The University of Michigan-Ann Arbor's Teacher Education Program is accredited by the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) through June 2030. This accreditation certifies that the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor has provided evidence that it adheres to CAEP’s standards. More information can be found on the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation website.
The chart below lists the name of each endorsement program, including its appropriate grade bands and accreditation/approval status, that is attached to initial teaching certification.
- Endorsement Program Accreditation Status
Endorsement Program Grade Bands Accreditation/Approval Status Arabic 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Biology 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Chemistry 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Earth/Space Science 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Economics 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Elementary Education K-5 All Subjects CAEP Accredited (2030) K-8 All Subjects Self-Contained Classroom CAEP Accredited (2030) English 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) English as a Second Language K-8 CAEP Accredited (2030) 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) French 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) German 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) History 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Integrated Science K-8 CAEP Accredited (2030) 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Italian 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Language Arts K-8 CAEP Accredited (2030) Latin 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Mandarin 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Mathematics K-8 CAEP Accredited (2030) 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Physics 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Political Science 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Psychology 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Social Studies K-8 CAEP Accredited (2030) 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) Spanish K-12 CAEP Accredited (2030) 6-12 CAEP Accredited (2030)
CAEP Annual Reporting
- Measure 1: Completer Impact and Effectiveness
(Component R4.1)
State of Michigan Educator Effectiveness Ratings (2014-2015 through 2022-2023). These are the most recent data available from the Michigan Department of Education.
State of Michigan Educator Effectiveness Ratings, 2014–15 through 2021–22 Year Total Effective +
Highly EffectiveHighly
EffectiveEffective Minimally
EffectiveIneffective 2014–15 127 111 (87%) 32 (25%) 79 (62%) 14 (11%) 2 (1%) 2015–16 232 212 (91%) 45 (19%) 167 (72%) 15 (6%) 5 (2%) 2016–17 276 260 (94%) 55 (20%) 205 (74%) 15 (5%) 1 (<1%) 2017–18 345 339 (98%) 75 (22%) 264 (76%) 4 (1%) 2 (<1%) 2018–19 396 386 (97%) 124 (31%) 262 (66%) 9 (2%) 1 (<1%) 2019-20 No data due to COVID-19 pandemic 2020-21 322 322 (100%) 112 (35%) 210 (65%) 0 (0%) 9 (0%) 2021-22 382 374 (98%) 120 (31%) 254 (66%) 6 (2%) 2 (<1%) 2022-23 375 361 (96%) 115 (31%) 246 (66%) 12 (3%) 2 (<1%) Aggregate 2133 2053 (96%) 566 (27%) 1477 (69%) 75 (4%) 15 (<1%) - Measure 2: Satisfaction of Employers and Stakeholder Involvement
(Component R4.2|R5.3)
2021- 2023 Michigan Department of Education Administrator Survey Question 2021-2022 N 2021-2022 Percent effective 2022-2023 N 2022-2023 Percent Effective 2023-2024 N 2023-2024 Percent Effective As a first-year teacher, compared to other first-year teachers, to what extent is (teacher name) able to… support all students in making connections to prior knowledge and experiences? 30 90.0% 37 97.3% 40 87.5% implement multiple strategies to present key content area(s) concepts? 31 90.3% 38 89.5% 40 90.0% utilize available technology to enhance the learning experience of students? 31 93.5% 37 97.3% 39 92.3% implement strategies which maximize student engagement to support positive student behavior? 31 77.4% 38 92.1% 40 77.5% organize the learning environment to guide student engagement during instructional time? 31 80.6% 38 92.1% 40 85.0% implement literacy and reading strategies appropriate to their content area(s) and grade level(s)? 31 90.3% 35 94.3% 39 87.2% differentiate instruction based on student assessment data to support each student's academic achievement? 31 80.6% 35 74.3% 39 82.1% support each student's socioemotional (e.g., social, emotional, psychological) development with instructional strategies and resources? 31 80.6% 38 86.8% 40 85.0% understand and make accommodations based on a student's IEP or Section 504 plan? 30 86.7% 38 89.5% 40 82.5% As first-year teacher, compared to other first-year teachers, to what extent can (teacher name) apply instructional strategies and resources to support… English learners? 19 84.2% 27 81.5% 36 88.9% high performing students? 31 83.9% 37 91.9% 37 89.2% low performing students? 31 80.6% 38 84.2% 40 85.0% students experiencing trauma? 29 79.3% 36 83.3% 39 84.6% students from culturally diverse backgrounds? 27 88.9% 37 89.2% 38 86.8% students with special needs or disabilities? 29 79.3% 38 92.1% 39 84.6% each individual student's learning abilities and needs? 31 77.4% 38 89.5% 40 87.5% As a first-year teacher, compared to other first-year teachers, to what extent is (teacher name) able to build positive relations with… students? 31 83.9% 38 94.7% 40 87.5% families/caregivers? 31 90.3% 38 97.4% 39 84.6% colleagues? 31 93.5% 38 86.8% 40 87.5% As first-year teacher, compared to other first-year teachers, to what extent is (teacher name) able to… demonstrate responsiveness and flexibility to unexpected situations which arise? 31 77.4% 37 91.9% 40 77.5% act in a manner consistent with ethical and professional educator expectations? 31 93.5% 38 94.7% 40 87.5% utilize constructive criticism to reflect upon and improve practice? 31 96.8% 38 92.1% 40 85.0% - Measure 3: Candidate Competency at Program Completion
(Component R3.3)
The following data represents program completers from the Undergraduate Elementary Teacher Education (ETE) program and Undergraduate Secondary Teacher Education (STE) programs within the EPP. The data was received via a Michigan Department of Education survey provided to all first-year teachers. The 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19 school years are represented.
Title II Reports
- 2014 Title II Report (for 2012–13 academic year)
- 2015 Title II Report (for 2013–14 academic year)
- 2016 Title II Report (for 2014–15 academic year)
- 2017 Title II Report (for 2015–16 academic year)
- 2018 Title II Report (for 2016–17 academic year)
- 2019 Title II Report (for 2017–18 academic year)
- 2020 Title II Report (for 2018–19 academic year)
- 2021 Title II Report (for 2019–20 academic year)
- 2022 Title II Report (for 2020–21 academic year)
- 2023 Title II Report (for 2021–22 academic year)
- 2024 Title II Report (for 2022–23 academic year)
- Measure 4: Ability of Completers to Be Hired in Education Positions for Which They Have Prepared
Ability of Completers to Be Hired in Education Positions for Which They Have Prepared
The following data represents program completers from the Undergraduate Elementary Teacher Education (ETE) program and Undergraduate Secondary Teacher Education (STE) programs within the EPP. The data was received via a Michigan Department of Education survey provided to all first-year teachers. The 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19 school years are represented.
Did you obtain employment in a school setting? 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20 2020-21 2021-22 Overall 29 / 34 Yes (85%) 25 / 29 Yes (86%) 22 / 23 Yes (96%) 36 / 37 Yes (97%) 44 / 44 Yes (100%) 76 / 86 Yes (88%) Did you obtain or continue employment in the school district where you completed your internship? 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20 2020-21 2021-22 Overall 4 / 34 Yes (12%) 3 / 29 Yes (10%) 7 / 23 Yes (30%) 9 / 37 Yes (24%) 12 / 44 Yes (27%) 14 / 86 Yes (16%) To what extent did your preparation program prepare you well for the teaching job market? 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20 2020-21 2021-22 Overall 29 / 34 say "Prepared Me Well" (85%) 23 / 29 say "Prepared Me Well" (79%) 18 / 23 say "Prepared Me Well" (78%) 32 / 36 "To a Great or Moderate Extent" (88.9%) 35 / 44 say “To a Great or Moderate Extent” (79.5%) 70 / 86 say "Prepared Me Well" (81%) To what extent did your preparation program support you in your job search? 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20 2020-21 2021-22 Overall 23 / 34 say "Supported Me Well" (67%) 23 / 29 say "Supported Me Well" (79%)) 15 / 23 say "Supported Me Well" (65%) 23 / 35 “To a Great or Moderate Extent” (65.7%) 30/44 say “To a Great or Moderate Extent” (68.2%) 61 / 86 say "Supported Me Well" (71%) How many job applications did you complete? Year 0 1–3 4–6 5–9 10–12 13–15 16 or more Total 2016–17 1 (3%) 7 (24%) 7 (24%) 4 (14%) 3 (10%) 2 (7%) 5 (17%) 29 2017–18 1 (3%) 10 (29%) 6 (18%) 6 (18%) 3 (9%) 2 (7%) 6 (18%) 34 2018–19 0 (0%) 5 (17%) 5 (17%) 8 (28%) 2 (7%) 2 (7%) 8 (28%) 29 Data no longer collected Aggregate 2 (2%) 22 (24%) 18 (19%) 18 (19%) 8 (9%) 6 (7%) 19 (21%) 92 How many interviews did you have? Year 0 1–3 4–6 5–9 10–12 13–15 16 or more Total 2016–17 1 (3%) 17 (59%) 5 (17%) 2 (7%) 2 (7%) 0 (0%) 2 (7%) 29 2017–18 1 (3%) 19 (56%) 8 (24%) 4 (12%) 1 (3%) 1 (3%) 0 (0%) 34 2018–19 0 (0%) 15 (52%) 10 (34%) 2 (7%) 2 (7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 29 Data no longer collected Aggregate 2 (2%) 51 (55%) 23 (25%) 8 (9%) 5 (5%) 1 (1%) 2 (2%) 92 How many job offers did you receive? Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 or more Total 2016–17 2 (7%) 15 (52%) 3 (10%) 6 (21%) 2 (7%) 1 (3%) 29 2017–18 3 (9%) 13 (38%) 10 (29%) 4 (12%) 3 (9%) 1 (3%) 34 2018–19 0 (0%) 12 (41%) 9 (31%) 6 (21%) 1 (3%) 1 (3%) 29 Data no longer collected Aggregate 5 (5%) 40 (43%) 22 (24%) 16 (17%) 6 (7%) 3 (3%) 92 In your opinion, how difficult was it/is it, to find a job in your content area(s)? Year Very Easy Somewhat Easy Somewhat Difficult Very Difficult Total 2016–17 6 (21%) 4 (14%) 15 (52%) 4 (14%) 29 2017–18 5 (15%) 12 (35%) 12 (35%) 5 (15%) 34 2018–19 3 (10%) 13 (45%) 10 (34%) 3 (10%) 29 Data no longer collected Aggregate 14 (15%) 29 (32%) 37 (40%) 12 (13%) 92 Data for 2022-23 and 2023-2024 will be available Fall of 2024.