AAQEP Annual Report for 2025

This overview describes the mission and context of the educator preparation provider and the programs included in its AAQEP review.

Stony Brook University’s (SBU) approach to teacher education is distinguished by a university-wide distributed model that combines the rigor of a disciplinary major with an integrated teacher education core curriculum. Content knowledge gained through an academic major is amplified through teaching methods courses, opportunities for observation and reflection, and mentored teaching practicums. The objective of this approach is to synergistically promote the development of subject matter expertise concurrently with the development of pedagogical expertise. SBU’s teacher education program seeks to hone disciplinary strength with a set of unifying principles, goals, outcomes, and assessments. Our unique structure serves to foster cross-disciplinary dialogue, curriculum development, and innovative programming, amongst our faculty, while developing a sense of agency, identity, and purpose in our students.

Teaching and learning objectives in the teacher education program are informed broadly by the technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) framework, and coherent well-coordinated clinical practices that emphasize authentic learning experiences, observation, and reflective practice. Administrative coordination is achieved through the deep collaborations of faculty and staff from each of the participating schools and colleges together with the Graduate School and the Division of Undergraduate Education.

Stony Brook University’s educational leadership programs are designed to promote the highest levels of excellence and professionalism in the development of the next generation of school and district leaders. Teaching and learning objectives are advanced through a contemporary evidence-based curriculum grounded in practice and applied theory, flexible teaching and learning formats, distinguished scholarly practitioner faculty, accomplished and motivated students who aspire to lead, and an extensive far-reaching professional network.

The School of Professional Development (SPD) is the academic home for the teacher education programs and post-master’s educational leadership programs. The intellectual communities in our teacher and educational leadership programs are nurtured through selective admissions, evidence-based curriculum, and from faculty appointed in the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS), College of Engineering and Applied Sciences (CEAS), the School of Health Professions (SHP), and the School of Professional Development.

 

Programs Included in AAQEP Review

---

Programs that lead to initial teaching certification (NYSED)

 

Bachelor of Arts

• Chinese (7-12), Earth Science (7-12), English (7-12), French (7-12), Italian (7-12), Japanese (7-12), Korean (7-12), Social Studies (7-12), Spanish (7-12), TESOL (P-12)

Bachelor of Science

• Chemistry (7-12), Mathematics (7-12)

Master of Arts in English as a Second Language

• TESOL (P-12)

Master of Arts in Teaching

• Biology (7-12), Chemistry (7-12), Earth Science (7-12), English (7-12), French (7-12), Italian (7-12), Mathematics (7-12), Physics (7-12), Social Studies (7-12), Spanish (7-12)

Bachelor of Arts + Master of Arts in Teaching

• Chemistry (7-12), Earth Science (7-12), English (7-12), French (7-12), Spanish (7-12), Social Studies (7-12)

Bachelor of Science + Master of Arts in Teaching

• Biology (7-12), Mathematics (7-12), Physics (7-12), Spanish (7-12), TESOL (P-12)

Programs that lead to additional or advanced certification (NYSED)

Advanced Graduate Certificate

• TESOL (P-12), School Building Leader (P-12)*, School District Leader (P-12)*, School District Business Leader (P-12), Bilingual Education (Extension)

*Currently, SBU offers a combined post-master’s program that leads to both Building and District Leader certifications.

 

Public Posting URL

Part I of this report is posted at the following web address (accredited members filing this report must post at least Part I): https://www.stonybrook.edu/teacher-education/accreditation.html

Back to top

Table 1. Program Specification: Enrollment and Completers for Academic Year 2024–2025

Table 1 shows current enrollment and recent completion data, disaggregated by program and license/certificate, for each program included in the AAQEP review.

---

Programs That Lead to Initial Teaching Credentials

Total for programs that lead to initial credentials: 422 candidates enrolled, 156 completers.

 

---

Programs That Lead to Additional or Advanced Credentials for Already-Licensed Educators

Total for additional/advanced credentials: 11 candidates enrolled, 5 completers.

---

Programs That Lead to P-12 Leader Credentials

Total for P-12 leader credentials: 672 candidates enrolled, 126 completers.

---

Programs That Lead to Credentials for Specialized Professionals or to No Specific Credential

Total for programs that lead to specialized or no professional credentials: 63 candidates enrolled, 24 completers.

TOTAL enrollment and productivity for all programs: 1168 candidates enrolled, 311 completers.

Unduplicated total of all program candidates and completers: 1168 candidates enrolled, 311 completers.

Added or Discontinued Programs Any programs within the AAQEP review that have been added or discontinued within the past year are listed below. (This list is required only from providers with accredited programs.)

N/A

Back to top

The program performance information in Table 2 applies to the academic year indicated in Table 1.

Back to top

Tables 3 and 4 report on select measures (3 to 5 measures for each standard) of candidate/completer performance related to AAQEP Standards 1 and 2, including the program’s expectations for performance (criteria for success) and indicators of the degree to which those expectations are met.

Expectations and Performance on Standard 1: Candidate and Completer Performance

Table 1 — Teacher Candidate Professional Development Form (TCPDF): Methods I All Levels (2024-2025)

Table 1 . The scores highlighted in yellow are higher than the program self-imposed marker of 10% or more when combining “Ineffective” and “Developing.” These markers are discussed with the unit to ensure that there are no areas of concern that should be addressed and if, indeed, there is an area that is of concern, the programs will address it within their Methods I instruction.

Table 2 — Teacher Candidate Professional Development Form (TCPDF): Methods II All Levels (2024-2025)

The scores highlighted in yellow are higher than the self-imposed marker of 10% or more when combining “Ineffective” and “Developing.” These markers are discussed with the unit to ensure that there are no areas of concern that should be addressed and if, indeed, there is an area that is of concern, the programs will address it within their Methods II instruction.

Table 3 — Teacher Candidate Professional Development Form (TCPDF): Student Teaching All Levels (2024-2025)

Table 3. Note that this assessment combines three independent ratings of each student, one by the faculty member and one by each of the two cooperating teachers in the classroom.

A comparison of the data in Table 1 vs. Table 2 vs. Table 3 clearly illustrates the developmental progression of students through the teacher education program and their growing proficiency and competency.

Lesson Evaluation Form (LEF) for Teacher Education Programs (All Levels) 2024-2025

Observation Evaluation Form (OEF) 2024-2025

Q3: Act with cultural competence.
Q4: Implement systems of curriculum, instruction and assessment.
Q5: Effective educational leaders cultivate an inclusive, caring and supportive school community that promotes the academic success and well-being of each student.
Q6: Empower and motivate teachers.

EDL 501 Q3 — “Act with cultural competence and responsiveness.”

EDL 502 Q2 — “Use assessment data appropriately.”

EDL 503 Q2 — “Seek resources to support curriculum, instruction, and assessment.” & Q6 — “Develop systems of data collection.”

EDL 515 Q1 — “Promote adult-student relationships.”

EDL 528 Q1 — “Act ethically and professionally.”

EDL 555 Q3 — “Develop productive working relationships.”

EDL 571 Q2 — “Maintain a safe school environment.”

EDL 572 Q1 — “Establish a professional culture.”

EDL 595 Q4 — “Develop systems of data collection.”

EDL Intern Summative Evaluation Form (ISEF) Q4 — “Use assessment data appropriately.” & Q6 — “Empower and motivate teachers.” (External – Cooperating Administrator)

EDL Portfolio Assessment Form Q4 — “Use assessment data appropriately.”

EDL School Improvement Plan (SIP) Q6 — “Develop systems of data collection.”

Expectations and Performance on Standard 2: Completer Professional Competence and Growth

Table 1-Standard 2 — Teacher Candidate Professional Development Form (TCPDF): Methods I All Levels (2024-2025)

The scores highlighted in yellow are higher than the program self-imposed marker of 10% or more when combining “Ineffective” and “Developing.” These markers are discussed with the unit to ensure that there are no areas of concern that should be addressed and if, indeed, there is an area that is of concern, the programs will address it within their Methods I instruction.

Table 2-Standard 2 — Teacher Candidate Professional Development Form (TCPDF): Methods II All Levels (2024-2025)

The scores highlighted in yellow are higher than the self-imposed marker of 10% or more when combining “Ineffective” and “Developing.” These markers are discussed with the unit to ensure that there are no areas of concern that should be addressed and if, indeed, there is an area that is of concern, the programs will address it within their Methods II instruction.

Table 3-Standard 2 — Teacher Candidate Professional Development Form (TCPDF): Student Teaching All Levels (2024-2025)

Table 3. Note that this assessment combines three independent ratings of each student, one by the faculty member and one by each of the two cooperating teachers in the classroom.

A comparison of the data in Table 1 vs. Table 2 vs. Table 3 clearly illustrates the developmental progression of students through the teacher education program and their growing proficiency and competency over time with cumulative experience, feedback, reflection, and mentoring.

The vast majority of students have been assessed as “Effective” and “Highly Effective” with the lowest of these combined scores at 94.5%.

Lesson Evaluation Form (LEF) for Teacher Education Programs (All Levels) 2024-2025 — Standard 2

Teacher Candidate Work Sample for Student Learning (TCWSSL) 2024-2025

EDL Intern Summative Evaluation Form
Q6 — Empower and motivate teachers.
Q7 — Design job-embedded opportunities.
Q8 — Create productive relationships with families.

EDL School Improvement Plan
Q1 — Engage in two-way communication with families.
Q2 — Employ the community’s cultural resources.

EDL Observation Evaluation Form
Q3 — Act with cultural competence. (Internal – Faculty)
Q6 — Empower and motivate teachers. (Internal – Faculty)

EDL Portfolio Assessment
Q6 — Develop teachers’ professional knowledge.
Q7 — Design job-embedded opportunities.
Q8 — Partner with families.

Select Questions from EDL Coursework (Standard 2)

EDL 501 Q1 - Develop and promote a vision.
EDL 501 Q3 - Act with cultural competence and responsiveness.
EDL 501 Q4 - Provide coherent systems of academic and social support.
EDL 502 Q3 - Foster continuous improvement.
EDL 515 Q2 - Engage in two-way communication with families.
EDL 555 Q1 - Promote instructional practice.
EDL 571 Q2 - Maintain a safe school environment.
EDL 572 Q1 - Establish a professional culture.
EDL 595 Q1 - Create positive family relationships.

Back to top

This section describes program accomplishments, efforts, and innovations (strengths and outcomes) to address challenges and priorities over the past year.

Educational Leadership Programs

The Strengthening Diversity in Leadership Initiative was made possible through the work of the Metropolitan Council of Education Administration Programs (MCEAP) executive committee and Stony Brook University and has received funding from a New York State Education Department (NYSED) grant. The grant’s objectives were to help create a pipeline for emerging school leaders, conduct and disseminate research on the effective strategies being used in the field, and foster new and better leadership skills to integrate diversity and inclusion efforts deeply into school priorities, culture, and operations. Here are our grant findings: https://bit.ly/3L7iAH7

Dr. Ken Forman, the Associate Director of the educational leadership program, has been named President of the Metropolitan Council of Education Administration Programs (MCEAP). This prestigious appointment places Dr. Forman as the leader of an organization that brings together 27 downstate university educational leadership programs. MCEAP plays a role in shaping the future of educational leadership by fostering collaboration, sharing best practices, and promoting strong leadership programs. In addition, Dr. Forman serves as Executive Director of the New York Academy for Public Education, a downstate organization that facilitates and supports education and leadership. Dr. Craig Markson, the Program Director of the educational leadership program has been named as Secretary of MCEAP in support of Stony Brook University’s influence on Educational Leadership across the state. In addition, Dr. Markson has been appointed to the position of Secretary and Research Editor of the New York Academy for Public Education. The Academy successfully provides a common forum and meeting ground in fostering educational activities between the professional community and the public-at-large across New York.

The Professional Certificate with Superintendent’s Extension was approved by the New York State Board of Regents in January 2025 which established the Professional Administrator Certificate with a Superintendent Extension. The Educational Leadership program has been approved by the New York State Education Department for the Professional Administrator Certificate with Superintendent Extension, July 1, 2025. This new certification is designed to reflect the changing landscape of administrator positions in New York State by combining all building-level and district-level leadership positions, except those that include “superintendent” in the title, into a single certification title aligned to the New York State version of the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSELs). To work in positions that include “superintendent” in the title, candidates who hold the new Professional Administrator certificate would also need to obtain the new Superintendent Extension. Because of the quality of our dual licensure educational leadership program, we have successfully implemented the requirements for licensure for these new certifications.

Dr. James Polansky, a recently retired superintendent with over 35 years’ experience and a former graduate of the EDL program, has been appointed as the Assistant Director of the Educational Leadership Program. He is responsible for onboarding new faculty members, ensuring that the syllabi of current faculty and courses are compliant with best practices as outlined by the SUNY OSCQR framework and best online practices of the University’s CELT Department, developing master course shells for Brightspace to onboard new faculty and train existing faculty as well as developing master course shells.

The Administrative Externship is a virtual pilot program that focuses on building relationships, offering advice, and reinforcing career goals to new graduates of the Educational Leadership Program. Agendas for virtual meetings will be organically derived based on externs’ needs and include sharing leadership information, reinforcing learned skills, and providing support for career advancement. This voluntary program incurs no cost to the graduates. The externship is structured as a virtual experience with Zoom meetings. There are two main components to the program, Group 1 includes grant program graduates who are currently in or are considering moving rapidly into administrative roles. Participants are linked with EDL faculty members who have experience in the positions the graduates are seeking. Group 2 grant program graduates who are not immediately seeking leadership positions but would benefit from career mentoring by identified EDL faculty.

The EDL Program has undertaken several initiatives to extend professional learning to faculty. Program leaders, Dr. Craig Markson, Dr. James Polansky and Dr. Ken Forman have undertaken this responsibility. Topics have included understanding artificial intelligence and its use in teaching and learning in the leadership program, using artificial intelligence responsibility in courseware, making documents more accessible, more effective delivery of online synchronous and asynchronous instruction, and effectively using original sources in coursework. As part of ongoing professional development, the EDL program has initiated an ongoing communication mechanism, The EDL News, to meet the needs to share our expertise in an environment other than a conference or faculty meeting. It is published virtually twice a year (Fall and Spring) in which we share happenings in our Educational Leadership Program, individual research articles by our numerous instructors, and what is happening in teaching and learning at Stony Brook University and across the region.

The Educational Leadership Program has developed strategic partnerships to further extend leadership opportunities for candidates and leadership instructors from participating partners. Our participating partners include the Suffolk County School Superintendents Association, Nassau County/SCOPE Superintendents Partnership, The Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) of Western Suffolk County, SCOPE Education Services (a non-profit organization that supports education across Long Island), the New York Academy for Public Education and a number of Teachers Centers (a professional hub designed to support the growth, mental well-being, and instructional skills of educators). The University hosted a Spring 2025 conference with the Suffolk County School Superintendents Association and our faculty covering areas “Building Robust Plans in Unpredictable Times” and “Leading A Community with Resilience & Perseverance”.

As part of our commitment to sustaining the knowledge base of theory and practice in the Educational Leadership community, faculty have produced a variety of research in the Journal for Leadership & Instruction (Forman, K., & Markson, C. (2024). No aftermath: A comparison of pre-and post-pandemic assessment scores for Mathematics and English Language Arts in grades 3-8. 23(1), 15-18; The Opt-Out Movement revisited: A deep dive into the 2023 data 24(1), 10-15; and in the New York Academy of Public Education Research (Cucinello, K., Forman, K., & Markson, C. (2025). The relationships between digital devices, per pupil spending, and student achievement on the English Language Arts and Mathematics Assessments for grades 3-8 14(1), 1-6.

A focus on AI capabilities (from the professors’ and students’ perspectives) was the focus at multiple EDL faculty meetings and continues to stimulate detailed and ongoing discussions about how to incorporate its capabilities to advance teaching and learning outcomes in accordance with University guidelines Faculty also took advantage of multiple professional development opportunities related to the use of AI and on many other topics through SBU’s Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching. One of the three main Internship projects for program interns focused on developing responsible AI policies for their respective school districts to promote student achievement. Stony Brook University (SBU) has comprehensive accessibility guidelines focusing on digital content (websites, apps, course materials), physical spaces (events, classrooms), and services, mandating compliance with standards like WCAG 2.1 AA for digital materials, requiring accessible design for new EIT, and offering support via the Student Accessibility Support Center (SASC) for accommodations. Key requirements include ‘alt’ text for images, captioned videos, accessible PDFs, accessible event planning (parking, routes, restrooms), and proactive design for inclusive digital experiences, with a strong emphasis on making everything accessible from the start. The Educational Leadership Program is sensitive to these requirements. A staff member from CELT will be presenting at our February 2026 faculty meeting, to discuss upcoming changes/deadlines to policies relating to accessibility and demonstrate new/emerging compliance software for the learning management system and individual documents.

One critical component of the Educational Leadership program is the Internship program which is designed to provide students with opportunities to develop into effective instructional leaders and effective managers. To develop the skills necessary to carry out the comprehensive and systematic work of administrators as instructional leaders, candidates design, implement and evaluate three (3) comprehensive action projects. The third project has evolved to reflect the unique needs or challenges facing education since the Covid Pandemic. This modification reflects the commitment of the Educational Leadership Program to train and educate a new cadre of administrators prepared to meet the unique challenges facing educators. During the spring 2025 internship interns were required to meet with administrators and develop and adopt a News Literacy curriculum for project #3. During the fall 2025 internship interns were required to meet with administrators to develop a plan for project #3 that addresses the challenges of chronic absenteeism.

Teacher Education

This past year was a challenging one from an administrative drain perspective. NYSED established a policy that all IHE’s needed to put in place ‘MOUs’ with any participating school district where student teachers were placed either for their teaching observation or teaching practicum. While not intended at the outset to lead to formal legal agreements, that is the direction that this initiative eventually took. The implication was that as much as 50% of administrative time was spent on back-and-forth communications with specific school districts to ensure that MOU’s were established and in place. This was an enormous undertaking and quite frankly one that added little value from all vantage points with many still trying to determine what problem was solved by this solution.

On a more positive note, we made great strides this year in supporting the actively budding Future Teachers Association. This is a student organized and managed group that promotes awareness of teacher education career pathways and promotes ongoing co-curricular professional development for teacher education candidates. In the fall of 2024, they hosted their annual Teacher Meet & Greet, an event designed to afford current students an opportunity to listen and learn from a panel of current K-12 teachers as they discuss their personal experiences in the classroom and offer advice for students who will be entering the field. In the spring of 2025, a representative from Stony Brook’s Career Services met with the students to discuss resume and cover letter preparation and interviewing techniques. At other FTA meetings, students discussed teacher education program requirements, including NYSED workshops, fingerprinting, TEACH profiles, lesson planning, and time organizational tips just to name a few.

Our English Education Program hosted two summits for our current students, alumni, school district faculty, and SBU professors. The topic of the fall summit was “Building the Bridge: Connecting HS English Teachers with SBU English Professors: An Open Roundtable.” The spring summit focused on English Language Learners and how best to help them in the context of a secondary English classroom.

Twice a year since 2003 the Authentic Interviewing Event for Interns in the EDL Program and Student Teachers in all the teacher programs have successfully prepared all candidates for the interview process. Consistently over 200 individual interviews occur in the span of one night with each participant getting 4 interviews. This event is a hallmark for both programs and serves to advance the intersectionality of program participants in productive ways for all.

Finally, members of the Educators Alumni Network (EAN) (over 700 strong to date) received valuable information through a seventh evening symposium on Chronic Absenteeism. This symposium explored the reasons behind chronic absenteeism and potential solutions to this growing problem. A leading Senior Director of Strategic Initiatives and National Partnerships at EdTrust was the keynote speaker with alumni, students and faculty from both the Teacher Programs and the Educational Leadership Program in attendance. It should be noted that students in the recent internship had to engage with school administrators on developing a plan that would address specifically how their school/district might address this challenge and improve student attendance.

Back to top

This section charts ongoing improvement processes in relation to each AAQEP standard and recent activities related to investigating data quality. Table 5 may focus on an aspect of one or two standards each year, with only brief entries regarding ongoing efforts for those standards that are not the focus in the current year.

---

 

Provider Self-Assessment and Continuous Improvement

Update on Activities to Investigate Data Quality

Data quality investigations are essential to work across the standards. This section documents activities in the 2024-25 reporting year related to ensuring data quality.

As noted previously, we maintain an in-house data eco-system to facilitate the distribution of surveys and curation and collection of data. This is the same system we utilized in 2023-24 reporting period. It is dense but functional. We push out data regularly to faculty in both the Teacher Education and Educational Leadership programs. We provide both automatic and manual nudges for students, faculty, and cooperating teachers/administrators to complete required surveys in a timely fashion. Also as mentioned earlier, one activity we spent significant time on this year related to data quality was back-end work to unpack enrollment data to more effectively identify joint BA/MAT and BS/MAT student pathways, something made more complicated because of the manner and timing in which degrees are awarded. Simply put, there is more manual effort required to examine the data for this joint degree population of students than there is in tracking data for the other unique populations (undergraduate only, MAT only, or AGC in EDL).

Back to top

This section documents how concerns or conditions that were noted in an accreditation decision are being addressed (indicate “n/a” if no concerns or conditions were noted). If a condition has been noted, a more detailed focused report will be needed in addition to the description included here. Please contact staff with any questions regarding this section.

We noted in the response to the 2023–24 review a request for greater clarity in relation to time to degree completion rates for both teacher education candidates and educational leadership candidates. We have provided the relevant data for this year but caution the interpretation of the data in a standard fashion with respect to teacher education candidates. Stony Brook University’s historic practice has been to award ‘both’ the bachelor’s and master’s degrees earned for joint BA/MAT and BS/MAT candidates at the same time—upon completion of the master’s degree. These joint degree candidates make up a significant portion of all teacher education conferrals, and the data is skewed as a result. We are currently working with senior administration, the Registrar’s office, and the Graduate School at SBU to change this practice such that in the future, candidates in joint BA/MAT and BS/MAT degree programs will be awarded their baccalaureate degree once all requirements for that degree have been met, which in most cases will be similar to the time frame for BA/BS candidates. The joint programs offer students an opportunity to enroll in and utilize 15 credits of graduate course work in their senior year to count toward their UGRD degree. We hope to have this change in place for the graduating class in May 2027.

We also recognize the need to more effectively capture, track, and communicate post graduate employment outcomes for all our teacher and educational leader graduates.

Back to top

This section summarizes planned improvements, innovations, or anticipated new program developments, including description of any identified potential challenges or barriers.

 

Educational Leadership Programs

The EDL program is very large, and changes are best accomplished through focused pilot programs, two of which we are planning for the next year. The first pilot involves enhanced instructional/technological design support for faculty teaching online courses from our Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching whereby each lead faculty for a course spends ~6 months redesigning and enhancing courses to ensure ongoing alignment of course and program learning outcomes, ongoing development of authentic assessments, and ensuring that new accessibility standards are realized. The second pilot involves expanding the size of the administrative externship program which is designed to help develop professional relationships and networks and provide additional mentorship to junior level administrators.

Teacher Education

We are currently discussing and considering the development of new program proposals for: (1) an Advanced Graduate Certificate in Elementary Math, (2) an Advanced Graduate Certificate or possibly an MAT in Computer Science Education, (3) Creating a path for combined BA in Linguistics and English with an MAT in English leading to two certifications (TESOL/ENL + English), (4) Seeking initial certification for a program in Native American and Indigenous Studies, (5) Developing online MAT’s for Italian and Spanish to complement the one we already have in French, (6) possible development of an MAT in Music, and (7) possible development of an Advanced Graduate Certificate in TESOL.

Back to top

This section notes new or anticipated regulatory requirements and the provider’s response to those changes (indicate “n/a” if no changes have been made or are anticipated).

N/A

 

Back to top

Date sent to AAQEP: December 31, 2025

Back to top