Preparing Teacher Candidates to Successfully Complete the Teacher Performance Assessment (TPA)

1. Preparing Teacher Candidates to Successfully Complete the Teacher Performance Assessment (TPA)

2. Implementing the TPA Dr. Marcia Matanin, Youngstown State University Dr. Julie M. Knutson, Minnesota State University-Moorhead

4. BACKGROUND • Stanford University (TPAC)—3 year grant to create a national teacher performance assessment • Twenty states have committed • Four accelerated states (OH, WA, TN, MN) • Ohio Resident Educator Licensure • Formative assessment coupled with goal-setting and coaching. • Annual summative assessment based on multiple measures of educator effectiveness including student growth • TPA appeared to be a good fit.

5. TPA Nationwide

6. Teaching Effectiveness • Of all the factors that affect student learning, the effectiveness of the teacher is the most important. • Effective teachers are able to clearly define student learning outcomes and provide a clear road map on how to reach those outcomes. • Effective teachers provide a “hands-on” approach to K-12 student learning. • Effective teachers provide “authentic assessments” to measure K-12 student growth.

7. TPA Characteristics • The TPA: • Is discipline specific • Integrates assessment throughout • Is K-12 student centered • Requires the teacher candidate to provide analytic feedback and support to K-12 students • Overall, allows the teacher candidate to present the complex process of teaching and the assessment of learning through multiple measures of best practice.

8. TPA Task 1: Planning • Planning for developing competencies and knowledge in content area. • Planning to support varied K-12 student learning needs. • Using knowledge of K-12 students to inform teaching and learning. • Identifying and supporting language demands. • Planning assessments to monitor and support K-12 student learning.

9. Program ImplicationsTask 1: Planning • Having teacher candidates take a closer look at the context—move from the general context (school level) to more specific (classroom level). • Planning to support varied student needs—move from IEP to all K-12 students (remediation and enrichment). • Using knowledge of K-12 students—where are they now? • Identifying and supporting language demands—this was brand new for us.

10. What did we do? • Revised the lesson plan format to more closely align with the TPA: • Academic language demands (vocabulary, form, function) • Assessment strategies (formal, informal) • Type of feedback to learner • Instructional strategies (teacher) • Learning tasks (K-12 students) • Analysis of learning (reflection) • HPE Lesson Plan Directions Master Template.doc • Lesson Plan Template_YSU.doc • Lesson Plan Template Directions_YSU.doc

11. What did we do (cont’d)? • Placed a stronger focus on the formal planning process including more attention to: • Context • Varied needs of learners • Planning for assessment • Planning how to provide feedback • Placed a “new” focus on academic language: • Vocabulary or forms • Related functions

12. TPA Task 2: Instruction • The learning environment. • Engaging K-12studentsin learning. • Deepening K-12 student learning. • Subject-specific pedagogy.

13. Program ImplicationsTask 2: Instruction • Students being “active” vs. “actively engaged” • Interactions: Teacher-student interactions and student-student interactions • Facilitation: Discussion in methods classes on how to facilitate this • Active Engagement: Deepening student learning through higher-order, critical thinking type questions and continued discussion with students. • New Prompt/Rubric: Subject-specific pedagogy

14. What did we do? • Video Recording: More video recording looking for examples of active engagement • Pedagogy: More focus on questioning strategies and the use of them during the instructional process • Lesson progressions: Links to prior learning • Feedback and Follow Up: Providing feedback and following-up with the K-12 student • Academic Language: Think about how to get K-12 students using the academic language

15. TPA Task 3: Analysis • Effective Teaching: Analyzing teaching effectiveness. • K-12 Student Learning: Analyzing K-12 student learning. • Feedback Type: Providing feedback to guide learning. • Feedback Usefulness: K-12 Student use of feedback. • Academic Language Application: Analyzing K-12 students’ language use and content area learning. • Purposeful Assessment: Using assessment to inform instruction.

16. Program ImplicationsTask 3: Analysis • Collecting, analyzing, and representing data • The reflection process • Are there opportunities for K-12 students to use feedback to improve performance (easier for our content because generally verbal/immediate) • Are K-12 STUDENTSusing academic language? • Analyzing Best Practice Pedagogy: How does the teacher candidate use this information to improve instruction?

17. What did we do? • Data Implications: Placed an emphasis on visual representation of data in our assessment course. • Self Evaluations/Reflections: Had teacher candidates analyze their own performance before receiving feedback from the CT or US. • What Next? One step beyond what worked, what didn’t, specifically what he/she would do differently if teaching the same lesson to the same class again.

18. Youngstown State University • Ohio is an accelerated state. • YSU is one of the 4 pilot programs. • Initial pilot: spring 2010 (15 students pre-selected across content areas and grade bands) • Second semester: fall 2010 (18 elementary education majors) • Third semester: spring 2011 (20 special education) • Fourth semester: current (AYA and MULTI)

19. Minnesota State University • Minnesota is an accelerated state. • MSU is one year behind YSU. • 2012-13 scoring is done within the University with remediation for teacher candidates. • 2013-14 is considered “high stakes” • MSU is now looking at creating a uniform Lesson Plan Template across the COE to create success for their teacher candidates.

20. Teacher Candidate Strengths • Varied by program/content area • Physical education: • Lesson planning • Instructional alignment • Assessment • Subject-specific pedagogy • Feedback to learners

21. Teacher Candidate Weaknesses • Again, varied by program/content area • Physical education: • Academic language—identifying needs • Academic language—identifying demands • Prior learning • Deepening student learning—questioning strategies

22. Overall Impact • Positives: • Uniform lesson plan format • Forces the notion of instructional alignment • Reinforces what effective teachers do • Showed program weaknesses that led to changes • Enhances the end product: A future professional • Prepared teacher candidates for the Resident Educator Licensure process in Ohio where they will be required to complete a similar, more extensive student learning project during year 4

23. Overall Impact • Negatives (faculty perspective): • Backing it into the program so quickly was stressful for faculty and students. • Teacher candidates who had finished methods but delayed student teaching were affected the most. • Negatives (teacher candidate perspective) • They viewed the TPA as just something to get over with so they could focus on student teaching vs. a documentation of good teaching taking place. • As with any pilot, a lot of questions. Wanted to see a finished product.

24. TPA WEBSITE http://www.edtpa.com/

25. Comments/Questions?

26. References • Unknown. (2011). Photographs. Retrieved on March 17, 2011 from WORTH1000 website: http://www.worth1000.com/