edTPA Score Results

1. An evidence-based reflection on edTPA implementation and its impact on teacher preparationCorinne Donovan, Emily Kang, MaryJean McCarthy, Devin ThornburgAdelphi UniversityAlbany, New YorkJune 18, 2014

2. edTPA Score Results *Two students failed due to uploading issues Undergrad students are PE, Music and Art. Graduate students include all Masters programs plus the STEP (5 year BA/MA).

3. edTPA ITEM ANALYSIS

4. Methods Courses Mini edTPA’s starting 2 years prior to edTPA state licensure exam Science mini edTPA https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBaFA4aE9valJjZDA/edit?usp=sharing Math mini edTPA format https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBcmJlWTJrS1c4c2s/edit?usp=sharing Social Studies and Critical Literacy Unit Plan https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBMkxTQ0xHZWRBVmhvUmp3aW5oU2tnY0p4NGxv/edit?usp=sharing

5. edTPA Seminars Standing Fieldwork Committee created EdTPA Working Group. Chair shared edTPA seminar plan with Dean who secured support from University Administration to run 5 noncredit bearing, tuition-free edTPA seminars (January – March 2014). 1 in Physical Education and Health 1 in Special Education 1 in Adolescence 1 in our NYC location (mixed content) 1 in Childhood Education

6. edTPA Seminar • Syllabi • Childhood • https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBME8xUFZueDVYcUE/edit?usp=sharing • Adolescent • https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBMGpUZDkxYWxIQ28/edit?usp=sharing • Lesson plan template https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBb2wyd3pCMXJhUTg/edit?usp=sharing • Moodle and Google site https://sites.google.com/a/adelphi.edu/edtpa-draft-childhood-ed/ • Plethora of “digestible”, focused resources • e.g., Video Thoughts to consider (aligned with “unpacked” rubrics) https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBNF9mQ1lTdGthbWs/edit?usp=sharing

8. Curriculum Mapping Ongoing! • Program meetings • Curriculum & Instruction department meetings • School of Education retreats • Using Evidence for Program Improvement – May 13, 2014 • Childhood Retreat- June 25, 2014

9. edTPA Student Feedback Survey ( Survey Monkey) ( N= 32) https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8uGWEpTm5CYbDduNV9LYWczZFk/edit?usp=sharing Follow-Up Interview ( N = 7) https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8uGWEpTm5CYTlhGdHpNVFNYWUk/edit?usp=sharing

10. edTPA Student Feedback – High Level Strengths • It was an incredibly stressful year with all of the changes and new exams. • Reported a high level of support from the School of Ed in terms of the edTPA seminar and prep workshops provided for the exams. • The FT faculty had a strong command of edTPA and all felt that they found a primary faculty to count on for support.

11. edTPA Student Feedback – High Level Areas of Need • Some University Supervisors had little or no knowledge of edTPA, and were “in fact either learning along with them...” • Differentiation strategies in early courses. Specific names of strategies and types; need more and earlier. • Assessment course should be better aligned to edTPA requirements, more rigorous.

12. Student Recommendations • Even if NOT a model student, should begin placement in school (at least 1 day a week observing), and complete Task 4 before December. • Any experience using video analysis/ self-reflection will help prepare for edTPA and make you a better teacher, peers are critical since others’ perspectives are important. • Recommend ST’s get onto edTPA platform as EARLY as possible (just pay the $$, will have to eventually). There are many resources, and you will see and understand the exact formatting and technical requirements for each section. • What if some of the method courses paired students with a current ST to come observe with them, and provide some support for videotaping?

13. Focus on Assessment

14. edTPA ITEM ANALYSIS

15. Analysis of Task 3: Assessment • Rubrics associated with assessment • Rubric 3 (preassessment) • Rubric 5 (informal and formal assessments throughout instruction) • Rubrics 11-15 (analysis of findings from 1 assessment) • Rubrics 16-18 (Elementary Math)

16. Task 3: Assessment Requirements • Post-assessment • Rubric (how you will score post-assessment) • Summary of student learning chart and analysis of class set of work • 3 samples of student work (focus students) • Give feedback (written or oral) – write directly on student work or type in commentary • Next steps for instruction based upon what students did/not learn

17. Possible reasons for low scores on Task 3 • Task 3 tends to be the lowest scoring task • Possible reasons: • Fatigue by the end of this process • Weak background in assessing student work, developing rubrics, aligning assessments to objectives and rubrics • PERSEVERE UNTIL THE END! • IT COULD MAKE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PASSING AND NOT PASSING!

18. Rubric 3 (from Adol Science) While preassessing students is not required by edTPA, doing so may help candidates who are new to their placement quickly identify student learning needs and strengths.

19. Rubric 5 (from Elem Literacy ) • Examples of assessments: Think pair share, kwl informal assessments, Oral, written, diagrams, mapping • Make sure IEP/504 accommodations are met (longer time, scribe); if no IEPs/504s than not applicable • Level 4: multiple assessments in multiple ways throughout start out with KWL, then do think-pair-share, then do groupwork where they create multimedia, then give formative assessment  assessment is throughout.

20. Rubric 13 (from Adol SS) • Candidate describes how students will use feedback to revise current work: • Ex: “If you redo and turn back into me then I will give you higher points” • Ideal candidate response on lesson on maps/diagrams: Need to label this better because that is what scientists/historians/mathematicians do.

21. Rubric 14 (from Adol SS) • Level 2: only addressed vocabulary • Level 3: evidence that students demonstrated syntax or discourse • Make sure that it is consistent with what candidate identified as language function initially: analyze, explain, justify with evidence • Level 4: talk about patterns (including discussion of subgroups • Usually scores are between 2 and 3

22. Pitfalls to watch for regarding Academic Language • Candidates only focus on vocabulary instruction • Language function mentioned in Task 1 is not consistently taught in lessons • Language function is not assessed in formal and/or informal assessments • Candidates (and supervisors and professors!) have unclear idea of what syntax and discourse are.

23. Ways to support candidates’ success in the immediate situation of student teaching Short term perspective: • edTPA seminar – there are so many technical and pedagogical layers to the edTPA that guided support is a must • Professors, supervisors should sign up to be scorers • Practice! Use real student work from candidate placements, tied to objectives – (art ed candidate comment – “I didn’t know what I was doing for assessment until I got to be in a real classroom context and knew what skills, content, language I wanted to emphasize with my students) • Practice in creating rubrics that align to candidate-created assessments

24. Factors beyond SOEs that nonetheless affect candidates’ ability to complete edTPA • K-12 schools’ tight adherence to Engage NY Common Core modules  affects candidates’ freedom to design inquiry-based curriculum • Teacher accountability/APPR constraints • Videotaping permission

25. Ways to cumulatively build stronger skills in this area across a candidate’s program Long term perspective: • Connection to research and theory – foundations, methods courses • Academic language throughout coursework • Practice assessing real student work • Good student teaching placements where they can see exemplary planning, teaching, assessing modeled • Build strong ties to local schools – ease of videotaping

26. Thank you! Further questions… Corinne Donovan cdonovan@adelphi.edu Emily Kang ekang@adelphi.edu Mary Jean McCarthy mccarthy2@adelphi.edu Devin Thornburg thornburg@adelphi.edu