BackHome
Refresh: OffView Personal Schedule
Paper Summary
Share...

Direct link:

A Tale of Two Universities: The edTPA in Massachusetts

Mon, April 7, 10:35am to 12:05pm, Convention Center, Floor: 100 Level, 113C

Abstract

Objectives
Within the national context of education reform, conflicting forces struggle to control teacher preparation (Imig et al. 2011) and to standardize teacher assessment. This paper presents a cross-case analysis of edTPA research by two universities in Massachusetts—a large, public institution and a mid-sized private college. Although there are significant differences in the diversity of teacher candidates enrolled at teach university, both share a commitment to preparing high-quality teachers for urban schools. We explored the potential of the edTPA to support candidates’ learning and commitment to socially just teaching.

Perspectives/Theoretical Framework
Massachusetts, which is known for the rigor of its standards for students and teachers (Meier, 2000; Flippo & Riccards, 2000), has actively explored new opportunities for interstate alignment. As the edTPA is associated with a movement toward national standards (Darling-Hammond, 2010), research on the edTPA represented a logical next step in the state’s ongoing alignment efforts. Massachusetts further recognized a significant weakness in the reliability and validity of the Preservice Performance Assessment—the current assessment for initial teacher licensure. These factors contributed to the state’s decision to join the edTPA pilot in 2009.

Data Sources/Methods
We conducted a cross-case analysis of findings from two, independent, mixed-methods studies from 2011-2013. The first study collected data from three sources: elementary/secondary teacher candidate focus groups (n=35), candidate surveys (n=57), and a random sample of edTPA portfolios. A constant comparative approach, using both apriori and emergent codes, was used to analyze the data and to develop a theory of how candidates’ knowledge was formed through completion of the edTPA. The second study examined the infrastructure needed to successfully actualize the edTPA, outcomes for candidates, and the broader implications of adopting this assessment. A rigorous mixed-methods analysis (Onwuegbuzie & Teddlie, 2003) was utilized to integrate data from four sources: two surveys of elementary/secondary candidates (N=84), edTPA portfolios, instructor focus group (N=3), and an analysis of archival data.

Results
Three themes emerged: 1) while candidates’ were aware of the edTPA’s educative goals, the high stakes nature of the assessment discouraged many from engaging in a deeper reflection of their practice, 2) the social justice goals for teaching were not fully visible to teacher candidates or a priority during the formative assessment cycle, and 3) disparities in resources between the universities contributed to differences in perceptions about the value of the edTPA in relation to local reform efforts.

Significance
Although the edTPA is positioned as an instrument for large-scale reform, we argue that the assessment tool may or may not provide support for improved teacher education programs depending upon the context in which it is adopted. Our analysis identified tensions between the original “educative” role of the edTPA in developing reflective practitioners and the consequences of transferring power to outside evaluators. Candidates were often inhibited from developing inquiry based on continual learning due to concerns about evaluation. Finally, the edTPA did not fully address socially just and culturally relevant pedagogy that may reinforce current norms that lead to the achievement gaps reforms claim to address.

Authors