The edTPA Pilot and the Evolution of a Preservice Performance Assessment for Massachusetts Teachers (2010–2014)

• In Event: The Possibilities and Limits of Policy Frameworks for Teacher Candidate Performance Assessments

Abstract

Objectives and Framework

In Massachusetts, a 2009 Race to the Top grant initiated restructured standards and assessments for preparing educators. In 2010, five campuses joined a national pilot of the edTPA, a pre-service performance assessment. In 2013, a stakeholder taskforce reviewed the edTPA pilot and other vendors’ assessments prioritizing 2014 revisions to the MA Professional Standards for Teachers. The taskforce’s ultimate decision was to develop a multiple measure performance assessment known as the Massachusetts Candidate Assessment of Performance (MA CAP) to be adopted statewide in 2016-17.
This paper analyzes the four-year edTPA exploratory pilot at a public university. The multi-year pilot was based on the edTPA’s formative potential to inform candidates’ learning and program revision, rather than on its potential role as a nationally-adopted high stakes instrument. This paper adds the candidates’ perspectives to the policy discussion, drawing on what Cochran-Smith, Piazza, & Power (2014) frame as the “context of practice” or the influence of local contradictions that emerge as policies are remade and reworked by practitioners” (p. 9).

Methods and Data Sources

Three years of elementary and middle-secondary candidates’ surveys (n= 80), focus groups (n=69), and a subsample of portfolio data were collected to answer the questions: In what ways do candidates’ perceptions and performance during the pilot of the edTPA develop or not develop teacher-candidates praxis? What do candidates’ perceptions and performance offer faculty for ongoing revision of the teacher education programs? Year one surveys and focus group transcripts were coded for themes by the first three authors (all program supervisors) using a grounded theory methodology (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Using the agreed upon themes and definitions, the first author continued the analysis, member checking with the others. A random sub-sample of elementary edTPA portfolios from candidates who gave consent were coded to triangulate findings.

Findings and Significance

The findings problematized what edTPA developers defined as “educative” benefits for candidates (NYSED & SCALE, 2012) in light of the edTPA’s claims to be both “formative” and “summative” (Chung, 2008). Candidates demonstrated multiple benefits in that the edTPA positioned them to reflect on their learning within classroom contexts (Pecheone & Chung, 2006) supporting the program’s interest in providing formative feedback and developing candidates “praxis” (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999). However, gaps limited its ability to fully address two MA educator evaluation standards related to Family and Community and Professional Culture, and aspects of the university’s urban mission. Candidates’ experienced tensions included: the weight of culturally relevant pedagogy within the assessment’s priorities, the conflation of writing and teaching ability, and the paradox presented when considering focal students who would help them demonstrate success versus those who were truly challenging.
These findings necessitated faculty building additional assessments into the final portfolio. Discussion includes questions about a passing score on the edTPA as only a partial indication of candidates’ knowledge, especially for urban contexts. Arguments concerning the necessity of reliable and valid pre-service assessments (Darling-Hammond, 2010), while preserving unique needs for local context are considered in light of the newly released MA CAP indicators.

Authors

• Patricia C. Paugh, University of Massachusetts - Boston

• Kristen Wendell, Tufts University

• Michael Gilbert, University of Massachusetts - Boston

• Christine Power, Boston College