Session B1:
edTPA Policies and Implementation
GaPSC Certification and Program Officials’ Conference
November 12, 2013
1
Session Agenda
• Purpose
– Today’s Session
– edTPA
•
•
•
•
About edTPA
Policy
Implementation
Sources of Support
http://todaysmeet.com/edTPA-Conference
As you participate in the edTPA
session today, we encourage
you to use this live stream to
make comments, offer
suggestions, ask questions, and
let us know any additional needs
you may have.
Purpose and Policy
4
Session Outcomes
This session will focus on policy and
implementation to help EPPs effectively and
fully implement the edTPA by 2015-2016:
•
•
•
National, state, and provider policy will be
discussed;
EPP panelists will share their strategies and
activities; and
State and national resources will be shared
….so that candidates can be successful.
About edTPA
• The edTPA is a subject-specific performance
assessment administered during a candidate’s
student teaching.
• It has been designed to be educative and
predictive of effective teaching and student
learning.
• The assessment, developed by Stanford
University, has been field tested in over 25 states,
including 8 IHEs in Georgia. This spring a large
number of our private and public IHEs are piloting
it with some of their programs.
6
About Effective Teaching
• Develop knowledge of subject matter, content
standards and subject-specific pedagogy
• Develop and apply knowledge of varied students’
needs
• Consider research and theory about how students
learn
• Reflect on and analyze evidence of the effects of
instruction on student learning
7
Benefits
•Educative to inform candidates and program
improvement
•Collaboration: IHE/LEA
•Informing induction programs
•Program Accountability
8
Benefits to Candidates
•An authentic, educative assessment
•Charts their early professional development
progression
•Prepares them for the new teacher evaluation
systems
•Identifies areas of strength and areas for
development
9
Benefits to Providers
•Feedback regarding program effectiveness
•Clear performance criteria and performance
data
•Examine claims about what is “infused
throughout the curriculum”
•Collaboration across institutions via shared
outcomes
•Independent, objective affirmation regarding
quality of our programs
•Actionable evidence to support program
change
10
Projected Timeline
•Spring 2013-Fall 2013 Finalize policy incorporating edTPA
•2012-13 Introductory/Exploratory year for providers
•2013-14 Exploratory/Scaling Up year for providers
•2014-15 Partial Implementation (each provider implements
edTPA with a subset/all of programs, but not consequential
yet)
•2015-16 Full Implementation (each provider implements
edTPA for all programs, consequential)
11
Handbook Structure
•Electronic Portfolio Demonstrating Readiness to Teach
•3-5 Day Learnng Segment focused on 3 Tasks:
• Planning
• Instruction
• Assessment
•Clearly Articulated
• What to Think About (Purpose)
• What Do I Need to Do? (Check list)
• What Do I Need to Write? (Commentary Prompts)
•Rubrics for Scoring
13
Evidence of Practice
•Artifacts
• Authentic work completed by candidates and/or
students
• Lesson plans, instructional materials and
assessment, video clips, and student work
samples
•Commentaries
• Description of artifacts and the rationale for using
them
• Analysis of student learning and candidate
practice
14
Evidence of Practice
•Describe plans or provide descriptions or evidence of
what teacher or students did;
•Justify a rationale for plans in terms of knowledge of
students & research/theory;
•Analyze what happened in terms of student learning or
how teaching affected student learning; and
•Explain feedback to students and next instructional steps
based on assessment results
15
edTPA “Records of Practice”
TPAC Artifacts of Practice
Planning
Instruction
• Instructional and social
context
• Lesson plans
• Instructional materials,
student assignments
• Planning Commentary
• Video Clips
• Instruction
Commentary
Assessment
• Analysis of whole
class assessment
• Analysis of learning
and feedback to
THREE students
• Assessment
Commentary
Analysis of Teaching Effectiveness
Academic Language Development
16
Rubric Progression


Expanding repertoire of skills & strategies
Deepening of rationale and reflection
1
Not Ready
Teacher
Focus
5
Early Beginning
Teacher
Highly Accomplished
Beginning Teacher
Student
Focus
Whole
Class
Individuals/ Flex.
Groups
Fragmented or
Indiscriminate
Intentional & Well
Executed
Rubric 5:
Planning Assessments to Monitor and Support Student Learning
How are the informal and formal assessments selected or designed to monitor students’ conceptual understanding,
procedural fluency, AND mathematical reasoning and/ or problem solving skills?
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
The assessments only
provide evidence of
students' procedural
skills and/or factual
knowledge.
The assessments
provide limited
evidence to monitor
students’ conceptual
understanding,
procedural fluency,
AND mathematical
reasoning and/or
problem solving skills
during the learning
segment.
The assessments
provide evidence to
monitor students’
conceptual
understanding,
procedural fluency, AND
mathematical reasoning
and/or problem solving
skills during the learning
segment.
The assessments provide
multiple forms of evidence
to monitor students’
progress toward
developing conceptual
understanding, procedural
fluency, AND
mathematical reasoning
and/or problem solving
skills throughout the
learning segment.
Level 4 plus:
Assessment
adaptations required
by IEP or 504 plans
are NOT made.
Assessment
adaptations required
by IEP or 504 plans
are made.
Assessments are NOT
aligned with the central
focus and
standards/objectives for the
learning segment.
Assessment adaptations
required by IEP or 504
plans are made.
Assessment adaptations
required by IEP or 504
plans are made.
The assessments are
strategically designed
to allow individuals or
groups with specific
needs to
demonstrate their
learning.
http://edtpa.aacte.org
• For a helpful brief overview of edTPA called,
“Using the edTPA,” please access:
http://edtpa.aacte.org/about-edtpa#Overview-0,
then click on “Using edTPA (PDF).”
19
Who Scores?
50% IHE faculty and 50% P-12 Educators who:
• Are subject matter experts; AND
• Have experience mentoring or supervising
beginning teachers; AND
• Have taught in that subject in the past 5
years; OR
• Taught methods or supervised student
teachers in that field: OR
• Administer teacher preparation programs
20
Usage Plan
• If any candidate’s edTPA is submitted for
official scoring, the EPP is designated to be at
the Implementation phase.
• All others in Georgia are considered to be at
the Exploratory phase.
21
Invitation
Become a Scorer
22
National Policy
Scoring:
• A candidate will be able to designate one local EPP
faculty member to view and provide feedback after
the edTPA has been uploaded and before it has been
submitted for official scoring.
• edTPA portfolios will be scored by trained and
calibrated scorers, selected based on their
experience with candidates who wish to become
teachers and their content knowledge and
pedagogical expertise.
23
National Policy
•ES will provide scores for each of the fifteen (15) rubrics
on a scale from one (1) to five (5) as well as a score for
each of the three (3) tasks. The overall score reflects the
total of the scores on the fifteen (15) rubrics. The
summative score of the 15 rubrics will be reported on a
scale of fifteen (15) to seventy-five (75).
•Candidates will receive an individual score report from ES
that will include the score obtained on each of the edTPA
rubrics on each task and a total score.
24
National Policy
Access to Data:
• Designated EPPs participating in edTPA will have
electronic access to demographic and
performance information for candidates who have
listed the EPP as a score report recipient.
• EPPs will have access to the web-based
ResultsAnalyzer™ data reporting tool for edTPA to
generate reports related to the EPP and the
candidates enrolled at the EPP.
25
National Policy
• Score reports will be provided to candidates
through the website. EPPs may also assign a
contact person to receive scores for candidates
who have designated the EPP.
• Scores will be retained for ten years through
candidates’ “Personal edTPA Account.”
• Portfolios will be retained by ES for four years
post-submission, but will not be accessible to
candidates, EPPs, or GaPSC.
26
National Policy
Confidentiality:
• Prior to submitting their assessment materials
to Pearson for scoring, edTPA candidates will
be asked to consent to or opt out of use of their
assessment materials to support continued
program improvement activities conducted by
SCALE and Pearson, such as future validity
and reliability studies of the edTPA.
• Candidate video recordings, will not be shown
in any public venue nor made available in a
non-secure way.
27
National Policy
Customer Service:
• ES will support edTPA candidates and EPP
faculty via phone and online customer service,
providing information to candidates in response
to inquiries on the nature of edTPA,
registration, preparation, remediation, retesting,
and technology issues associated with the
electronic portfolio platform. Questions related
to policy or certification regulations will be
referred to the GaPSC.
28
National Policy
Pricing:
• Full-portfolio: The assessment fee for the full
portfolio during the two (2) years of this contract
is $300, which includes access for eighteen
(18) months to the edTPA electronic portfolio
platform for registration, submission, scoring,
and score reporting services.
• Candidates may retake the entire portfolio and
pay the full assessment fee. At the time of
contract renewal, the assessment fee may be
revised upon mutual agreement of the parties.
29
National Policy
• Partial-portfolio: Candidates may resubmit one
task and pay the single assessment task fee.
The assessment fee for retaking one task of the
portfolio is $100.
30
Hot off the Press
PRESS RELEASE
31
EdTPA Advisory Committee
Purpose of EdTPA Policy and Implementation
Advisory Committee
• Inform policy
• Establish expectations, including
milestones/activities, of where we need to be
each year in order to effectively implement
edTPA by 2015-2016
• Identify/build structures of support
• Establish timelines
32
Draft edTPA State Policy
• Will be required to be passed to earn an Induction
Certificate in the planned Tiered Certification model
• Will count fifteen percent (15)% toward the PPEM for
fields in which there is a state-adopted edTPA Handbook
• Becomes consequential in 2015-2016. In short,
candidates who student teach in Fall 2015 and those that
student teach in Spring 2016 will be required to take the
edTPA. GaTAPP candidates must take the edTPA the
second semester after completing the first full semester
33
Draft edTPA State Policy
• Will be required for all Georgia stateapproved EPP candidates in initial teaching
fields (for which an edTPA has been stateadopted) and for all out-of-state candidates
who are completing clinical field experience
in Georgia’s schools
• Will not be required for service fields, even
though there are edTPA handbooks for
some service fields
34
Pending Decisions
• The appropriate edTPA Handbooks must be
selected for each field.
• A determination regarding the PPEM score
needs to be made for teaching fields for which
there is state-adopted edTPA Handbook.
• A determination needs to be made whether
taking or passing the edTPA is required for
program completion.
35
Pending Decisions
• A Georgia passing cut score needs to be
determined, which may/may not be based
on the national passing cut score.
• Georgia can set additional retake policy
over and above the national retake policy.
• Additional discussion is needed on how
edTPA might inform induction programs.
36
Pending Decisions
• A Georgia passing cut score needs to be
determined, which may/may not be based
on the national passing cut score.
• Georgia can set additional retake policy
over and above the national retake policy.
• Additional discussion is needed on how
edTPA might inform induction programs.
37
Implementation
38
Panel Discussion
Pam B. Cole
Interim Associate Dean, Kennesaw State University
Carla Lynn Tanguay
Clinical Instructor and ECE BSED Coordinator
Georgia State University
Kaye Thomas
Assistant Dean and Director of Field Placement
Mercer University
Pam Wetherington
edTPA Coordinator, Columbus State University
Panel Discussion
• Access the document Session B1:
edTPA Panelists Topics and Notes
• Panelists are listed with primary topics
• Other panelists will add comments
• As you listen to the Panel Discussion, on
the document:
• Column 3, ideas you would like to add
based on your experiences with
edTPA
• Column 4, what else would you like to
hear from these experienced
panelists?
40
Sources of Support
41
Contact Information
If Questions, Suggestions, Comments:
Julie Beck
julie.beck@gapsc.com
Anne Marie Fenton
annemarie.fenton@gapsc.com
Phyllis S. Payne
phyllis.payne@gapsc.com