Evidence Requested in the NCATE Offsite Reports

Evidence Requested in the NCATE Offsite Reports

Not Provided in the Addendum

Submitted by the

University of Cincinnati

BOE Visit: November 4-6, 2012

Responses to Concerns and Requests for Further Evidence

Please refer to www.uc.edu/cech-accreditation for the NCATE and CAEP Institutional Reports, Evidence, and further documentation.

In this evidence we have provided the actually data that was unable to be added directly to the addendum to the NCATE IR and the addendum to the CAEP IR. This parallel document includes the evidence requested. Though it was our intent to provide the evidence directly with the narrative for ease of review, a separate document had to be generated due to page limitations in uploading through the aims.ncate.org site. Wherever possible, we placed the evidence directly in the narrative for the convenience of the reviewer. These tables, data, and documentation were unwieldy as part of each addendum. For individuals who will print these documents we have put this evidence in a landscaped format to readily differentiate it from other documents. Please direct any further questions or concerns to Annie Bauer () and every effort will be made to respond within 24 hours.

Evidence requested in the NCATE and Offsite Reports

Report Section/Evidence Provided / Addendum page on which the evidence is referenced / Page
Transformation Initiative/Evidence of emphasis of impact on student learning – Analysis of student work protocol / NCATE Addendum page 5 / 3
Standard 1/Alumni Surveys / NCATE Addendum page 9 / 5
Standards 3 and 5/Evidence of efforts to prepare mentors and supervisors / NCATE Addendum page 17,20 / 10
Standard 4/Demographics of schools used for field and clinical experiences / NCATE Addendum page 19 / 10
Standard 4/Reflections of the work at Hughes STEM High School / NCATE Addendum page 20 / 21
Standard 5/Faculty Information Table / NCATE Addendum page 20 / 26
Standard 5/Training elated to the eTPA / NCATE Addendum page 20 / 58
Standard 6/Minutes of the University Council for Educator Preparation / NCATE addendum page 22 / 61

Transformation Initiative/Evidence of emphasis of impact on student learning

Analysis of student work protocol

Analysis of Student Work: You will work collaboratively (special education and English education candidates) with you cooperating teachers to collect and analyze the work of target students to discover student learning needs and determine how best to address them. You will select appropriate student work samples of a single assignment (minimum 12), establish criteria for assessment, and sort and analyze the work to identify what students are able to do as well as their learning needs. Finally, you will develop an overall plan for differentiated instruction.

Define Expectations – What is the specific writing objective? (Consult the Ohio K-12 Academic Content Standards at Be specific:
Describe a writing assignment that was aligned to the Common Core standards. This should be a single assignment that all or most students completed.
Describe how the writing assignment related to the course.
Outline the procedures that were followed when the assignment was made.
Sort Student Artifacts to See the Range – Include the complete data on this process. Where does each piece of writing fall? To accomplish this sorting task you will need to do the following:
Read each artifact and determine if it is far below standard, approaching standard, meeting standard or exceeding standard. Do not score on a curve. Use the standard.
Sort the scored artifacts into four tiers.
Calculate the percentages of artifacts in each tier.
Select a representative case for each tier by placing a circle around the selected name on the chart and placing that artifact on the top of each stack. Each case will represent several of the characteristics from that group of artifacts.
Describe Student Performance (Focus) – What can you celebrate about each artifact (work sample) selected as a representative case?
Make direct connections to the Response to Intervention framework. Special Education students studied Response to Intervention (RTI) in their Law class last year. Many of you were introduced to RTI in your introduction to Special Education course (Dr. Bauer).
Begin with a celebration of what the student has accomplished and only then describe the performance using the standards and indicators to guide description of what is missing.
Do this for each case in each of the four tiers.
Be sure to focus on performance, not the need.
Describe Learning Needs (Prioritizing Needs, If/Then Chart) – Determine the important learning needs of each standard level in light of the specific writing objective.
In this step we describe the learning needs of each of the 4 representative cases. Identify patterns that become apparent from this analysis and reflect on implications for instruction for this assignment.
Use the Beers’ (2003, p.393) “If → Then” chart to connect (a) knowledge of students, (b) knowledge of content, (c) knowledge of texts, and (d) knowledge of pedagogical strategies to make decisions about the students with whom you are currently working. Pull in earlier data sets (e.g., surveys, interviews, ASW, racial identity, context for learning) and apply the “If → Then” insights you gained from Beers (2003), Tovani (2004) and your other readings to make decisions about your target students.

Explain how you will Differentiate Instruction – how does what you have learned from the analysis of student work influence your choices of instructional strategies to promote student learning. What effective evidence-based teaching strategies can you implement to address the wide array of learning needs in this group? Use each of the If → Then statements that you developed in the last step to describe a different teaching and learning strategy. Include instructional features such as the following:
Environmental aspects of the classroom that can support learning
Multiple and flexible ways of presenting content (how will you teach this content)
Multiple and flexible ways students can express and practice new skill/knowledge
Multiple and flexible ways to engage student affect and student product
Articulate strategies that you can use for all the learners in your classroom.
Identify and integrate the unique Funds of Knowledge (FoK) that students bring to the classroom and how to use those FoK to support learning.
Draw on all that you have learned about yourself and your students throughout the semester thus far. Use all of the data that you collected. Go beyond broad descriptions of the racial, cultural and gender diversity. Describe what your target students can do as well as what they are learning to do. Consider the variety of learners in your class, including individuals and subgroups requiring different strategies.
Make specific APA citations for the multiple (minimum 4) strategies you have selected. Describe in detail why these strategies are a good fit for these learners.

Standard 1

Alumni Surveys

2009 Follow- up (2007 - 2008 completers)
Ratings below the Dean's "ok" level - 3.5 - are printed in red
Survey Items / C&I / ECE / ECLC / ECLC / LTCY M. Ed. / MDL / MDL / Sec. / SPED / SPED
M. Ed. / Uptown / B-5 / Pre-K Assoc / TESL / BSEd / PB / Incl FL / BSED / PB
N=1 / N=8 / N=1 / a / b / a / b / N=8 / N=1 / N=5 / a / b / a / b / c
Preparation: I feel
competent to begin in the role for which I am prepared. / 4 / 4.5 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 3.5 / 5 / 4.4 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 5
prepared in my content area(s). / 4 / 4.6 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 3.4 / 5 / 4.6 / 4 / 5 / 5 / 4 / 5
prepared in the foundations of education and how schools work. / 4 / 4.4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 3.4 / 5 / 4.2 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 5
prepared in the ability to plan, teach, and evaluate lessons. / 4 / 4.75 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 3.4 / 5 / 4.2 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 5
prepared in the ability to use a range of assessments. / 3 / 4.5 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 4 / 5 / 3.9 / 5 / 4.2 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 5
prepared to infuse technology throughout my instruction. / 3 / 4.4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 3.9 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 5
prepared to address issues of diversity. / 5 / 4.8 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 3.6 / 5 / 4.2 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 5
prepared to work with the community and with parents. / 5 / 4.8 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 4 / 5 / 3.5 / 5 / 4.4 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 5
Quality of Program
The teaching in my program modeled best practices. / 2 / 4.4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 3 / 1 / 3 / 5 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 5
The content of my program was current and research based. / 4 / 4.6 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 3.6 / 1 / 3.6 / 5 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 5
The content of my program was relevant to my field experiences and internship. / 3 / 4.5 / 5 / 4 / 4 / 4 / 5 / 3.4 / 1 / 3.4 / 5 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 5
I had a positive relationship with the faculty members in my program / 4 / 4.6 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 1 / 4 / 5 / 5 / 5 / 5 / 5
2009-2010 Program Completer Survey (2008-2009 Completers)
What license did you receive? / % / N
Early Childhood Education Prek-Third Grade / 21.4% / 9
Middle Childhood Math/Science / 7.1% / 3
Middle Childhood Math/language Arts / 4.8% / 2
Middle Childhood Math/Social Studies / 9.5% / 4
Middle Childhood Language Arts/Science / 0.0% / 0
Middle Childhood Language Arts/Social Studies / 7.1% / 3
Middle Childhood Science/Social Studies / 4.8% / 2
Grades 7-12 English/Language Arts / 9.5% / 4
Grades 7-12 Math / 2.4% / 1
Grades 7-12 Science (any of the science licenses) / 4.8% / 2
Grades 7-12 Social Studies / 14.3% / 6
Intervention Specialist (Special Education) / 9.5% / 4
Foreign Language / 4.8% / 2
What is your current position? / % / N
Teacher with full time contract in licensure area / 35.7% / 15
Teacher with part-time contract in licensure area / 9.5% / 4
Substitute teacher / 19.0% / 8
Teaching outside of area / 16.7% / 7
Not working in education / 19.0% / 8
If you responded that you are NOT teaching in your content/licensure area, please indicate the primary reason why: / % / N
Decided not to pursue a career in education / 14.3% / 2
Unable to secure a job after completing my program / 85.7% / 12
Offered a position but decided not to take it / 0.0% / 0
Personal/Family constraints / 0.0% / 0
To what professional organizations do you belong? / % / N
NAEYC / 15.4% / 2
NSTA / 15.4% / 2
NCSS / 38.5% / 5
IRA / 0.0% / 0
CEC / 23.1% / 3
NCTE / 7.7% / 1
NCTM / 30.8% / 4
NMSA / 7.7% / 1
Please indicate your level of agreement for each of the following statements: / Strongly agree / Agree / Neutral / Disagree / Strongly disagree / N
I feel competent to begin in the role for which I am prepared. / 12 / 24 / 4 / 2 / 0 / 42
I feel prepared in my content area(s). / 13 / 20 / 7 / 3 / 0 / 42
I feel prepared in the foundations of education and how schools work. / 7 / 25 / 10 / 2 / 0 / 42
I feel prepared in the ability to plan, teach, and evaluate lessons. / 12 / 23 / 4 / 3 / 0 / 42
I feel prepared in the ability to use a range of assessments. / 12 / 19 / 6 / 6 / 0 / 42
I feel prepared to infuse technology throughout my instruction. / 11 / 24 / 7 / 0 / 0 / 42
I feel prepared to address issues of diversity. / 10 / 27 / 5 / 0 / 0 / 42
I feel prepared to work with the community and with parents. / 14 / 21 / 5 / 2 / 2 / 42
Please indicate your level of agreement for each of the following statements: / Strongly agree / Agree / Neutral / Disagree / Strongly disagree / N
The teaching in my program modeled best practices. / 6 / 18 / 10 / 7 / 1 / 42
The content of my program was current and research based. / 7 / 23 / 12 / 1 / 0 / 42
The content of my program was relevant to my field experiences / 7 / 18 / 9 / 7 / 2 / 42
I had a positive relationship with the faculty members in my program / 13 / 19 / 8 / 2 / 1 / 42
Please indicate your level of agreement for each of the following statements: / Strongly agree / Agree / Neutral / Disagree / Strongly disagree / N
I am glad I chose my program. / 14 / 17 / 7 / 3 / 2 / 42
I am glad I chose the University of Cincinnati. / 12 / 18 / 6 / 4 / 2 / 42
I would recommend the program to others. / 9 / 16 / 5 / 7 / 6 / 42
I was treated respectfully in my program. / 14 / 20 / 6 / 3 / 0 / 42
I have the skills to be a competent professional in my area of preparation. / 13 / 24 / 3 / 2 / 0 / 42
2011-2012 Follow Up (2009 and 2010 Completers)
Please indicate the program you completed: / N / %
Early Childhood Education / 10 / 29%
Intervention Specialist / 8 / 23%
Middle Level Education / 5 / 14%
Multiage Foreign Language / 2 / 6%
Woodrow Wilson Fellows / 0 / 0%
Grades 7-12 English/Language Arts / 4 / 11%
Grades 7-12 Math / 0 / 0%
Grades 7-12 Science / 1 / 3%
Grades 7-12 Social Studies / 4 / 11%
Early Childhood Education Birth to Five / 0 / 0%
Pre-Kindergarten Associate / 1 / 3%
What is your current position? / N / %
Full-time contract in my area of completion / 24 / 69%
Part-time contract in my area of completion / 2 / 6%
Substitute teacher or substitute/temporary position / 3 / 9%
Working outside of my area, but working in education / 3 / 9%
Not currently working in education / 3 / 9%
If you are not working in education, why… / N / %
Decided not to pursue a career in my area / 1 / 33%
Unable to secure a job after completing my program / 1 / 33%
Offered a position, but decided not to take it / 0 / 0%
Personal/family constraints / 0 / 0%
Other : laid off, but recently secured a teaching position for the upcoming year
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement / Strongly Agree / Agree / Neither Agree Nor Disagree / Disagree / Strongly Disagree / N
I feel competent to begin in the role for which I have been prepared. / 15 / 9 / 3 / 1 / 0 / 28
I feel prepared in my content area(s). / 12 / 15 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 28
I feel prepared in the foundations of education and how schools work. / 11 / 14 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 28
I feel prepared in the ability to plan, teach, and evaluate lessons. / 18 / 10 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 29
I feel prepared in the ability to use a range of assessments. / 11 / 12 / 2 / 4 / 0 / 29
I feel prepared to infuse technology throughout my instruction. / 11 / 11 / 3 / 3 / 1 / 29
I feel prepared to address issues of diversity. / 13 / 12 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 29
Please indicate your level of agreement with each statement: / Strongly Agree / Agree / Neither Agree Nor Disagree / Disagree / Strongly Disagree / N
The teaching in my program modeled best practices. / 12 / 9 / 3 / 2 / 2 / 28
The content of my program was current and research based. / 16 / 9 / 3 / 1 / 0 / 29
The content of my program was relevant to my field experiences and internship. / 8 / 15 / 4 / 2 / 0 / 29
I had a positive relationship with the faculty members in my program. / 13 / 12 / 3 / 1 / 0 / 29
Please indicate your level of agreement for each statement: / Strongly Agree / Agree / Neither Agree Nor disagree / Disagree / Strongly Disagree / N
I am glad I chose my program. / 17 / 10 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 29
I am glad I chose the University of Cincinnati. / 18 / 9 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 29
I would recommend the program to others. / 13 / 12 / 1 / 1 / 2 / 29
I was treated respectfully in my program. / 14 / 10 / 1 / 3 / 0 / 28
I have the skills to be a competent professional in my area of preparation. / 17 / 11 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 29

Evidence of Preparation of Mentors and University Supervisors

The following evidence will be saved on a jump drive for all BOE members:

August 2012 Training of Mentor Teachers and Candidates related to progress monitoring of student learning
Supporting candidates in connecting with school and community PowerPoint
Internship audio presentation available online for mentors unable to attend training
Pre-service teacher goals setting preparation materials
Supervisor’s visit checklist
UC mentor preparation PowerPoint

Demographics of Individual Schools Used for Clinical Experiences

Individual School Data for Hamilton County (in the format provided by the state):

Organization / # Placements
2011-2012 / Race / Economic Disadvantage Flag / Limited English Proficiency Flag (Enrollment) / 2010-2011 School Year
Enrollment / Pct of Total Enrollment
Academy for Multilingual Immersion Studies / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 32 / 11.1%
1 / Y / Yes / 45 / 21.7%
No / 216 / 76.0%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 143 / 69.2%
No / 16 / 5.6%
Multiracial / Y / No / 11 / 3.9%
Academy Of World Languages Elementary School / Asian / Y / Yes / 33 / 14.6%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 41 / 12.0%
1 / Y / Yes / 115 / 51.0%
No / 270 / 78.5%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 48 / 21.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / Y / Yes / 16 / 7.2%
Aiken College and Career High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 148 / 22.0%
10 / Y / No / 480 / 71.4%
Multiracial / Y / No / 16 / 2.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 12 / 1.8%
Carson Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 29 / 4.3%
Y / No / 320 / 47.7%
4 / Hispanic / Y / Yes / 21 / 81.5%
Multiracial / Y / No / 49 / 7.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 31 / 4.5%
Y / No / 233 / 34.8%
Chase Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 14 / 4.2%
Y / No / 270 / 82.6%
1 / Multiracial / Y / No / 14 / 4.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / Y / No / 22 / 6.6%
Cheviot Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 17 / 2.9%
Y / No / 154 / 27.4%
4 / Multiracial / Y / No / 42 / 7.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 73 / 12.9%
Y / No / 263 / 46.7%
Clark Montessori High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 171 / 25.3%
Y / No / 166 / 24.6%
Multiracial / N / No / 30 / 4.4%
2 / Y / No / 12 / 1.8%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 249 / 36.9%
Y / No / 32 / 4.8%
College Hill Fundamental Academy / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 94 / 19.4%
Y / No / 349 / 72.2%
5 / Multiracial / Y / No / 15 / 3.2%
White, Non-Hispanic / Y / No / 17 / 3.4%
Covedale Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 38 / 6.7%
Y / No / 130 / 22.7%
3 / Multiracial / N / No / 19 / 3.4%
Y / No / 25 / 4.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 197 / 34.4%
Y / No / 152 / 26.7%
Ethel M. Taylor Academy / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 62 / 16.1%
1 / Y / No / 296 / 76.7%
Multiracial / Y / No / 18 / 4.7%
Evanston Academy Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 31 / 7.8%
3 / Y / No / 349 / 87.0%
Fairview-Clifton German Language School / Asian / N / No / 26 / 3.8%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 67 / 9.9%
13 / Y / No / 97 / 14.3%
Multiracial / N / No / 39 / 5.7%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 393 / 57.7%
Y / No / 38 / 5.6%
Gilbert A. Dater High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 113 / 14.8%
Y / No / 280 / 36.8%
11 / Multiracial / N / No / 10 / 1.4%
Y / No / 20 / 2.7%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 180 / 23.7%
Y / No / 150 / 19.7%
Hartwell Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 31 / 8.2%
Y / No / 164 / 43.8%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 33 / 79.9%
1 / Multiracial / Y / No / 22 / 6.0%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 32 / 8.4%
Y / No / 111 / 29.6%
Hughes Center High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 83 / 21.2%
Y / No / 250 / 64.0%
13 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 31 / 7.9%
Y / No / 17 / 4.3%
Hughes STEM High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 86 / 17.0%
Y / No / 354 / 69.8%
Multiracial / Y / No / 14 / 2.7%
63 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 25 / 4.9%
Y / No / 21 / 4.1%
James N. Gamble Montessori High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 72 / 24.6%
Y / No / 120 / 40.7%
1 / Multiracial / N / No / 13 / 4.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 52 / 17.6%
Y / No / 28 / 9.6%
John P Parker Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 46 / 10.3%
Y / No / 348 / 77.9%
3 / Multiracial / Y / No / 17 / 3.9%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 10 / 2.2%
Y / No / 15 / 3.5%
Midway Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 41 / 7.1%
Y / Yes / 25 / 47.5%
No / 300 / 52.3%
2 / Hispanic / Y / Yes / 19 / 35.8%
Multiracial / Y / No / 49 / 8.6%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 33 / 5.8%
Y / No / 139 / 24.2%
Mt. Airy Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 40 / 6.9%
Y / Yes / 14 / 69.5%
5 / No / 488 / 83.8%
Multiracial / Y / No / 25 / 4.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / Y / No / 16 / 2.8%
Mt. Washington Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 30 / 7.0%
Y / No / 89 / 20.6%
Multiracial / N / No / 12 / 2.9%
9 / Y / No / 24 / 5.6%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 113 / 26.0%
Y / No / 156 / 36.0%
North Avondale Montessori Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 148 / 30.1%
Y / No / 187 / 37.8%
1 / Multiracial / N / No / 29 / 5.9%
Y / No / 10 / 2.0%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 89 / 18.1%
Y / No / 14 / 2.7%
Oyler School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 21 / 3.4%
Y / No / 142 / 22.8%
13 / Hispanic / Y / No / 13 / 2.1%
Multiracial / Y / No / 25 / 4.0%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 67 / 10.8%
Y / No / 352 / 56.6%
Pleasant Hill Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 62 / 9.2%
2 / Y / No / 570 / 85.1%
Multiracial / Y / No / 19 / 2.9%
Riverview East Academy / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 41 / 8.8%
Y / No / 159 / 33.9%
1 / Multiracial / Y / No / 20 / 4.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 58 / 12.5%
Y / No / 181 / 38.6%
Robert A. Taft Information Technology High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 114 / 22.4%
4 / Y / No / 355 / 70.1%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 23 / 4.5%
Roberts Academy: A Paideia Learning Community / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 24 / 4.7%
Y / No / 365 / 71.2%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 140 / >95%
1 / No / 14 / 2.7%
Multiracial / Y / No / 43 / 8.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 12 / 2.3%
Y / No / 49 / 9.5%
Rockdale Academy Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 29 / 6.8%
3 / Y / No / 345 / 82.8%
Multiracial / Y / No / 29 / 7.0%
Roll Hill School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 42 / 7.9%
1 / Y / No / 458 / 85.7%
Multiracial / Y / No / 18 / 3.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / Y / No / 12 / 2.2%
Roselawn Condon Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 56 / 13.0%
4 / Y / No / 352 / 80.9%
Multiracial / Y / No / 13 / 3.0%
Rothenberg Preparatory Academy / 43 / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 13 / 3.9%
Y / No / 300 / 93.1%
Sands Montessori Elementary School / Asian / N / No / 10 / 1.6%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 43 / 6.9%
Y / No / 84 / 13.4%
2 / Multiracial / N / No / 39 / 6.2%
Y / No / 16 / 2.5%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 355 / 56.7%
Y / No / 70 / 11.3%
Sayler Park Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / Y / No / 20 / 6.3%
Multiracial / Y / No / 17 / 5.4%
7 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 39 / 12.4%
Y / No / 233 / 73.1%
School For Creat & Perf Arts High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 283 / 20.4%
Y / No / 536 / 38.6%
Multiracial / N / No / 45 / 3.2%
9 / Y / No / 61 / 4.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 341 / 24.6%
Y / No / 102 / 7.4%
Shroder Paideia High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 163 / 22.9%
Y / No / 487 / 68.6%
Multiracial / N / No / 10 / 1.5%
5 / Y / No / 11 / 1.6%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 22 / 3.1%
Y / No / 12 / 1.7%
Silverton Paideia Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 45 / 13.3%
Y / No / 243 / 71.7%
3 / Multiracial / Y / No / 22 / 6.5%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 11 / 3.1%
Y / No / 11 / 3.3%
South Avondale Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 27 / 5.2%
3 / Y / No / 470 / 91.2%
Multiracial / Y / No / 13 / 2.5%
Walnut Hills High School / Asian / N / No / 53 / 2.5%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 420 / 19.6%
Y / No / 286 / 13.3%
Hispanic / N / No / 20 / .9%
6 / Y / No / 13 / .6%
Multiracial / N / No / 93 / 4.3%
Y / No / 24 / 1.1%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 1,133 / 52.8%
Y / No / 96 / 4.5%
Western Hills University High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 114 / 17.4%
Y / No / 399 / 61.1%
5 / Multiracial / Y / No / 35 / 5.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 42 / 6.4%
Y / No / 50 / 7.7%
Westwood Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 22 / 7.1%
Y / Yes / 12 / 78.9%
No / 241 / 76.4%
9 / Multiracial / Y / No / 18 / 5.7%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 10 / 3.2%
Y / No / 16 / 5.2%
William H Taft Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 10 / 3.4%
4 / Y / No / 258 / 85.6%
Multiracial / Y / No / 19 / 6.3%
Winton Hills Academy Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 15 / 3.4%
8 / Y / No / 376 / 86.5%
Multiracial / Y / No / 29 / 6.6%
Withrow University High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 228 / 28.9%
Y / No / 514 / 65.3%
8 / Multiracial / Y / No / 11 / 1.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 21 / 2.6%
Woodward Career Technical High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 207 / 21.1%
3 / Y / No / 713 / 72.6%
Multiracial / Y / No / 15 / 1.6%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 25 / 2.6%
Y / No / 15 / 1.5%
Deer Park Jr/Sr High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 13 / 2.1%
Y / No / 37 / 6.1%
2 / Multiracial / N / No / 15 / 2.5%
Y / No / 23 / 3.7%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 340 / 55.6%
Y / No / 163 / 26.7%
Finneytown Secondary Campus / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 144 / 18.2%
Y / No / 172 / 21.8%
Multiracial / N / No / 21 / 2.6%
Y / No / 12 / 1.5%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 370 / 46.9%
Y / No / 58 / 7.3%
Anderson High School / Asian / N / No / 16 / 1.3%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 16 / 1.3%
8 / Y / No / 11 / .9%
Hispanic / N / No / 15 / 1.2%
Multiracial / N / No / 32 / 2.5%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 1,073 / 83.8%
Y / No / 104 / 8.1%
Ayer Elementary School / Asian / N / No / 21 / 3.4%
1 / Multiracial / N / No / 14 / 2.2%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 535 / 83.9%
Y / No / 41 / 6.5%
Maddux Elementary School / Multiracial / N / No / 18 / 3.0%
2 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 439 / 75.8%
Y / No / 88 / 15.2%
Mercer Elementary School / Asian / N / No / 11 / 1.5%
Multiracial / N / No / 20 / 2.8%
1 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 568 / 76.6%
Y / No / 117 / 15.8%
Nagel Middle School / Asian / N / No / 23 / 2.1%
Hispanic / N / No / 13 / 1.1%
4 / Multiracial / N / No / 32 / 2.8%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 934 / 81.9%
Y / No / 110 / 9.6%
Summit Elementary School / Asian / N / No / 12 / 2.2%
2 / Multiracial / N / No / 21 / 3.7%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 449 / 81.7%
Y / No / 49 / 8.9%
Turpin High School / Asian / N / No / 21 / 1.8%
Hispanic / N / No / 10 / .8%
8 / Multiracial / N / No / 18 / 1.5%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 1,044 / 88.3%
Y / No / 68 / 5.8%
Wilson Elementary School / Asian / N / No / 16 / 2.5%
Multiracial / N / No / 23 / 3.4%
1 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 586 / 89.9%
Y / No / 13 / 2.0%
Indian Hill Elementary School / Asian / N / No / 33 / 7.5%
Multiracial / N / No / 12 / 2.7%
1 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 354 / 79.5%
Y / No / 16 / 3.6%
Indian Hill Middle School / Asian / N / No / 34 / 6.5%
Hispanic / N / No / 14 / 2.6%
3 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 427 / 82.0%
Y / No / 16 / 3.0%
Madeira Elementary School / Asian / N / No / 15 / 3.2%
Hispanic / N / No / 12 / 2.6%
6 / Multiracial / N / No / 11 / 2.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 379 / 81.8%
Y / No / 32 / 6.9%
Madeira High School / Asian / N / No / 12 / 2.5%
3 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 403 / 85.7%
Y / No / 25 / 5.3%
Mt Healthy High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 215 / 22.7%
Y / No / 432 / 45.5%
Hispanic / Y / No / 16 / 1.7%
Multiracial / N / No / 21 / 2.2%
4 / Y / No / 49 / 5.2%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 125 / 13.1%
Y / No / 79 / 8.3%
North Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 88 / 8.8%
Y / No / 562 / 56.4%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 16 / 51.5%
1 / No / 24 / 2.4%
Multiracial / N / No / 21 / 2.1%
Y / No / 57 / 5.7%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 77 / 7.7%
Y / No / 150 / 15.1%
South Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 72 / 7.1%
Y / No / 685 / 67.6%
1 / Hispanic / Y / No / 15 / 1.5%
Multiracial / Y / No / 49 / 4.8%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 64 / 6.3%
Y / No / 109 / 10.7%
North College Hill Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 90 / 14.7%
Y / No / 342 / 55.9%
Multiracial / N / No / 15 / 2.5%
2 / Y / No / 36 / 5.8%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 54 / 8.8%
Y / No / 69 / 11.3%
Bevis Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 27 / 6.9%
Y / No / 61 / 15.8%
4 / Multiracial / Y / No / 19 / 4.9%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 121 / 31.4%
Y / No / 141 / 36.5%
Colerain Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 32 / 4.3%
Y / No / 101 / 13.5%
Multiracial / N / No / 36 / 4.8%
2 / Y / No / 38 / 5.1%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 374 / 49.7%
Y / No / 166 / 22.0%
Colerain High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 172 / 8.2%
Y / No / 277 / 13.1%
10 / Multiracial / N / No / 52 / 2.5%
Y / No / 54 / 2.6%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 1,160 / 55.1%
Y / No / 362 / 17.2%
Colerain Middle School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 50 / 8.0%
Y / No / 97 / 15.4%
Multiracial / N / No / 18 / 2.8%
1 / Y / No / 14 / 2.2%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 304 / 48.1%
Y / No / 142 / 22.4%
Monfort Heights Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 19 / 3.4%
Y / No / 30 / 5.2%
Multiracial / N / No / 11 / 2.0%
1 / Y / No / 13 / 2.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 322 / 56.8%
Y / No / 160 / 28.2%
Northwest High School / Asian / N / No / 11 / 1.1%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 142 / 13.9%
7 / Y / No / 202 / 19.7%
Multiracial / N / No / 33 / 3.3%
Y / No / 32 / 3.2%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 393 / 38.3%
Y / No / 193 / 18.9%
Pleasant Run Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 63 / 16.6%
Y / No / 113 / 30.0%
Multiracial / N / No / 17 / 4.5%
2 / Y / No / 26 / 7.0%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 107 / 28.3%
Y / No / 41 / 10.8%
Pleasant Run Middle School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 113 / 14.6%
Y / No / 179 / 23.0%
Multiracial / N / No / 22 / 2.9%
1 / Y / No / 35 / 4.5%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 212 / 27.2%
Y / No / 195 / 25.1%
Norwood High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 11 / 1.8%
Y / No / 38 / 6.2%
Hispanic / Y / No / 13 / 2.1%
2 / Multiracial / N / No / 10 / 1.6%
Y / No / 13 / 2.1%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 315 / 51.4%
Y / No / 196 / 31.9%
Norwood Middle School / Black, Non-Hispanic / Y / No / 29 / 9.6%
1 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 106 / 34.5%
Y / No / 154 / 50.1%
Bridgetown Middle School / Asian / N / No / 11 / 1.8%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 11 / 1.9%
2 / Multiracial / N / No / 11 / 1.9%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 558 / 93.8%
Delshire Elementary School / Multiracial / Y / No / 19 / 3.9%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 183 / 37.7%
Y / No / 242 / 49.8%
John Foster Dulles Elementary School / 2 / Multiracial / N / No / 16 / 2.2%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 671 / 95.0%
Oak Hills High School / Asian / N / No / 36 / 1.3%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 36 / 1.4%
17 / Hispanic / N / No / 18 / .7%
Multiracial / N / No / 62 / 2.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 2,505 / 93.8%
Rapid Run Middle School / Multiracial / N / No / 13 / 2.1%
1 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 582 / 94.9%
Heritage Hill Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / Y / Yes / 14 / 8.4%
No / 62 / 46.8%
3 / Hispanic / Y / Yes / 126 / 76.3%
Multiracial / Y / No / 11 / 8.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 11 / 8.3%
Y / No / 25 / 18.9%
Lincoln Heights Elementary School / 2 / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 20 / 8.2%
Y / No / 212 / 88.7%
Princeton Community Middle School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 164 / 15.4%
Y / No / 388 / 36.5%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 48 / 67.4%
30 / No / 26 / 2.4%
Multiracial / N / No / 27 / 2.5%
Y / No / 31 / 2.9%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 262 / 24.6%
Y / No / 140 / 13.2%
Princeton High School / Asian / N / No / 21 / 1.4%
Y / Yes / 12 / 13.5%
No / 11 / .7%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 337 / 21.5%
Y / No / 562 / 35.9%
25 / Hispanic / N / No / 18 / 1.2%
Y / Yes / 43 / 48.5%
No / 34 / 2.2%
Multiracial / N / No / 34 / 2.2%
Y / No / 27 / 1.7%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 378 / 24.2%
Y / No / 141 / 9.0%
Sharonville Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 17 / 5.3%
Y / No / 80 / 25.3%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 52 / 70.6%
3 / Multiracial / Y / No / 17 / 5.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 111 / 34.9%
Y / No / 75 / 23.5%
Springdale Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 93 / 24.0%
Y / No / 84 / 21.6%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 17 / 59.2%
4 / Multiracial / N / No / 21 / 5.4%
Y / No / 15 / 4.0%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 86 / 22.2%
Y / No / 69 / 17.9%
Stewart Elementary School / Asian / N / No / 11 / 3.3%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 23 / 6.7%
Y / No / 22 / 6.2%
1 / Hispanic / Y / Yes / 65 / 72.6%
No / 15 / 4.3%
Multiracial / N / No / 19 / 5.5%
Y / No / 15 / 4.3%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 131 / 37.5%
Y / No / 106 / 30.2%
Woodlawn Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 36 / 20.5%
8 / Y / No / 110 / 63.1%
Multiracial / Y / No / 18 / 10.2%
Hilltop Community Elementary School / Multiracial / N / No / 11 / 2.7%
3 / Y / No / 14 / 3.4%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 282 / 68.3%
Y / No / 87 / 21.1%
Reading Community High School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 16 / 3.5%
3 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 303 / 66.4%
Y / No / 117 / 25.6%
St Bernard Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / Y / No / 65 / 22.9%
1 / Multiracial / Y / No / 14 / 5.0%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 65 / 23.0%
Y / No / 123 / 43.4%
Taylor High School / 1 / White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 430 / 71.6%
Y / No / 140 / 23.3%
Winton Woods Elementary School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 93 / 21.1%
Y / No / 219 / 49.7%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 25 / 45.9%
3 / Multiracial / N / No / 30 / 6.7%
Y / No / 20 / 4.5%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 32 / 7.3%
Y / No / 38 / 8.6%
Winton Woods High School / Asian / N / No / 12 / 1.1%
Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 378 / 34.6%
Y / Yes / 11 / 29.0%
No / 402 / 36.8%
11 / Hispanic / Y / Yes / 17 / 45.0%
No / 22 / 2.1%
Multiracial / N / No / 57 / 5.2%
Y / No / 41 / 3.8%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 118 / 10.8%
Y / No / 45 / 4.1%
Winton Woods Intermediate School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 116 / 23.5%
Y / No / 237 / 47.9%
Hispanic / Y / Yes / 15 / 59.5%
6 / Multiracial / N / No / 22 / 4.4%
Y / No / 27 / 5.5%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 43 / 8.6%
Y / No / 32 / 6.4%
Winton Woods Middle School / Black, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 140 / 28.5%
Y / No / 218 / 44.3%
Hispanic / Y / No / 15 / 3.1%
5 / Multiracial / N / No / 14 / 2.8%
Y / No / 16 / 3.2%
White, Non-Hispanic / N / No / 47 / 9.5%
Y / No / 36 / 7.2%

Data from current pilot of the focused dispositions assessmentData collection was still underway when the IR was submitted. The spring pilot of the focused dispositions form yielded these data (items highlighted in yellow are areas for fall discussion with programs):