Rick Ayers, a professor of teacher education at the University of San Francisco, reviews the controversy over EdTPA, the Pearson-owned assessment tool for future teachers. In the past, educational professionals decided whether teachers were prepared for their job. Now, in 35 states, teachers must take the Pearson EdTPA to win certification.
He writes:
The Education Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA) is the new set of evaluations of teacher candidates that is spreading across the country. Packaged as government-mandated test that assures the quality of teaching, it in fact colonizes the curriculum of teacher education programs and narrows the focus on teaching as pre-determined and top down delivery of lessons.
If you ask advocates about edTPA, they’ll tell you it’s a teacher performance assessment developed through a partnership between Stanford University’s Center for Assessment, Learning and Equity (SCALE) and the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE). They describe it as being designed “by the profession, for the profession” and “transformative for prospective teachers because [it] requires candidates to actually demonstrate the knowledge and skills required to help all students learn in real classrooms.” And policy makers are listening: as of November 2015, 647 educator preparation programs in 35 states are using edTPA, and it’s required for teacher licensure in 4 states.
Critics, however, tell a radically different story. In articles published in an increasing number of academic journals, blogs, and trade magazines, they question the validity of the assessment, its ideological stance, and its function as yet another tool of privatized, neoliberal reform. Barbara Madeloni, now president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association, was an early resistor. After the New York Times published a 2012 article about her students’ refusal to participate in an edTPA pilot, Madeloni lost her job at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. Later, she, with Julie Gorlewski of SUNY New Paltz, published a series of critiques under headlines like “Wrong Answer to the Wrong Question” that describe edTPA as reductive and poorly aligned with the goals of social justice education….
Many scholars and activists are especially concerned about the role of Pearson Education, who is the exclusive administrator of edTPA and charges $300 per candidate per submission. $75 of this goes back to a “calibrated scorer”–a teacher or teacher educator who, with just 19-23 hours of computer-based training by Pearson was magically transformed from unqualified to evaluate their own teacher candidates to a national expert in evidence-based assessment. The other $225, presumably, goes to Pearson, SCALE and AACTE, who are surely celebrating their resounding success: 18,463 candidates were required to take edTPA in 2014. At $300 each, that’s $5,538,900. It is true that Pearson offers some vouchers to offset the cost for candidates. But in 2014, there were a whopping 600 vouchers available for the entire state of New York.
I have learned from a high-level official in New York that EdTPA has caused numerous problems. The future teachers are supposed to submit videos that show them teaching but parents are reluctant to give permission to film their children. The pass rates of African-American and Hispanic candidates is disproportionately low.
To many observers, both inside and outside the teacher education profession, EdTPA seems to be just one more piece of the “reform” effort to break the teaching profession and make it easier to turn teaching into a scripted performance.
If anyone wants to defend EdTPA, go for it. I’m all ears.

YouTube is full of EdTPA videos showing teachers with students, in violation of FERPA. Pearson and EdTPA need to monitor and control the posting of these videos much more closely. If you want a defender, you should ask Linda Darling Hammond who was a key designer of the system.
LikeLike
I thought that the DoE under Duncan had quietly relaxed FERPA.
LikeLike
This is a matter of unprofessional conduct and should be addressed as such by prep programs or licensure boards.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
LikeLike
My experience with EdTPA for the past five years is just the opposite of Mr Ayers. It is not prescriptive. Our teacher candidates can be as creative as they want to be. Since it is modeled after NBPTS I assume Mr Ayers has issues with NBTS too. It is rigorous, focuses on tasks that all good teachers do and only the scoring belongs to Pearson. It makes our candidates think. Something multiple choice exams can’t do. Sorry, but I prefer it than the advice of higher toyed that are disconnected from what real teachers are faced with today.
LikeLike
You lost me (or autocorrect did) with “higher toyed”. Please clarify! TIA!
LikeLike
“that are disconnected from what real teachers are faced with today.”
If I may ask: When and how many years did you teach in K-12 public education?
LikeLike
Duane, does it work for PEARSON? http://www.allynbaconmerrill.com/authors/bio.aspx?a=204f58c4-67bc-44f6-80aa-f7e662624899
LikeLike
Sir — or Madam — I have SEEN the ads on Craigslist for scorers. They earn like $11-15 an hour. Are you kidding me?!
LikeLike
Modeled after NBPTS….hmmm…I thought you couldn’t apply for National Board Certification until after 3 years of experience. Now we’re expecting novices to perform at expert levels.
LikeLike
I would echo your experience, Sutton. Illinois State University: four years experience, 2000+ candidates, 29 fields, 86% of districts in IL, 1400+ scored through Pearson. Not disruptive, and we hear from supervisors that it has deepened their professional dialogue with candidates. It fits well, too, with the evaluation model once in practice. And yes, aligns well with NBPTS principles, but at the level of beginning teaching.
LikeLike
Actually, the concern over students in the videos came down to, Who “owns” the rights to the images of those students in the videos? Pearson does. A few of us, building principals, sent a letter to one of the colleges we typically accept student teaching candidates from and informed the college that we would not support student teachers in our buildings if the video component was shared outside of the actual critique. This letter was shared with NYSED and resulted in a change of process with the videos. We need to flex our muscles where and when we can.
LikeLike
Incorrect. The portfolio materials are the intellectual property of the candidates. Higher Ed asks their permission to use for PD or/and SCALE for scoring support, when it is a part of the parent consent form. They are free to grant it or not. A matter of professional conduct for which we all must hold ourselves to account.
LikeLike
To “Part of the Problem”, those are ads for PARCC scorers, not edTPA scorers. edTPA scorers do not get paid by the hour. To Terrence, Pearson does not own the videos, the teacher candidate does and there are strict legal constraints as to how they can be used.
LikeLike
In New York, United University Professions has been a crusader against Pearson and the edTPA, and has been calling for an overhaul of this exam for more than two years.
Last week, in fact, Jamie Dangler, UUP’s statewide Vice President for Academics, with members of the Board of Regents Higher Education Committee and State Education Department Deputy Commissioner John D’Agati to air concerns and criticisms about the test– which is broken and must be scrapped and reworked with input from teacher educators. You can read more about that meeting here: http://goo.gl/RKZKBv
In New York, enrollment in teacher preparation programs has declined by 40 percent since the 2008-2009 school year — due to the combined effects of the new certification process and recent changes that make it even more difficult for teachers to achieve tenure or good performance assessments.
The edTPA has so overwhelmed the student teaching experience that it is often the only issue student teachers can focus on; and student teachers have admitted that they have edited their edTPA videos to present a sanitized and unrealistic portrait of a classroom—one in which every child is attentive and no mishap or misbehavior ever occurs.
The costs to take and retake the tests are expensive for students and is simply a means to make a profit for Pearson.
UUP is committed to changing New York’s flawed teacher certification process, which are so out of whack that the Regents last year extended “safety nets” temporarily put in place that allow teacher preparation students to take an alternative path to certification if they fail one or more of the new certification exams. These alternatives will remain in place until June.
As Dangler said in a speech to members of the New York State Reading Association this week, “We’re not going to give up.”
LikeLike
2008-09 = Great Recession, an era of heightened rhetoric of teacher education as broken, and serious crises in pension benefits = parents discouraging education because of earning potential + overall decline in college-aged youth. To afford edTPA decisive in the choice to enter the field is grossly exaggerated. It wasn’t even on the national radar until states began Racing to the Top in 2010.
LikeLike
Great article/analysis! Thanks for posting! You won’t be seeing me defending EdTPA, although perhaps Linda Darling-Hammond, often seen as one of the great suporters of public schools may want to step forward. Of course, in her book The Flat World and Education: How America’s Commitment to Equity W
ill Determine Our Future (Multicultural Education) , she also saw Finland as the great education model! WOW!!! You know this education reform world is getting more bizarre by the day. https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2012/08/13/essay-argues-real-teacher-education-reform-going-led-profession
LikeLike
They lost me at “predicting capacity of a candidate.” Once again we see increased dependence on the reliability of some algorithm from a computer model that is designed to pidgeonhole candidates. Human beings are dynamic, not static, and I doubt a computer can tell us who’s a keeper. Big brother is testing you and your future potential. Put this idea in the round file with VAM!
LikeLike
I’ve been saying that Linda Darling-Hammond is no friend to teachers here for a very long time. Her work is not far removed from the Danielson and Marzano abominations.
It is all about people who wouldn’t last one period in a Title I classroom telling seasoned professionals what to do and how to do it, all derived solely from self-referential ‘research’ based on ridiculous theories.
Linda Darling-Hammond has been agreeing for years that teachers are the problem; her work is pretty useless otherwise. She failed to produce any kind of meaningful results with her own methods at her own experimental school and was forced to close it down, if I recall correctly.
Yet she, Charlotte Danielson whom no one can find any evidence of having ever taught in a public school, and Robert Marzano who simply reviewed the research of others before cashing in with his own branded company, have all been elevated to the loftiest heights of expertise regarding teaching by the neoliberal reformist movement.
I have far more respect and faith in any Title I teacher in an inner city school than I do in any of these higher ed charlatans who make the work lives of hundreds of thousands of teachers nearly intolerable and who have needlessly complicated and strangled a once-noble profession.
They are responsible for the cancerous growth of the micromanaging bureaucracies that have invaded classrooms all over the nation and the near-hourly harassment of teachers, all in the name of test scores and profits.
Infamous and never to be forgotten for the damage they have done. They are not to be elevated but rather ridiculed and ignored.
LikeLike
Another creepy aspect is that Pearson uses originality detection software and is in charge of determining the amount of “matching” that constitutes breaking the rules. Through social media I know of candidates accused of cheating who were simply using the common core curriculum mandated by their schools and included that in their portfolios. They can appeal, but the delays can mean the difference between finding employment or not. Also they receive a form letter that does not spell out exactly what the supposed “crime” was that they must then defend. IT IS A BIG MESS! http://alexandramiletta.blogspot.com/2015/10/software-to-indict-plagiarists-and-edtpa.html
LikeLike
Alexandra,
Thanks for the link. One of the most important aspect of all of this is contained in your statement “We’re always warned to read the fine print, but that doesn’t really mean we have much power to do anything about it, especially when it is a requirement of employment.” Everything has that small print and no one can do anything about it. It’s kind of like what is put in teachers’ contracts that they sign every year: “. . . and other duties as specified or requested by the administration.”
Carte blanche absolution for those that have the power to begin with. Tis quite sad. No sense of what is just, just what is legal-that is all that matters.
LikeLike
Also, have your read Noel Wilson’s work concerning the COMPLETE INVALIDITY of the whole educational standards and standardized tesing malpractices. If so what are your thoughts? Have you ever had your students read/discuss it?
LikeLike
I commented about edPTA on this blog about a year and a half ago. Back then, I had downloaded the visual arts handbook for edPTA, answered some survey questions about edPTA online, and looked at the published claims from the Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning and Equity (SCALE) about their R&D for edPTA, field tests, and so on. From that orientation, I had two follow-up exchanges about the R&D process and the specifics in the edPTA visual arts handbook.
One exchange was with Dr. Banhi Bhattacharya, Senior Director of Program Review at the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), who clearly did not understand the difference between a professional art school and a teacher education program in art. She was one of the key people who could recommend experts to SCALE, not just in the visual arts, but every subject.
The other exchange was with Dr. Andrea Whittaker at the Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning and Equity (SCALE). Among other questions, I asked her about the very low number of field tests for the visual arts, only 46, and with no indication of the grade levels of the test-takers in the field trials. Impression: She was not very savvy about the variety of job assignments for teachers in the visual arts (ranging from pre-K to advanced placement only) with multiple grade assignments typical. And I received no answers to my question about advisors on the visual arts except that they were experienced teachers and teacher educators.
Now, of course, Pearson has complete control. Because I am not part of institution administering edPTA, I cannot access any information about edPTA. I cannot make any informed comments about the content and requirements. So edPTA is in a black box for any independent review. Stanford decided to let Pearson have all rights.
Pearson has a monopoly and no incentive to listen at all with so many states caught up in the test mania, aided and abetted by USDE and a big last ditch effort by Arne and friends to keep in place a plan that will hold teacher educators responsible for the test scores of students taught by graduates of their programs. That threat may also explain why the American Educational Research Association—after fifteen years—decided to issue a statement about the use of VAM. Teacher educators and their programs are about to be VAMed and scores on edPTA will surely be part of those calculations.
LikeLike
“Teacher educators and their programs are about to be VAMed and scores on edPTA will surely be part of those calculations.” I’ve often wondered what will happen when college and university professors are subjected to VAMs. Any ideas?
LikeLike
Time for a legal challenge.
LikeLike
Hi! I am a teacher, an adjunct education professor, a cooperating teacher for a candidate for this Fall, and I work for the edTPA evaluating teacher portfolios in my ‘free’ time – I am also a long time reader of this blog who generally agrees with your points 90% of the time. To answer your question at the end asking for support for edTPA, I hope someone does actually want to know what a teacher, who is also a grader for the edTPA, thinks.
In comparison to many other types of assessments that have been used to evaluate teaching candidates, this system seems pretty fair – at least more fair than my own 15 years ago. EdTPA candidates are provided with lots of tools to help them design materials for their electronic portfolio – which really is a step by step process that teaches a lot about lesson plan design. They are asked to reflect, deeply, on the practice of teaching and the pedagogical dimensions of practice. They have to show student-directed learning, where students demonstrate their engagement, rather than rote memorization or drill and kill. Candidates provide feedback to their students, which must be constructive, as well as demonstrate how they will continue to work with students beyond the shown lesson plan(s), accounting for the diverse or homogeneous needs of their classroom. I would not speak for my own recent student teacher in this forum regarding how s/he feels about completing the edTPA, but in my discussions with him/her, s/he shared that it made him/her design lessons that stretched students at different levels and emphasized authentic assessment. I assume this is truthful.
I feel that the process to become a grader is rigorous – there was an application, an interview, training, practice portfolios, more training and then I was tested on portfolios. you also had to prove that you have worked with student teachers in the previous five years, as well as that you have an active placement at a school. I have had portfolios reviewed to see that I am doing them correctly and fairly. Honestly, the general quality that I have seen in candidate portfolios has been outstanding – teacher candidates across the country are very well prepared for teaching by their schools and by their student teaching experiences. I actually feel really good for my profession – that the next generation of educators cares about students rather than test scores.
I agree the new system is not perfect – it is expensive, it is time consuming, and you do have to get permission from students and parents to film. But, my students actually enjoyed learning a little about the process to become a teacher and not a single parent objected to our filming their kids (mostly from the back – you would be hard pressed to identify much detail in the film job I did – perhaps schools with more money have better equipment than I do.). I don’t know about passing rates for different groups of candidates and I always assume that any standardized system should do better with minority candidates. I would need to see some research or materials on passing rates – I can’t claim enough experience in the system to know much one way or the other.
After telling you all of this, I am honestly offended by your choice to include Rick Ayers comment regarding scorers: “a teacher or teacher educator who, with just 19-23 hours of computer-based training by Pearson was magically transformed from unqualified to evaluate their own teacher candidates to a national expert in evidence-based assessment.” How is that it that in this blog, which generally considers teachers the highly qualified professionals that we are, also easily suggests that teachers are incapable of evaluating teacher candidates? Most teachers (for NYS) have Master’s, have completed their own rigorous system to become a teacher, and continue to receive professional development (often at our own time and expense). We are the people who host observers and student teachers. And yet, to suit the purpose of driving the point that the edTPA is all bad, teachers are not capable of understanding evidence-based assessment to evaluate pre-service teachers. If an experience classroom teacher isn’t capable of examining the work of soon-to-be teachers, who exactly is?
LikeLike
I appreciate your detailed summary and it gave me some food for thought.
You need to learn to read sarcasm in comments, however.
The point wasn’t that Ayers thinks teachers aren’t capable of evaluation but rather that laws and regulations determined by Pearson ‘allow’ someone who was not considered qualified by the powers that be to suddenly change that status after minimal training from Pearson.
His point being that experienced professionals are already eminently qualified but are being denied that ability without Pearson intervening at a profit and that is insulting and outrageous to think Pearson training “magically” changes anything that wasn’t already there.
LikeLike
Annette, I appreciate your contribution to this dialogue. Due to the requirements for scorer eligibility, I cannot score (taught German in elementary schools, but have since lost my fluency), yet I have been elbow-deep in implementation at Illinois State University, and your perspective corroborates what I’ve heard from others who score.
I recently had a conversation with an architect who described his process for transferring a license across state lines. In addition to a battery of tests to address core competencies, he had to interview with a variety of local architects to achieve their endorsement of his competency. Hm.
I think edTPA is a measure of quality assurance that parents/guardians and their youth deserve. I have confidence in our programs to help candidates achieve what I see as a reasonable standard of beginning practice.
LikeLike
EdTPA, like high stakes standardized testing, is not logically or philosophically defensible. Anyone who tries to defend it should be met with a heavy dose of skepticism. Look at their motives, look at what they understand about education, look at their concept of fairness.
LikeLike
EdD,
If I may adjust your last sentence: “Look at their motives, look at what they MISUNDERSTAND about education, look at their MISCONCEPTION of fairness.”
LikeLike
Wow. Ideological polarity much? Might have a stake in student learning and an educated citizenry since they will one day be in charge of my care in the home when I am infirm.
LikeLike
“Wow. Ideological polarity much? Might have a stake in student learning and an educated citizenry since they will one day be in charge of my care in the home when I am infirm.”
Which makes edTPA a good solution… how?
LikeLike
A measure = a focus on knowledge of students, coherent planning for strong content understanding, engagement of students in understanding, and meaningful assessment of student learning = effective teaching to support student learning = people I can trust to think deeply.
LikeLike
I know of at least one teacher at a private school who is having great difficulty getting video permissions from the parents of her Pre K students. These are wealthy parents sending their children to a private school, so they’re disinclined to sign off on this nonsense. The teacher has to foot the bill for this! In addition – please verify this, I think it’s true – doesn’t Pearson OWN the video footage once you send it in? And, who is grading this video?
I’m involved with U Pre K in New York City. They are using Curriculum Gold, Writing Sample and other software for data entry and analysis. They encourage the teacher to upload videos of the students. To what location are these videos, photos, artwork and written work being uploaded? Who is keeping them?
Now, on to Pearson. Teachers must re-take the CST for a Pre K extension, even though we took and passed it for certification in NY State. It is $200 to take it. It is such a flawed test that most people fail. New York State says we can use our old test! They call it the “safety net.”But you still must take the new Pearson test before you can use the safety net. How much money is Pearson making from this?
LikeLike
The EdTPA, suffers all the inherent epistemologcial and ontological errors as any standardized test process that render it COMPLETELY INVALID as proven by Noel Wilson in his never refuted nor rebutted classic treatise “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine.
1. A description of a quality can only be partially quantified. Quantity is almost always a very small aspect of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category only by a part of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as unidimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing the descriptive information about said interactions is inadequate, insufficient and inferior to the point of invalidity and unacceptability.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other words all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. And a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it attempts to measure “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self-evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
LikeLike
This is interesting – It seems like you’ve spent a great deal of time thinking about the issues with these types of evaluations. I agree that Wilson’s analysis is a key reading to understanding the bias in standardized testing. My question is, what would you use to replace the edTPA that will control for bias, as well as preventing students from ‘internalizing’ being evaluated? On a practical level, most adults receive some sort of yearly evaluation, including at their jobs, medical, fiscal, etc. And, while we definitely can talk about the issues with power in those who do the evaluating in all of these settings, what is the alternative? Would you be willing to suggest some/one alternative that factors in your critiques from above? I would very much enjoy reading it.
LikeLike
Annette:
“I agree that Wilson’s analysis is a key reading to understanding the bias in standardized testing.”
Wilson, and myself, are not so much interested in “understanding the bias in standardized testing” but in pointing out that the whole process from a definitional standpoint, from an epistemological and ontological foundational standpoint is completely invalid. Bias has no meaning if the data used is invalid because any conclusions drawn era invalid and therefore can’t be used to point out bias.
I see the main problem that you are attempting to address is “bias” of the evaluator and that we can make an “objective” assessment instrument that will eliminate or at least supposedly lessen that bias. And that relates to the thinking that if something is “measured” that it is objective (supposedly more scientific or rationo-logical thought) and not subjective in any way. The problem with that assumption is that it is based on the falsehood that all human activities (but especially mental ones) can be adequately described (standards), a quality measuring standard is devised (either metrological or documentary standard) and that one can accurately use a measuring device accurately. NONE of that happens in any educational evaluation/assessment situation as proven by Wilson.
I am not arguing against evaluations/assessments only that all should recognize that such events are 100% subjective and that there are biases, assumptions and even error and falsehood that will have to be dealt with. And that the evaluation process should be a joint, shared, synergistic, and collaborative one between the humans. Any thing less only serves to have one person’s, the evaluator’s, be the authoritative and therefore the more “powerful” (in all senses of that term) one in a relationship that should be an egalitarian one.
What I am describing is Wilson’s “Responsive” frame of reference in talking of different types of frames of reference (epistemological and ontological frames of reference).
LikeLike
When Pearson says the EdTPA has been “designed by the profession, for the profession,” they should name those authors —- dedicated professionals who have never been compensated for their work. As one of the original unpaid and unacknowledged authors of what has become the for-profit EdTPA, I am sickened by how Pearson is using our work to make enormous profits on the back of credential students. It is shameful. I would love to talk with either Dr. Ayers or Dr. Ravitich about the history of that document and how it has been ripped off and misused.
LikeLike
Please do, and let us know.
LikeLike
I would like to talk to Dr. Ayres and Dr. Ravitch too. Of course, there are many versions of history. I may have written the earliest critique of the EdTPA, then called PACT (performance assessment of California teachers). Berlak, A. (2010, Summer). Coming soon to your favorite credential program: National exit exams. Rethinking Schools. 39-43.
Pearson had not yet added insult to injury but all the elements of the EdTPA that it has become legitimate to critique were as visible and real then as they are today to anyone who had the audacity to question a process initiated and supported by Linda Darling-Hammond. Read the Rethinking schools piece and see if the present critiques are substantively different. Don’t blame Pearson.
LikeLike
Isn’t TP the acronym for Toilet Paper? And we all know—-correct me if I’m wrong—-that there is only one three letter word that stars with an “a” and ends with an “s”.
So, does EDTPA stand for Ed’s Toilet Paper and A$$
LikeLike
TAGO!
LikeLike
Spoken by a great representative of our profession. 😐
LikeLike
LOL
I am not a diplomat and don’t want to even pretend I want to be one
I’m not a politician and will never be one
I’m not a billionaire oligarch and will never be one, but if I was, I’d be investing in drones—the kind US the troops are using in the Middle East, and I’m not talking about surveillance drones.
I retired after thirty years of teaching and for 45 years I worked to earn my money
I’m 70
I’m a former Marine and Vietnam Veteran
I live with PTSD and the VA is my medical provider because of a service (combat) related disability.
And I call it like I see it because I’m not a lying, backstabbing politician with a price tag on my forehead or the billionaire who pays the price on that tab to buy the votes.
LikeLike
Thank you for your lifetime of service, Lloyd, both in the marines and in the classroom.
I am honored to be acquainted with you and I support your statements of truth 100%.
LikeLike
Thank you and you are wecome.
LikeLike
With all sincerity, I thank you for your service and sacrifice. We are considering an initiative to encourage veterans to choose teacher prep at Illinois State University. If you would like to discuss this, my email is adadkin@ilstu.edu. You might be able to give us useful feedback and insights on this effort.
LikeLike
I know from supervising student teachers in NYS that they must add this test to all the others that are still required of them. They spend so much time on its preparation that they no longer have adequate time for preparing lessons for all the classes in which they are doing their student teaching. So they finish their placements much less prepared than before they had to complete the edTPA.
The problems involved are vast — ESL students whose parents do not speak English and therefore do not return the waivers needed for filming, lack of funds to buy adequate equipment to do all the filming, lower performing students who are constantly being pulled from class for special services and therefore can’t be followed in the video — to name a few.
Also upsetting are the experienced, talented educators who have been turned down by Pearson for grading. They have each been told they grade too highly and are “beyond remediation”, which leads me to believe that Pearson is trying to keep the passing rate purposefully low. Scorers are also being told they should be able to grade the portfolio in 2 hours — absurd when you see that most portfolios are in the 60-70 page range and also contain video to be watched and evaluated.
And of course, upsetting is the fact that I am the only one besides the Cooperating Teacher who sees them actually teaching, yet my evaluation is not good enough.
LikeLike
We have a student teacher here down from Illinois. She is buried in EdTPA nonsense. She is going to look for a job here in Texas, where (wonder of wonders) we haven’t adopted EdTPA yet. But just wait, I’m sure it’s coming. Than you Illinois for sending us a great candidate. You’re going to lose her.
LikeLike
I bet she is from Illinois State, right?
LikeLike
And we are glad to share her with you, because she is well prepared to lead student learning. Yes, she is from ISU, Redbird-pride.
LikeLike
Politicians and corporations, in business to funnel money to the corporations. Period. If they can bring in TFA without having to go through any of this hoopla, the better for them. That is the mindset. They will weed out what they deem “ineffective” teachers, and TFA will go through the back door, deemed the greatest and best, without ever having to take these tests. Aren’t TFA “highly qualified” automatically? Without even having to be certified. Amazing. Ka-ching.
LikeLike
I think that’s the essence of the what the “reformers” want to accomplish. They want to make becoming a teacher in public education so cumbersome and full of roadblocks so many will give up. This leave the field open to “alternatives” such as TFA.
LikeLike
Too much for young teachers entering the profession – teaching is and has always been hard work – to add the extra burdens to these aspiring teachers is asking too much. My colleague is retiring next year (38 years) – she just went to see the cal strs retirement specialist. This specialist said that she is busy with younger teachers that are leaving the profession and trying to figure out how to bank what they have put in so far. There is a teacher and substitute shortage in my district. ….and we want new teachers to do what?
LikeLike
The above commenter who estimated that most of us write 60-80 pages for edTPA is correct. The questions are circular and repetitive. I do not feel that it helped to make me a better teacher. I took the TPA in 2012. I am now in my second year of induction. I also have an additional portfolio to complete because as a special education teacher I have two credentials to clear.
I am looking forward to spending more of my energy on actual teaching.
LikeLike
Sorry to inform you that with the ever increasing amounts of data collection, chart making, graph producing, PLC minutes reporting, standardized test preparation, committee responsibilities for APPR evaluations,etc… teaching is no longer a profession that allows time for teachers to spend very much of their time actually thinking about teaching the actual children sitting in their classrooms.
If you are intelligent, creative and long to share that creativity with your students, you will continue to be frustrated by the restraints now placed upon you.
Teachers have always 1.designed lessons, 2.set up learning opportunities for their students, 3.assessed student progress and mastery toward meeting the requirements of a defined curriculum, and 4.reported student progress to parents. The role that a teacher is required to play in today’s system, in order to stay employed, is unbalanced because of the requirements for assessment and reporting that leaves so little time for planning and teaching. The bulk of my work week is now taken up responding to the demands of an adult hierarchy rather than to the needs of my students.
LikeLike
Barbara Madeloni, now president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association, made these prescient comments about edTPA back in 2012:
“The incursion of for profit companies into higher education occurs with willing collaborators. Whether misguided, fearful, subject to the lure of the advancement of their own careers, or standing to profit themselves we cannot know, but across the country faculty join administrators in advancing practices that open the door for the privatization of our work. The accountability regimes supported by accrediting agencies and professional organizations have become entryways for companies like Pearson, Inc. to not only sell their products, but to control our practices.”
LikeLike
I find it interesting that the NYSED sent out a notice to all teacher preparation programs last summer stating a concern that many EDTPA looked familiar. Are you kidding me? NYSED is prescribing the curriculum (if not scripting it) and we in teacher ed are expected to teach to the test. And then what, they expect uniqueness in the responses to the task?
LikeLike
I have not had access until now to a computer to sit down and write my comments. I have commented on edTPA before, and am not surprised to see the same responders here commenting on their issues with the assessment (too many pages, privacy issues, unqualified scorers, etc)
My university has used edTPA since the pilot year. for full disclosure, I (a 10-year veteran secondary math teacher and currently someone who works at a university helping train secondary math teachers) have served as an official scorer, supervisor and now trainer. In my trainer role, I offer support to scorers (two hours a week) and, on occasion, serve as quality control for scorers and supervisors, backreading their work and offering comments on the scores.
Here is a summary of why I feel that edTPA is a positive step for the profession:
1. It’s better than the current assessments for teacher certification – right now, nearly all states require Praxis II Pedagogy and Content – both of them multiple choice exams that really offer nothing about the teaching practice. States could decide to remove one or both of these requirements and instead use edTPA (an assessment that actually looks at teacher practice). If you are one that feels that teachers should have NO assessment at all, well, that’s your opinion. Doctors have medical boards, Lawyers have the bar exam, yet teachers should have NO exam?
2. One person commented that it is model after NBCT and a responder argued that edTPA expects the same requirements from NBCT. This is NOT the case. edTPA rubircs are numeric on a level of 1-5, where 5 is more of the master teacher level. Most states have set passing scores at or near 41-42, meaning that candidates should score around a 3 on each rubric. This shows that there is potential for growth. I recently interacted with a candidate via twitter who noted that the edTPA did prepare her for teaching and has given her a leg up in preparation for NBCT
3. The length – yes, edTPA is rigorous. It asks candidates to justify their teaching actions, reflect on their practices, etc. The 60-80 pages mentioned often include lesson plans (which I would assume TC are already doing), materials (again, I assume what they are doing, etc). The maximum number of pages for a commentary is 9 pages in total. If a TC were to add up the number of pages that they may have been asked to do in terms of term papers or other assignments that are only tangentially related to teaching, that may add up to more than 60-80 pages. If a course requires a 10 page paper on an education topic, where is the complaining about that? edTPA is only asking candidates to reflect on their work.
4. Qualification of scorers – As one person noted, Mr. Ayers is a bit off in his description of scorers. In addition to 20 hours of online training, scorers must complete a total of three entire portfolios (two of them on their own – to calibrate). Half of them are K-12 teachers, and half of them are in higher education. The requirements are that scorers must have some connection with student teachers (I recently had colleagues in K-12 who had to scan in their teacher certification and offer proof of their teaching). So, it is not just 10-12/hr temps that you have heard from other places.
5. Pearson – I concur with most that there is some uneasiness with Pearson. Yet two things. One – when SCALE sent out an RFP for operational support around edTPA, Pearson and ETS applied. ETS wanted full rights to edTPA. Pearson allowed SCALE and Stanford to maintain those rights. In trainings and in sessions, Pearson employees CANNOT give any scoring advice. I recall some early work with TPA when I helping calibrate portfolios for training my initial frustration that my Pearson scoring specialist could not offer assistance. It was at that point when I realized the very clear delineation between Pearson’s role for support and SCALE’s role as the educational partners with edTPA
6. Costs – there is some concern at the cost. I mentioned the medical and law boards – they cost much more than $300. Now, I know some states have over $1000 in tests – I think that is a bit too much and I think that states should sit down and see where there is overlap in the different assessments and consider dropping one or more to lower the costs. But I think that edTPA as a test that focuses on practice should be one of those assessments
7. High Stakes – Many have talked about edTPA is the ONLY deciding factor. Some have questioned why states are allowing others to make licensure decisions.. In my work, I know of NO program that has used edTPA and decided to NOT have supervisors, mentor teachers, etc. In my program, edTPA is used as ONE piece of data, not the only piece. If a supervisor or mentor teacher has concerns, then those are valued as much or more than a candidate’s score on edTPA. Now, I do see that in some states the reverse may not be true (one can do well with student teaching but not pass edTPA)
8. Bias – Some have argued about the potential bias of edTPA scorers. Scorers are trained on avoiding bias and how to use the rubrics and evidence. But bias is in humans, both in those scoring edTPA and THOSE that serve as evaluators and supervisors. How often have supervisors decided to let a candidate who has struggled barely pass by because they did not want to be the heavy or tell them that in reality that they should not be a teacher? And how often have those candidates not succeeded in the classroom (No, I do not have statistical data, but rather this is anecdotal stories)
Is edTPA perfect? No – no assessment is perfect. However, I think it’s a step in the right direction. When I completed my masters in 1999, my teacher program, like many, used a teaching portfolio – it was a nice notebook filled with artifacts (lesson plans, reflections, assessments). It said nothing about my teaching. Now we have our candidates use edTPA as their portfolio. At least it actually shows their teaching in action.
One last thing – our university has used edTPA as a way to engage with our K-12 partners. We have our edTPA locally evaluated (only a handful need to be officially scored) by our mentor teachers and local NBCT teachers. Many of them (current practicing teachers) have noted how edTPA aligns with their view of teaching and how serving as a local evaluator has sometimes served as professional development to enhance their own practice.
LikeLike
“I have commented on edTPA before, and am not surprised to see the same responders here commenting on their issues with the assessment (too many pages, privacy issues, unqualified scorers, etc)”
But you have not addressed the main issue with EdTPA, the process of making, giving and disseminating the results is filled with epistemological and ontological errors and falsehoods rendering any results COMPLETELY INVALID. Until the Wilson’s concerns are refuted or rebutted then the validity issue will always be the main, and only necessary point of contention against that process. EdTPA cannot escape its origins.
All the other points that are brought up and that you have highlighted are mute in light of the fact that any results are invalid. Invalid = worthless.
I suspect your defense of the process and results falls into U. Sinclair’s astute observation “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
LikeLike
Anecdotal evidence and self interested monetary reward does not a good argument make.
LikeLike
Thank you, jlsteach, for your substantive interjection on the matter. Speaking from direct experience is compelling. Let’s continue to engage the innovation critically, without outright dismissal. Let’s find the value and build upon it: substantial common denominator for entry into practice, strong focus on attention to student learning, active engagement with those in practice to evaluate readiness. What else?
LikeLike
Wow. Just, wow. If you’re involved and speak from experience, you get called out as suspect. This has been the most exasperating effort at dialogue about our profession I have ever encountered. Experience with an innovation is reduced to allegations of corporate remuneration, while strident objection is heralded as unassailable academic stance. When evidence is trumped by opinion, we are doomed.
LikeLike
bmarshall and Duane – one of the problems with such conversations are the assumptions that are unfairly made. I noted that I have participated as a trainer with official scoring to offer full disclosure and yet in doing so two people accused me of self-interest. Trust me – the $50 every week is not a monetary award. In fact, the main reason I chose to become an official scorer in the first place was not for the monetary gain at all, but rather to better understand the assessment and to support my own students. But more importantly is this the spirit of dialogue that we as educators should have – making accusations about unethical behavior?
In terms of the anecdotal evidence, edTPA has only been in operation for two years, so much of the evidence I have is only anecdotal. What surprises me is that many here have said many great things about Ayers’ responses, but much of that blog (and many of the other “studies” are filled with anecdotal evidence.
Finally Duane, I would like more information on why you feel that with edTPA “the process of making, giving and disseminating the results is filled with epistemological and ontological errors and falsehoods” What are those? Be specific?
LikeLike
I have read your detailed commentary and other supportive comments above and I am not convinced of the worth of this model. I also listened to the student teachers who have completed this model and do not have good things to say about it, something you seem to overlook or dismiss, I’m not sure which.
I am an NBCT, hold 3 degrees, Teacher of the Year for my district, an ABD doctorate program completed, and have 20+ years of teaching experience in Title I schools in 3 states.
The arrogance of it all is the first thing that turns me off. As I stated above I do not concur with the theories of Linda Darling Hammond. I wonder how much of edTPA is about indoctrinating teachers to be good ‘leaders’ in the reformist movement?
The profession of teaching is not the property of Stanford, Pearson, edTPA, or any other one entity. There are hundreds of thousands of teachers who have never had an opportunity to voice their opinions about what makes a ‘good’ teacher.
The ‘lesser of two evils’ argument that this is better than nothing or better than other less than stellar programs is hardly a ringing endorsement.
I, for one, am far more concerned about the qualities of empathy, creativity, joy, love, resilience in the face of unending bullying by administrators and reformists, deep understanding children, and the ability of teachers to coordinate support systems for the poor children who make up the majority of US students now. Yes, the number of children living in poverty is now at 51% by some measures.
edTPA does not value nor promote any of the qualities that I see as important for successful teaching and meaningful participation in communities where struggle is the foundation of life.
When edTPA, Stanford, Pearson, and others invite the rest of us to voice our opinions then perhaps the program will attain some credibility and worth that it sorely lacks now. It is just another something done to pre-service teachers by those far, far removed from day-to-day teaching under hostile conditions.
LikeLike
I did not suggest that your involvement in the edTPA was unethical. The point I was making is that there is no evidence that edTPA will further the supposed goal of having an excellent teacher in every classroom. In fact the evidence seems to suggest that the hurdle will harm rather than benefit young people who have a desire to become teachers.
The monetary reward, while small at the moment, may lead to a greater payoff down the line for you. I don’t know and it is not important to the discussion. You are invested in your particular career path, as am I. Your argument in support of the edTPA is connected to the career path that you have chosen. Your support is not unethical merely biased.
LikeLike
Some of the things that people are concerned about on here might be specific to individual states: for example, the concerns about originality detection software is not from Pearson, that’s from a deputy education commissioner in NYS – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/another-pearson-test-fias_b_7878110.html Additionally, there are some real problems with the other certification tests that candidates are required to take in their states (These can include subject tests, general knowledge tests, general educational theory, etc). And, in most states, there are mandated ‘extra’ classes that candidates have to pay for, which are good in the sense that they are often about issues we all care about deeply (child abuse, anti-bullying, etc), but it’s another expense for these candidates.
In my looking at the history of this movement, teacher candidates have been certified by arbitrary standardized testing for at least 20 years in most (all? I’m not as sure) states. There was bias in teaching programs, in evaluations from supervising and cooperating teachers, and in pass rates from programs before the edTPA was ever considered. And there still are. For example: universities face pressure to get students through programs and face new, frustrating demands holding them ‘accountable’ for graduation rates. The edTPA is not a perfect system, but it’s one of many problems in an overall system – one that I think is also offering some really positive parts (see my comments above).
For me, hearing about alternatives to this system would be interesting and useful to a discussion that seems to me to be a bit snarky (And yes, I know someone is going to say something awful about me because I said that: we are all professional adults here and should be able to figure out how to reply politely to each other without insults.). In the states that don’t use edTPA, what do they use instead? Is there anywhere in the country that doesn’t use some standardized system of materials to evaluate candidates?
LikeLike
See below!
LikeLike
Dear Diane, I hope you review what you are seeing here. It is a multi-faceted story with edTPA. Of course, it is not a flawless measure, but it is a promising one. Yes, Pearson is involved, but that is necessary to bring it to scale with reliability. Yes, it is a change to the way we authorize licenses for teachers in some states, and that aligns us with professional licensure in other fields, such as nursing, architecture, and accounting, all of which recognize they are service professions whose “clients” are dependent on them for responsible, effective practice, lest people suffer harm. Yes, this is a function of a state policy mandate, but perhaps that is a needed lever to get the practice in place and we will find it consonant with our work in teacher education. Yes, it is consistent with the principles of effective teaching embedded in NBPTS.
Yes, I am a college administrator working to support implementation in Illinois, and we have not experienced it to be inconsistent or disruptive to our design and intent with the student teaching experience. It coincides with our preparation program.
We need a genuine dialogue, such as this that you have opened, to share experiences and perspectives, so thank you.
LikeLike
Amee,
“Yes, Pearson is involved, but that is necessary to bring it to scale with reliability.”
Says who?! And no, that is not meant to be snarky, well maybe a little but it’s still a valid question. And why is it “necessary to bring it to scale”? (with or without reliability as all standardized tests have already been to be COMPLETELY INVALID, therefore, unreliable).
Please, Amee, if you could answer those two questions for me I would appreciate it.
LikeLike
Duane, I cannot imagine what would happen here in Blo-No if I announced to my faculty that they would be responsible for local evaluation. It was a thought that haunted me when we first started the pilot. I recognized it as a no-go as we dipped our toes in the edTPA water. This would be a significant addition to faculty workload, and I could not imagine where to find the resources to provide for this. Pearson = out-sourcing for sure, but, as Ray Pecheone puts it, Pearson contributes the engineering muscle to manage the scoring process, including training, calibrated reporting, and testing for reliability and validity. In other words, they are doing some work for us.
The analogy I draw is the habit of faculty to require survey texts, wherein they rely upon publishers to organize content, package it, and sell it to students.
From previous exchanges, I recall your argument, informed by Wilson. Have you seen the 2014 administrative report that addresses reliability and validity? I’ll read your resource; you read that, and let’s discuss. adadkin@ilstu.edu or here (but let me know if here)
I think local evaluation is simply too heavy a lift to provide credible results unless there is a massive infusion of capital.
LikeLike
Amee,
Please provide me a source for the reading you would like me to do. I’m quite willing to read most anything, as I’ve said I’ve looked for over a decade for a rebuttal/refutation to Wilson and have yet to find a legitimate one. I look forward to reading it!
TIA!,
Duane
P.S. What is Blo-No? I’ve heard of Illinois referred to as Ill-Annoy (thanks rbmtk) but I won’t get into what Wisconsinites and Missourians have to say about Illinois-ha ha!!!
LikeLike
Also:
“I think local evaluation is simply too heavy a lift to provide credible results unless there is a massive infusion of capital.”
Wow! Do you really believe that the professor in charge of a student teacher couldn’t provide “credible results” in evaluating his/her student? How did teacher prep programs survive up to this point without something like EdTPA, then??
It seems to me that your concern with “credible results” is an important concern but one that you are saying that the only “credible result” is one that is supposedly objective or at least purports to be objective when in fact (as proven by Wilson) it is not objective and is not scientific as the very foundational aspects are error and falsehood filled rendering them invalid.
That is why I ask that you read Wilson in his entirety, to understand just how invalid these psychometric machinations are. We have been sold a false metric by psychometrics as to
LikeLike
Bloomington-Normal. Normal is named for the institution that opened outside the mid-century booming town of Normal. Yes, Ill-Annoy rings true sometimes.
Still have to get the reading to you.
LikeLike
I think those commentators who were part of the original research under Linda-Darling Hammond and “engage the innovation critically,” should reveal their history with the project and the length of time their income came from working on it. I wonder if there is one single person who was part of the early creation of the EdTPA who has any critique of it pre-Pearson.
LikeLike
5 years, $0,lots of blood, sweat and tears because independent judgment concluded that this is an initiative that advances our work.
LikeLike
This comment stands out to me: “In my looking at the history of this movement, teacher candidates have been certified by arbitrary standardized testing for at least 20 years in most (all? I’m not as sure) states. There was bias in teaching programs, in evaluations from supervising and cooperating teachers, and in pass rates from programs before the edTPA was ever considered. And there still are”
No matter what system is chosen, there will always be the potential for some bias. Going even further back than 20 years, in the 1890s ALL teacher had to answer content questions that were rather random (i.e. What number is 5/8 less than 2/11). And if one could answer all of the questions they could become a teacher, even if they were only 13-14 years old. Later, to address the issue of a common assessment, the National Teacher Exam (NTE) was created, which later became the basis for the current Praxis II Content and Pedagogy Exam.
edTPA attempts to address this concern by creating a common assessment. Not a common standard, or a common way or teaching, but rather a common way to look at teaching. How many of us would argue that lesson plans should NOT be connected to prior knowledge or student’s background? If you do, I’d wonder about your role in teacher education or teaching. And if you don’t, then that’s the main topic in one of the planning rubrics. How many would argue that the class should not have a positive learning environment? Again, if you do argue against that, I’m wondering why you are on this blog. If you don’t, well, that’s rubric 6.
My sense is that many of those against edTPA have yet to even look at a handbook or know more about the assessment. To those that say that it’s behind lock and key, there are generic versions available to get a sense of what the assessment is like. As one noted, it is very similar to the NBCT, so if you look at those attributes you can get a sense of what edTPA is like.
LikeLike
“My sense is that many of those against edTPA have yet to even look at a handbook or know more about the assessment.”
I have, and the entire approach is fundamentally flawed. There are many more reasons to oppose edTPA than to accept it. I will be writing more about this in the upcoming months.
LikeLike
Ed Detective, could you provide a summary of what we will see from you?
LikeLike
What do you mean by bias? Point of view? Value orientation? Don’t the “measures” themselves reflect bias?
LikeLike
“Ed Detective, could you provide a summary of what we will see from you?”
Sure, I’ll write a summary off the top of my head.
EdTPA removes the responsibility of certification from local authorities, and places it in the hands of distant authorities.
EdTPA’s evaluators cannot fully understand or appreciate local circumstances.
EdTPA’s evaluators cannot fully understand or appreciate different personalities and teaching styles.
EdTPA’s evaluators are not in contact with the subjects involved, reducing the importance of human traits in the evaluation process.
EdTPA’s evaluators will inevitably fluctuate in quality, and we have no way of assuring quality or “accountability” from the corporation.
EdTPA’s evaluators will not necessarily understand the subject matter they are evaluating.
EdTPA causes massive frustration and wasted energy during the student teaching process.
EdTPA dangerously implies that the teacher evaluation of an entire nation can be handled by a for-profit corporation.
EdTPA costs student teachers additional money on top of what they already paid for their education and certification, and in a one-shot flawed exam, has the power to nullify everything that came before.
EdTPA has some questionable goals, but worse, completely removes local teacher educators and student teachers from the decisions of what is most important.
EdTPA compromises student privacy rights and possibly student teacher privacy rights.
EdTPA uses invalid measures (quantifying undefined qualities), see Wilson, Einstein, etc. Many things that matter are not “measured,” and if the student doesn’t pass, those traits and abilities don’t “count.”
LikeLike
I left out several big ones, by the way. EdTPA is highly problematic. It’s kind of like if high stakes standardized testing got even stronger, and set its sights on potential teachers…
LikeLike
Aimee wrote, “5 years, $0,lots of blood, sweat and tears because independent judgment concluded that this is an initiative that advances our work.
She glides right over the notion of independent judgment. Many would contest whether that judgment was independent. At least stop and consider what it means. To Aimee it must seem self evident.
There are at least two world views in conflict. The world view of most of those who are critics here questions the notion of independent judgment. To paraphrase Rick , “Critics, tell radically different stories, have different notions of what science means. …they question the validity of the assessment, its ideological stance, and its relation to power and privilege. We’re talking right by one another because we have fundamentally different notions of science, truth, power, democracy, and other fundamental conceptions of how the world works and should work.
LikeLike
Regarding Ed Detective objections:
Displaces local judgment = not true: candidate can pass edTPA and still be deemed unfit for licensure for a variety of sound reasons; passing edTPA is no different than a requirement to pass content exam, among other state stipulated requirements. Local assessment of quality remains in tact, albeit checked by systematic evaluation of core competencies.
Candidates have an opportunity to describe the context that can explain scripted curriculum, etc., so local context is addressed. Have to look at the rubrics to see what questions are asked of the work sample and to see that local knowledge is not necessary.
No rubric privileges teaching style or personality. Bias portion of scorer training is the first module and addresses fully. See Misty Sato’s piece in Journal of Teacher Education for deeper analysis.
Scorer qualifications are clear and strict: in the content area, teacher Ed faculty or teachers who have supported candidate development in the last three years or NBCT or administrator with eval experience.
$? Why are we not asking these questions of teacher Ed faculty who require specific survey textbooks that contain not one shred of original information bit cost candidates $hundreds per book? Lose one such text and it is a zero sum game. Lose three and we save candidates money.
Have not found it to disrupt student teaching when implemented carefully: support the effort, remind candidates to resume their role post-submission
Corporate role = scaling up with technical expertise we could not build efficiently across and within institutions nationally
LikeLike
“Displaces local judgment = not true: candidate can pass edTPA and still be deemed unfit for licensure for a variety of sound reasons; passing edTPA is no different than a requirement to pass content exam, among other state stipulated requirements. Local assessment of quality remains in tact, albeit checked by systematic evaluation of core competencies.”
The final decision to approve or disapprove a candidate lies with edTPA/Pearson, period. Flawed exams have no rightful place in that process, other flawed exams that exist for this purpose do not excuse edTPA.
“Candidates have an opportunity to describe the context that can explain scripted curriculum, etc., so local context is addressed. Have to look at the rubrics to see what questions are asked of the work sample and to see that local knowledge is not necessary.”
Describing context on a page is not good enough. The evaluators are still detached from the subject and the situation.
“No rubric privileges teaching style or personality. Bias portion of scorer training is the first module and addresses fully. See Misty Sato’s piece in Journal of Teacher Education for deeper analysis.”
You could have three different teachers, and the rubric will naturally place them in rank… even if they are all great at what they do. Not right. You cannot escape the bias of this format which is one reason why it is fundamentally flawed.
“Scorer qualifications are clear and strict: in the content area, teacher Ed faculty or teachers who have supported candidate development in the last three years or NBCT or administrator with eval experience.”
Saying you will have certain standards for evaluators does not mean they will always be upheld, and I have heard several stories already that warrant skepticism (posting for scorers on craigslist?). As I previously said, we have no way to assure quality or accountability in these evaluators. They can do what they want and get away with it if they wanted to — it’s not like for-profit education corporations have the most ethical of records. We know what they are capable of.
“$? Why are we not asking these questions of teacher Ed faculty who require specific survey textbooks that contain not one shred of original information bit cost candidates $hundreds per book? Lose one such text and it is a zero sum game. Lose three and we save candidates money.”
Again, if there are other problem$ in colleges and university programs, we should address them too. Doesn’t excuse edTPA. Question them all.
“Have not found it to disrupt student teaching when implemented carefully”
How many student teachers have you spoken with? It’s a common complaint that it gets in the way and causes lots of unnecessary stress.
“Corporate role = scaling up with technical expertise we could not build efficiently across and within institutions nationally”
If edTPA is not a good idea, the corporate role would be to scale up something that should not be scaled up — leaving the rest of us with less power to determine our own destinies.
LikeLike
anncberlak, critics have been vocal, to be sure, but those who find this a valid and promising assessment have not necessarily been stirred to contribute commentary for a variety of reasons. I am insistent because I am tired of being quiet when it comes to educational policy. If we don’t speak, policy makers will still make policy. Considered evaluation of edTPA leads me to conclude that it is far better than anything we’ve had previously and is better positioned to answer those who would dismiss educator preparation. One should not critique without an equally compelling alternative.
LikeLike
Chris you write, “edTPA does not value nor promote any of the qualities that I see as important for successful teaching and meaningful participation in communities where struggle is the foundation of life.”
Really? So having teachers create lessons that are focused on who the students are is not one of your qualities of successful teaching? Neither is having students engage in students centered work (as opposed to simply being lectured to OR completing mindless worksheets). Unlike other tools, providing student teachers with a context for learning where they can share about some of the concerns that you raise and the environments they face so that an evaluator can better understand their situation does not fit your needs
There is not one assessment that can address everything…your concerns about children poverty are real. What’s interesting to me is that in my experience our local NBCT that have locally evaluated edTPA at my institution feel the exact opposite as you do about it. They see it as the beginning work for pre-service teachers to begin exploring the same things they do as NBCT teachers. Many note how participating in local evaluation helps remind them of some of the skills they have learned and it re-energizes them.
LikeLike
Ed Detective – since you have seen the handbooks, I am curious to know what aspects within the rubrics don’t represent what you (or others) may consider to be good teaching. Note, SCALE and others have been up front that edTPA is NOT supposed to capture all aspects of teaching, or even all aspects a TPP may want to focus on. That is why there are still grades for student teaching or OTHER assignments that a TPP may assign candidates. So the argument that “edTPA doesn’t do X, Y or Z” is a mute point. But specifically what in the handbooks would you say is NOT good teaching? I’d welcome that commentary…
LikeLike
One of the things that to me is most problematic about edTPA is that it all seems just fine at first – designed by the profession for the profession, based on the high expectations of national board certification, developed by the geniuses at Stanford, etc. – but in its implementation it has created reductive and over simplified rhetoric about the holy grail: student learning. For example, in my blog (where I have written a number of posts about edTPA) I showed how a graphic used often by SCALE in training materials creates a false dichotomy between a focus on individual students v. the whole class: http://alexandramiletta.blogspot.com/2015/06/almost-like-being-there.html We are also seeing the approach to addressing academic language in edTPA support materials as an oversimplification of language functions (describe, analyze, compare, etc.) to the use of graphic organizers to capture student work because they are simple to evaluate (both by the candidates and the anonymous scorers). The rhetoric that edTPA gives us candidates who are “safe to practice” is also problematic, for there is nothing about completing pages of commentary that is scored with narrowly defined rubrics that tells us the candidate knows how to handle a crisis in the classroom, or prevent a fight, or see the warning signs of a student who needs help from specialists. EdTPA distorts the priorities of the profession by taking much of the humanity out of the process of deciding that someone is prepared to teach.
LikeLike
There are some statements within the “common core standards” that are good for teaching and learning. Does that mean the entire package of Common Core™ is good and fair? The major problems with edTPA have less to do with its suggestions of what is “good teaching” (though problems do exist in that area), rather, it is how the entire thing is judged and enforced. If you want student teachers to “have a positive attitude in the classroom,” for example, then support the few teacher-education programs that are not already emphasizing that goal. EdTPA is not needed for those “common sense suggestions.” EdTPA is needed, however, if Pearson et al wants to make a lot of money and have fine control over the teacher education process in this country.
LikeLike
One of the other major problems with edTPA is how extremely bloated and distracting it is for student teachers. Student teaching should be about becoming a better teacher, not being consumed with worry that you may not jump through all the right hoops and loopholes. If you don’t think this affects student teachers psychologically, in a real bad way… and that it doesn’t get in the way of their growth… think again. All of edTPA’s supposedly good goals can be accomplished in a much simpler way.
Another major problem that is likely insurmountable is the “privacy rights” issue, but that’s already been discussed in depth.
LikeLike
Alexandra, I can appreciate your comment about edTPA the approach to academic language being at a simplified/introductory level but it is important to remember that these students are beginning teachers and academic language is a fairly advanced teaching skill. The fact of the matter is many teacher education programs were not even addressing academic language until they began to implement edTPA. In terms of the “safe to practice”, this refers to being ready to teach children and be responsible for student learning. There is a rubric that addresses classroom environment but the things you mention are the very reasons why those of us implementing edTPA use it as just one of many assessments to determine teacher candidates’ readiness for the classroom. edTPA doesn’t look at everything nor should we expect a single assessment to do so.
LikeLike
edTPA has made our candidates, and our program, stronger. It not only reflects the work that is done by an NBCT, but also mirrors the evaluation process that our P-12 partners in the local schools must do. Our principals have shown great interest in the work, and have been very supportive because they believe it is helping to better prepare their prospective teachers.
LikeLike
“. . . one of the problems with such conversations are the assumptions that are unfairly made.”
Quite correct jlsteach!
If by unfair you mean assumptions that are not rationo-logically sound, that are error filled with many epistemological and ontological falsehoods, and then when those conditions are pointed out one continues to hang on to those assumptions. It’s not those pointing out the fallacies of educational standards and the accompanying standardized tests who are doing the “unfair” assuming.
Comte-Sponville writes of “fidelity to truth” which I perceive to be as an apt description for the “scientific” or “rationo-logical” way of thinking. Since all perceive the world in a different fashion and everyone comes to their own “truths” some of which correspond better to the world outside of the head better than others. When one is shown the errors and fallacies of one’s current “truth” one should adjust that belief/”truth” to take into account the new information. This is and should be a fundamental mode “being”. If one doesn’t adjust their “truths” to new information then one is not “faithful to truth” and in essences lives in a state of falsehood (which I might contend could be evolutionary defense mechanism). Living in a state of falsehood, when one has been shown how that falsehood harms many others is to live unethically which is what the believers (yes, in a religious fashion) of the usage of educational standards and standardized testing are doing as Wilson has shown the complete invalidity of those policies and practices.
Which ties into your statement: “Finally Duane, I would like more information on why you feel that with edTPA “the process of making, giving and disseminating the results is filled with epistemological and ontological errors and falsehoods” What are those? Be specific?”
To which I ask: Have you read Wilson’s (see above) work? The specifics are there for all to understand. If you haven’t read it and read it and have questions concerning any part please feel free to contact me at: d s w a c k e r @ c e n t u r y t e l . n e t any time! (take out the spaces).
For a shorter read on the invalidity aspect may I suggest reading Wilson’s A Little Less than Valid: An Essay Review http://www.edrev.info/essays/v10n5.pdf
If you have already read his work, I am quite interested to read your comments and or rebuttal/refutation. I’ve been looking for, asking for, practically begging for rebuttals/refutations for fifteen years and have yet to find one.
Take care.
Duane
LikeLike
Duane, I just read the review, and I think you broke my brain. I have some background in philosophy and scant in measurement theory, but not enough to fully unpack the implications of the argument. I do not mean to ask you to oversimplify, but can you put this in terms that are more accessible and can you describe the preferred alternative your critique implies?
LikeLike
Amee,
Let me try this. Would you believe that my new MgPE* adequately assesses and evaluates your marriage, love for your spouse and children by video taping a fifteen minute segment of your interactions with your spouse and family? Even as only a part of that overall evaluation would that be legitimate/valid?
What I am getting at is that complex human interactions whether the teaching and learning process and/or the loving environment of a marriage and family life cannot be accurately described by simplistic methods that purport to rank and sort, what I consider discriminate against certain students.
One does not have to have much background in anything other than a rationo-logical or fidelity to truth sense of being. All are capable and Wilson does get into some psychometrics, mainly to turn them on their heads but if you read his dissertation, I’d be happy to walk you through it. He has been in the belly of the psychometric beast and survived-ha ha! Really, though if you wish to do so email me at dswacker@centurytel.net. It will be the best learning experience, eye opening, once you understand what he is saying and has proven on the complete invalidities involved in these educational malpractices.
*MgPE = Marriage Professional Evaluation
LikeLike
Here’s my interpretation, assisted by Albert Einstein. Not all that is counted counts, and not all that counts can be counted. If you understand this, and continue to practice in contradiction to this principle… you are in the wrong.
LikeLike
Fair enough. It doesn’t purport to count everything that matters, rather a substantial common denominator of the capacity we need to know about effective beginning teachers. Contrary to many commentaries elsewhere, edTPA is not the only measure and no more influential than any others states and programs require of candidates. Pass edTPA but be habitually late or falsify data = no go.
LikeLike
I actually started off as an edTPA skeptic but, wanting to critique the assessment from a knowledgeable viewpoint, I decided to pilot the assessment with my teacher candidates before doing so. At the end of the semester, both my teacher candidates and I agreed that edTPA was a quality assessment. As a former secondary science teacher and biology education coordinator, I value edTPA for multiple reasons. Here are just a few…
1. edTPA examines candidates’ thinking and performance in 15 key areas of beginning teaching. Each area has an associated rubric, the development of which is supported both by extensive research and feedback from users of the assessment. The performance expectations are reasonable for the beginning teacher and teacher candidates know the performance expectations going into the assessment.
2. edTPA is content specific. Each content area has its own handbook and the rubrics are tailored to represent what educational experts in those content areas have deemed as the most important field-related skills beginning teachers should be able to demonstrate. While I can’t speak for other content areas (I’m not an expert in those areas), as a former secondary science teacher, I can say that the secondary science handbook, which emphasizes the learning of science concepts through investigations and the analysis of data or evidence, really does emphasize key aspects of effective science teaching.
3. edTPA is helping us prepare teacher candidates for their professional teacher evaluations. We are hearing this over and over again from our alumni. They didn’t enjoy edTPA while they were going through it (it is a lot of work) but the work they did made their first year teaching evaluations much easier, which they were very grateful for. Many report that their administrators comment that they seem to be very comfortable showing evidence of their professional practice and talking about it. Our teacher candidates credit their edTPA experience for that.
4. edTPA allows our teacher candidates who struggle with traditional standardized tests to show what they know and can do in a different manner. Up until now, the final licensure assessment in Illinois, Assessment of Professional Teaching (APT), determined whether or not teacher candidates could get licensed. It is a traditional exam of multiple-choice questions and an essay. Ironically, in the ten years that the exam existed, there was no outcry from those who are now decrying edTPA. It wasn’t until edTPA, a performance-based assessment (not a standardized test) came along, that the outcry began. Adding to the irony is that the APT is created and owned by Pearson (as is the entire Illinois Licensure Testing System). In fact, edTPA is the only state assessment in Illinois not owned by Pearson and in which Pearson plays a much more minor role.
5. edTPA is centered entirely on student learning. From start to finish, the teacher candidate must keep student learning at the center of planning, instruction, and assessment. From the start, teacher candidates must describe who their students are, what they know about them, and how they will use that knowledge to enhance interest in learning and meet their learning needs. This focus on student learning has also deepened our teacher candidates’ conversations with their cooperating teachers and their university supervisors as they intentionally ask about student learning and reflect on what they are seeing in the classroom.
6. edTPA is helping us to identify gaps in our teacher education programs. When we first began implementing edTPA, there were rubrics that addressed skills that our programs were not addressing. After researching these skills, we realized that we needed to be preparing our candidates to do these things in the classroom. Implementing these skills in course work has enabled us to prepare our candidates to better serve the needs of students, especially those that are often under served in our schools. Because edTPA data is reported back to us by rubric, we can see the areas that our teacher candidates are struggling with and can respond appropriately. Moreover, our programs collaborate much more with each other because they now speak a common language. Instead of doing teacher preparation in “silos”, we are doing teacher preparation as a campus community. I have found the same experience across the state of Illinois and nationally as well. Our teacher preparation programs are talking to each other more than ever before (and not in a “woe is us” kind of way) and are sharing preparation practices that benefit everyone.
At my institution, we have made edTPA one part of comprehensive system of teacher preparation. Because we have been implementing edTPA for quite a while, our teacher candidates report feeling well supported and prepared for the assessment. Furthermore, they are reporting that edTPA is preparing them for key aspects of their professional career. It has been a long road to get here but it has been worthwhile. Every time I begin to doubt that (usually after reading an erroneous blog post), I go back and read the countless e-mails and texts I have received from our teacher candidates affirming that our work has been worthwhile.
LikeLike
A great thing about the United States is that we have the freedom to agree to disagree. While, I wholeheartedly disagree with this post, I respect your opinion. Thank you for respecting my opinion as well! We can agree to disagree on this one! Here are some quotes from first-year teachers on how edTPA has impacted them in the classroom.
“The biggest influence edTPA has had on my first year is the ability to differentiate. Since I teach reading, I live a differentiated life in my classroom. Every single one of my readers has a different set of needs, and edTPA taught me how to meet those needs effectively.”
“Completing the task of edTPA has been extremely helpful in my first year of teaching because it is directly aligned with TKES. I am not nervous about which day my principal may or may not come observe me and which standards she may look at because edTPA taught me to do all 10 standards every day.”
“I believe assignments should be presented in an attractive way in order to increase student engagement on the task, but without relevance any task is useless. edTPA has prepared me to question my intentions behind all major assignments presented to my students. I must always ask myself, “Is this relevant to my students’ learning? How will it help them grow their knowledge in the subject area?”
“I know how to connect better with my students, school, and community to make a well-rounded classroom because of edTPA.”
“edTPA helped me to learn how to teach my learners on an individualized level. This assessment made me dig deeper to find what will help each student. I believe going through the assessment has made me a better teacher today.”
“edTPA has helped me because as a first year teacher, I believe I am better prepared to educate my students. I understand how to use data to drive my instruction, how to use the information I gain about their interests and background knowledge to prepare relevant lessons. “
“edTPA is the reason I do not worry about walkthroughs. Mine are completely unannounced and you have to be ready at any given moment. I feel so confident and prepared to teach. I love how the assessment kept me accountable to meet the needs of all my learners. I find myself thinking about edTPA every time I write a lesson plan.”
“edTPA has helped me so much in the planning aspect of teaching. I am a first year teacher and before I teach I am always thinking about language demands and possible misconceptions that my students might have. I am also more aware of the importance of using assets to inform my instruction. Without edTPA, these things would have taken years to realize.”
“edTPA has impacted every aspect of my first-year of teaching. I would say that it has helped me the best in that I can not only appropriately analyze data, but I can also implement that analysis to help my differentiation and small groups. Also, it’s given me more confidence in how to effectively monitor every student’s learning.”
LikeLike
These are awesome statements. At this point in implementation all we can provide are anecdotes, and thoughts like these are reassuring. Time will tell as we are able to do more systematic follow-up with candidates. My philosophy has been to test the innovation, collect feedback, and then draw conclusions. Early implementation assessment of the assessment has had to be one of looking for major hang-ups and we’ve not run into any.
LikeLike
How many people here have actually looked at the rubrics? At the vision of teaching at the highest and lowest levels? To me, helping weed out the people who are unable to accomplish the central tasks of the profession and giving a clear picture of accomplished practice is a win. I find that with my candidates it’s also opening up conversations with their cooperating teachers about more learner-centered practices. In my setting we had a very similar performance assessment embedded in student teaching prior to voluntarily adopting edTPA, but having the ability to compare our candidates’ performance with those of state and national cohorts has been really interesting.
Also, just to clarify, at least in my state (WI) it’s required of all licensure pathways, including alternative certification. That’s an opportunity for TFA and other alt cert pathways to put their pedagogical money where their mouth is.
(Full disclosure: I’ve worked with SCALE and edTPA in multiple ways since the beginning of the design of the edTPA, in part because of my experience in documenting teaching and performance assessment in teacher education in my professional setting).
LikeLike
It is important to me that I never ask candidates to do something that I have not yet done. Therefore, to effectively prepare my candidates for edTPA, I decided to partake in the assessment for educative purposes and self-reflection. During this process, I saw the value of edTPA. This assessment allows candidates to dig deeper and reflect on effective teaching strategies that are not yet automatic. Candidates have to constantly think about their students in every prompt. Personally, I have become a better teacher because I always want to model effective teaching strategies for my candidates. I am deliberate in the type of feedback that I give, and I am more intentional about using candidates’ assets to drive instruction. I would never tell a pre-service teacher to differentiate based off of data without showing him or her how. edTPA has helped me become more purposeful in my instruction and focused on analyzing my candidates’ data to support learning. Before every lesson, I think about language demands, possible misconceptions that my candidates might have, and supports that will incorporate differentiation activities. Teaching the skills and strategies that edTPA assesses has reminded me to be more intentional in how I respond to diversity. This type of modeling and self-reflection has made me more vulnerable to candidates, as I ask candidates to use edTPA rubrics to rate my teaching performance. However, this has been one of the most powerful pieces of the process because I am showing my candidates that I am willing to support them, encourage them, and I am able to show compassion during their learning segments. Equipping effective teachers and creating a culture of lifelong learning, means being willing to put some skin in the game. When I look at my first-year teachers, who have completed edTPA, the vulnerability is worth it because they are more confident to enter the classroom.
LikeLike
Our program hasn’t switched over to EdTPA from PACT, one of the original Performance Based Assessments developed in California. Our reticence has more to do with the $300 cost of the Pearson test which is an obstacle for teacher candidates, than the Assessment itself. Our students have taken the (PACT) as one measurement of their growing capacity. Each year, after completing the PACT, the feedback is remarkably similar to the quotes in KB’s post. This assessment is an authentic, carefully thought out, proven support to the candidate’s development at the same time as it measures a beginning teacher’s capacity. No one says it is easy, or a waste of time. The general consensus each year has been that by having to work through the entire sequence of tasks and commentaries, a great deal of learning takes place. At the same time, a passing score supports a sense of accomplishment and pride in the acknowledgement of their entry to the teaching profession.
Not all standardized tests are evil. Some actually define the boundaries of knowing and not knowing. We are finally coming into our own as a profession with the advent of teacher performance assessment.
LikeLike
You’re right. Not all assessments are evil. Some are used to help improve teaching or learning. The evil ones are used to rank and punish with no attempt to improve. That is the Common Core Agenda—-to rank and punish; then close the public schools so someone in the private sector, maybe a hedge fund, will profit off of OUR children.
LikeLike
“Not all standardized tests are evil. Some actually define the boundaries of knowing and not knowing.”
Who gets the right to define these boundaries? I think we’d al agree that the boundaries are socially constructed by those who have the power to construct them, in this case, those who have convinced us they “know” best what are the most important criteria of a good teacher, and how it one can know if the criteria have been reached; in other cases, there are boundary creators who set the boundaries of what we should teach children about marginalized groups,about the history of slavery or the history of women, or if these are within the boundaries at all.
LikeLike
Standardized tests are social constructions, rooted in racism and disdain for immigrants and the “lower” classes.
LikeLike
Please, let’s not confuse an assessment based on standards with a standardized test. edTPA is an assessment of standards of beginning practice, but it is not a standardized test. I am so tired and ashamed of imprecision in our professional dialogue. Are we not capable of more nuanced dialogue that makes these differences clear? If not? I pity us and the students we purport to serve. And if we cannot manage these nuances, we should not have access to other people’s children. Teaching is a profession of service to others, and that carries significant responsibility.
LikeLike
“And if we cannot manage these nuances, we should not have access to other people’s children. Teaching is a profession of service to others, and that carries significant responsibility.”
I fail to see how anyone here is abdicating their significant responsibility to students. Please save your unfounded attacks, and if you’re so concerned with imprecise language, maybe you should check your logical fallacies at the door.
LikeLike
Lloyd, edTPA is all about helping improve teaching and learning. It’s not supposed to just rank and punish. Some of the responsibility does fall back on the TPP… It has taken our program a little while, but now many of our content areas will infuse edTPA like assignments or questions into earlier courses and not just talk about teaching in student teaching. Here is an example – in nearly all ed classes, one is asked to write a lesson plan. Yet often we don’t push students on the plan itself. So, with those first or second lesson plans that students write, why not ask them, “How do you address who your students are with this plan? How do you address prior academic knowledge with the plan?” Such questions represent skills that ALL teachers should be doing and TPP can begin early on to help improve teaching and learning.finally as the previous poster noted, no one who has supported edTPA here has said it’s easy. To quote Tom Hanks from a League of their Own, “If it wasn’t hard, everyone would do it. It’s the hard that makes it great.” Right now we know that teaching is a challenging profession and also the impression is that anyone can do it. Passing edTPA gives TC a sense of accomplishment similar to passing the bar or medical boards.
This is off the topic, but there is a HUGE difference between the Common Core and the testing that goes along with it (just as there is a huge difference between edTPA and the rash of standardized tests that teachers and students face). What I do find interesting is that there are so many complaints about edTPA being a standardized tests and yet no one here has said, “Praxis is bad”. Praxis is what I would call your typical standardized test – multiple choice, one right answer. It does not measure teaching, and yet most states do this. edTPA looks at teaching. In a similar vain to PACT, we at our institution use edTPA local evaluation as a means to support candidates into induction. So if your idea of a good assessment is one that promotes teaching and learning, well…that is edTPA. Or are you saying that the only good assessments are formative assessments and that we should never have a summative one?
LikeLike
Praxis is bad. EdTPA is bad.
Experienced educators organically supporting student teachers during their internship is good.
If you need edTPA to have a good teacher education program, what you need to do is improve your teacher educators, and your program — rather than fight to force edTPA on everyone else.
LikeLike
Diane wrote: dianeravitch
November 19, 2015 at 2:03 pm
Standardized tests are social constructions, rooted in racism and disdain for immigrants and the “lower” classes.
Absolutely. I hope you realized that the first line of my comment upon which you commented was the first line of a post I then critiqued. Your comment was a good summary of my post. Just wanted to clarify this.
LikeLike
Here’s my take:
Anything forced from the top down on the public schools MUST go if teachers decide they don’t want any part of it. That is what’s called the democratic process where the stakeholders, in this case teachers and the parents of the children who are the learners, are the deciders.
Common core, no matter what anyone thinks about it, MUST go.
High stakes testing, no matter what anyone thinks about, MUST go.
Any top down mandated teacher training programs from a for-profit corporation like Pearson, MUST go. Most if not all veteran teachers know what’s needed in teacher training. Let those teachers decide by holding forums across the country and created a teacher training program from the bottom up.
There is no compromise with the oligarchs, the president, the Congress, the governors and the state legislatures. Their job is to make sure the schools are properly funded and then support teachers and allow them to teach..
Public education SHOULD be bottom up. Teachers MUST be allowed to decide what curriculum to teach and how to teach it.
When it comes to Common Core good or bad, etc. there is nothing to debate. It MUST go.
LikeLike
Ed Decetive….if you read all of the commentary above from advocates of edTPA, its not a substitution for having experienced educators work with student teachers, but rather a way to demonstrate that the work being done is of quality work. Otherwise, how do you know that those working with educators are doing a good job?
LikeLike
Ah, the accountability argument. You could rationalize doing virtually anything on the basis of “how else will we know?” That’s exactly the rationalization for high stakes standardized testing.
We do not have to accept the package of “edTPA” in order to know if teacher educators are doing a good job. And just following through with edTPA does not somehow prove that they are doing a good job.
LikeLike
Also, I am sure there are good elements of edTPA, few things are totally good or totally bad. The question is rather if it is a good thing overall. What I consistently see from edTPA proponents is a dismissal of all the negative points and complaints about edTPA. When people do this, it makes me suspicious of their agenda and critical thinking skills.
LikeLike
I am responding to the following abridged post: “Any top down mandated teacher training programs from a for-profit corporation like Pearson, MUST go…. Let those teachers decide by holding forums across the country and create a teacher training program from the bottom up….Public education SHOULD be bottom up. Teachers MUST be allowed to decide what curriculum to teach and how to teach it.”
I fear a slippery slope. In the first sentence the qualifier “for profit corporation like Pearson” is redundant. The demon is not Pearson. The creators of the PACT system under the aegis of Linda Darling Hammond would say that they represent the teachers and thus teachers did decide what curriculum to teach. But the result was a hierarchical system. The creators of PACT were assumed to have superior understanding of what good teaching is and how to measure long before Pearson appeared on the scene. How did they come to represent “teachers”?
LikeLike
Ed Detective – no assessment is perfect. For example, I wish that officially scored edTPA would have a space for qualitative feedback (I have mentioned this to SCALE numerous times).
In terms of the accountability argument – many on this blog have commented again that bad teachers don’t exist (or are few in number compared to what others are saying). In response to that, I have mentioned my own experience teaching in DC Public Schools where I taught with a math teacher who constantly had low standards for his students (i.e. gave a final exam focused only on Algebra II concepts to a class of seniors taking Pre-calculus). Many can point fingers at who is to blame why such a teacher is still teaching today (administration not doing their job, etc)
I will bring up the doctor/lawyer/nurse example – why is is that we expect those professions to have some type of accountability and yet with teachers we don’t have the similar level of accountability?
In terms of high-stakes standardized testing at the K-12 level…Do I think there is too much testing in schools? Yes. Do I believe that having SOME type of accountability is a good thing. Yes as well. If I could trust that ALL teachers (and ALL teacher preparation programs) were practicing good teaching (and in this case, I will define good teaching as student centered discovery based lessons), then I wouldn’t have to worry about something like edTPA. But in reality, that doesn’t happen. So to that, I think that edTPA is better than what we have had before…and puts our profession on the right track towards gaining more respect in society. Everyone who has taught before knows teaching is a rigorous profession – so why shouldn’t we have a rigorous way to see if someone is ready for the profession?
LikeLike
“Ed Detective – no assessment is perfect.”
It’s not a matter of perfect or not perfect. It’s a matter of who has control over the certification and evaluation of new teachers — whether it is fair or not, whether it is necessary or not. It’s a matter of whether it is more good than better. It’s a matter if it is worth implementing overall.
“In terms of the accountability argument – many on this blog have commented again that bad teachers don’t exist (or are few in number compared to what others are saying)….”
The question is not whether bad or mediocre teachers exist. They do. The question is who decides and how; then the question is what to do about it. EdTPA is not the only or the best option.
“I will bring up the doctor/lawyer/nurse example – why is is that we expect those professions to have some type of accountability and yet with teachers we don’t have the similar level of accountability?”
We should expect all public servants to be accountable. Again, the question is not whether we should expect quality — but what teachers are accountable for, who teachers are accountable to, and how it is determined. What gives Pearson, and those who developed this program, the right to decide all of those things rather than the public and the teacher educators who work with student teachers?
“If I could trust that ALL teachers (and ALL teacher preparation programs) were practicing good teaching (and in this case, I will define good teaching as student centered discovery based lessons), then I wouldn’t have to worry about something like edTPA. But in reality, that doesn’t happen. So to that, I think that edTPA is better than what we have had before…and puts our profession on the right track towards gaining more respect in society. Everyone who has taught before knows teaching is a rigorous profession – so why shouldn’t we have a rigorous way to see if someone is ready for the profession?”
You should research how Finland educates and certifies their teachers. Much better than edTPA. That is the general path we should take if we want good teachers who earn respect from society. EdTPA is another distraction, it is a way to profit and remove power from those who should have it and give it to those who shouldn’t.
LikeLike
Thank you, Ed Detective, for your patience in continuing to respond on this topic, for your persistence in defending the good practices of teacher educators across the country, and your perspicacity in dismantling these false arguments that we need anything at all like edTPA.
LikeLike
by “more good than better” i meant “more good than bad”
LikeLike
Thanks Christine, I think it is an important issue or I wouldn’t spend the time and effort. I believe we can improve a lot of what we’re doing, but have also seen and studied enough to believe that this kind of top down coercion and “power grabs” will only make things worse…
LikeLike
Lloyd = So….If a teacher decides, “I’m supposed to be teaching Pre-calculus, but all I want my students to do is pass so I will just teach them concepts from Algebra II so that they all get A’s and will like me”…is that ok? (yes that happened with one of my colleagues at a school)…
Also, to your comment, “”Most if not all veteran teachers know what’s needed in teacher training.”…our TPP struggles to find quality mentor teachers within our local districts…so if we were to leave things to just veteran teachers…I am a little bit worried about that.
LikeLike
“Lloyd = So….If a teacher decides, “I’m supposed to be teaching Pre-calculus, but all I want my students to do is pass so I will just teach them concepts from Algebra II so that they all get A’s and will like me”…is that ok? (yes that happened with one of my colleagues at a school)…”
If it’s not ok, and I don’t think it is, then the principal and other teachers should take care of the problem. How does this one anecdote justify edTPA?
LikeLike
Nothing justifies Pearson’s edTPA. It’s BS. It’s another tool to destroy the public schools. That’s all it is.
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch – I think many of us would agree with you in terms of the traditional standardized tests…Yet that is why I am a bit confused on why so many are against edTPA. Most that look at the rubrics, even those here that have been skeptics of the assessment, see that the rubrics advocate for things I would think many of us would consider to be good teaching practices – creating lessons that are aimed at our students, engaging our students in student centered practices, etc. Some have criticized that edTPA only focuses on those practices (i.e. lecture is bad, discovery is good), but that is not the case at all….Also, as someone who has both helped prepare candidates on edTPA as well as served as an official scorer, supervisor and trainer -to me the beauty of this assessment is there is no ONE right way to teach. Candidates have the opportunity to share their perspective of what they think good teaching should be,
In terms of other criticisms (edTPA is biased against minorities, etc). I personally have not seen that happen, and have had my own minority students score as well or better than others on edTPA.
Ed Dectective brought up the accountability debate…I think everyone here would agree on one thing – we are trying to do what’s best for children, and making sure that there are qualified teachers in the classroom is one of those steps. Additionally, having a common assessment like edTPA can help make sure that those in alt cert programs who claim their teachers do as well or better than traditional TPP – those teachers can be held to the same standards (I know some will note that TFA handles edTPA differently in some policy states – but that is a STATE issue, not an edTPA issue)
LikeLike
Dear JLSteach,
Re edTPA: I think there is a concern about whether exit is a good idea to remove the responsibility for certifying teachers from their professors and hand it over to a test scored by people who do not know the prospective teacher.
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch – So that concern is completely valid and understandable…However, I would offer a few thoughts:
1. I would argue that having edTPA official scoring IS NOT replacing the responsibility of having supervisors or professors work closely with teacher candidates. I personally do not know of any TPP program that has stated, “Well, we have edTPA now, so no need to hire supervisors” Rather edTPA has helped programs realize some of their gaps, improve TPP programs in preparing teachers. Yes, some states are making it high stakes (and I would argue that instead of adding many more tests such states should look at their current assessments and see which ones they can get rid of)…but TPP still have a place in the process…they give a grade for student teaching, right?
2. I know some have addressed this before, but why is it ok for doctors and lawyers to have these types of exams but not teachers. Even worse in my mind is that those professions still rely on multiple choice tests as their high stakes testing. I have a good friend who has completed her medical training as a pediatric surgeon (she is one of the few African American pediatric surgeons in the nation). Yet she cannot even get a physican’s assistant position because she has struggled to complete the multiple choice tests required for board certification. I cannot fathom that medicine does not have some type of performance assessment…Right now the only assessments that states have are multiple choice assessments (Praxis). Isn’t it better to have an assessment that actually focuses on teaching.
3. In terms of the people that don’t know there teacher – is objectivity sometimes a good thing? Do some supervisors or professors, in some cases, decide someone is ready for the classroom because they don’t want to not fail someone that they have worked with for years? (Bias can exist with edTPA scorers as well, I know…but couldn’t it also exist with supervisors or professors)
4. SCALE is trying to addresses the issue of those that don’t know candidates by offering regional official scoring. This process allows a portion of portfolios from a TPP to be officially scored by faculty, K-12 educators or others that are tied to the faculty. This helps addresses the concern that official scorers may not be familiar with a particular context.
5. One of the things edTPA has done at one program is bridge the disconnect between TPP and local districts:
http://aheadoftheheard.org/connecting-teacher-preparation-programs-and-district-partners-through-performance-assessments/
LikeLike
Pasi Sahlberg quotes Niall MacKinnon in “Finnish Lessons 2.0”
“There is the real practical danger that without an understanding of rationale and theoretical bases for school development, practitioners may be judged by auditors on differing underlying assumptions to their own developmental pathways, and the universalistic grading schemas come to be applied as a mask or front giving pseudoscientific veneer to imposed critical judgments which are nothing more than expressions of different views and models of education. Through the mechanism of inspection, a difference of conceptual viewpoint, which could prompt debate and dialogue in consideration of practice, is eliminated in judgmental and differential power relations. One view supplants another. Command and control replaces mutuality, dialogue and conceptual exploration matched to practice development. Those who suffer are those innovating and bringing in new ideas.”
Sounds a lot like edTPA to me.
LikeLike
If someone is willing to point me to the most current edTPA documents, I will analyze them and show why edTPA is 1. subjective (not objective) 2. wasteful 3. unfair.
If it turns out I am wrong after my analysis, I will admit that I was wrong.
LikeLike
Ed Detective:
First, the pre-calculus story wasn’t in response to Lloyd about edTPA at all, but rather the comment, “Teachers MUST be allowed to decide what curriculum to teach and how to teach it.” It was one example of what can happen WHEN teachers are given total autonomy…to your response, “then the principal and other teachers should take care of the problem….: How would you suggest that? What if this teacher has got the principal wrapped around his finger and the principal doesn’t really care? What if other teacher complain and nothing happens?
Now, onto Finland…Here’s an article on the Finish schools written by none other than…Linda Darling Hammond (the same LDH that many here have spoken critically against because of her connection to edTPA). So, which side of LDH are you on Ed Detective?
http://www.nea.org/home/40991.htm
The article points out a few things about Finnish schools:
1. “The overall variation in achievement among Finnish students is also smaller than that of nearly all the other OECD countries” LDH does not increased diversity within Finland recently, but the point here is that diversity here in the US is much larger than the diversity within Finland.
2. Finnish schools are generally small (fewer than 300 pupils) with relatively small class sizes (in the 20s), and are uniformly well equipped. The notion of caring for students educationally and personally is a central principle in the schools. All students receive a free meal daily, as well as free health care, transportation, learning materials, and counseling in their schools, so that the foundations for learning are in place. I think many of us would agree that this would be VERY nice here in the US
3. This occurred in two stages between 1972 and 1982… and a common curriculum, through the end of high school, was developed throughout the entire system. Hmm…sounds like the same Common Core that Lloyd and others were so against…So, which is it…Finland is great because of a common curriculum or Finland is great because of less standardized tests?
4. The current national core curriculum is a much leaner document—featuring fewer than 10 pages of guidance for all of mathematics, for example—that guides teachers in collectively developing local curriculum and assessments. …This sounds similar to Common Core folks!
5. Finland maintains one exam prior to attending university: the matriculation exam, organized and evaluated by a matriculation exam board appointed by the Finnish Ministry of Education. Although not required for graduation or entry into a university, it is common practice for students to take this set of four open-ended exams that emphasize problem-solving, analysis, and writing. Teachers use official guidelines to grade the matriculation exams locally, and samples of the grades are re-examined by professional raters hired by the matriculation exam board. – SO THERE ARE exams in Finland! And the exam is looked at both locally (aka edTPA local evaluation) and by professional raters (aka official scorers!)..
6. In a Finnish classroom, it is rare to see a teacher standing at the front of a classroom lecturing students for 50 minutes – this is the type of teaching that edTPA advocates for – student focused teaching.
7. Prospective teachers are competitively selected from the pool of college graduates—only 15 percent of those who apply are admitted—and receive a three-year graduate-level teacher preparation program, entirely free of charge and with a living stipend. – So Ed Detective…would this help us create the number of teachers we need here in the US? And should we eliminate the bachelor’s degree in education and only have Master’s Programs? Some TPP are moving in that direction…but what would that do to other places? Would some Colleges of Education shut down?
I’m going to stop here for now…as I could go on…my point is that yes, there are lots of things about Finland that would be great to have – a place where teachers were PAID to go to school and teach, a system where teaching is valued. That would take hundreds of years and an overall change at the TOP (Washington, DC) where we were just able to create a new version of ESEA that, as according to our Constitution, moved control of many aspects of education back to the states.
One more note: Teachers should not be seen as technicians whose work is to implement strictly dictated syllabi, but rather as professionals who know how to improve learning for all
That IS all about edTPA…edTPA is about knowing who your students are and creating lessons that are for them and to improve their learning.
I guess Ed Detective we found something in common…I like many of the same things that Finland does to…
LikeLike
“1. “The overall variation in achievement among Finnish students is also smaller than that of nearly all the other OECD countries” LDH does not increased diversity within Finland recently, but the point here is that diversity here in the US is much larger than the diversity within Finland.”
So, we need edTPA because of diversity? No.
“3. This occurred in two stages between 1972 and 1982… and a common curriculum, through the end of high school, was developed throughout the entire system. Hmm…sounds like the same Common Core that Lloyd and others were so against…So, which is it…Finland is great because of a common curriculum or Finland is great because of less standardized tests?”
The common curriculum in Finland is nothing like Common Core. The curriculum in Finland is a loose framework, which is then tailored at the school and classroom level. The Common Core was created and pushed along by many special interest groups, and is a much more dense set of overly-specific mandates that are tied to high stakes standardized testing. Common Core is not intended to be adaptable at the local level.
“4. The current national core curriculum is a much leaner document—featuring fewer than 10 pages of guidance for all of mathematics, for example—that guides teachers in collectively developing local curriculum and assessments. …This sounds similar to Common Core folks!”
See above, and I’m not sure why this is now about Common Core instead of edTPA.
“SO THERE ARE exams in Finland!”
Yeah, about a hundred less than there are in the U.S.
And don’t forget to read this part: “Although not required for graduation or entry into a university,…”
“6. In a Finnish classroom, it is rare to see a teacher standing at the front of a classroom lecturing students for 50 minutes – this is the type of teaching that edTPA advocates for – student focused teaching.”
There are good ideas sporadically throughout the Common Core. That doesn’t mean Common Core™ is good or necessary. Same with edTPA. Now I’m rehashing earlier arguments.
“Prospective teachers are competitively selected from the pool of college graduates—only 15 percent of those who apply are admitted—and receive a three-year graduate-level teacher preparation program, entirely free of charge and with a living stipend. – So Ed Detective…would this help us create the number of teachers we need here in the US? And should we eliminate the bachelor’s degree in education and only have Master’s Programs? Some TPP are moving in that direction…but what would that do to other places? Would some Colleges of Education shut down?”
The point is that teacher education programs can be improved, but tacking edTPA on the end is not going to address root causes of poor programs, and it would cause lots of other problems.
“That IS all about edTPA…edTPA is about knowing who your students are and creating lessons that are for them and to improve their learning.”
Please, if you have the most current revision of the documents, send them to me at eddetective (at gmail) and I will show you why edTPA is subjective, wasteful, and unfair. “Knowing your students and creating lessons for them” is nothing revolutionary, it would be very simple to incorporate that philosophy into a teaching ed program without edTPA. While there are certainly good ideas spread throughout the edTPA package, the bottom line of edTPA is profit and control, and there are better ways to go about improving teacher education without schools of education and student teachers giving up their power to decide what are the most important goals and processes.
Believe me, I do not think all teachers or teacher education programs are good. EdTPA will not save us from that, and it will punish many of the teachers and programs who ARE good.
LikeLike
Sorry that should have been “that Finland does too”
LikeLike
So, Point #1 doesn’t say that is why we need or don’t need edTPA, but rather notes two things: 1) Finland and the US are very different in the students that we teach as well as the number of teachers that we need. 2) I would disagree that CC in the US is not adaptable at the local level…for example, if one states that you should learn how to solve quadratics, the CC doesn’t say, “This is how you should solve them”…I would disagree that CC is so structured. As for the comment on why I added things about CC, that is because others have responded to this posting with comments about CC
“The point is that teacher education programs can be improved, but tacking edTPA on the end is not going to address root causes of poor programs, and it would cause lots of other problems” –
So why is it that many programs that have been implementing edTPA (and research on those that completed PACT) noted that having the assessment DID help programs find concerns and also helped them address them? HOW are you so confident that edTPA will not addresses root causes of poor programs?
In terms of research on PACT, see Whittaker and Nelson:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1547688X.2013.751315?journalCode=utne20#.VlE85-JOmSo
the bottom line of edTPA is profit and control, and there are better ways to go about improving teacher education without schools of education and student teachers giving up their power to decide what are the most important goals and processes. –
No, that is not the bottom line…But I wonder Ed Dedective – do you think that there are some ways that are better than others to teach? Or would you advocate that it was ok if a student teacher or any teacher simply lectured the entire period every day? If you felt that wasn’t right, then aren’t you deciding on how one should teach? The ideas within edTPA don’t come from one person, one university, or one company (in fact, Pearson is NOT involved at all in the creation of the rubrics or the handbooks)…As for your better ways, I’m all ears to hearing what they are?
Believe me, I do not think all teachers or teacher education programs are good. EdTPA will not save us from that, and it will punish many of the teachers and programs who ARE good.
So here is what I say to your final statement…If a teacher or a program is confident that they are good, then they should not be worried about any type of outside assessment, such as edTPA. Its like when I taught I welcomed any outside observer – a principal, someone from the district, into my classroom. We have already established no assessment is perfect, so there may be some instances where, as you state, edTPA “punishes” good teachers or good programs. But I believe that overall it will do more good than harm, and thus is a positive step in our profession.
as for asking for the documents, first of all there isn’t just one edTPA (each handbook is content specific). SCALE is the owner of the intellectual property of edTPA, so I would consider approaching them for copies of the material.
LikeLike
I have my Masters in Education and am certified to teach Social Studies in Missouri. I completed a performance based assessment similar to the EdTpa called the MoStep. I completed lesson plans that addressed the various MoStep performance indicators and rubrics. I wrote rationales and reflections on all of my lesson plans, submitted student artifacts as well as tests, worksheets and other assignments I personally designed.
I submitted IEP (heavily redacted for privacy) forms and reflected on how I met those students accommodations.
I submitted many more lesson plans than the EdTpa requires. I submitted rationales and reflections for each on as well as for other tasks like attending board meetings and interviewing administrators.
I did all this while having my Professor come into my classroom multiple times and observe me teaching numerous times throughout my student teaching. A board of Professors including mine (whose commentary based on his observations was included in my portfolio) were tasked with grading my portfolio and made sure it addressed each preformance indicator I was tasked with completing.
I passed with flying colors. I then passed my content area test (Praxis II) in Missouri.
I then passed the my content area test Illinois requires. I passed the APT and every single sub test on the TAP except the math portion (Illinois requires you score an 80 percent on each sub test as part of the TAP, their Basic skills test) There is nothing basic about the math portion. The applied math questions are absurd for someone not teaching math.
Illinois forced me to wait 60 days to retake the math test (at an additional 75 dollar fee). I applied for my ILL license on July 15, 2015 and was told I was deficient the EdTpa. I contacted ISBE and was told the they would not accept the assessment I already completed and that I would either have to obtain a provisional and complete the EdTpa teaching on that temporary license (which I can’t do because mine expired on July 1st 2015 and they won’t let me renew it because I didn’t apply to renew it befor it expired) ,provide evidence of 3 years teaching experience with evaluations marked as proficient or ( I can’t do this as I haven’t obtained a job yet)
OR, get this folks…….enroll in a student teaching portion of an education program and complete the EdTpa. Really? Student teach again? Take another semester off of work, lose income, pay tuition to student teach, lose insurance benefits for the rest of my year my job provides, AND pay 300 dollars on top of the 400 dollars in testing fees and 150 to apply for my license???? Illinois has lost its mind.
I’ve worked as a paraprofessional in an ILlinois school district in the STL area for the last 8 years. I have letters of recommendation from teachers I’ve worked with, building principals, assistant principals and the superintendent of our district. I have worked hard to build a reputation as a hard working para that cares about education, am knowledgable about my content, and have worked in our behavioral program as well as in our cross cat program working with student with IEP’s.
None of this matters to ISBE. There is no substitute for their new “capstone” assessment. They allowed in state applicants who student taught before September 1, 2015 to waive the EdTpa but set that deadline for out of state applicants at July 1, 2015, a two month difference. This makes no sense to me. I’ve called ISBE and they won’t budge. I applied 15 days later than their deadline and am subject to their new rules.
This is after I was told I had to take four more classes ( which I completed in 2014) as required in another rule change by ISBE.
It makes me sick to my stomach to see Dr. Amee Adkins in every comment section on the internet championing this abomination and these rule changes.
I’ve since obtained my Licence in Colorado ( who accepted everything I completed for Missouri, with literally no further testing or hoops to jump through). I’m applying for jobs in both MIssouri and Colorado while hoping that state legislators in Illinois, many of whom are irate with the rules ISBE have instituted over the last 5 years, take legislative action and “smack down” the Amee Akins’ of Illinois doing all they can to keep teachers from entering Illinois as well as causing home grown ones to flee the state in droves. If anything, allow reciprocity with other states performance based assessments. Why only the EdTpa??? Pearson have that much control over ISBE and their lackys a cross the state pushing this nonsense?
LikeLike
I’ve tried to edit my comment to fix some errors I noticed in my post but do not see an edit function. I typed this post on my phone.
LikeLike
Keep checking since they change the rules so often they are hard to follow, they may have changed that date to August 31, 2015 for all candidates per latest post at ISBE .
All educators who have completed student teaching prior to August, 31, 2015 are eligible to complete either the Assessment of Professional Teaching (APT 188) or the edTPA
Either way, Illinois has effectively shut the door on out of state applicants without at least 3 years of teaching experience.
As a department chair who has hired from out of state, I am aghast at the entire thing. As a NBCT, I am appalled that a college student, while student teaching, is expected to complete and submit these portfolio entries. Some of the finest teachers I know did not pass National Board because they wrote about what they do instead of what is on the rubric. And this is definitely a mini-National Board process Compared to the year or two given to experienced teachers though, this is condensed to the 12 – 15 weeks of student teaching. This entire process ignores realities of student teaching: the stress, the fact that it is not your classroom and you do not set the standards unless your cooperating teacher lets you, and the fact that many cooperating teachers will not be able to help you get these done unless they are very familiar with the system -the expertise of an experienced educator is central to this process as you don’t just set up the kind of classroom structures this requires in a couple of weeks, it needs to be part of what kids expect. It doesn’t matter if the goal is worthy or not. It matters if this is the right teachable moment, the right time in their career and the right time in their life (how many classes did you still have to go to? did you still have to work your campus job? ) The only person I know who has scored these has never had a student teacher and has never gone through the National Board process. Student teachers can demonstrate their ability to differentiate, use data and assessment to guide instruction, and engage learners to their cooperating teacher and university supervisor. They do not need a faceless corporation to judge that performance out of context.
Saying it is a great goal and a great process reminds me of teachers who choose to teach concepts above the level of their students readiness based on whether they feel good about teaching it instead of whether it is what students should be learning. Everything is great to know: the key is when is it most appropriate and meaningful for you to learn it.
As to the post below, I also know someone who failed National Board because their was a glitch in their video and they deemed it edited. They abandoned the process in disgust. You can not do that without giving up the career.
It is so hard to find highly competent young teachers in so many high school subject areas. None of them enter knowing many things they will learn or improve on as they teach. I fully endorse basic skills and content tests. That is it. The rest is what the elaborate mentoring and induction programs all schools have now are for.
LikeLike
My first edTPA submission came back as “incomplete”, stating that my videos were incorrectly uploaded. How in the world did Pearson accept them if they were presented in the wrong format? In order to try again, I had to PAY again. So let’s do the math folks, $300 plus another $300 is now $600 out of pocket. My scores came back and much to my advisor’s, as well as everyone else’s dismiss, I missed by a single point. I reviewed my work, added detailed narrative supporting graphic representation of my analyzed data (area of low score) and DID NOT change anything else. My next score results posted and to my horror, scores in the one section I retook actually went DOWN! How is this even possible since the edPTA and Person promises candidates that scorers are QUALIFIED and are consistent due to the nature of the “in the box” rubrics? The discrepancies between individual rubric scores kept me from passing and what did the edTPA tell me? Well of course, for another $200, we will have your scores reviewed and confirmed but only if your score changes, will we refund your additional $200. So now I’m out $800 and have no physical address to overnight a letter of protest. Instead, my letter must be sent via priority mail and hope that a responsible person retrieves the mail from their P.O. Box and doesn’t misplace my time sensitive letter and MONEY ORDER. In addition, it absolutely bewilders me how I can earn a 4.0 at the master’s level, max out field placement evaluations with superior ratings, earn an “A” in student teaching with superior performance evaluations from the same rigorous university, have a teaching credential in another area of expertise and yet, fail the edPTA? At this point, my lawyer may be summoned to help resolve such a troubling situation.
LikeLike
A task force should be assembled to thoroughly debunk and nullify EdTPA. It is a sleeper bomb in the teacher education system. In districts that subscribe, PEARSON ultimately controls who enters the profession.
LikeLike
Let’s play a fair game. If one mandates current certified teachers take edTPA, I can assure you that 95% of them will fail it. And there will be global shortage of teachers. Let’s see what NYS DOE will say after that. huh?
LikeLike
I am very frustrated with the process of becoming a teacher. I have my Master’s in Early Childhood education birth- 2nd grade. I passed the old tests before April 2014 deadline but I didn’t graduate before the deadline. Now I have to pass the Edtpa and EAS. This is more money spent and more time that I am not working as a teacher. I wanted to give up so many times. It is so hard to become a teacher, I lost my passion for teaching.
LikeLike