Accreditation Information

SPRING ARBOR UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

The School of Education at Spring Arbor University has been granted probationary accreditation for the next two years by The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). The fall 2018 review by the CAEP Accreditation Council resulted in Spring Arbor University and 52 other providers from 27 states and Puerto Rico to receive accreditation for their education preparation programs.

The Michigan Department of Education requires that all educator preparation programs be nationally accredited. Upon successfully completing the chosen program of study in which they choose to be certified, candidates participating in the Spring Arbor University School of Education accredited program will be certified by the Michigan Department of Education.

In preparation for the review visit in 2020, Spring Arbor University School of Education will be focusing on the following stipulations:

CAEP Standard 3

  • 3.1 The provider presents plans and goals to recruit and support completion of high-quality candidates from a broad range of backgrounds and diverse populations to accomplish their mission. The admitted pool of candidates reflects the diversity of America’s P-12 students. The provider demonstrates efforts to know and address community, state, national, regional, or local needs for hard-to-staff schools and shortage fields, currently, STEM, English-language learning, and students with disabilities.

CAEP Standard 5

  • 5.1 The provider’s quality assurance system is comprised of multiple measures that can monitor candidate progress, completer achievements, and provider operational effectiveness. Evidence demonstrates that the provider satisfies all CAEP standards.
  • 5.2 The provider’s quality assurance system relies on relevant, verifiable, representative, cumulative and actionable measures, and produces empirical evidence that interpretations of data are valid and consistent.

Spring Arbor University joins a total of 196 other educator preparation providers nation-wide to receive CAEP Accreditation.


CAEP Annual Report (2020)

4.1  Impact on P-12 Learning and Development

The School of Education has selected five pieces of evidence addressing the impact the Spring Arbor University trained teachers have on P-12 student learning and development.

Educator Preparation Institution (EPI) Performance Score Report. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) has provided an annual Educator Preparation Institution (EPI) Performance Score Report for Spring Arbor University.

  

Refer to the following link to access the SAU EPIPS report

SAU Completer Effectiveness Case Study. Six SAU trained teachers submitted their annual evaluations (EOY 2019) for review in respect to their impact on student learning and development.

  • Five of the SAU teachers received ratings of “Effective” and one of the year three teachers received a rating of “Highly Effective”.
  • Three SAU teachers received satisfactory ratings for student growth achievement
  • Three SAU teachers provided student growth data that indicated that 83% or more of their students had exceeded or met a district approved academic growth target.

Refer to the following link to access this report

SAU Trained Teacher Effectiveness Data – Three-Year (EOY). The report includes an analysis of three cycles of end of year evaluation ratings for SAU trained teachers who were continuous employed during the academic years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, and 2018-2019. 

  • The SAU trained teachers were consistently rated “effective” or “highly effective” at levels exceeding 90% for the EOY reporting periods.

Refer to the following link to access this report

Partnership Teacher Effectiveness Ratings. The Spring Arbor University School of Education has signed partnerships with eight school districts and one nationally recognized charter academy, totally nine partnerships.  End of Year evaluations of SAU trained teachers employed by partner school districts or the National Heritage Academy schools for 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 indicated that:

  • 95.7% of SAU trained teachers hired to teach in partner districts/schools were rated “effective” or “highly effective” during their time of employment.

Refer to the following link to access this report

SAU Trained Teacher Employment Demographics. MDE data helped identify where SAU trained teachers were employed across the state of Michigan.  

  • SAU trained teacher are affecting student learning in multiple types of schools and settings across the state of Michigan.

Refer to the following link to access this report

4.2 Indicators of Teaching Effectiveness

The School of Education has selected four pieces of evidence as indicators of the teaching effectiveness of individuals trained at SAU.

SAU Trained Teacher Effectiveness Data – Three-Year (EOY).

Refer to description for 4.1 C

Refer to the following link to access this report

Partnership Teacher Effectiveness Ratings.

Refer to description for 4.1 D

Refer to the following link to access this report

School Administrator (Preparedness & Satisfaction) Survey.

  • 98% of school administrators completing the survey agreed or strongly agreed that beginning teachers trained at SAU were well prepared.

Refer to the following link to access this report

Spring Arbor University School of Education Promise. The Promise proclaims that any teacher from a School of Education program who receives an annual evaluation rating less than “effective” may appeal to the School of Education for mentoring and ongoing faculty support to remedy any areas of deficiency as defined in the annual teacher evaluation.

  • Since its initiation, only two SAU trained teachers have sought assistance from the School of Education Promise.

Refer to the following link to access this report

4.3 Satisfaction of Employers and Employment Milestones

The School of Education has selected three pieces of evidence as indicators of employer satisfaction and employment milestones of SAU completers.

School Administrator (Preparedness & Satisfaction) Survey.

Refer to description for 4.2 C. See: Questions# 1 & 2.

  • 100% of school administrators reported being satisfied with SAU trained teachers they hired in the past three years!
  • 50% of SAU trained teachers hired in the past three years had advanced into a school leadership role.

Refer to the following link to access this report

Beginning Teacher Survey Report 2020.

  • 34.09% responded that they had advanced in a leadership role at their school and that 25.00% of them had enrolled in a Master’s degree program.

Refer to the following link to access this report

Partnership Teacher Effectiveness Ratings.

Refer to description for 4.1 D

Refer to the following link to access this report

4.4 Satisfaction of Completers

The School of Education has selected two pieces of evidence as indicators of the satisfaction of program Completers.

MDE SAU Teacher Year-Out Survey Report (2019). Each year the Michigan Department of Education identifies and contacts EPP program completers with a request to complete a two-part survey that addresses questions regarding their job search preparation and eight critical areas of teaching effectiveness:

  • Designing high quality learning experiences
  • Applying critical thinking
  • Connecting real-world problems locally and globally
  • Addressing the needs of special populations
  • Organizing the learning environment
  • Using technology to maximize student learning
  • Effective use of assessments and data
  • Field experiences and clinical practices.

The data indicates that:

  • 85.2% – Finding a job in their certification area was very or somewhat easy.
  • 94.2% – The SAU teacher education program holds a positive reputation among prospective employers.
  • All teachers stated that their SAU teacher training was critical to the eight common teacher practices surveyed.
  • Revealed they were not as well prepared to teach English language learners.

Refer to the following link and data

Beginner Teacher Survey. The data indicates that:

  • 94.8% – SAU education program prepared them well to be a teacher. 
  • 100% – Were prepared for meeting the expected levels of content preparation and knowledge levels.
  • 100% – Were prepared to provide an inclusive learning environment.
  • 97.2% – Were prepared to develop quality assessments to test for student understanding of lessons.
  • 97.2% – Were prepared to work effectively with the school culture.

Refer to the following link and data

5. Graduation Rates

The data below was provided to the EPP by the the Spring Arbor University Office of Financial Aid and Office for Institutional Assessment the Office of
Registration and Records.

 

 

 

 

 

6. Ability of Completers to Meet Licensing (Certification)

The Summary Pass Rate data is from the EPP’s Title II Report 2018-2019)

7. Ability of Completers to be Hired in Education Positions for which they are Prepared

The EPP has selected two pieces of evidence for this section of the report.

Data from the Year Out Data Report (2016-2018; 2017-2018; 2018-2019), that:

  • Twenty-three completers (n=23/27; 85.2%) identified that finding a job in their certification area was very easy or somewhat easy.

Data from the Beginning Teacher Survey Report indicated that:

  • 100% (n=44) found employment in their area of certification
    • Elementary (n=23)
    • Secondary (n=21)

Refer to the following links and data

8. Student Loan Default Rate

The data for this section was provided to the EPP by the the Spring Arbor University Financial Aid Office. National default rates are published at: https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/national-federal-student-loan-cohort-default-rate-continues-decline


Other Accreditation Information

Title II Program Report