Accreditation Information

ANNUAL REPORT (2021)

CAEP conducted an initial program (traditional undergraduate) accreditation visit of the Spring Arbor University School of Education in the fall of 2018. The site team reviewed the School of Education’s initial programs for Elementary Education, Secondary Education, Early Childhood Education, and Special Education. In addition, CAEP recognizes the CACREP accreditation for the Masters of Counseling program with a School Counseling component as the EPP’s only Advance program.

A stipulation visit in December 2020, followed by the CAEP Council review resulted in the EPP satisfactorily meeting all accreditation requirements. The EPP is actively pursuing program evaluation and review in preparation for the next CAEP accreditation visit in 2025.

The School of Education Offers Initial Certification Programs in Elementary and Secondary Education. A full list of such programs can be found HERE.

Program Improvement Statement

All report data in this Annual Report has been shared with the School of Education’s decision-making team, faculty, and partners for the purposes of our established ongoing program improvement process.

Impact Measure R4.1: Completer Effectiveness

The Spring Arbor University School of Education has selected the following evidence as indicators of the impact SAU completers have on the learning and development of P-12 learners and their ability to apply professional knowledge, skills and dispositions in P-12 classrooms.

SAU Completer Effectiveness Data – (EOY) Evaluation Ratings

The Michigan Department of Education annually provides EPPs with five cycles of end of year evaluation (EOY) ratings for their completers employed in Michigan public schools. All Michigan public school teachers are required by law to receive an annual evaluation using one of five state approved evaluation instruments. In addition, the law stipulates that 40% of every teacher’s annual evaluation rating be based on student growth and assessment data. The EPPs do not receive specific student growth/assessment markers from the MDE EOY evaluation data. However, the student growth/assessment markers are imbedded within the evaluation rating each teacher receives on their end of year evaluation.  Also embedded with the evaluation rating is the professional disposition practices of candidates.

Teachers may receive an EOY evaluation rating of: Highly Effective, Effective, Minimally Effective, or Ineffective. Ratings of Highly Effective and/or Effective indicate satisfactory performance and include the factoring of meeting student growth/assessment goals (40% of the evaluation) established by the school/district thus effectively contributing to P-12 student-learning growth (CAEP R4.1) and provides evidence of completers’ satisfactory performance of professional knowledge, skills, and disposition practices (CAEP R4.1). Ratings of Highly Effective or Effective is evidence toward meeting CAEP criteria for reporting Satisfaction of Employees (CAEP R4.2).

The end of year evaluation ratings in this year’s report cover the year’s 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021. A total of 117 Spring Arbor University Completers (n=17) received EOY evaluations resulting in a total of 254 annual evaluation ratings (n=254) over the five year period.

Data Highlights

  • Thirty-eight evaluations (n=38; 15%) rated SAU completers as Highly Effective.
  • Two hundred and nine evaluations (n=209; 82.3%) rated EPP completers as
  • Seven evaluations (n=7; 2.8%) rated SAU completers as Minimally Effective.
  • There were no Ineffective evaluation ratings received by EPP completers. Combined, 97% of the EPP completers received ratings of Highly Effective or Effective for the reporting period.
  • The total attrition rate for EPP completers over five years was 1.9%.

Refer to the following link to access this report:

MDE Administrator Survey of First Year Teachers (2020-2021)

The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) conducted a new survey among school administrators with the intent to measure the teaching practices of first year teachers. The MDE identified first year teachers and matched each to the school where they completed their first year of service. The MDE requested school administrators to complete a survey on the identified first year teacher(s).

The results of the 2020-2021 survey revealed that statewide, administrators completed surveys on 639 (n=639) first year teachers. For Spring Arbor University, 13 (n=13) first year teachers were included in the survey results. 

The survey consisted of 21 questions framed within four components:

  • Teacher instructional practices
  • Teacher application of instructional practices and resources to supported targeted student groups.
  • Relationship building with targeted groups.
  • Professional disposition practice.

School administrators also provided with the option of providing comments at the end of the survey.

Data Highlights

EPP completers’ scores were the same as, or higher than the state average, on the following survey items:

  • Supporting all students in making connections to prior knowledge and experiences (100%).
  • Utilizing technology to enhance the learning experience of students (100%).
  • Implementing literacy and reading strategies appropriate to their content area(s) and grade level(s) (91%).
  • Applying instructional strategies and resources to support gifted and talented students (83%), and students experiencing trauma (91%).
  • Building positive relationships with students (100%).
  • Demonstrating responsiveness and flexibility to unexpected situations which arise (100%).

Refer to the following link to access this report:

SAU Completer Effectiveness Case Study

Five EPP completers (n=5) and three school administrators (n=3) submitted either last year’s annual evaluations (EOY 2019) or a recently completed lesson observation with documentation of their impact on student learning and development.

Data Highlights

  • All eight completers received 2021 EOY ratings of “Effective”.
  • Five End of Year Evaluations were submitted.
  • Evidence for seven of the candidates indicated they had fully met the school / district goals for student growth data. One candidate received a rating of “Minimally Effective” for one of three criteria associated with student growth data.
  • One school administrator generated lesson observation was submitted.
  • Three emails pertaining to candidate teaching effectiveness were submitted by school administrators.
  • Two completers (white, female) taught in elementary settings; six completers (5 females; 1 male; all white) taught in secondary settings.
  • Two completers were special education teachers; one elementary and one secondary.
  • The range of teaching experience for the completers was 0.5 to 3 years.
  • All completers taught in public schools. Three completers taught in schools located in rural areas, two taught in small towns surrounded by rural areas, one taught in a rural school adjacent to a large city, one taught in large city, and one taught in a suburban school adjacent to Detroit.

Refer to the following link to access this report:

EPP Administrator Satisfaction Survey

The EPP invites school administrators to complete a survey that measure EPP completers’ knowledge, performance, and dispositional preparation. Twenty-two (n=22) school administrators completed the survey on 26 completers (n=26).

Data Highlights

  • 86% of school administrators responded that they were “highly satisfied” or “mostly satisfied” with the EPP completers hired in the past five years (n=18).
  • 91% of school administrators responded that recently hired EPP completers were prepared with an understanding of how learners/students develop and grow.
  • 13% of school administrators responded that recently hired EPP completers were prepared for meeting the expected levels of content preparation and having the knowledge levels expected of a beginning teacher.
  • 100% of school administrators responded that recently hired EPP completers were prepared for adhering to the legal requirements of the teaching profession.
  • 91% of school administrators responded that recently hired EPP completers were prepared to provide appropriate and challenging learning experiences
  • 100% of school administrators responded that recently hired EPP completers were prepared to provide an inclusive learning environment.
  • 91% of school administrators responded that recently hired EPP completers were prepared to provide a rigorous learning environment.
  • 91% of school administrators responded that recently hired EPP completers were prepared to use appropriate strategies to effectively manage learning environments.
  • 100% of school administrators responded that recently hired EPP completers were prepared to exhibit ethical practices.
  • 95% of school administrators responded that EPP completers had/were effectively contributing to the learning-growth of their students.

Refer to the following link to access this report:

Partnership Teacher Effectiveness Ratings

The Spring Arbor University School of Education has signed partnerships with seven local school districts and one charter academy (total = eight partnerships).  End of Year evaluations of SAU trained teachers employed by partner school districts for 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020 indicated that:

  • 100% of SAU trained teachers hired to teach in partner districts/schools were rated “effective” or “highly effective” on EOY evaluations from 2017 – 2021.

Completer Employment Demographics (2020-2021)

MDE End of Year Evaluation data helped identify where SAU trained teachers were employed across the state of Michigan for the 2020-2021 academic year.  

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

Impact Measure R4.2: Employer Satisfaction

The Spring Arbor University School of Education has selected the following evidence as indicators employer satisfaction with the preparation and performance of EPP completers.

SAU Completer Effectiveness Data – (EOY) Evaluation Ratings

The Michigan Department of Education annually provides EPPs with five cycles of end of year evaluation (EOY) ratings for their completers employed in Michigan public schools. All Michigan public school teachers are required by law to receive an annual evaluation using one of five state approved evaluation instruments. Teachers may receive an EOY evaluation rating of: Highly Effective, Effective, Minimally Effective, or Ineffective. Ratings of Highly Effective and/or Effective indicate satisfactory performance and include the factoring of meeting student growth/assessment goals (40% of the evaluation) established by the school/district thus effectively contributing to P-12 student-learning growth (CAEP R4.1) and provides evidence of completers’ satisfactory performance of professional knowledge, skills, and disposition practices (CAEP R4.1). Ratings of Highly Effective or Effective is evidence toward meeting CAEP criteria for reporting Satisfaction of Employees (CAEP R4.2).

The end of year evaluation ratings in this year’s report cover the year’s 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021. A total of 117 Spring Arbor University Completers (n=117) received EOY evaluations resulting in a total of 254 annual evaluation ratings (n=254) over the five year period.

Data Highlights

  • Thirty-eight evaluations (n=38; 15%) rated SAU completers as Highly Effective.
  • Two hundred and nine evaluations (n=209; 82.3%) rated EPP completers as
  • Seven evaluations (n=7; 2.8%) rated SAU completers as Minimally Effective.
  • There were no Ineffective evaluation ratings received by EPP completers. Combined, 97% of the EPP completers received ratings of Highly Effective or Effective for the reporting period.
  • The total attrition rate for EPP completers over five years was 1.9%.

Refer to the following link to access this report:

MDE Administrator Survey of First Year Teachers (2020-2021)

The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) conducted a new survey among school administrators with the intent to measure the teaching practices of first year teachers. The MDE identified first year teachers and matched each to the school where they completed their first year of service. The MDE requested school administrators to complete a survey on the identified first year teacher(s).

The results of the 2020-2021 survey revealed that statewide, administrators completed surveys on 639 (n=639) first year teachers. For Spring Arbor University, 13 (n=13) first year teachers were included in the survey results. 

The survey consisted of 21 questions framed within four components:

  • Teacher instructional practices
  • Teacher application of instructional practices and resources to supported targeted student groups.
  • Relationship building with targeted groups.
  • Professional disposition practice.

School administrators also provided with the option of providing comments at the end of the survey.

Data Highlights

The EPP averaged the administrators’ ratings for each component of the survey:

  • Teacher instructional practices (92%).
  • Teacher application of instructional practices and resources to supported targeted student groups (85%).
  • Relationship building with targeted groups (92%),
  • Professional disposition practice (93%).
  • School administrators submitted five comments. Four complemented the completers’ teaching efforts. One comment offered complementary support for working with the completer in a more traditional classroom experience outside of COVID-19.

Refer to the following link to access this report:

MDE Administrator Survey of First Year Teachers (2020-2021)

Administrator Satisfaction Survey

The EPP invites school administrators to complete a survey that measure EPP completers’ knowledge, performance, and dispositional preparation. Twenty-two (n=22) school administrators completed the survey on 26 completers (n=26).

Data Highlights

  • 71% of school administrators responded that they were “highly satisfied” or “mostly satisfied” with the EPP completers hired in the past five years (n=18).

Refer to the following link to access this report:

Partnership Teacher Effectiveness Ratings

The Spring Arbor University School of Education has signed partnerships with seven local school districts and one charter academy (total = eight partnerships). The Michigan Department of Education provided five cycles of End of Year evaluations for EPP completers. The data was disaggregated to determine partner school employment trends and satisfaction of partners employing EPP completers.

Data Highlights

  • 100% of SAU trained teachers hired to teach in partner districts/schools were rated “effective” or “highly effective” on EOY evaluations from 2017 – 2021.

Spring Arbor University 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 in 2012, only two SAU trained teachers have sought assistance from the School of Education Promise.

Refer to the following link to access this report:

Impact Measure 4.3: Satisfaction of Completers

MDE Year Out Survey of First Year Teachers (2020-2021)

The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) conducts an annual survey among EPP completers hired as first year teachers. The intent of the survey is to measure aspects of the completers’ preparation and satisfaction with their preparation as a beginning teacher. The MDE identifies and contacts first year teachers with a request to complete the 44 question survey and answer four questions. Eighteen EPP completers (n=18) in their first year of teaching responded to the survey.

Data Highlights

  • 4% of the EPP completers reported that at the end of their teacher preparation they were ready to enter the teaching force.
  • 89% of the EPP completers reported that their teaching methods coursework positively contributed to the readiness to begin their teaching careers.
  • 4% of the EPP completers reported that their pre-student teaching clinical experiences involving direct student contact positively contributed to their readiness to begin their teaching careers.
  • 100% of the EPP completers reported that their student teaching experience positively contributed to their readiness to begin their teaching careers.
  • EPP completers submitted a number of positive comments
    • Experienced, knowledgeable, compassionate professors holding students to high standards (8 comments).
    • Being prepared in professional practices (7 comments).
    • Real-World School classroom experiences and connecting with schools and school districts (5 comments).
  • EPP completers submitted a number of program improvement comments.

Refer to the following link to access this report:

Beginning Teacher Survey

The EPP identified the email addresses of 134 completers employed as teachers from 2017 through 2021 and invited each to complete the survey. Thirty-seven (n=37) completers responded to the survey (27.5% Return Rate).

The survey is developed with three sections. Part one provides general employment and demographic information as well as information regarding the length of time taken to gain employment, the preparation for job interviews, whether they have advanced in a leadership role at their school, their professional goals, and a general evaluation of the teacher preparation they received from the EPP.

Part two, is composed of questions organized within three central themes: Knowledge Preparation, Performance Preparation, and Dispositional Preparation. For this part of the survey, completers used a 4-Point Likert Scale: 4= Strongly Agree, 3 = Agree, 2 = Disagree, 1 = Strongly Disagree.

The last part of the survey requests completers to upload evidence of their teaching effectiveness and to identify if they would be willing to provide program improvement expertise to the EPP.

Data Highlights

The EPP averaged the administrators’ ratings for each component of the survey:

  • 100% of the completers (n=37) identified that the EPP prepared them as teachers (very well (62%); somewhat well (38%).
  • 4% of the completers (n=37) strongly agreed or agreed that EPP prepared them in the area of Knowledge preparation.
  • 92% of the completers (n=37) strongly agreed or agreed that EPP prepared them in the area of Performance preparation.
  • Overall, 95% of completers (n=37) strongly agreed or agreed that EPP prepared them in the area of Dispositional Preparation.
  • 89% of completers (n=34) responded that they are meeting their school / school district’s expected learning / development goals for their students.
  • Sixteen completers (n=16; 43%) provided comments which complemented the teacher preparation they received.

Refer to the following links:

Impact Measure 4.4: Ability of Completers to be Hired in Education Positions for which they are Prepared

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

MDE Year Out Survey of First Year Teachers (2020-2021)

  • 17 of the 18 EPP Completers (n=17) were employed teachers (94.4%).

EPP Beginning Teacher Survey

Thirty-four (92.0%) of completers responding to the Beginning Teacher Satisfaction Survey reported they found employment in their area of certification.

Thirty-five (94.6%) of the completers reported they were hired Full Time.

  • One completer (2.7%) reported being hired “Less than Full Time but More than Part Time.”
  • One completer (2.7%) reported being hired Part Time.\

Thirty-seven completers responded that it took the following length of time for them to obtain a teaching job.

  • 22 (59.46%) reported they found employment immediately.
  • 9 (24%) reported that they found employment in less than three months.
  • 4 (11%) reported that they found employment in 4 to 6 months.
  • 1 (2.7%) reported that they found employment in 7 to 12 months.
  • 1 (2.7%) reported that it took them more than 1 year to find.

EPP Beginning Teacher Survey

Other Accreditation Information

Title II Program Report: The 2022 Title II report be updated upon final submission