Undergraduate CAEP Education Data

The Educator Preparation Programs (EPP) is the primary coordinating body for all of CMU’s teacher preparation and continuing education programs which are distributed across five colleges and involve 20 departments and three interdisciplinary councils. The EPP consists of more than 150 professional education faculty members, the Director of Educator Preparation, the dean of the College of Education and Human Services, and the dean or dean’s designee of each involved college. The work of the EPP is supported by the Office of Educator Preparation Programs housed in the College of Education and Human Services. The EPP offers 8 graduate programs at the master’s and specialist levels and 20 areas of specialized study at the undergraduate level accredited by CAEP. CMU has been a leader in teacher education programs since it was founded in 1892 and graduates more than 300 teacher candidates annually.

EPP by the Numbers

Clinical Field Placements

EPP Demographics: admitted and enrolled candidates

2021-2022 total number of admitted and enrolled = 965

Pie chart representing demographic data of students who have been admitted and enrolled in the program.

: 3 pie charts representing demographic data of 268 students who completed the program.

EPP Demographics: program completers

2021-2022 total number of completers=268

3 pie charts representing demographic data of 965 students who completed the program.

Major and Minor Distribution: admitted and enrolled

2021-2022 total number admitted and enrolled=965

Bar charts representing the breakdown of where a total 965 admitted and enrolled students are majoring.

Bar charts representing the breakdown of majors and minors of 268 students who completed the program in 2021-2022.

Major and Minor Distribution: program completers

2021-2022 total number completers=268

Measure 1: Completer impact and effectiveness

MDE Teacher Effectiveness Rating: 2021-2022 effectiveness ratings for education majors

Percentage of teachers rated effective or highly effective

Average effectiveness rating for education majors

Total effectiveness rating for education majors

Measure 2: Satisfaction of employers and stakeholder involvement

Employer satisfaction

2021-2022 MDE administrator survey

QUESTION: As a first-year teacher, compared to other first-year teachers, to what extent is [TeacherName] able to...
	State Average % Effective	State (N)	CMU % Effective	CMU (N)
support all students in making connections to prior knowledge and experiences?	93.1%	534	87.2%	47
implement multiple strategies to present key content area(s) concepts?	90.7%	537	85.4%	48
utilize available technology to enhance the learning experience of students?	98.6%	536	91.3%	46
implement strategies which maximize student engagement to support positive student behavior?	87.0%	539	87.5%	48
organize the learning environment to guide student engagement during instructional time?	87.5%	538	89.6%	48
implement literacy and reading strategies appropriate to their content area(s) and grade level(s)?	87.0%	539	87.5%	48
differentiate instruction based on student assessment data to support each student's academic achievement?	82.1%	519	80.0%	45
support each student's socioemotional (e.g., social, emotional, psychological) development with instructional strategies and resources?	86.9%	536	83.0%	47
understand and make accommodations based on a student's IEP or Section 504 plan?	84.1%	511	77.8%	45

QUESTION: As a first-year teacher, compared to other first-year teachers, to what extent can [TeacherName] apply instructional strategies and resources to support...
	State Average % Effective	State (N)	CMU % Effective	CMU (N)
English learners?	82.3%	339	72.4%	29
high performing students?	88.1%	488	85.7%	42
low performing students?	86.9%	535	81.3%	48
students experiencing trauma?	84.3%	491	78.3%	46
students from culturally diverse backgrounds?	88.0%	476	76.7%	43
students with special needs or disabilities?	88.2%	508	83.0%	47
each individual student's learning abilities and needs?	87.1%	536	81.3%	48

QUESTION: As a first-year teacher, compared to other first-year teachers, to what extent is [TeacherName] able to build positive relationships with. . .
	State Average % Effective	State (N)	CMU % Effective	CMU (N)
students?	93.9%	538	93.8%	48
families/caregivers?	89.7%	517	84.8%	46
colleagues?	92.8%	538	91.7%	48

QUESTION: As a first-year teacher, compared to other first-year teachers, to what extent is [TeacherName] able to build positive relationships with. . .
	State Average % Effective	State (N)	CMU % Effective	CMU (N)
demonstrate responsiveness and flexibility to unexpected situations which arise?	88.1%	537	85.4%	48
act in a manner consistent with ethical and professional educator expectations?	94.8%	537	93.6%	47
utilize constructive criticism to reflect upon and improve practice?	93.6%	534	89.1%	46

P-12 Stakeholder Involvement

Affiliation Agreement Database

Alumni feedback

Feedback from 2018-2019 Alumni that have been teaching for 3 years

Pie chart with data and photo of a teacher in a classroom.

93.8% of alumni surveyed felt well or adequately prepared to demonstrate dispositions, ethics, and behaviors appropriate to the profession.

81.3% of alumni surveyed felt well or adequately prepared to use appropriate technology in carrying out professional responsibilities.

87.5% of alumni surveyed agreed or strongly agreed that their general education student teaching experience was helpful in preparing them to achieve teacher certification.