Reclaiming the Teacher Performance Assessment: Implementation and Ownership at the Program Level

• In Event: Redesigned Performance Assessment: A State’s New Assessment Tool Confronts the Shortcomings in Teacher Preparation

Abstract

The lasting impact teachers have on student achievement has been widely corroborated by research (Hattie, 2012; Mendro, 1998; Stronge & Hindman, 2003). Given that teachers have a cumulative effect on student achievement, refining teacher development to ensure all educators can deliver quality instruction is critical (Stronge & Hindman, 2003; Wright, Horn, & Sanders, 1997). As such, the state’s credentialing agency, along with 21 design team members representing the full range of teacher preparation programs, teacher induction programs, and the geographic regions of the state, have come together to redesign the Teacher Performance Assessment (TPA) to assesses the knowledge, skills and abilities of teacher candidates in relation to the Teacher Performance Expectations (TPEs).

The nation has over a decade of experience with teacher performance assessments. As such, challenges have surfaced. As noted by Greenblatt & O’Hara (2015), one challenge for faculty is lack of transparency on the part of the test designer coupled with restricted access to supports and resources. A further challenge is one of compliance and loss of program autonomy, leaving faculty to believe they are teaching to the test (Peck, Gallucci & Sloan, 2010). In light of these challenges, the objective of this paper is to identify how the redesign process has been a bottom up approach aiming to minimize potential concerns as well as garner support and buy-in from faculty.

Unique to this redesign process has been the multifaceted approach of supporting and engaging all interested programs and stakeholders. While initial discussion and collaboration occurred with the state credentialing agency and design team members, each member returned to their respective programs to facilitate discussion and feedback allowing for stakeholder buy-in. During pilot test implementation, webinars, weekly office hours and in person meetings were held for participating programs. Additionally, the application to score pilot submissions was open to all teachers and teacher educators within the state. The week-long, in-person scoring of the pilot brought stakeholders together from the myriad of teacher preparation programs offered throughout the state, providing teachers and faculty the opportunity for critical and reflective inquiry of the redesigned TPA.

At the time of this writing (July 2017), programs are preparing for the the fall launch of the field test; 900 candidates representing 31 public and private preparation programs have been granted waivers to participate. By conference date in April of 2018, the field test will be concluded and scoring will be imminent. The most notable change from the pilot test to the field test is the move from 10 holistic rubrics to 18 analytic rubrics focused on specific elements of teacher performance. Programs can expect that these new rubrics will provide data on both candidate and program levels allowing for educative feedback. Moving forward, programs will continually seek feedback and recommendations in response to the redesigned TPA, allowing those with “boots on the ground” to have a voice in moving teacher education and the profession forward.

Authors

• Karen Escalante, California State University - San Marcos

• Helene T. Mandell, University of San Diego