FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
DUE MAY 20, 2012
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
PART I: SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY AND FOLLOW-UP PARTICIPANT SURVEYS
FOR ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF OHIO BOARD OF REGENTS
IMPROVING TEACHER QUALITY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
PARTICIPANT INFORMATION
S1.
What is your current position?
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Teacher
Special Education, Resource or Inclusion Teacher
Teacher aide or assistant
Administrator/Supervisor
Other (Specify): Long-term substitute.
TOTAL
P1 Total #
54
1
0
1
0
56
F1 Total #
48
1
0
0
1
50
S2.
What is your gender?
a) Female
b) Male
c) TOTAL (should equal S1 total)
P2 Total #
33
23
56
S3.
Which of the following categories best describes the
way you define your racial/ethnic background?
a) White, non-Hispanic
b) Black, non-Hispanic
c) Hispanic
d) Asian/Pacific Islander
e) American Indian/Alaskan Native
f) Other, not indicated above
g) TOTAL (should equal S1 total)
P3 Total #
55
1
0
0
0
0
56
S4.
What level best describes the grade level you are
currently teaching or preparing to teach?
a) PreKindergarten
b) Primary (K-3)
c) Intermediate (4-6)
d) Middle (7-8)
e) High School (9-12)
f) Administrator – Elementary School
g) Administrator – Middle School
h) Administrator – High School
i) Administrator/Supervisor (District-wide)
j) Other (specify): 7-12; 7-8 and administrator
k) TOTAL (should equal S1 total)
ITQ FY 2010
P4 Total #
0
0
1
7
46
0
0
0
0
2
56
1
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
DUE MAY 20, 2012
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
S5.
What type of school best describes where you are
currently teaching or preparing to teach?
a)
b)
c)
d)
Public School District
Community School, Charter School or Nonpublic School
Other Institution
TOTAL (should equal S1 total)
P5 Total #
53
3
0
56
S6.
Select the response that best describes the main
subject area you are currently teaching or preparing
to teach.
a) Self-contained class (teach all or most subjects)
b) Math only
c) Science only
d) Math and Science
e) Other or Multi-Subject combinations: Chemistry, math,
English, government, and transition.
f) Not Applicable; Administrator/Supervisor
g) TOTAL (should equal S1 total)
P6 Total #
1
1
53
0
1
0
56
S7.
Which of the following influenced you to become
involved in this professional development program?
a) Applied on my own initiative
b) Participation was required by the school district
c) School district provided incentives to participate
d) Encouraged to participate by the project director
e) School staff agreed that the program was needed
f) Encouraged to attend by a former participant
g) Other reason (Specify): 1 = Informed of the program by
fellow staff member. 1 = Taught using modeling last year. 1 =
To add to new license.
2 = Did not specify.
P7 Total #
35
0
0
2
1
34
5
S8.
Which of the following types of credit will you receive
for participating in this program?
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
Graduate credit
Undergraduate credit
Credit toward salary increase
Credit toward continuing education
Credit toward certification/licensure
No credit given
Other (Specify)
ITQ FY 2010
P8 Total #
44
0
17
15
25
7
0
2
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
DUE MAY 20, 2012
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
STUDENTS DIRECTLY SERVED INFORMATION
S9.
Approximate the number of students in your class(es) who are defined as
high-need as determined by being from families below the poverty line
based on census data or by eligibility for free and reduced price lunches.
P9 Total #
Total number of high need students (based on poverty) directly served by participants in
your program
1938
Total number of students directly served by participants in your program
7651
Percentage of high-need students directly served by participants in your program
25.3%
S10.
Approximate number of students in your class(es) who are:
Race/Ethnicity
a) White, non-Hispanic
b) Black, non-Hispanic
c) Hispanic
d) Asian/Pacific Islander
e) American Indian/Alaskan Native
f) Other, not indicated above
g) Total number of students for Race/Ethnicity category (should equal S9 Total
number of students directly served by participants in your program)
P10 Total #
6134
946
187
245
8
131
7651
Location
h) Urban
i) Suburban
j) Rural
k) Total number of students for Location category (should equal S9 Total number
of students directly served by participants in your program)
1053
4919
1679
7651
Special Needs
l)
m)
n)
o)
p)
q)
Limited English proficient
Disabled/Handicapped
Migrant
Economically Disadvantaged
Appalachian
Gifted and Talented
225
489
22
2000
567
566
S11. Participants’ school district, county, school, and school rating will be summarized
in the Project Director Summary Report, Part II: Project Profile, page 10.
ITQ FY 2010
3
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
DUE MAY 20, 2012
PARTICIPANTS’ ATTITUDES, BELIEFS AND DEGREE OF CONFIDENCE
S12.
To what extent do you agree with each
of the following statements?
(Record the number of participant
responses)
Strongly
Agree
1
2
Neither
agree or
disagree
3
Strongly
Disagree
31
29
25
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
25
36
23
7
2
1
0
0
0
5
22
39
25
11
2
1
0
0
0
7
20
36
27
10
2
3
1
0
0
4
5
a) I have a good understanding of
fundamental core content in my discipline…
Preliminary:
Follow-Up:
b) I have a good understanding of relating
classroom activities to Ohio’s Academic
Standards…
Preliminary:
Follow-Up:
c) I have a good understanding of how to
assess student learning in multiple ways…
Preliminary:
Follow-Up:
d) I have a good understanding of effective
questioning techniques and its use in the
classroom…
Preliminary:
Follow-Up:
e) I have a good understanding of how to use
technology effectively in the classroom…
Preliminary:
Follow-Up:
Evaluator accidentally omitted item from Preliminary Survey
13
32
5
0
0
10
24
41
25
4
1
1
0
0
0
9
20
45
29
1
1
1
0
0
0
40
38
15
11
1
1
0
0
0
0
34
32
19
18
3
0
0
0
0
0
f)
I have a good understanding of the
methods necessary to teach math and/or
science concepts effectively…
Preliminary:
Follow-Up:
g) I believe I am an effective teacher…
Preliminary:
Follow-Up:
h) I am excited about teaching in my subject
area…
Preliminary:
Follow-Up:
i) I am interested in networking with teachers
and other professionals…
Preliminary:
Follow-Up:
ITQ FY 2010
4
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
DUE MAY 20, 2012
S13.
Record the number of participant responses.
Pair A
Classroom interaction consists of
teacher-led lecture with limited
response from students.
1
2
Preliminary
Follow-up
2
0
8
1
3
11
3
Classroom interaction involves a
dialogue among teacher and
students.
4
5
22
20
13
26
Pair B
Students generally work in
groups cooperatively.
Preliminary
Follow-up
Students generally work
independently.
1
2
3
4
5
13
14
30
26
9
8
4
2
0
0
Pair C
Instruction focuses on the central
ideas of a discipline, covering
fewer topics in depth.
1
2
Preliminary
Follow-up
6
13
25
23
3
12
10
Instruction emphasizes broad
coverage of information with
little depth.
4
5
12
1
0
2
Pair D
Students role is to receive/recite
factual information and/or to answer
questions using repetitive routines.
1
2
Preliminary
Follow-up
0
1
3
2
3
13
5
Student role is to apply inquiry
and problem solving skills to
discover solutions to problems.
4
5
28
23
12
19
Pair E
Students generally learn concepts
and processes using hands-on
approaches.
1
2
Preliminary
Follow-up
ITQ FY 2010
5
15
28
27
3
20
5
Students generally learn concepts
and processes through readings,
lectures and demonstrations.
4
5
3
3
0
0
5
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
DUE MAY 20, 2012
Pair F
I am generally successful in
encouraging effort and
participation among all students.
1
2
Preliminary
Follow-up
4
11
I find it difficult to encourage the
efforts and contributions of certain
students or groups of students
4
5
3
31
29
13
7
8
3
0
0
Pair G
I generally assess students’
progress using conventional
methods (e.g., paper and pencil
tests such as multiple choice,
fill-in-the-blank, true/false)
1
2
Preliminary
Follow-up
7
2
I generally assess students’
progress using alternative
methods (e.g., open-response
questions, hands-on performance,
portfolios, observation)
4
5
3
10
10
25
20
11
12
3
6
S14.
To what extent do you agree with each
of the following statements as a result
of this professional development?
2
Neither
agree or
disagree
3
4
Strongly
Disagree
5
28
16
5
1
0
b) I learned multiple ways to assess student
learning
26
21
1
1
0
c) I learned effective questioning
techniques…
34
14
2
0
0
d) I learned how to use technology in my
classroom…
13
27
6
4
0
e) I learned new instructional approaches,
methods and teaching strategies…
39
10
1
0
0
f) I learned inquiry-based, hands-on activities
to use in my classroom…
39
11
0
0
0
g) Participation in this professional
development improved my teaching…
h) Participation in this professional
development increased my enthusiasm for
teaching…
40
10
0
0
0
41
8
1
0
0
Strongly
Agree
1
a) I learned new content (concepts, facts and
definitions)…
(Record the number of participant
responses)
ITQ FY 2010
6
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
DUE MAY 20, 2012
S15.
To what extent do you agree with each
of the following statements about the
quality of this professional
development?
(Record the number of participant
responses)
Neither
agree or
disagree
Strongly
Agree
Strongly
Disagree
1
2
3
4
5
a) …provided ample time to achieve the
stated objectives…
28
20
1
1
0
b) …provided adequate follow-up…
30
20
0
0
0
c)…provided useful resources and/or
materials to assist with my instruction in the
classroom…
36
13
1
0
0
d) …was high quality, sustained and
intensive…
42
8
0
0
0
e) …was linked to state and national
standards…
30
19
1
0
0
S16.
To what extent do you agree with each
of the following statements about the
impact of this program on your
students?
(Record the number of participant
responses)
a) My students are more attentive,
enthusiastic and involved in classroom
activities…
b) The quality of student work is noticeably
improved…
c) My students are participating in science
and math activities outside of the classroom to
a greater degree…
ITQ FY 2010
Neither
agree or
disagree
Strongly
Agree
Strongly
Disagree
1
2
3
4
5
19
25
5
1
0
17
24
8
1
0
8
17
23
2
0
7
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
DUE MAY 20, 2012
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
S17.
Do you agree with each of the following statements
about the impact this program had on you?
Yes
No
N/A
a) I have maintained contact (or plan to maintain contact) with
other participants…
b) I have maintained contact (or plan to maintain contact) with
college/university faculty who provided the professional
development…
45
5
0
38
10
2
c) The program led to the establishment of a professional
network among participants…
47
2
1
20
29
1
e) I have or would recommend this program to other
teachers…
50
0
0
f) I have shared what I learned with colleagues through
informal interactions…
50
0
0
g) I have shared what I learned with colleagues through formal
interactions...
23
25
2
(Record the number of participant responses)
d) I have attended a professional association conference…
PART II: PROJECT PROFILE
S18.
Project Subject Area
a)
b)
c)
d)
Mathematics
Science
Mathematics/Science
Other
Check one
category
x
S19.
Grade Level Focus
a) PreKindergarten
b) Primary (K-3)
c) Intermediate (4-6)
d) Middle (7-8)
e) High School (9-12)
f) Post Secondary
ITQ FY 2010
Check all that
apply
x
8
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
DUE MAY 20, 2012
S20.
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
Institution Type
a) Public – Four Year
b) Public – Two Year
c) Private – Four Year
d) Private – Two Year
e) Community or Technical College
f) Nonprofit Organization
Check all that
apply
x
S21.
Training Provided by Faculty from the Following Areas
a) Faculty from the Education division (department, school or college)
b) Faculty from the Arts & Sciences division (department, school or college)
c) K-12 Staff (Lead Teachers)
d) School or District Administrators
e) State Education Agency Personnel
f) Other (Specify) Engineering
Number of
Faculty Involved
x
x
x
S22.
Duration of Professional Development
(Contact Hours per Participant, including Follow-up Sessions)
a) Less than 40 hours
b) 40-79 hours
c) 80 hours or more
Check one
category
x
S23.
Additional Funding Sources
Check all that
apply
a) Improving Teacher Quality Program local school district funds
b) Other U.S. Department of Education program funds (specify)
c) National Science Foundation (specify)
d) Other Federal Funds (specify)
e) Local Public Funds (specify)
f) Foundation/Non-Profit organizations (specify)
g) Local Business and Industry (specify)
h) Other Funds (specify)
S24.
Professional Development Focus
a) In-service training for teachers in additional content or pedagogical skills/knowledge
b) Training of lead or master teachers who will mentor or peer coach other teachers
c) Training of under-prepared, out-of-field or uncertified teachers currently assigned to
teach math or science
d) Professional development for school administrators and other school staff
e) Other or Combination (creating networks and supporting certification efforts)
ITQ FY 2010
P – Primary
S - Secondary
P
S
S
S
9
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
DUE MAY 20, 2012
S25.
Check all that
apply
Professional Development Type
a) Stand-alone activity
b) Part of an ongoing series of activities throughout the school year
c) Part of an ongoing multi-year series of activities (participants continuing from a
previous year’s grant)
d) Existing college-level course
e) Other (describe)
x
x
S26.
Institutions of Higher Education Involved in the Project (List Names)
The Ohio State University
S27.
Other Agencies Involved in the Project (List Names)
Metro School
Columbus City Schools
Please include the following sections as an attachment.
S28.
Public School
Districts
Represented
County
School District
Local Report
Card
Designation/
Rating
(from ODE)
School Local
Report Card
Designation/
Rating
(from ODE)
School where
Participants
Teach
Number of
Participants
TOTAL
S29.
Community Schools,
Charter Schools,
Nonpublic Schools or
Other Institutions
Represented
Diocese
[if applicable]
School Local Report
Card Designation/
Rating (from ODE)
[if applicable]
County
Number of
Participants
TOTAL
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS (should equal S1 total)
ITQ FY 2010
10
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
DUE MAY 20, 2012
S28.
Avon Lake City Schools
Lorain
Avon Lake City Schools
Lorain
School
District Local
Report Card
Designation/
Rating
(from ODE)
Excellent with
Distinction
Excellent with
Distinction
Barberton City Schools
Summit
Central Local Schools
Learwood MS
School Local
Report Card
Designation/
Rating
(from ODE)
Excellent with
Distinction
Avon Lake HS
Excellent
1
Excellent
Barberton HS
Effective
1
Defiance
Excellent
Fairview HS
Excellent
1
Columbus City Schools
Franklin
Cont. Improve.
Beechcroft HS
Effective
1
Columbus City Schools
Franklin
Cont. Improve.
Briggs HS
Cont. Improve.
1
Columbus City Schools
Franklin
Cont. Improve.
Marion-Franklin HS
Cont. Improve.
2
Columbus City Schools
Franklin
Cont. Improve.
Monroe MS
1
Columbus City Schools
Franklin
Cont. Improve.
Columbus City Schools
Franklin
Cont. Improve.
Champion MS
Columbus International
HS
Cont. Improve.
Academic
Emergency
New school in
2009-10
Dover City Schools
Tuscarawas
Dover HS
Excellent
1
Forest Hills School District
Hamilton
Excellent
Excellent with
Distinction
Turpin HS
Excellent
1
Franklin Local
Muskingum
Effective
Philo HS
Effective
1
Fredericktown Local
Knox
Fredericktown HS
Excellent
1
Hilliard City Schools
Franklin
Hilliard Bradley HS
Excellent
1
Hilliard City Schools
Franklin
Excellent
Excellent with
Distinction
Excellent with
Distinction
Hilliard Davidson HS
Excellent
1
Hillsdale Local Schools
Ashland
Effective
Hillsdale HS
Excellent
1
Johnstown-Monroe
Licking
Excellent
Johnstown HS
Excellent
1
Lakewood Local
Licking
Excellent
Lakewood HS
Effective
1
Mason City Schools
Warren
Excellent
William Mason HS
Excellent
2
Maysville Local
Muskingum
Effective
Maysville HS
Excellent
3
Mount Vernon City Schools
Knox
Mount Vernon HS
Cont. Improve.
1
New Albany-Plain Local
Franklin
Effective
Excellent with
Distinction
New Albany HS
Excellent
2
Newark City Schools
Licking
Effective
Newark HS
Cont. Improve.
1
North Union Local
Union
Excellent
North Union HS
Effective
1
Oak Hills Local
Hamilton
Excellent
Oak Hills HS
Excellent
4
Olentangy Local
Delaware
Excellent
Olentangy HS
Excellent
2
Olentangy Local
Delaware
Excellent
Orange HS
Excellent
1
Public School Districts
Represented
ITQ FY 2010
County
School where
Participants Teach
Number of
Participants
1
1
1
11
FY 2010 PROJECT DIRECTOR SUMMARY REPORT
Ohio Board of Regents
FY 2010 Improving Teacher Quality Program
Project # ___10-34_________________
Institution __Ohio State_____________
Project Director: ___Harper_________
DUE MAY 20, 2012
S28. - Continued
School
District Local
Report Card
Designation/
Rating
(from ODE)
Public School Districts
Represented
Perrysburg Exempted Village
Schools
Wood
Excellent
Perrysburg HS
Excellent
1
Pickerington Local Schools
Fairfield
Excellent
Pickerington HS North
Excellent
2
Pickerington Local Schools
Fairfield
Excellent
Effective
2
Reynoldsburg City Schools
Franklin
Effective
Ridgeview Junior High
Baldwin Road Junior
High
Effective
1
Riverside Local Schools
Logan
Effective
Riverside HS
Effective
1
Shaker Heights City Schools
Southwest Licking Local
Schools
Cuyahoga
Effective
Shaker Heights HS
Excellent
1
Licking
Effective
Watkins Memorial HS
Excellent
1
South-Western City Schools
Franklin
Excellent
Westland HS
Cont. Improve.
1
St. Marys City Schools
Auglaize
Excellent
Memorial HS
Excellent
1
Teays Valley Local
Pickaway
Teays Valley HS
Excellent
2
Westerville City Schools
Franklin
Excellent
Excellent with
Distinction
Westerville Central HS
Excellent
1
Worthington City Schools
Franklin
Excellent
Wilson Hill ES
Excellent
1
Worthington City Schools
Franklin
Excellent
Worthingway MS
Effective
1
Zanesville City Schools
Muskingum
Cont. Improve.
Zanesville HS
Effective
1
TOTAL
54
County
School where
Participants Teach
School Local
Report Card
Designation/
Rating
(from ODE)
Number of
Participants
1
School and district ratings are from the Ohio Department of Education 2009-2010 report cards http://ilrc.ode.state.oh.us/default.asp.
S29.
Community Schools,
Charter Schools,
Nonpublic Schools or
Other Institutions
Represented
St. Edward HS
Laurel School
One teacher was
between teaching
positions at the time of
the summer workshop
Diocese
[if applicable]
Cleveland Diocese
County
School Local Report
Card Designation/
Rating (from ODE)
[if applicable]
Cuyahoga
1
Cuyahoga
2
1
TOTAL
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS (should equal S1 total)
ITQ FY 2010
Number of
Participants
4
58
12