohio receive an invitation tocomplete the survey in the fall semester as they enter Year 2 of the Resident Educator program. A total of305 respondents completed the survey statewide for a response rate of eight percent.



StateAverage

1 My teacher licensure program prepared me with knowledge of research on how studentslearn.

3.00 3.48

2 My teacher licensure program prepared me to recognize characteristics of gifted students,students with disabilities, and at-risk students in order to plan and deliver appropriateinstruction.

2.83 3.18

3 My teacher licensure program prepared me with high levels of knowledge and the academiccontent I plan to teach.

2.83 3.32

4 My teacher licensure program prepared me to identify instructional strategies appropriate tomy content area.

3.00 3.37

5 My teacher licensure program prepared me to understand the importance of linkinginterdisciplinary experiences.

2.83 3.32

6 My teacher licensure program prepared me to align instructional goals and activities withOhio's academic content standards, including Ohio's Learning Standards.

3.33 3.53

7 My teacher licensure program prepared me to use assessment data to inform instruction. 3.25 3.40

8 My teacher licensure program prepared me to clearly communicate learning goals to students. 2.92 3.41

9 My teacher licensure program prepared me to apply knowledge of how students learn, toinform instruction.

3.00 3.47

10 My teacher licensure program prepared me to differentiate instruction to support the learningneeds of all students, including students identified as gifted, students with disabilities, and at-risk students.

3.00 3.28

11 My teacher licensure program prepared me to identify strategies to increase studentmotivation and interest in topics of study.

2.75 3.24

12 My teacher licensure program prepared me to create learning situations in which studentswork independently, collaboratively, and/or a whole class.

2.92 3.43

13 My teacher licensure program prepared me to use strategies for effective classroommanagement.

2.58 3.06




StateAverage

14 My teacher licensure program prepared me to communicate clearly and effectively. 3.17 3.46

15 My teacher licensure program prepared me to understand the importance of communicationwith families and caregivers.

3.33 3.41

16 My teacher licensure program prepared me to understand, uphold, and follow professionalethics, policies, and legal codes of professional conduct.

3.17 3.58

17 My teacher licensure program prepared me to use a variety of diagnostic, formative, andsummative assessments.

3.08 3.42

18 My teacher licensure program prepared me prepared me to understand students' diversecultures, language skills, and experiences.

3.08 3.34

19 My teacher licensure program prepared me to treat all students fairly and establish anenvironment that is respectful, supportive, and caring.

3.08 3.59

20 My teacher licensure program prepared me prepared me to use technology to enhanceteaching and student learning.

2.83 3.28

21 My teacher licensure program prepared me prepared me to collaborate with colleagues andmembers of the community when and where appropriate.

3.00 3.41

22 My teacher licensure program prepared me collected evidence of my performance on multiplemeasures to monitor my progress.

3.08 3.36

23 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Ohio Licensure Programstandards for my discipline (e.g. NAEYC, CEC, NCTM).

2.67 3.14

24 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the operation of Ohio schoolsas delineated in the Ohio Department of Education School Operating Standards.

2.92 3.03

25 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the requirements for theResident Educator License.

2.92 3.03

26 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Ohio Standards for theTeaching Profession.

2.92 3.24

27 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Ohio Standards forProfessional Development.

2.75 3.11

28 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Ohio Academic ContentStandards, including Ohio's Learning Standards.

2.83 3.44

29 My teacher licensure program provided me with knowledge of the Value-added GrowthMeasure as defined by the Ohio State Board of Education.

2.50 2.73

30 My teacher licensure program provided field experiences that supported my development asan effective educator focused on student learning.

3.08 3.55

31 My teacher licensure program provided field experiences in a variety of settings (urban,suburban, and rural).

2.92 3.30

32 My teacher licensure program provided student teaching experience(s) that supported mydevelopment as an effective educator focused on student learning.

3.00 3.53

33 My teacher licensure program provided cooperating teachers who supported me throughobservation and conferences (face-to-face or via electronic media).

3.33 3.51

34 My teacher licensure program provided university supervisors who supported me throughobservation and conferences (face-to-face or via electronic media).

3.08 3.51

35 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to work with diverse students (includinggifted students, students with disabilities, and at-risk students).

2.83 3.31




StateAverage

36 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to understand students' diverse cultures,languages, and experiences.

3.00 3.38

37 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to work with diverse teachers. 2.75 3.18

38 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to interact with diverse faculty. 2.83 3.22

39 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to work and study with diverse peers. 2.92 3.29

40 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program demonstrated in-depth knowledge of theirfield.

3.17 3.55

41 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program used effective teaching methods thathelped promote learning.

3.17 3.46

42 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program modeled respect for diverse populations. 3.25 3.55

43 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program integrated diversity-related subject matterwithin coursework.

2.92 3.41

44 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program used technology to facilitate teaching andlearning.

3.17 3.40

45 Overall, the faculty in my teacher licensure program conducted themselves in a professionalmanner.

3.58 3.59

46 My teacher licensure program provided clearly articulated policies published to facilitateprogression to program completion.

2.83 3.33

47 My teacher licensure program provided opportunities to voice concerns about the program. 2.33 3.13

48 My teacher licensure program provided advising to facilitate progression to programcompletion.

2.75 3.31

49 My teacher licensure program provided prepared me with the knowledge and skills necessaryto enter the classroom as a Resident Educator.

2.83 3.27



Principal Intern Survey Results


Description of Data:To gather information the quality of preparation provided by their educator preparation providers, the OhioDepartment of Higher Education distributes a survey to Ohio principal interns. Questions on the surveyare aligned with the Ohio Standards for Principals, Ohio licensure requirements, and elements of nationalaccreditation. A total of 450 respondents completed the survey statewide for a response rate of 44 percent.

Cleveland State University Survey Response Rate = 20%




StateAverage

1 My program prepared me to lead and facilitate continuous improvement efforts within a schoolbuilding setting.

3.20 3.55

2 My program prepared me to lead the processes of setting, monitoring, and achieving specificand challenging goals for all students and staff.

3.15 3.54

3 My program prepared me to anticipate, monitor, and respond to educational developmentsaffecting the school and its environment.

3.15 3.53

4 My program prepared me to lead instruction. 3.15 3.47

5 My program prepared me to ensure the instructional content being taught is aligned withthe academic standards (e.g. national, Common Core, state) and curriculum priorities of theschool and district.

3.25 3.48

6 My program prepared me to ensure effective instructional practices meet the needs of allstudents at high levels of learning.

3.20 3.50

7 My program prepared me to encourage and facilitate effective use of data by self and staff. 3.20 3.56

8 My program prepared me to advocate for high levels of learning for all students, includingstudents identified as gifted, students with disabilities, and at-risk students.

3.20 3.57

9 My program prepared me to encourage and facilitate effective use of research by self andstaff.

3.10 3.50

10 My program prepared me to support staff in planning and implementing research-basedprofessional development and instructional practices.

3.10 3.51

11 My program prepared me to establish and maintain procedures and practices supporting staffand students with a safe environment conducive to learning.

3.20 3.57

12 My program prepared me to establish and maintain a nurturing school environmentaddressing the physical and mental health needs of all.

3.25 3.49

13 My program prepared me to allocate resources, including technology, to support student andstaff learning.

3.15 3.44

14 My program prepared me to uphold and model professional ethics; local, state, and nationalpolicies; and, legal codes of conduct

3.40 3.60

15 My program prepared me to share leadership with staff, students, parents, and communitymembers.

3.35 3.64




StateAverage

16 My program prepared me to establish effective working teams and developing structures forcollaboration between teachers and educational support personnel.

3.30 3.59

17 My program prepared me to foster positive professional relationships among staff. 3.30 3.64

18 My program prepared me to support and advance the leadership capacity of educators. 3.35 3.59

19 My program prepared me to utilize good communication skills, both verbal and written, with allstakeholder audiences.

3.30 3.64

20 My program prepared me to connect the school with the community through print andelectronic media.

3.20 3.42

21 My program prepared me to involve parents and communities in improving student learning. 3.15 3.50

22 My program prepared me to use community resources to improve student learning. 3.15 3.45

23 My program prepared me to establish expectations for using culturally responsive practicesthat acknowledge and value diversity.

3.25 3.50



Principal Internship Mentor Survey Results


Description of Data:To gather information the quality of preparation provided by their educator preparation programs, theOhio Department of Higher Education distributes a survey to individuals who serve as mentors to Ohioprincipal interns. Questions on the survey are aligned with the Ohio Standards for Principals, Ohio licensurerequirements, and elements of national accreditation. A total of 174 respondents completed the surveystatewide for a response rate of 19 percent.

Cleveland State University Survey Response Rate = 3.88%




StateAverage

1 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandleading and facilitating continuous improvement efforts within a school building setting.

N<10 3.33

2 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandleading the process of setting, monitoring, and achieving specific and challenging goals for allstudents and staff.

N<10 3.33

3 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandanticipating, monitoring, and responding to educational developments affecting the school andits environment.

N<10 3.32

4 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandensuring the instructional content being taught is aligned with the academic standards (i.e.,national, Common Core, state) and curriculum priorities of the school and district.

N<10 3.39

5 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate tounderstandEnsuring effective instructional practices that meet the needs of all students athigh levels of learning.

N<10 3.39

6 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandadvocating for high levels of learning for all students, including students identified as gifted,students with disabilities and at-risk students.

N<10 3.39

7 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandencouraging and facilitating effective use of data by self and staff.

N<10 3.46

8 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandencouraging and facilitating effective use of research by self and staff.

N<10 3.35

9 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandsupporting staff in planning and implementing research-based professional development.

N<10 3.33

10 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandestablishing and maintaining procedures and practices supporting staff and students with asafe environment conducive to learning.

N<10 3.45

11 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandestablishing and maintaining a nurturing school environment addressing the physical andmental health needs of all.

N<10 3.45

12 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandallocating resources, including technology, to support student and staff learning.

N<10 3.39




StateAverage

13 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandupholding and modeling professional ethics; local, state, and national policies; and, legalcodes of conduct.

N<10 3.53

14 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandconnecting the school with the community through print and electronic media.

N<10 3.30

15 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandinvolving parents and communities in improving student learning.

N<10 3.35

16 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understand usingcommunity resources to improve student learning.

N<10 3.28

17 The principal preparation program prepared the school leader candidate to understandetablishing expectations for using culturally responsive practices that acknowledge and valuediversity.

N<10 3.33

18 The school leader candidate's preparation program provided me with training on how tomentor the school leader candidate.

N<10 2.74

19 I participated in and/or accessed the provided mentor training and/or materials. N<10 2.88

20 The training by the school leader's preparation program adequately prepared me to mentorthe school leader candidate.

N<10 2.14



Employer Perceptions of Ohio EPP Programs Survey Results

Reporting Period from Sept 1, 2017 to Aug 31, 2018(Data Source: Ohio Department of Higher Education administered survey of Employers of Ohio Educators)

Description of Data:To gather information on the quality of preparation provided by their educator preparation providers, theOhio Department of Higher Education distributes a survey to employers of Ohio educators. Questions on thesurvey are aligned with Ohio's Learning Standards, Ohio licensure requirements, and elements of nationalaccreditation. A total of 141 respondents completed the survey statewide.



StateAverage

1 The institution prepares its graduates to understand student learning and development. N<10 3.39

2 The institution prepares its graduates to respect the diversity of the students they teach. N<10 3.43

3 The institution prepares its graduates to know and understand the content area for which theyhave instructional responsibility.

N<10 3.45

4 The institution prepares its graduates to understand and use content-specific instructionalstrategies to effectively teach the central concepts and skills of the discipline.

N<10 3.35

5 The institution prepares its graduates to be knowledgeable about assessment types, theirpurposes, and the data they generate.

N<10 3.22

6 The institution prepares its graduates to analyze data to monitor student progress andlearning.

N<10 3.12

7 The institution prepares its graduates to use data to plan, differentiate, and modify instruction. N<10 3.13

8 The institution prepares its graduates to align their instructional goals and activities withschool and district priorities.

N<10 3.23

9 The institution prepares its graduates to differentiate instruction to support the learning needsof all students.

N<10 3.20

10 The institution prepares its graduates to treat students fairly and establish an environment thatis respectful, supportive, and caring.

N<10 3.47

11 The institution prepares its graduates to maintain an environment that is conducive to learningfor all students.

N<10 3.42

12 The institution prepares its graduates to communicate clearly and effectively. N<10 3.38

13 The institution prepares its graduates to collaborate effectively with other teachers,administrators, and district staff.

N<10 3.38

14 The institution prepares its graduates to understand, uphold, and follow professional ethics,policies, and legal codes of professional conduct.

N<10 3.45

15 The institution prepares its graduates to assume responsibility for professional growth. N<10 3.34



National Accreditation Status

Reporting Period from Sept 1, 2017 to Aug 31, 2018(Data Source: Ohio Department of Higher Education)

Description of Data:All educator preparation programs (EPPs) in Ohio are required to be accredited by either the NationalCouncil for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), the Teacher Education Accreditation Council(TEAC), or their successor agency, the Counciil for Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).Accreditation is a mechanism to ensure the quality of an institution and its programs. The accreditation of aninstitution and/or program helps employers evaluate the professional preparation of job applicants.

Accrediting Agency CAEP

Date of Last Review April 2017

Accreditation Status Accredited



Teacher Residency Program


Description of Data:The Resident Educator Program in Ohio encompasses a robust four-year teacher development system. Thedata below show the persistence of Ohio Educator Preparation Provider graduates through the program.

Data from this table captures a year-to-year snapshot of the persistence of Ohio Educators PreparationProvider graduates through the program. Corrections to prior year reporting may be captured in the currentyear's reporting. Data used to create this "snapshot" table is sourced not only from the current year's residenteducator completion data results, but also prior year results because a Resident Educator may fail tocomplete all the program year requirements within the same academic year.

Numerous scenarios were taken into account and discussions were held on how each should impact thecounts. Some of the scenarios addressed in the design of the table are as follows:

1. A normal scenario, where a student is reported each year and is listed as completed. In this case, we onlyinclude them in the Entering/Persisting counts for the current year.

2. A scenario where a student is reported as entering one year, but not as completed, but then reportedthe following year as completing the previous year and current year. In this case, we include them in thePersisting count for the previous year, but not the Entering count. We also include them in the Entering andPersisting counts for the current year.

3. A scenario where a student is not reported one year, but reported with records for the previous yearand the current year the following year (both as completed). In this scenario, we include them in both theEntering and Persisting counts for both years.

Ohio EPP Program Completers Persisting in the State ResidentEducator Program who were Prepared at Cleveland State University

InitialLicensureEffectiveYear

Residency Year 1 Residency Year 2 Residency Year 3 Residency Year 4

Entering Persisting Entering Persisting Entering Persisting Entering Completing

2014 3 3 100% 10 10 100% 54 53 98.1% 57 56 98.2%

2015 14 14 100% 42 41 97.6% 91 89 97.8% N/A N/A N/A

2016 46 44 95.7% 84 84 100% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

2017 92 89 96.7% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A



Excellence and Innovation Initiatives


Description of Data:This section reflects self-reported information from Ohio Educator Preparation Providers on a maximum ofthree initiatives geared to increase excellence and support innovation in the preparation of Ohio educators.


Initiative: Campus International School & MC2STEM High School

Purpose: Development of Cleveland Metropolitan Schools housed on the campus of Cleveland State University

Goal: To strengthen existing partnerships and involvement of CEHS interns as well as CEHS faculty whoengage in meaningful research supporting student instruction and teacher professional development.CEHS Interns engage in Methods, Practicum and Student Teaching field placements at both schoolsites.

Strategy: The Campus International School (CIS), opened in the fall of 2010, currently enrolls students fromkindergarten through grade 8 and will eventually become a K-12 building. CIS is designed to be aspace for innovation and possibility striving to develop inquiring, knowledgeable, lifelong learners,who have the courage to act responsibly thus making the world a better place. CIS students follow theInternational Baccalaureate curriculum focusing on global perspectives and foreign languages, such asMandarin Chinese. In 2014, the CIS achieved “IB World School” accreditation from The InternationalBaccalaureate Organization. In November of 2013, Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson joined officials fromCSU, the Cleveland Metropolitan School District, and the KeyBank Foundation to celebrate the grandopening of the MC2STEM High School on CSU’s campus. This award-winning school specializes inscience, technology, engineering and mathematics, offering its 140 juniors and seniors a state-of-the-artfabrication laboratory with the latest technology as well as “workshops with tutors from NASA, mentoringwith engineers from GE Lighting, and demanding internships with local businesses.”

Demonstration of Impact: Data collection will continue and be analyzed as detailed in our Partnership Development Plan. Thisplan offers a specific, measurable strategy to engage CEHS in ongoing improvement related to ClinicalPartnerships. The Rubric for Clinical Partnerships completed collaboratively by CSU faculty and schoolpartners provides an accurate measure of progress of the plan. A new K-8 Campus International Schoolbuilding opened in August 2017 at the corner of Payne Avenue and East 22nd Street on propertyleased from Cleveland State University by the Cleveland Metropolitan School District. The $24 milliondollar facility provides a permanent home for the Kindergarten through eight grade students of CampusInternational.

External Recognition: 2016 Council of Great City Schools Shirley Schwartz Urban Education Impact Award for our partnershipwith the Cleveland Metropolitan School District.

Initiative: ODE/ODHE Pipeline Partnership Grant

Purpose: To strengthen the ongoing relationship between the Heights Career Tech Prep Consortium TeacherAcademy and Cleveland State University.

Goal: The intent is to create a pathway for Teacher Academy students from high school to college, with thehope they will be inspired to attend Cleveland State University for postsecondary studies.

Strategy: These funds will be used to better reach potential students while also providing Teacher Academycandidates and CSU College of Education students with enhanced experiences in their respectiveprograms. This plan includes five components: More Diverse Field Experiences; Collaborative Activities;Guest Lecturers; Rebranding the Teacher Academy and Revamping the Teacher Academy Classroom.Supporting this project means that CSU will do the following; Engage with Maple Heights and theCareer Tech Prep Consortium as a collaborative partner; Provide in kind support so that Maple Heights



Teacher Academy and Consortium Students may participate in on-site experiences at the Universityincluding field visits to our Campus International Schools and participation in our Youth ParticipatoryAction Research Project (YPAR); Provide in kind support to continue the partnership activities with theNortheast Ohio Educators Rising Consortium; Facilitate guest speakers to present to rising juniors andseniors on site at both the Heights Career Tech Consortium Classroom and on CSU’s Campus. Guestspeakers may be CSU faculty as well as national and local educational experts.

Demonstration of Impact: This grant will provide enhanced opportunities for our faculty, staff and current students to engage withrising juniors and seniors who may one day become our future teacher candidates. It is the College’shope that the grant will support our recruitment efforts, most especially our goal of attracting candidateswho reflect the diverse minority populations they will serve as teachers. We believe the grant willincrease the visibility of the option for Maple Heights and Career Tech Prep Consortium students tofollow the articulated pathway to matriculate into our Teacher Education Program. Additionally, we willbe directly supporting our investment to the region for creating a more diverse teaching staff that canbetter meet the needs of greater Cleveland’s students.

External Recognition: Opportunities to share model at Regional and National Conference Venues

Programs: Educators Rising

Initiative: Cleveland Teaching Fellows (CTG) Program

Purpose: Create a pipeline of highly qualified future teachers in urban settings, specifically within the ClevelandMetropolitan School District (CMSD)

Goal: Assist the district in fulfilling hiring needs related to grade levels and subject areas needed as well assupport the cultivation of a diverse teaching force

Number of Participants: 45

Strategy: Teacher candidates (Fellows) are selected to engage in a year-long paid practicum and studentteaching field experience in an early, middle or secondary classroom within the Cleveland MetropolitanSchool District. Fellows are encouraged to create deeper partnerships with their select schools,faculty and students by spending increased time in their buildings. Fellows participate in professionaldevelopment opportunities and may be considered for hire, in the subsequent school year, since allFellows are guaranteed an initial interview with district personnel.

Demonstration of Impact: CMSD will have access to CSU’s top graduates a year ahead of time and CSU is positioned to serve asan active partner in strengthening the teacher pipeline for the future.

External Recognition: First initiative of its kind in the State. This model has been presented at State and Regional ConferenceVenues



Principal Preparation Programs

Initiative: ODE Principal Preparation Grant

Purpose: To upgrade Principal Preparation in Ohio

Goal: Establish CEL Advisory Board, Align IL to Ohio Standards, Offer Urban Principal Endorsement andCreate a replicable model for others to follow


Strategy: The Center for Educational Leadership established 3 targeted priorities which were to; Establish aCenter for Educational Leadership Advisory Board with representatives from local school districts thatenables responsive changes to programs; Aligning its Inspired Leaders Principal Licensure Programwith the new Ohio Standards for School Leaders and create an additional offering of an Urban PrincipalEndorsement Program and Creating a model for a Principal Pipeline with an urban partner schooldistrict (Canton City Schools) that could be utilized by school districts across the state of Ohio. The CELAdvisory Board meetings were facilitated by CSU Faculty. The Inspired Leaders Principal LicensureProgram was updated through information gathered at CEL Advisory board meetings and meetingswith each of the part time instructors selected as Lead Instructors. The CEL Advisory Board meetingsalso influenced the development of the Urban Principal Endorsement. While the Urban EndorsementProgram was developed based on the needs and recommendations of the CEL Advisory Board, thefinal Endorsement is targeted for both our partner districts and potentially those across the state.

Demonstration of Impact: The Center for Educational Leadership launched X Inspired Leaders Principal Licensure Cohorts in theFall of 2018 having courses aligned with new Ohio Principal Leadership Standards. Two new additionalcohorts, one Inspired Leaders, and a Masters in Educational Administration were launched in theCanton City School District.

External Recognition: The Center for ELearning is submitting ILP courses for Quality Matters. The Canton City Schools alsocreated a new Central Office Position that will continue much of the work that was started through thisgrant.

Initiative: Institute for Premier Leadership

Purpose: Leadership Training for Assistant Principals

Strategy: The Center for Educational Leadership at Cleveland State University delivers an intellectuallyrigorous and customized leadership professional development experience for aspiring and practicingadministrators in the Cleveland Metropolitan School District. In recent years, the focus has been entirelyon working with Assistant Principals aspiring to move forward along their leadership pathways. TheInstitute for Premier Leadership embraces the concept of learning about leadership across sectorsas a means to build better understanding and skill development. Aspiring leaders are provided theopportunity to engage with experts across sectors of various community leaders on managing change,transforming school culture, using data effectively and building leadership capacity. Institute participantsbecome self-aware leaders who practice reflection and deep consideration of their work and theirchallenges. Premier Leaders immerse themselves in relevant texts and pursuing knowledge.

Demonstration of Impact: Over the years Institute graduates have successfully moved forward along their leadership pathwaysand created a powerful network characterized by innovative thinking, enhanced leadership skills, andexpanded meaningful relationships with community partners.

Initiative: Urban Principal Endorsement Program

Purpose: To develop a Competency Based Urban Principal Endorsement Program at Cleveland State University

Goal: To offer this program to our Urban School District Partners, the Cleveland Metropolitan SchoolDistrict, the Akron Public Schools, and the Canton City School District as a highly optimal leadershipprofessional development/endorsement program for its practicing school leaders.


Strategy: In 2018, motivated by the prospect of providing its leadership candidates yet another venue throughwhich to cultivate leadership competencies geared towards the Urban environment, as well as beingawarded a grant from Ohio Department of Education for Innovation in preparing principals, the Centerfor Educational Leadership (CEL) at Cleveland State University has designed a competency based



Urban Principal Endorsement Program. There are five leadership standards, which will be the focusof five deep learning seminars across a five-month period. Throughout the program, at each seminar,every candidate (participant) in the CEL Urban Principal Endorsement Program will be instructed byexpert facilitators on each standard, given the opportunity to 1) observe, 2) question, 3) practice, 4)reflect, 5) apply, and 6) create a plan to implement tasks (aligned with the new Ohio Standards forSchool Leaders) related to the standards once they return to their districts/field. Qualified participantcandidates must be licensed as school administrators and be employed full time in an administrativecapacity.

Demonstration of Impact: Most importantly, each candidate will have his/her performance assessed by their principal/supervisor,the CEL facilitator, and an expert on Urban School Leadership. The assessment team will engagewith the candidate, review the artifacts and results of the candidate’s performance on each of the 5standards, provide feedback through the “Ohio Urban Principal Endorsement Standards PerformanceTask Checklist,” and sign off upon mastery of each of the five Urban Principal Leadership Standards.Once a candidate completes the program successfully, the documents will be submitted to the Centerfor Educational Leadership and Cleveland State University in partnership with the Ohio Department ofEducation will confer the Urban Principal Endorsement on the license of the successful candidate.

External Recognition: As the only institution currently offering an Urban Principal Endorsement to an Ohio Principal’s License,our program will serve as a model to others.

Cleveland State University - Ohio Educator Preparation Provider … · 2019-02-08 · Cleveland...

Documents

Transcript of Cleveland State University - Ohio Educator Preparation Provider … · 2019-02-08 · Cleveland...