New York University Global Center

Troubleshooting edTPA Workshop

August 29th, 2013

1:30 – 4:30 PM

New York University Global Center

238 Thompson Street

Room 461

New York, NY 10003

Key Issues and Next Steps

Overall, participants feel confident regarding the transmission of content knowledge related to edTPA. They feel that their current courses teach candidates what they need to know pedagogically. Their concerns relate instead to the following areas:

Structural Concern: Students move through the program at varying rates, and in some cases, take courses and conduct supervised fieldwork in varying sequences. Given this, how can we ensure that knowledge of edTPA is imparted at the right time?

Validity Concern: Candidates who use more direct instruction seem to score better than those who use inquiry-based, constructivist teaching methods. This may be because it is easier to capture direct instruction on video. Group work, for example, does not record well, particularly in regard to sound. This raises questions about the validity of the assessment.

Social Justice Concern: Students in elite schools will likely respond to their teacher candidates differently than students in high needs schools. Since candidates are assessed partly by how their students respond, this biases the assessment in favor of candidates in more elite schools. This is dangerous, as it provides a disincentive to place candidates in high needs schools, and penalizes programs that do. This should be addressed in candidates’ reflection on “context” but it is unclear that this will be sufficient.

Framing Concern: Although content knowledge is already embedded into the curriculum at most institutions, edTPA assesses candidates on their capacity to explicitly articulate their work in terms associated with this assessment. How can we prepare our students to do this, while still teaching the content as naturally as possible rather than as something that is done just for the sake of the assessment? Moreover, teaching content as explicitly for the purpose of edTPA is also problematic because students are aware of the politicized nature of edTPA.

Difference Concern: There is no uniform way to restructure our programs, because we all have different charters with the state. This limits our ability to share strategies.

Faculty Time Concern: Helping students prepare their portfolios is very time-consuming for faculty. There are no extra resources or course releases to provide for this. Jessica Riccio from TC, for example, noted that 10 students taking the fieldtest generated significantly more work for her. This fall, she will have more advisees.

Candidate Time Concern: Students also are short on time. This process is demanding, particularly the expectations for writing commentary. [Note: Participants with scoring experience noted that students should be advised to be concise and only answer the specific question that is asked. This will decrease the workload, as students often write too much.]

Writing Concern: In a related issue, students are often not strong writers. The edTPA is evaluating their capacity not only to reflect, but to write on their reflections.

Information Source Concern: There are too many different sources of information regarding edTPA. One single authoritative source would be helpful.

Feedback Concern: It is unclear how much and what kind of feedback faculty should give to students to prepare them to submit their work for edTPA. It is also unclear how much responsibility faculty should take if students fail.

Specialty Area Concern: There is a lack of information about edTPA for specialty areas such as music, art, and physical education, particularly in regard to how candidates should capture them on video and audio.

Scorer Concern: There is concern about the background of the scorers. We were told that a master teacher and a teacher educator would score each portfolio, but it is unclear whether that occurred.

Scoring Concern: It is still unclear how scoring judgments are made, since commentary was not provided for the fieldtest. It is also unclear whether students need to pass every rubric. The details of cut scores are uncertain as well.

Partnership Concern: It was initially unclear whether all the public schools been notified about edtpa and videotaping. However, Dwight Manning notes that the Office of Teacher Education at Teachers College has confirmed that principals were notified. In addition, Dan Stein indicated that an email went to every principal asking them to allow students to be taped. He will try to locate the email and send it to Rachel. It is possible that schools may not wish to partner with us if we insist upon videos.

Technology Concern: Candidates must become technologically sophisticated. There are many technical issues. For example, files can be very large and take up a lot of space, so candidates must figure out how to store them. It is difficult to sync audio with visual, among other challenges. The quality of the video is seriously affected by the production values: how many mics are in the room and where they are placed, and the kind of tripod being used, for example. This is likely to privilege schools that can afford to purchase technology for their students, or favor students who can afford to purchase it for themselves.

Developmental Concern: Academic language rubrics may not be developmentally appropriate. There is also some concern that scorers are listening for specific buzzwords rather than assessing students according to the context and their capacity.

Different solutions

Each institution is attempting to meet these various challenges in different ways. For example, Relay purchased tripods for all of their students. They are also using video assessments in their classes, which helps candidates become comfortable with the process. In one program this year, Teachers College provided help and advice by hosting a “camp” when NYC schools are closed on break. Candidates wrote their commentaries and receive help with technology. Dan Stein of Touro College presented an Interactive edTPA aligned lesson plan for use in all courses. The lesson plan includes links to TPA definitions, Common Core Standards, and contain links to learning videos. Candidate’s written reflections and simulated lesson videos will required in this lesson plan and prepare candidates with videography and technology skills. The completed document which is sent to the instructor. All are welcome to view the lesson planning activity on RonaldLehrer.com. Touro is also using Blackboard in the Fall for an edTPA in-house trial. New York University is planning to pose two or three questions in the student teaching debriefing that use edTPA language. These are questions that NYU would have used regardless, but they will specifically relate to the terminology of edTPA in order for candidates to become accustomed to it. Candidates will likely also use them in their journal entries so they can develop their ability to write their assessments of their work. Frank Pignatosi from NYU also noted that candidates tend to think too abstractly about students, rather than think about the individual students. One positive aspect of edTPA is that it encourages candidates to think about their students individually.

Next steps

The suggestions for future events include:

Once we receive the scores from the fieldtest, it would be helpful to sort through videos and analyze why candidates scored as they did. It would also be helpful to view examples of successful candidate videos.

It would be productive to host a special program with principals to explain what kind of collaboration we desire, what the edTPA requires, and what they need from us.

Many of the concerns could best be addressed through a meeting with Beverly Falk.

It would be helpful to meet with people who do scoring for national boards. They could provide guidance in how to know what one is viewing and how to reflect on it.