School of Education Accreditation

Accreditation Information

Annual Report (2026 for 2024-2025 Acacemic Year)

Spring Arbor University School of Education

CAEP conducted an initial program (traditional undergraduate) accreditation visit of the Spring Arbor University School of Education in the Spring of 2025. 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 Master's of Counseling program with a School Counseling component as the EPP's only Advanced program.

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.

Measure 1 – 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 state of Michigan has revised their evaluation ratings. Teachers may receive an EOY evaluation rating of, Effective, Developing, and Needing Support. Ratings of Effective and/or Developing indicate satisfactory performance and include the factoring of meeting student growth/assessment goals (20% 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 Effective and or Developing are evidence toward meeting CAEP criteria for reporting Satisfaction of Employees (CAEP R4.2).

The end of year evaluation ratings in this year’s report covers the year’s, 2024-2025. A total of 82 (n=82) were reported for Spring Arbor University Completers. This represents the first year of the revised rating scale for the MDE.

Data Highlights

82 = Total Number of Completers Receiving EOY Evaluations
78 (95%) = Year 1 - Number of Completers Receiving Effective Rating
3 (4%) = Year 1 - Number of Completers Receiving Developing Rating
1 (1%) = Year 4 - Number of Completers Receiving Needs Support Ratin

Refer to the following link to access this report:

SAU Completer Effectiveness Data (EOY)

MDE Administrator Survey of First Year Teachers (2024-2025)

The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) conducts a yearly survey among school administrators with the intent to measure the teaching practices of first year teachers. The MDE identified EPP 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 2024-2025 survey revealed that statewide, administrators completed surveys on 804 (n=804) first year teachers. For Spring Arbor University, 11 (n=11) 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 were also provided with the option of providing comments at the end of the survey.

Data Highlights

EPP completers’ survey items scores highlighted below were selected because the EPP rating was not less than 5% of the state average and/or the EPP ratings were the same as, or above the state average:

Supporting all students in making connections to prior knowledge and experiences (100%).
Utilizing technology to enhance the learning experience of students (100%).
Understand and make accommodations based on a student’s IEP or Section 504 plan (100%).
Applying instructional strategies and resources to support students experiencing trauma (90%).
Building positive relationships with students (100%), families/caregivers (100%), and colleagues (100%).
Demonstrating responsiveness and flexibility to unexpected situations which arise (91%).
Act in a manner consistent with ethical and professional educator expectations (100%).

Refer to the following link to access this report:

MDE Administrator Survey (2024-2025)

SAU Satisfaction Surveys (Administrator & Beginning Teacher)

In addition, school administrators and beginning teachers (completers) are requested to answer a question regarding their effectiveness and/or ability to contribute to learning growth / development of their students.

Administrator Satisfaction Survey Question #28: Spring Arbor University trained teacher has effectively contributed to the learning-growth of their students?

Strongly Agree (n=19; 57.58%)
Agree (n=14; 42.42%)
Disagree (n=0)
Strongly Disagree (n=0; 0%)

Beginning Teacher Satisfaction Survey Question #38: CAEP Accreditation standard R4.1 requires the School of Education to demonstrate that our graduates effectively contribute to P-12 student learning growth. In your teaching last year, and/or currently, are you meeting the expected learning / development goals for your students?

Yes (n=39; 95%)
Choose Not to Answer (n=2; 5%)

Refer to the following link to access this report:

EOY 2019-2023 SAU Summary Data

3. Partnership Teacher Effectiveness Ratings. The Spring Arbor University School of Education has signed partnerships with 15 local school districts and one charter academy (total = sixteen partnerships). End of Year evaluations of SAU trained teachers employed by partner school districts for 2024-2025 indicated that:

100% of SAU trained teachers hired to teach in partner districts/schools were rated “effective” on the 2024-2025 EOY evaluations.
- 82 = Total Number of Completers Receiving 2024 EOY Evaluations (Highly Effective / Effective)
- 50 = Number of Completers employed as teachers by Partner & Area Schools
- 100% (n=50) were rated “Effective” by their school building administrator.
38.5% = Percent of SAU Completers employed as teachers by Partner & Area Schools in 2024

MDE End of Year Evaluation data helped identify where SAU trained teachers were employed across the state of Michigan.

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

Measure 2 - Impact Measure R4.2 Employer Satisfaction & Stakeholder Involvement

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

4. 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: Effective, Developing, or Needs Support. Ratings of Effective indicate satisfactory performance and include the factoring of meeting student growth/assessment goals (20% of the overall 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). By law, teachers receiving ratings of Developing are given one year and additional supports to raise their rating or may face dismissal by the school district whereas, teachers receiving a Needs Support rating may be immediately terminated from service. There is an overall strength of consensus among the Michigan Department of Education, school districts, and EPPs that teachers receiving a rating Effective or Developing is evidence toward meeting CAEP criteria for reporting Satisfaction of Employers (CAEP R4.2).

The end of year evaluation ratings in this year’s report covers 2024-2025. Please see SAU Effectiveness data (page 2), prior to this and using the former MDE teacher rating system. During that time, a total of 130 Spring Arbor University Completers (n=130) received EOY evaluations resulting in a total of 262 annual evaluation ratings (n=262) over the five-year period (2019-2023).

Data Highlights

Seventy-one evaluations (n=71; 37%) rated EPP completers as Highly Effective.
Ninety-seven evaluations (n=97; 51%) rated EPP completers as Effective.
Zero evaluations (n=0; 0%) rated EPP completers as Minimally Effective.
There were no Ineffective evaluation ratings received by EPP completers. Combined, 100% of the EPP completers received ratings of Highly Effective or Effective for the reporting period.
12% EPP completers did not have a recorded evaluation.
The total attrition rate for EPP completers over five years was 1.9%.

EPP Administrator Satisfaction Survey

The EPP historically has incorporated a satisfaction survey. The EPP began a new accreditation cycle in 2025, with the new cycle beginning in 2026, and therefore will distribute a survey in summer of current data will be established in the coming year. The EPP incorporates a satisfaction survey specifically designed to meet the CAEP criteria for EPP created surveys. School building administrators employing EPP Completers are contacted (email) to complete the survey which measures EPP completers’ knowledge, performance, and dispositional preparation. In addition, the survey directly asks school building administrators to indicate their level of satisfaction with the EPP completers hired. Thirty-eight (n=38) school administrators completed the survey on 49 completers (n=49).

Data Highlights

gfds

Refer to the following link to access this report:

Partnership Teacher Effectiveness Ratings

The Spring Arbor University School of Education has signed partnership agreements with fifteen local school districts and one charter academy (n = 16 partnerships). End of Year evaluations of SAU trained teachers employed by partner school districts for 2025 (Student teacher interns for SP23, FA23, SP24) indicated that:

100% of SAU trained teachers hired to teach in partner districts/schools were rated “effective” on the 2024-2025 EOY evaluations (Please note highly effective was discontinued in 2025).
- N= 42 =Total Number of Completers Receiving 2025 EOY Evaluations (Effective/Developing)
- 15 = Number of Completers employed as teachers by Partner & Area Schools
- 100% (n=15) were rated Effective” by their school building administrator.
- The number of student teachers in partner schools
- 32% = Percent of SAU Completers employed as teachers by Partner & Area Schools in 2025.

Refer to the following link to access this report:

EOY 2019-2023 SAU Summary Data

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:

Spring Arbor University School of Education Promise

Additional Measure - Impact Measure 4.3: Satisfaction of Completers

(The EPP understands that this is not a required impact measure for the 2026 Annual Report but considers the data presented to be valuable in understanding completer perceptions of their preparation as beginning teachings.)

Beginning sau teacher survey chart

MDE Year Out Survey First Year Teachers (2024-2025)

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. Surveys were completed by six hundred and four (n=604) statewide completers. Six EPP completers (n=6) in their first year of teaching responded to the survey.

Data Highlights

EPP completers’ survey ratings were above the state averages in six of the seven category summaries.

Category Summary	State Average (n=559)	EPP Average (n=9)
Overall Preparation	90.3%	100%
Meeting Student Needs	75.7%	86.7%
Technology	82.3%	94.4%
Instructional Strategies & Assessment	78.3%	93.8%
Professionalism	88%	100%
Clinical Experience & Program Prep	77.5%	78.5%

EPP identified areas below the state average for the Professionalism category included:

Adapting Instruction – curriculum and assessment. According to IEP and Section 504 State Average: 67.7%; EPP Average: 66.7%
In Clinical Experiences, Teaching Methods Course Work: State Average: 80.2%; EPP Average: 77.8%
Early Clinical Observational Experiences: State Average: 75
6%; EPP Average: 66.7%

EPP completers also provided the following comments:

Question: Do you have additional elements of your preparation program you feel made a positive contribution to your readiness to begin a teaching career?
Answer: I enjoyed my student teaching mentor teacher, who was wonderful to gain insights from, and now to work alongside.

I enjoyed the diverse area of teaching experiences, Florida, Guatemala, Honduras

Question: What do you believe your educator preparation provider did especially well?
Answers:

Site-based Hours
Promoted Professionalism in every class.

Question: What do you believe your educator preparation provider needs to improve upon?
Answers:

More time in classrooms.
Collaboration and communication with parents and various stakeholders.

Question: If you had advice for candidates enrolled in a program within your educator preparation provider, what would it be?

Answers:

Do your best.
Soak in the experiences
Save all your ideas in one area to reference and use.
Don’t be afraid to make mistakes. Ask plenty of questions.
Develop positive relationships, begin preparations early in your college career

Refer to the following link to access this report:

MDE Year Out Survey 2024-2025

Beginning Teacher Survey

The EPP identified the email addresses of 124 completers employed as teachers from 2018 through 2022 and invited each to complete the survey. Completers will be surveyed again in 2026 covering the years to include 2023-2024 and 2024-2025. The Data that follows is relative to that collected through 2022. Thirty-seven (n=37) completers responded to the survey (30% 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 completers’ ratings for each component of the survey:

100% of the completers (n=37) identified that the EPP prepared them as teachers “Very well” or “Somewhat well.”
3% of the completers (n=37) strongly agreed or agreed that EPP prepared them in the survey areas associated with Knowledge preparation.
5% of the completers (n=37) strongly agreed or agreed that EPP prepared them in the survey areas associated with Performance preparation.
91% of completers (n=37) strongly agreed or agreed that EPP prepared them in the survey areas associated with Dispositional Preparation.
89% of completers (n=33) responded that they are meeting their school / school district’s expected learning / development goals for their students. Four (n=4) completers choose not to answer the question.
Twenty-three completers (n=23; 62%) provided comments which complemented the teacher preparation they received. The EPP will review and analyze the comments at an upcoming data retreat.

Refer to the following links:

Measure 3 - Impact Measure R3.3: Candidate Competency at Program Completion

The EPP measures candidate competency at completion in multiple ways. The student teaching internship is the last and final experience for candidates to demonstrate and be assessed as competent in the skills associated with beginning teachers. Additionally, candidates are required to pass their respective certification test to become certified teachers in the state of Michigan.

Incorporating two proprietary assessments: the Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching (CDF) and the Educator Disposition Assessment (EDA), the student teachers’ (candidates’) classroom (mentor) teachers and university supervisors complete a final evaluation on each candidate.

The Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching instrument incorporates 22 elements within four domains: Preparation and Planning, the Classroom Environment, Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities. Each element is assessed on a 4-point Likert Scale: 1 = Ineffective, 2 = Minimally Effective, 3 = Effective, and 4 = Highly Effective. Student teachers are expected to establish an overall rating of 3 “Effective” by both the classroom (mentor) teacher and university supervisor assessments to meet the criteria for successful competency during student teacher.

The Educator Disposition Assessment incorporates 9 elements assessed on a 3-point Likert Scale: 1 = Developing (In Need of Immediate Remediation), 2 = Needs Improvement, and 3 = Meets Expectations. Student teaching candidates are expected to establish an overall rating of 3 “Meets Expectations” by both the classroom (mentor) teacher and university supervisor to meet the criteria for successful competency during student teacher. In the event the student teachers does not meet the rating of 3 “Meets Expectations” the overall assessment is reviewed and the EPP determines any warranted further improvement action steps.

The EPP also incorporates a simple survey for the classroom (mentor) teacher and university supervisor to state whether they support the candidate becoming a certified teacher. The survey requires the classroom (mentor) teachers and the university supervisor to identify whether they recommend the candidate for certification. Student teaching candidates are expected to establish an overall rating of 3 “Recommend for Certification” by both the classroom (mentor) teacher and university supervisor to meet the criteria for successful competency during student teacher. In the event the student teacher candidate receives a rating of “Recommend for Certification” by one assessor and “Recommend with Reservations” by the second assessor, the EPP reviews the CDF and EDA assessments and determines whether or not to recommend the candidate for teacher certification.

Forty-seven candidates (n=47; FA23-SP24, FA24) completed student teaching internship in elementary and secondary experiences. From the 2024-2025 MTTC data as reported by the MDE 89% (n=56) of Elementary test takers, 75% (n=6) of Secondary, and 83% (n=5) of Special Education successfully completed their MTTC assessment. measures presented above. 94% n=17 of our Elementary candidates, 88% N=7 of our Secondary, 100% n=6 of our Special Education candidates met the EPP for meeting the competency expectations related to the three assessments.

An additional measure of completer competency is the number of completers who passed their certification test (Michigan Test for Teacher Certification [MTTC]). Of the 47 elementary and secondary candidates, all elementary candidates (n=20; 85%) passed the certification test and became certified teachers in the state of Michigan. Among the secondary candidates (n=19), eight candidates passed the certification test (n=8; 90%) and became certified teachers in the state of Michigan. One of the two secondary candidates who did not pass the certification test did so in the FA22 semester. The other candidate who did not pass the certification test decided to pursue employment outside of teaching.

Measure 4 - 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.

Incorporating data from the MDE End of Year Evaluations and personally contacting each completer (2024-2025), the EPP determined the following:

47 individuals (n=47; 100%) completed the program successfully
completers (n=36; 77%) became certified teachers
45 completers (n=44; 96%) became employed teachers
Special Education (n= 8)
- 8 of 8 = 100%
Elementary (n=19)
- 19 of 20 = 96%
Secondary (n=19)
- 18 of 19 = 95%

Employment of EPP Teachers (2024)

Graph of employment for teachers

Data Highlights

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

94% of the completers (n=45) reported employment as teachers. One completer (n=2 or 4%) reported working in education, but not as a teacher. One student perusing a master’s degree in education.
N=2 or 4% reported teaching internationally.
70% of the completers, (n=33) identified that they are teaching within their certification area.
30% or n=14 identify long-term substitute teaching positions in their certification area. (Question 9, Beginning Teacher Satisfaction Survey).
Forty-seven completers (n=47) responded that it took the following length of time for them to obtain a teaching job.
- n=34 (72%) reported they found employment immediately.
- n=9 (19%) reported that they found employment in less than three months.
- n=2 (4%) reported that they found employment in 4 to 6 months.
- n=1 (2%) reported that they found employment in 7 to 12 months. (Question 10, Beginning Teacher Satisfaction Survey).

Refer to the following links:

Other Accreditation Information

Title II Report - 2026