About Title II | Contacts
VIEW TITLE II REPORTS
Login
SUBMIT REPORTS
Webinars
Technical Assistance
User Manuals
2016
University of Colorado - Denver
Traditional Program
Complete Report Card
AY 2014-15
Institution Information
Name of Institution: University of Colorado - Denver
Institution/Program Type: Traditional
Academic Year: 2014-15
State: Colorado
Address: Campus Box 106
PO Box 173364
Denver, CO, 80217
Contact Name: Mr. Tony Romero
Phone: 303-315-6346
Email: Tony.Romero@ucdenver.edu
Is your institution a member of an HEA Title II Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP) grant awarded by the U.S. Department of Education?
(http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/tqp/index.html)
No
If yes, provide the following:
Award year:
Grantee name:
Project name:
Grant number:
List partner districts/LEAs:
List other partners:
Project Type:
Section I.a Program Information
List each teacher preparation program included in your traditional route. Indicate if your program or programs participate in a Teacher Quality Partnership Grant
awarded by the U.S. Department of Education as described at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/tqp/index.html.
Teacher Preparation Programs
Teacher Quality
Partnership Grant
Member?
Early Childhood Special Education No Special Education No Urban Community Teacher Education No Total number of teacher preparation programs: 3
Section I.b Admissions
Indicate when students are formally admitted into your initial teacher certification program:
Postgraduate Undergraduate: junior/senior year
Does your initial teacher certification program conditionally admit students?
Yes
Provide a link to your website where additional information about admissions requirements can be found:
Provide a link to your website where additional information about admissions requirements can be found:
http://www.ucdenver.edu/ACADEMICS/COLLEGES/SCHOOLOFEDUCATION/ACADEMICS/Pages/Academic-Programs.aspx
Please provide any additional comments about or exceptions to the admissions information provided above:
Undergraduate students are accepted in their junior/senior years and no additional application fee needed. Undergraduate admission standard here is only for
students admitted to the TE program in their junior year of undergraduate study. Since they had been admitted to the university already, SEHD does not require their
ACT, SAT, high School GPA, etc. to be admitted into the TE program. GRE or Miller Analogies test scores are only required for students with lower GPAs.
Section I.b Undergraduate Requirements
Please provide the following information about your teacher preparation program's entry and exit requirements. (§205(a)(1)(C)(i))
Are there initial teacher certification programs at the undergraduate level?
Yes
If yes, for each element listed below, indicate if it is required for admission into or exit from any of your teacher preparation program(s) at the Undergraduate level.
Element
Required for Entry Required for Exit
Transcript Yes No Fingerprint check Yes No Background check Yes No Minimum number of courses/credits/semester hours completed Yes Yes Minimum GPA Yes Yes Minimum GPA in content area coursework Yes No Minimum GPA in professional education coursework No Yes Minimum ACT score No No Minimum SAT score No No Minimum basic skills test score No No Subject area/academic content test or other subject matter verification Yes No Recommendation(s) Yes No Essay or personal statement Yes No Interview Yes No Other No No What is the minimum GPA required for admission into the program?
2.75
What was the median GPA of individuals accepted into the program in academic year 2014-15
3.4
What is the minimum GPA required for completing the program?
3
What was the median GPA of individuals completing the program in academic year 2014-15
3.55
Please provide any additional comments about the information provided above:
The minimum average GPA for each admitted cohort is 3.0. Individuals applying with below 3.0 GPAs are treated on a case-by-case basis.
Section I.b Postgraduate Requirements
Please provide the following information about your teacher preparation program's entry and exit requirements. (§205(a)(1)(C)(i))
Are there initial teacher certification programs at the postgraduate level?
Yes
If yes, for each element listed below, indicate if it is required for admission into or exit from any of your teacher preparation program(s) at the Postgraduate level.
Element
Required for Entry Required for Exit
Transcript Yes No Fingerprint check Yes No Background check Yes No Minimum number of courses/credits/semester hours completed Yes Yes Minimum number of courses/credits/semester hours completed Yes Yes Minimum GPA Yes Yes Minimum GPA in content area coursework Yes No Minimum GPA in professional education coursework No Yes Minimum ACT score No No Minimum SAT score No No Minimum basic skills test score No No Subject area/academic content test or other subject matter verification Yes No Recommendation(s) Yes No Essay or personal statement Yes No Interview Yes No Other No No What is the minimum GPA required for admission into the program?
2.75
What was the median GPA of individuals accepted into the program in academic year 2014-15
3.3
What is the minimum GPA required for completing the program?
3
What was the median GPA of individuals completing the program in academic year 2014-15
3.98
Please provide any additional comments about the information provided above:
The minimum average GPA for each admitted cohort is 3.0. Individuals applying with below 3.0 GPAs are treated on a case-by-case basis.
Section I.c Enrollment
Provide the number of students in the teacher preparation program in the following categories. Note that you must report on the number of students by ethnicity and
race separately. Individuals who are non-Hispanic/Latino will be reported in one of the race categories. Also note that individuals can belong to one or more racial
groups, so the sum of the members of each racial category may not necessarily add up to the total number of students enrolled.
For the purpose of Title II reporting, an enrolled student is defined as a student who has been admitted to a teacher preparation program, but who has not completed
the program during the academic year being reported. An individual who completed the program during the academic year being reported is counted as a program
completer and not an enrolled student.
Additional guidance on reporting race and ethnicity data.
Total number of students enrolled in 2014-15:
281 Unduplicated number of males enrolled in 2014-15:
60 Unduplicated number of females enrolled in 2014-15: 221 2014-15
Number enrolled
Ethnicity
Hispanic/Latino of any race:
36 Race
American Indian or Alaska Native:
0 Asian:
5 Black or African American:
3 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander:
0 White:
Two or more races:
217 5 Section I.d Supervised Clinical Experience
Provide the following information about supervised clinical experience in 2014-15.
Average number of clock hours of supervised clinical experience required prior to student teaching
356 Average number of clock hours required for student teaching
568 Average number of clock hours required for mentoring/induction support
0 Average number of clock hours required for mentoring/induction support
0 Number of full-time equivalent faculty supervising clinical experience during this academic year
9.8 Number of adjunct faculty supervising clinical experience during this academic year (IHE and PreK-12 staff) 21 Number of students in supervised clinical experience during this academic year
225 Please provide any additional information about or descriptions of the supervised clinical experiences:
Colorado requires a minimum of 800 hours of clinical experience in all teacher preparation programs. In all of our initial licensure pathways/programs, all Elementary,
Secondary and Special Education Teacher candidates engage in a series of internships from the beginning of the program to the end of the program that equate to
over 900 hours spent working in schools. Elementary, Secondary & Special Education candidates have 3 internships spanning a minimum of an entire academic school
year and dual Special Education candidates have an additional 4th special education internship. Undergraduate teacher candidates have an additional early internship
their sophomore year before full admission into candidacy and engagement in the regular internship sequence. All internships take place in one of the UCD
Professional Development Schools (PDSs) or partner schools. We partner with five urban school districts in the Denver metro area and worked in 16 PDSs for the
2014-15 academic year. At each PDS, a university faculty member, known as the site professor, works closely with a school-based master teacher or instructional
coach, known as the site coordinator to support a cohort of 8-10 teacher candidates selected by each school to do their internships at the PDS. (Most full-time faculty
assigned to teacher education serve in the role of site professor as part of their overall academic year load. The remaining site professors are carefully selected and
hired from a pool of outstanding retired principals, curriculum specialists, or instructional coaches who have chosen to work part time with our program and serve as a
site professor in a PDS.) During each internship, teacher candidates are paired with classroom teachers who serve as "clinical teachers" as they model, co-teach,
mentor and provide additional feedback to teacher candidates as their practice develops. The site professor and site coordinator work closely with all clinical teachers
to support their ability to serve in their role (i.e., bi-monthly meetings, workshops, etc.)
Internships are very closely aligned with coursework while the performance based assignments and program assessments create a direct connection between
learning in courses and performance in the internship. UCTE has a well-established Teacher Education Collaborative Council comprised of all site professors, site
coordinators, and other teacher education faculty who meet for a full day 3 times across the year to ensure alignment between coursework and internships.
Internships provide teacher candidates with the opportunity to truly “live the life of a teacher” while learning to assume gradual responsibility for all aspects of being
a highly effective urban teacher. This experience is so crucial to teacher candidate learning and development that internships begin even before the university
semester with teacher candidates following their PDS school district calendar, working at their PDS 1-3 full weeks before university classes start and often extend
beyond the university semester. It is critical that teacher candidates capitalize on every opportunity to be immersed in the authentic world of teaching. The term
“school internship” was selected to signal a different model of teacher preparation from traditional models like “student teaching”, one that not only prepares
teacher candidates to teach students well in a classroom but also prepares them to engage in collaborative efforts with adults and youth in the school and community,
especially in school improvement or renewal. For this reason, TC’s will spend their time within school internships in classrooms, in the school, and in the school’s
community, seeking continuously to develop teaching skills in the broadest sense of the word “teacher.”
Section I.e Teachers Prepared by Subject Area
Please provide the number of teachers prepared by subject area for academic year 2014-15. For the purposes of this section, number prepared means the number of
program completers. "Subject area" refers to the subject area(s) an individual has been prepared to teach. An individual can be counted in more than one subject area.
If no individuals were prepared in a particular subject area, please leave that cell blank. (§205(b)(1)(H))
Subject Area
Number Prepared
Education - General Teacher Education - Special Education 19 Teacher Education - Early Childhood Education 12 Teacher Education - Elementary Education 47 Teacher Education - Junior High/Intermediate/Middle School Education Teacher Education - Secondary Education Teacher Education - Multiple Levels Teacher Education - Agriculture Teacher Education - Art Teacher Education - Business Teacher Education - English/Language Arts 13 Teacher Education - Foreign Language 2 Teacher Education - Health Teacher Education - Family and Consumer Sciences/Home Economics Teacher Education - Technology Teacher Education/Industrial Arts Teacher Education - Mathematics 7 Teacher Education - Music Teacher Education - Physical Education and Coaching Teacher Education - Reading Teacher Education - Science Teacher Education/General Science 12 Teacher Education - Social Science Teacher Education - Social Studies 11 Teacher Education - Technical Education Teacher Education - Computer Science Teacher Education - Computer Science Teacher Education - Biology Teacher Education - Chemistry Teacher Education - Drama and Dance Teacher Education - French Teacher Education - German Teacher Education - History Teacher Education - Physics Teacher Education - Spanish Teacher Education - Speech Teacher Education - Geography Teacher Education - Latin Teacher Education - Psychology Teacher Education - Earth Science Teacher Education - English as a Second Language Teacher Education - Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Education - Other Specify:
Section I.e Teachers Prepared by Academic Major
Please provide the number of teachers prepared by academic major for academic year 2014-15. For the purposes of this section, number prepared means the number
of program completers. "Academic major" refers to the actual major(s) declared by the program completer. An individual can be counted in more than one academic
major. If no individuals were prepared in a particular academic major, please leave that cell blank. (§205(b)(1)(H))
Academic Major
Number Prepared
Education - General Teacher Education - Special Education Teacher Education - Early Childhood Education Teacher Education - Elementary Education 12 7 47 Teacher Education - Junior High/Intermediate/Middle School Education Teacher Education - Secondary Education Teacher Education - Agriculture Teacher Education - Art Teacher Education - Business Teacher Education - English/Language Arts 13 Teacher Education - Foreign Language 2 Teacher Education - Health Teacher Education - Family and Consumer Sciences/Home Economics Teacher Education - Technology Teacher Education/Industrial Arts Teacher Education - Mathematics 7 Teacher Education - Music Teacher Education - Physical Education and Coaching Teacher Education - Reading Teacher Education - Science 12 Teacher Education - Social Science Teacher Education - Social Studies 11 Teacher Education - Technical Education Teacher Education - Computer Science Teacher Education - Biology Teacher Education - Chemistry Teacher Education - Drama and Dance Teacher Education - French Teacher Education - German Teacher Education - History Teacher Education - Physics Teacher Education - Physics Teacher Education - Spanish Teacher Education - Speech Teacher Education - Geography Teacher Education - Latin Teacher Education - Psychology Teacher Education - Earth Science Teacher Education - English as a Second Language Teacher Education - Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Education - Curriculum and Instruction Education - Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education Liberal Arts/Humanities Psychology Social Sciences Anthropology Economics Geography and Cartography Political Science and Government Sociology Visual and Performing Arts History Foreign Languages Family and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences English Language/Literature Philosophy and Religious Studies Agriculture Communication or Journalism Engineering Biology Mathematics and Statistics Physical Sciences Astronomy and Astrophysics Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Chemistry Geological and Earth Sciences/Geosciences Physics Business/Business Administration/Accounting Computer and Information Sciences Other Specify:
Section I.f Program Completers
Provide the total number of teacher preparation program completers in each of the following academic years:
2014-15: 111
2013-14: 118
2012-13: 137
Section II Annual Goals - Mathematics
Each institution of higher education (IHE) that conducts a traditional teacher preparation program (including programs that offer any ongoing professional
development programs) or alternative route to state credential program, and that enrolls students receiving Federal assistance under this Act, shall set annual
quantifiable goals for increasing the number of prospective teachers trained in teacher shortage areas designated by the Secretary or by the state educational agency,
including mathematics, science, special education, and instruction of limited English proficient students. (§205(a)(1)(A)(ii), §206(a))
Information about teacher shortage areas can be found at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.html.
Please provide the information below about your program's goals to increase the number of prospective teachers in mathematics in each of three academic years.
Please provide the information below about your program's goals to increase the number of prospective teachers in mathematics in each of three academic years.
Academic year 2014-15
Did your program prepare teachers in mathematics in 2014-15?
Yes
How many prospective teachers did your program plan to add in mathematics in 2014-15?
12
Did your program meet the goal for prospective teachers set in mathematics in 2014-15?
No
Description of strategies used to achieve goal, if applicable:
Our continued efforts are to reverse the downward trend in enrollment and increase back to the past enrollment averages plus 10%. We have increased efforts in the
undergraduate mathematics licensure program to grow this pool. We anticipate that participation in the Learning Assistant program will add to this pool. We have also
continued to work with the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences faculty. Work also continues in the development of a K-12 STEM pipeline within the Adams 12 School
District.
Description of steps to improve performance in meeting goal or lessons learned in meeting goal, if applicable:
We continue to expand opportunities for teachers to experience mathematics through a number of mathematics partners, grants and field-based opportunities. We
are continuing to support existing teachers to gain highly qualified status by providing the content courses needed.
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
This projection plans for continued increase in enrollment, anticipating that growth from 2013-14 to 2014-15 will remain on pace with projected growth from 201213 to 2013-14.
Academic year 2015-16
Is your program preparing teachers in mathematics in 2015-16?
Yes
How many prospective teachers did your program plan to add in mathematics in 2015-16?
12
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
This projection planned for continued increase in enrollment, anticipating that growth from 2013-14 to 2014-15 will remain on pace with projected growth from
2012-13 to 2013-14.
Academic year 2016-17
Will your program prepare teachers in mathematics in 2016-17?
Yes
How many prospective teachers does your program plan to add in mathematics in 2016-17?
10
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
This projection plans that the low numbers from anticipated enrollments for 2015-16 will rebound, based on the increased numbers of inquiries from potential
students as well as anticipating that growth from 2015-16 to 2016-17 will remain on pace with growth from 2012-13 to 2013-14.
Section II Annual Goals - Science
Each institution of higher education (IHE) that conducts a traditional teacher preparation program (including programs that offer any ongoing professional
development programs) or alternative route to state credential program, and that enrolls students receiving Federal assistance under this Act, shall set annual
quantifiable goals for increasing the number of prospective teachers trained in teacher shortage areas designated by the Secretary or by the state educational agency,
including mathematics, science, special education, and instruction of limited English proficient students. (§205(a)(1)(A)(ii), §206(a))
Information about teacher shortage areas can be found at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.html.
Please provide the information below about your program's goals to increase the number of prospective teachers in science in each of three academic years.
Academic year 2014-15
Did your program prepare teachers in science in 2014-15?
Yes
How many prospective teachers did your program plan to add in science in 2014-15?
12
12
Did your program meet the goal for prospective teachers set in science in 2014-15?
Yes
Description of strategies used to achieve goal, if applicable:
Recruiting through the Science Noyce and Learning Assistant programs.
Description of steps to improve performance in meeting goal or lessons learned in meeting goal, if applicable:
Recruiting through the Science Noyce and Learning Assistant programs.
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
We will not meet our goal this year, and recruiting through paths other than Noyce and the LA program has been sparse.
Academic year 2015-16
Is your program preparing teachers in science in 2015-16?
Yes
How many prospective teachers did your program plan to add in science in 2015-16?
12
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
We are working on ways to make our program more attractive to potential candidates. Increased content specific pedagogy, stronger internship placements, and
support outside of licensure (in partnership with our colleagues in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences) are all avenues that we are exploring.
Academic year 2016-17
Will your program prepare teachers in science in 2016-17?
Yes
How many prospective teachers does your program plan to add in science in 2016-17?
12
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
We are working to increase content specific pedagogy, strong internship placements, and support outside of licensure (in partnership with our colleagues in the
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences). Our Science Noyce and Learning Assistant programs continue to partner in recruiting efforts.
Section II Annual Goals - Special Education
Each institution of higher education (IHE) that conducts a traditional teacher preparation program (including programs that offer any ongoing professional
development programs) or alternative route to state credential program, and that enrolls students receiving Federal assistance under this Act, shall set annual
quantifiable goals for increasing the number of prospective teachers trained in teacher shortage areas designated by the Secretary or by the state educational agency,
including mathematics, science, special education, and instruction of limited English proficient students. (§205(a)(1)(A)(ii), §206(a))
Information about teacher shortage areas can be found at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.html.
Please provide the information below about your program's goals to increase the number of prospective teachers in special education in each of three academic
years.
Academic year 2014-15
Did your program prepare teachers in special education in 2014-15?
Yes
How many prospective teachers did your program plan to add in special education in 2014-15?
30
Did your program meet the goal for prospective teachers set in special education in 2014-15?
Yes
Description of strategies used to achieve goal, if applicable:
Description of steps to improve performance in meeting goal or lessons learned in meeting goal, if applicable:
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
2014-2015: Program faculty developed, and received CDE (as well as Regent’s) approval, to begin preparation of special education teachers at the undergraduate
level. This new program offering is in addition to our current post-baccalaureate/graduate level program options. The UG program began in fall term, 2014 so it is
unlikely that there will be a measurable increase in the number of new teachers prepared during the 2014-2015 academic year from this new program option.
unlikely that there will be a measurable increase in the number of new teachers prepared during the 2014-2015 academic year from this new program option.
Extension into the arena of UG education has allowed us to reach a new audience of prospective teachers, and may have a positive impact on the diversity of our
student body as well. However, even with a flexible model of enrollment for current UG students who seek to transfer into this new plan of studies, it is anticipated
that it will be the 2017-2017 academic year before we see results in our enrollment numbers.
Academic year 2015-16
Is your program preparing teachers in special education in 2015-16?
Yes
How many prospective teachers did your program plan to add in special education in 2015-16?
40
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
Undergraduate
We anticipate significant growth in our special education program as a result of our new undergraduate licensure program. We currently have 16 undergraduate
students and expect to enroll a new cluster of students in the fall of 2015. Our continued collaboration with the newly established office of Admissions and Outreach
should result in a robust special education undergraduate program.
Post-baccalaureate/graduate level
We also anticipate growth at the post-baccalaureate and graduate level. During the 2014-2015 academic year, our special education program faculty engaged in
evaluating our program, enrollment patterns, and our plans of study. This work has led to decisions regarding streamlining our plans of study, increasing our online
course offerings, and creating new certificate programs with a focus on strengthening special education teachers’ expertise in serving students identified with specific
learning disabilities and emotional / behavioral disabilities. This work is ongoing and will continue through the 2015-2016 academic year.
Academic year 2016-17
Will your program prepare teachers in special education in 2016-17?
Yes
How many prospective teachers does your program plan to add in special education in 2016-17?
20
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
Like many other graduate special education programs around the country, ours has seen a decline in enrollment over the last several years. We hope that our new
undergraduate program, coupled with a revised MA program, that our enrollment will increase in the coming years.
Section II Annual Goals - Instruction of Limited English Proficient Students
Each institution of higher education (IHE) that conducts a traditional teacher preparation program (including programs that offer any ongoing professional
development programs) or alternative route to state credential program, and that enrolls students receiving Federal assistance under this Act, shall set annual
quantifiable goals for increasing the number of prospective teachers trained in teacher shortage areas designated by the Secretary or by the state educational agency,
including mathematics, science, special education, and instruction of limited English proficient students. (§205(a)(1)(A)(ii), §206(a))
Information about teacher shortage areas can be found at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.html.
Please provide the information below about your program's goals to increase the number of prospective teachers in instruction of limited English proficient students
in each of three academic years.
Academic year 2014-15
Did your program prepare teachers in instruction of limited English proficient students in 2014-15?
Yes
How many prospective teachers did your program plan to add in instruction of limited English proficient students in 2014-15?
40
Did your program meet the goal for prospective teachers set in instruction of limited English proficient students in 2014-15?
Yes
Description of strategies used to achieve goal, if applicable:
Most of our efforts to increase main campus (D1) enrollment was to increase our extended studies (D2) enrollment in certificate classes which then prepares teachers
of LEP to enroll in D1. We were very successful in these efforts.
Description of steps to improve performance in meeting goal or lessons learned in meeting goal, if applicable:
These efforts have been successful and have increased our visibility and desirability to teachers in a wide range of districts. Also, we work collaboratively with
districts that must be in compliance with OCR requirements including coursework for teaching LEP.
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
We hired a full time Tenure Track Assistant Professor to develop the Bilingual Specialist endorsement. Dr. Luis Poza was hired and he got the Bilingual Specialist
endorsement approved and he developed coursework taught in Spanish. We enhanced the CLDE program to address more than English as a Second Language and to
focus on historical and legal foundations and on bilingualism. Concentrated effort to organize faculty including Tenure Track, Clinical, and adjunct around nonnegotiable assumptions of teaching bilingual students.
Academic year 2015-16
Is your program preparing teachers in instruction of limited English proficient students in 2015-16?
Yes
How many prospective teachers did your program plan to add in instruction of limited English proficient students in 2015-16?
40
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
We will continue to grow our D2 enrollments (plan to add 280) and partnerships to increase the D1 endorsement and MA programs.
Academic year 2016-17
Will your program prepare teachers in instruction of limited English proficient students in 2016-17?
Yes
How many prospective teachers does your program plan to add in instruction of limited English proficient students in 2016-17?
40
Provide any additional comments, exceptions and explanations below:
We will continue to grow our D2 enrollments (plan to add 280) and partnerships to increase the D1 endorsement and MA programs.
Section II Assurances
Please certify that your institution is in compliance with the following assurances. (§205(a)(1)(A)(iii), §206(b)) Note: Be prepared to provide documentation and
evidence for your responses, when requested, to support the following assurances.
Preparation responds to the identified needs of the local educational agencies or States where the program completers are likely to teach, based on past hiring and
recruitment trends.
Yes
Preparation is closely linked with the needs of schools and the instructional decisions new teachers face in the classroom.
Yes
Prospective special education teachers are prepared in core academic subjects and to instruct in core academic subjects.
Yes
Prospective general education teachers are prepared to provide instruction to students with disabilities.
Yes
Prospective general education teachers are prepared to provide instruction to limited English proficient students.
Yes
Prospective general education teachers are prepared to provide instruction to students from low-income families.
Yes
Prospective teachers are prepared to effectively teach in urban and rural schools, as applicable.
Yes
Describe your institution’s most successful strategies in meeting the assurances listed above:
Because of the highly collaborative nature of our teacher preparation program and the innovative, in-depth partnerships we have established (see section on clinical
practice), our preparation curriculum remains on the cutting edge to provide teacher candidates with knowledge, skills, and dispositions to meet the needs of
culturally, linguistically, and socioeconomically diverse students while also preparing our teacher candidates to constantly respond to the most pressing and realistic
challenges of working in highly diverse schools. We have a well-established Teacher Education Collaborative Council comprised of university and K-12 faculty that
work together to constantly refine our curriculum and internship experiences to meet these needs. The Director of Teacher Education meets with district
administrators in our 5 urban partner districts along with principals of all professional development schools three times a year through a PDS Leadership Institute. The
majority of our full-time teacher education faculty work as site professors in our professional development schools or are involved in collaborative research and
professional development initiatives within our urban partner districts allowing them to understand deeply the realities of the life of urban teachers, schools,
students, and communities.
All of our teacher candidates experience a common core of courses (15 credit hours) in addition to their specialty methods courses that provide teacher candidates
with clear instruction and training on meeting the needs of children with disabilities, children for whom English is a second language, and children who live in poverty
(please see section on Teacher Training for more specifics related to this curriculum). These courses are taken simultaneously alongside professional development
school internships where teacher candidates immediately apply their learning from courses to the practice of teaching with the guidance and mentoring from clinical
teachers, site coordinators, and site professors each week.
Issues of content preparation for special education students are attended to in a two-fold manner. First, special education is only available at the graduate level at CU
Issues of content preparation for special education students are attended to in a two-fold manner. First, special education is only available at the graduate level at CU
Denver. Prior to admission, a transcript evaluation is done for every special education applicant to assure broad content preparation in all core academic areas of
mathematics, science, language arts, and social studies. Secondly, all special education teachers take all five courses in the common curriculum core for all teacher
candidates that attend to issues of general instructional pedagogy to meet the needs of all diverse learners and an additional 11 credit hours in content specific
methods of how to teach core subjects as well as a uniquely designed course that examines the cross-section of students who are linguistically diverse and have
identified disabilities and how to design curriculum, instruction, and assessment that needs their unique needs.
Section III Assessment Pass Rates
Assessment code - Assessment name
Test Company
Group
Number Avg. Number Pass
taking scaled passing rate
tests
score
tests (%)
027 -EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION Evaluation Systems group of Pearson Other enrolled students 12 253 12 100 027 -EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2014-15 12 254 12 100 027 -EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2013-14 027 -EARLY CHILDHOOD SPECIAL EDUCATION Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2012-13 8 33 247 001 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION Evaluation Systems group of Pearson Other enrolled students 3 001 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2014-15 3 001 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2013-14 9 001 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2012-13 13 257 0014 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) Other enrolled students 5 5018 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) Other enrolled students 7 0014 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 5 33 100 13 100 0014 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 11 177 11 100 0014 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2012-13 19 168 19 100 5014 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) Other enrolled students 19 174 19 100 5014 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 39 177 39 100 5014 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 35 171 35 100 5014 -ELEMENTARY EDUCATION: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2012-13 16 178 16 100 007 -ENGLISH Evaluation Systems group of Pearson Other enrolled students 3 007 -ENGLISH 4 007 -ENGLISH Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2014-15 4 007 -ENGLISH Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2013-14 2 007 -ENGLISH Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2012-13 6 5038 -ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) Other enrolled students 2 5038 -ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 1 0041 -ENGLISH LANGUAGE: LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 2 0041 -ENGLISH LANGUAGE: LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 6 0041 -ENGLISH LANGUAGE: LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2012-13 9 5041 -ENGLISH LANGUAGE: LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 5 5041 -ENGLISH LANGUAGE: LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 5 008 -FRENCH Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2014-15 1 008 -FRENCH Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2013-14 1 0435 -GENERAL SCIENCE: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) Other enrolled students 2 0435 -GENERAL SCIENCE: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 5 0435 -GENERAL SCIENCE: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 5 0435 -GENERAL SCIENCE: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2012-13 3 5435 -GENERAL SCIENCE: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) Other enrolled students 8 5435 -GENERAL SCIENCE: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 5 5435 -GENERAL SCIENCE: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 2 004 -MATHEMATICS Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2014-15 4 004 -MATHEMATICS Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2013-14 4 004 -MATHEMATICS 3 004 -MATHEMATICS Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2012-13 3 0061 -MATHEMATICS: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 1 0061 -MATHEMATICS: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 1 0061 -MATHEMATICS: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2012-13 2 5061 -MATHEMATICS: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 3 005 -SCIENCE Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2014-15 2 005 -SCIENCE Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2013-14 2 005 -SCIENCE Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2012-13 4 006 -SOCIAL STUDIES Evaluation Systems group of Pearson Other enrolled students 1 006 -SOCIAL STUDIES Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2014-15 3 006 -SOCIAL STUDIES Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2013-14 5 006 -SOCIAL STUDIES Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2012-13 6 0081 -SOCIAL STUDIES: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) Other enrolled students 5 0081 -SOCIAL STUDIES: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 1 0081 -SOCIAL STUDIES: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 8 0081 -SOCIAL STUDIES: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2012-13 11 171 11 100 5081 -SOCIAL STUDIES: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) Other enrolled students 11 172 11 100 5081 -SOCIAL STUDIES: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2014-15 7 5081 -SOCIAL STUDIES: CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (CBT) Educational Testing Service (ETS) All program completers, 2013-14 5 009 -SPANISH Evaluation Systems group of Pearson Other enrolled students 3 009 -SPANISH Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2014-15 1 009 -SPANISH 1 Evaluation Systems group of Pearson Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2013-14 009 -SPANISH Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2012-13 1 020 -SPECIAL EDUCATION GENERALIST Evaluation Systems group of Pearson Other enrolled students 4 020 -SPECIAL EDUCATION GENERALIST Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2014-15 7 020 -SPECIAL EDUCATION GENERALIST Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2013-14 9 020 -SPECIAL EDUCATION GENERALIST Evaluation Systems group of Pearson All program completers, 2012-13 12 257 12 100 Section III Summary Pass Rates
Group
Number Number Pass
taking passing rate
tests
tests (%)
All program completers, 2014-15 108 108 100 All program completers, 2013-14 117 117 100 All program completers, 2012-13 135 135 100 Section IV Low-Performing
Provide the following information about the approval or accreditation of your teacher preparation program.
Is your teacher preparation program currently approved or accredited?
Yes
If yes, please specify the organization(s) that approved or accredited your program:
NCATE
Is your teacher preparation program currently under a designation as "low-performing" by the state (as per section 207(a) of the HEA of 2008)?
No
Section V Use of Technology
Provide the following information about the use of technology in your teacher preparation program. Please note that choosing 'yes' indicates that your teacher
preparation program would be able to provide evidence upon request.
Does your program prepare teachers to:
integrate technology effectively into curricula and instruction
Yes
use technology effectively to collect data to improve teaching and learning
Yes
use technology effectively to manage data to improve teaching and learning
Yes
use technology effectively to analyze data to improve teaching and learning
Yes
Provide a description of the evidence that your program uses to show that it prepares teachers to integrate technology effectively into curricula and instruction, and
to use technology effectively to collect, manage, and analyze data in order to improve teaching and learning for the purpose of increasing student academic
achievement. Include a description of the evidence your program uses to show that it prepares teachers to use the principles of universal design for learning, as
applicable. Include planning activities and a timeline if any of the four elements listed above are not currently in place.
Technology is an important part of all aspects of UCD’s Teacher Education programs, with technology skills integrated throughout coursework, performance
assessments, and program management which leads to the ability of teacher candidates to integrate technology into their own instruction with P-12 students and to
use technology to effectively collect, manage, and analyze data to improve teaching and learning.
All teacher candidates are required to have access to a computer and the internet. Nearly 75% of the coursework in teacher education is carefully developed as
hybrid courses that leverages the best of face-to-face instruction with online instruction through Canvas learning management course shells. This type of learning
environment allows for teacher development to become community-based and public, where teacher candidate work that is developed in the course is shared
publicly not only with instructors but with their peers so that ongoing feedback and dialogue regarding the complexities of urban teaching and learning are taking
place all the time, not just when students are sitting in a UCD classroom.
Teaching about effective uses of technology to teacher candidates is infused throughout UCTE courses and internship integration. For our undergraduates a course on
digital teaching and learning is required. Through a series of performance-based course assignments, teacher candidates are required to integrate technology into
digital teaching and learning is required. Through a series of performance-based course assignments, teacher candidates are required to integrate technology into
their lessons (e.g., digital story-telling, development of video reflections, use of smart boards, Google app's, etc.). CU Denver has also been part of a video-coaching
pilot with the Colorado Education Initiative that has provided i-pad/swivl video kits and specific training to teacher candidates and site teams to integrate the use of
video to support reflection on teaching and just-in-time coaching. Early results from the pilot show promising practices that are being planned as a larger-scale
implementation for all of our teacher candidates and professional development schools.
In the culminating performance-based assessment of the program that is connected to our 2-course general pedagogy series, teacher candidates develop and teach a
standards-based unit of instruction that incorporates pre-and post-assessment, along with formative assessment demonstrating a teacher candidates’ ability to design
and implement instruction that leads to student growth and achievement. Teacher candidates must use technology (e.g., spread sheets, data collection and
information systems in place at the professional development schools they work in) to collect, manage, and analyze the data from their unit to continually make datadriven decisions about next teaching steps throughout the entire unit. In addition, universal design for learning is a foundational planning framework taught to
students in the first pedagogy course and UDL is expected to be applied in planning the unit.
We also uses LiveText as our electronic assessment system. Performance-based assessments for the program are submitted and scored through LiveText including all
tools within the Internship Assessment Body of Evidence and Capstone Unit. Data from all of the assessments is carefully analyzed to determine both strengths and
weaknesses in teacher candidate performance so that faculty can quickly respond to needed program improvements.
Section VI Teacher Training
Provide the following information about your teacher preparation program. Please note that choosing 'yes' indicates that your teacher preparation program would be
able to provide evidence upon request.
Does your program prepare general education teachers to:
teach students with disabilities effectively
Yes
participate as a member of individualized education program teams
Yes
teach students who are limited English proficient effectively
Yes
Provide a description of the evidence your program uses to show that it prepares general education teachers to teach students with disabilities effectively, including
training related to participation as a member of individualized education program teams, as defined in section 614(d)(1)(B) of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act, and to effectively teach students who are limited English proficient. Include planning activities and a timeline if any of the three elements listed above
are not currently in place.
The CU Denver teacher preparation pathways are developed around a merged philosophy that general education and special education teachers should be prepared
side-by-side through the collaboration of special education and general education faculty. This has led to the development of a common, five-course core of classes
that all elementary, secondary, and special education teacher candidates complete that prepare them to develop effective instruction that differentiates for the needs
of students with disabilities. This common core also attends to issues of teacher training to meet the needs of second language learners. For example, in the second
core course entitled, Co-Constructing Culturally Responsive Classroom Communities for Diverse Learners, all teacher candidates learn foundational elements of
learning theory from a multi-linguistic and socio-cultural perspective to develop inclusive classroom communities characterized by caring relationships with all
students and establishing a classroom community that attends to the instructional, behavioral, and social-emotional needs of ALL diverse students. Through the third
core course, Data-Driven Decision Making for Diverse Learners, teacher candidates build on their knowledge from course two about culturally responsive classrooms
to focus in on the student's lived experiences in schools (as this course is paired with the first professional development school internship-- see clinical experiences
section) Through this course and their internship experience, teacher candidates engage in an extensive inquiry study that looks at the issues students in urban
schools face and how schools are organized to meet the needs of students facing those issues (i.e., second language acquisition, disabilities, homelessness, mobility,
transition, engagement, etc.) Students learn about Response to Intervention and then engage in the RtI model established at their school trying to ascertain how
students with the issue they are inquiring about would be best served in that school setting. These courses build a deeper understanding about the many needs of
diverse students in urban schools so that in their 2-course general pedagogy series teacher candidates are taught to develop responsive instruction that meets the
needs of all students including infusion of language and literacy development, sheltered instructional practices, universal design for accommodations and
modifications, differentiated instruction, and transformative critical pedagogy that relates to the diverse lives of their students.
In their internships all teacher candidates are expected to participate as a member of an individualized education program team alongside their clinical teacher as
part of the building Response to Intervention (RtI) model. Site professors and site coordinators introduce students to RtI processes in the building and how the school
organizes instruction to meet the needs of students through multiple tiered interventions that begin in the classroom and extend to special service providers.
Does your program prepare special education teachers to:
teach students with disabilities effectively
Yes
participate as a member of individualized education program teams
Yes
teach students who are limited English proficient effectively
Yes
Provide a description of the evidence your program uses to show that it prepares special education teachers to teach students with disabilities effectively, including
training related to participation as a member of individualized education program teams, as defined in section 614(d)(1)(B) of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act, and to effectively teach students who are limited English proficient. Include planning activities and a timeline if any of the three elements listed above
are not currently in place.
Beyond what all teacher candidates experience in the UCTE program listed above, special education teacher candidates receive an additional seven courses that are
unique to the role of a special education teacher to provide intensive, targeted instruction to meet the needs of students with disabilities and to serve as an
instructional leader in the development of individualized education plans for students with identified disabilities. Practices learned in these courses are emphasized
in their internships at their PDSs working alongside special education clinical teachers.
in their internships at their PDSs working alongside special education clinical teachers.
An additional course was developed in spring 2010 to help special education teacher candidates more deeply understand the needs of students with disabilities who
are also second language learners (SPED 5740: Linguistically Responsive Special Education). This course supports teacher candidate's ability to distinguish between
language issues and disability issues in order to stop the practice of over identification of English Language Learners in special education.
Section VII Contextual Information
Please use this space to provide any additional information that describes your teacher preparation program(s). You may also attach information to this report card.
The U.S. Department of Education is especially interested in any evaluation plans or interim or final reports that may be available.
Located in the heart of downtown Denver, the CU Denver downtown campus offers degree programs in liberal arts and sciences and professional degree programs in
architecture and planning, business, education, engineering, the arts, and public affairs. As one of the three campuses in the University of Colorado system, CU Denver
benefits from the academic and administrative support structures of the University system. CU Denver shares the Auraria campus with two other institutions: the
Metropolitan State University of Denver and the Community College of Denver. Approximately 14,000 CU Denver downtown campus students pursued degrees in
about 100 fields of study. CU Denver downtown campus students range in age from 17 to 75, with the average age of 26. At the downtown campus almost 30% of
degree-seeking students are enrolled in graduate programs. The CU Denver School of Education and Human Development provides leadership for learning, teaching,
and mental health in urban communities through research and education. Faculty work to prepare highly competent and culturally responsive practitioners to serve as
leaders in schools, districts, mental health agencies, and other settings. To increase learning and life opportunities for all students and families, program faculty and
students combine research and action as they work with urban communities to address the complexities of poverty, English language acquisition, ability differences,
and mental health. CU Denver's School of Education and Human Development provides undergraduate and post-baccalaureate education for students seeking initial
licensure as teachers as well as advanced credentials and degrees. The School of Education and Human Development offers the following undergraduate and
graduate state-approved and CAEP-accredited programs for initial teacher licensure: (1) UCTE Undergraduate Licensure Program: Elementary, Secondary English,
Secondary Math, Secondary Social Studies, Secondary Science, Secondary Foreign Language (Spanish or French) -- English tracks have the option of adding a
linguistically diverse education endorsement onto their initial license; (2) UCTE Graduate Program: Elementary and Elementary Dual (General Education and Special
Education), Secondary and Secondary Dual (General Education and Special Education) in English, Science, Math, Social Studies, and Foreign Language, Special
Education: K-12 Generalist, Early Childhood Special Education; and (3) BA in Education: Elementary Education, Early Childhood Education, Special Education (Note that
the BA will undergo CAEP accreditation review in the next review cycle). The School of Education and Human Development’s graduate students are non-traditional,
even in the initial licensure programs. Most teacher candidates enter with significant work experience in other fields and many continue to work and carry on
significant family responsibilities while earning an initial teaching license. CU Denver's initial licensure programs are designed so that teacher candidates immerse
themselves in a professional development school and its classrooms through a year-long sequence of internships in order to enhance their university coursework and
their overall understanding of what it means to be a teacher. Professional Development School and University faculties work together to link each teacher candidate’s
internships with the university classes for the benefit of P-12 students. Concurrent learning at the school and university is deliberately planned so teacher candidates
develop both the theoretical and the practical knowledge needed for great teaching. The undergraduate initial teacher licensure program at the University of
Colorado Denver is a joint effort between the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and the School of Education and Human Development. This UCTE Undergraduate
program is dedicated to quality teacher education. To that end our admission standards are rigorous and there are a number of program “gates” that teacher
candidates go through in order to complete licensure. Because the post-baccalaureate/graduate initial licensure program is designed for those who already hold at
least a bachelor's degree, usually in liberal arts and sciences; it is fast-paced and rigorous.
Supporting Files
Complete Report Card
This is a United States Department of Education computer system.
AY 2014-15
About Title II | Technical Assistance | Privacy Policy | Contacts