Some general requirements of recordings include the following. A video clip must be continuous and unedited. For example, do not remove the middle 30 seconds of a 10 minute clip because a student is off-task for that part of the video. Check the video and sound quality to ensure that the students and candidate are seen and heard on the video. Practicing with the equipment beforehand helps reduce technical problems. Do not include the name of the state, school, or district in your video. Use first names for students, and void using last names. Mentor teachers should be present during edTPA teaching and video recording. Mentors do not need to leave, and in fact mentors are responsible for supervising candidates throughout internship.
The number of minutes and clips of video recording vary by discipline. The best source of information about minutes and clips is the description for Task 2 in the handbook. Nevertheless, all areas are permitted either 15 or 20 minutes of video instruction. Elementary literacy, elementary mathematics, and secondary mathematics may submit one clip up to 15 minutes, or two clips totaling up to 15 minutes. Alternatively, English language arts, performing arts, and secondary science submit two clips, totaling up to 20 minutes. And again, health education and visual arts may submit one clip up to 20 minutes or two clips totaling up to 20 minutes. All of the disciplines shown here include two optional clips. Candidates may include a three minute clip showing student voice and a five minute clip showing academic language. Optional clips do not contribute to the totals associated with instruction clips. For example, a portfolio in visual arts may include one 20 minute clip showing instruction, another three minute clip of student voice, and another five minute clip of academic language, for a total of 28 minutes.
The purpose of edTPA, according to handbook statements, is to measure novice readiness to teach. However, since most of the portfolio consists of candidates’ written response to commentary prompts, it is also, to some degree, a measure of writing proficiency.
Two types of writing frequently required for assembling a portfolio include descriptive and analytical.
Descriptive writing should be logical, well-ordered, with sufficient detail so the assessor comprehends the lesson plans, the students, and explanations supporting decisions about instruction.
Analytical writing consists of explanations and interpretations based on evidence. Evidence for Task 1 includes lesson plans, the Context for Learning, and instructional materials. These should be referenced often in the commentary.
Some general strategies to consider when responding to commentary prompts include 1) break down questions into their component parts, 2) maximize page limits by supporting claims with evidence and including one or more examples per prompt, and 3) note that writing prompts often correspond to rubrics, such as prompt 1 and rubric 1. However, also note that this correspondence is not perfectly true, since prompt 5 corresponds to rubric 5 and 2.
The definition of assessment according to the edTPA model is that it “includes all those activities undertaken by teachers and students that provide information to be used as feedback to modify teaching and learning activities.”
There are many types of assessments. Nowadays, educators often talk about formative and summative assessment. However, in edTPA, assessments are categorized as informal and formal. It is possible to align informal assessment with formative and formal with summative.
Nevertheless, the definitions provided for informal and formal assessment are defined with examples. Informal assessments include questions posed by the teacher or teacher observations of students. Practical methods for conducting observations for assessment include pair-share and think aloud, among others. In addition, any type of prompt presented by the teacher to elicit student response may be labeled as an informal assessment.
Some examples of formal assessment include assignments, quizzes, journal entries, projects, tests, lab reports, and so on.
Generally, the requirements for edTPA include multiple informal assessments across lessons, assessment of students’ prior learning to begin the lesson sequence, assessment of student voice, and a formal assessment summarizing student learning of the lesson sequence. In addition, the formal assessment should include an assessment criteria, though brief assessment criteria could be presented for each assessment included in the portfolio.
Let’s summarize academic language, which is generally students writing or speaking to express understanding of subject matter. It consists of discourse, which may be thought of as how students write or speak. It also consists of the language function, which is the way students are supposed to think as a result of engaging in the lesson sequence. The language function is more practically identified as the verb found in the central focus. The language demand is the method students use to express their understanding of subject matter. Syntax is the system used for organizing written or spoken communication. Vocabulary consists of subject-specific or general words, while language supports are the steps the teacher takes to help students learn all of the above.
Search your edTPA handbook for the word “target” and the phrase “central focus.” Note the number of times these words appear, as a way to understand the emphasis edTPA places on these elements of teaching and learning.
Also note that failure to attend to learning targets and a central focus as you write lessons and construct your portfolio will limit the strength of your evidence and your ability to write effective commentary.
The relationship between the standard, central focus, and learning targets is hierarchical. Typically, there is one Standard and one Central Focus used to inform and unify learning targets in the lesson sequence. Each lesson has its own learning target.
The authors of edTPA have designed Task 1 with five questions in mind. There are different ways to answer these questions. However, some approaches are more efficient than others.
The first question is, What do your students know, what can they do, and what are they learning to do? One of the best ways to answer this question is to use information from a preassessment, or previous assessment data.
The second question is, What do you want your students to learn? What are the important understandings and core concepts you want students to develop within the learning segment? One way to answer this question is with the Central Focus and Learning Targets of the lesson sequence.
Third, What instructional strategies, learning tasks, and assessments will you design to support student learning and language use? The answer to question three depends on many factors, such as grade and subject. However, general instructional strategies such as preview, review, practice, inquiry, formative assessment, preassessment and the like are useful for framing answers.
Fourth, How is the teaching you propose supported by research and theory about how students learn? One efficient way to answer this question is to rely on sources from coursework such as textbooks and articles.
Fifth, How is the teaching you propose informed by your knowledge of students? Again, we should rely on data gathered from a preassessment, or perhaps previous assessment data, and also from the Context for Learning write-up.
In 2012, TPA was renamed edTPA, to emphasize the “the educative nature of the assessment for teacher candidate learning and program renewal” (Professional Educator Standards Board, 2012).
Claiming that TPA was renamed edTPA to emphasize educative features is an exaggeration. There are practical reasons companies rebrand their products.
The most plausible reason, in the case of edTPA, is that an insurance company has owned the domain tpa.com since 1993. Pearson, Stanford’s operations partner, began using edtpa.com in 2012, presumably since tpa.com was already taken. Another reason is that TPA has been used as a general term to describe other performance assessments, according to California’s Commission on Teacher Credentialing, which uses the phrase Teaching Performance Assessment and the acronym TPA on its website. Leaving edTPA as TPA would have caused confusion and interfered with SCALE Stanford’s ability to enforce trademark and copyright provisions on their product.
Adding the prefix ed does not make an activity educative. Continuity linked to interaction makes an experience educative, according to John Dewey (1938).
Continuity refers to the principle that humans respond to experiences and learn from them. Interaction goes with continuity since humans recollect previous experiences to make predictions about the future and then adjust their behavior accordingly. Alternatively, miseducative experiences are those that “narrow the field of further experience.”
Hopefully, student teachers completing edTPA portfolios exit the process feeling ed- (rather than) mis-educated.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education.
Generally, rubrics for Task 1 and 3 are similar across disciplines and handbooks in edTPA. Examples include scales dealing with how lessons build on one another, using instruction to support learning, and eliciting student self-assessment on the learning targets.
The rubrics in Task 2 are somewhat different across handbooks since they describe specific learning activities student teachers should use in their portfolios. The exception to this is the rubric dealing with classroom management, which is the same for every discipline.
Since specific learning activities are inferred from Task 2 rubrics, the most efficient place to begin planning lessons is by examining Task 2 rubrics, and then organize learning activities that align with these descriptions. Some example activities according to Task 2 rubrics follow:
Secondary Science: Students construct a scientific argument, related to a science concept or phenomenon. Students display data to support of this argument.
Elementary Literacy: Students use a specific literacy skill, such as write to learn. Candidates determine beforehand whether students have requisite knowledge to use the skill, and also model its use.
Social Studies: Students analyze documents, events, or phenomenon and then form an interpretation. Students generate an argument from their interpretation and support the argument with evidence.
Performance Assessment of California Teachers (2010). Supporting Documents for Candidates. Retrieved from http://www.pacttpa.org/_main/hub.php?pageName=Supporting_Documents_for_Candidates
Student teachers are able to plan their portfolios around three, four, or five lessons. As long as other requirements are met, it is more efficient to write three lessons instead of four or five.
Think of your edTPA portfolio as a mini-unit. Your plans need not connect to any content that has come before or that will come after. But you do need to assess students’ prior learning and background knowledge. This can be accomplished with pre- and postassessment, but your portfolio does not need to reflect long-term learning or achievement. The portfolio is a snap-shot of what students learn over a short period of time.
Use a preassessment to describe students’ current understanding of the content (specifically the learning targets). Plan and deploy three lessons aligned with the edTPA model of teaching and learning according to your handbook. Then, conclude with a postassessment.
Planning three lessons instead of four or five will eliminate lesson writing, inclusion of additional instructional materials and it will also focus your commentary writing.
Pearson Inc. will charge student teachers $300 to score their edTPA portfolio. According to the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education website, this is a “fair” price.
It could be argued that the price is fair since Pearson has to pay for scoring, training, and information technology used for collecting and storing portfolio elements. Pearson is also paying SCALE Stanford, since this group owns edTPA.
Nevertheless, student teachers don’t receive much for their money, only 15 numerical scores. There is no feedback. Suggestions for improvement, or justification for marks are absent, and most educators agree that these are basic elements to fair and effective assessment.
Pearson Inc. does give users an opportunity to request feedback, presumably from university personnel. Presenting this option is deferring responsibility. For $300, Pearson Inc. should be providing some information about why particular scores were assigned. Plus, university personnel are not allowed to make substantive suggestions for improvement, and even if they did, the portfolio has been submitted.
Since being fair is important, student teachers should request feedback. They should request it from the owner of edTPA, SCALE Stanford, or from Pearson Inc.