Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

edTPA is designed to strengthen teacher professionalization and provide a framework for program redesign. However, using a national assessment to shift the content of local programs is challenging because of their inherent organizational complexity. In this article, we focus on this complexity, using a systems lens to analyze edTPA implementation at a large, public university. Employing a mixed-methods case study design, we survey 250 teacher educators and candidates to understand how they interpret the demands of edTPA and how their varied perspectives impact each other. We interview a stratified, purposive subset of participants to explore mechanisms underlying quantitative findings. We find substantial internal variation in edTPA implementation that translates into differential support for candidates. This variation could not be explained by duration of implementation of edTPA. Varied perspectives may stem from distinct perceptions of teacher educators’ professional roles and the role they see edTPA playing in teacher professionalization.

Keywords

accountability performance assessment teacher educator characteristics educational policy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bastian

K. C.

Henry

G. T.

Pan

Lys

(2016). Teacher candidate performance assessments: Local scoring and implications for teacher preparation program improvement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 1-12.

Coburn

C. E.

(2001). Collective sense-making about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 145-170.

Cochran-Smith

Piazza

Power

(2013). The politics of accountability: Assessing teacher education in the United States. The Educational Forum, 77(1), 6-27.

Cohen

D. K.

Hill

H. C.

(2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Creswell

J. W.

Miller

D. L.

(2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130.

Darling-Hammond

(2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300-314.

Darling-Hammond

Hyler

M. E.

(2013). The role of performance assessment in developing teaching as a profession. Rethinking Schools, 27(4), 10-15.

Darling-Hammond

Newton

S. P.

Chung Wei

(2013). Developing and assessing beginning teacher effectiveness: The potential of performance assessments. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 25(3), 179-204.

Dyson

A. H.

Genishi

(2005). On the case (Vol. 76). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

10.

Fayne

Qian

(2016). What does it mean to be student centered? An institutional case study of edTPA implementation. The New Educator, 12(4), 311-321.

11.

Goldhaber

Cowan

Theobald

(2016). Evaluating prospective teachers: Testing the predictive validity of the edTPA (Working Paper Number 157). Washington, DC: CALDER Center.

12.

Greenberg

McKee

Walsh

(2013). Teacher prep review: A review of the Nation’s Teacher Preparation Programs. Washington, DC: National Council of Teacher Quality.

13.

Guba

E. G.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 163-194). New York, NY: SAGE.

14.

Harris

(2015, June 17). Tough tests for teachers, with questions of bias. The New York Times, p. A1.

15.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.

16.

Ledwell

Oyler

(2016). Unstandardized responses to a “standardized” test: The edTPA as gatekeeper and curriculum change agent. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(2), 120-134.

17.

Levine

(2006). Educating school teachers. Washington, DC: The Education Schools Project.

18.

Margolis

Doring

(2013). National assessments for student teachers: Documenting teaching readiness to the tipping point. Action in Teacher Education, 35(4), 272-285.

19.

Marshall

Rossman

G. B.

(2014). Designing qualitative research. New York, NY: SAGE.

20.

Mehta

Doctor

(2013). Raising the bar for teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(7), 8-13.

21.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

A. M.

(1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. New York, NY: SAGE.

22.

Okhremtchouk

I. S.

Newell

P. A.

Rosa

(2013). Assessing pre-service teachers prior to certification: Perspectives on the Performance Assessment for California Teachers (PACT). Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(56), 1-31.

23.

Peck

C. A.

Gallucci

Sloan

Lippincott

(2009). Organizational learning and program renewal in teacher education: A socio-cultural theory of learning, innovation and change. Educational Research Review, 4(1), 16-25.

24.

Peck

C. A.

McDonald

(2013). Creating “cultures of evidence” in teacher education: Context, policy, and practice in three high-data-use programs. The New Educator, 9(1), 12-28.

25.

Ratner

A. R.

Kolman

J. S.

(2016). Breakers, benders, and obeyers: Inquiring into teacher educators’ mediation of edTPA. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(35), 1-29.

26.

Saldaña

(2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

27.

Sandholtz

J. H.

Shea

L. M.

(2012). Predicting performance: A comparison of university supervisors’ predictions and teacher candidates’ scores on a teaching performance assessment. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(1), 39-50.

28.

Spillane

J. P.

(1998). State policy and the non-monolithic nature of the local school district: Organizational and professional considerations. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 33-63.

29.

Spillane

J. P.

Reiser

B. J.

Reimer

(2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 387-431.

30.

Teddlie

(2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 77-100.

31.

Whittaker

Nelson

(2013). Assessment with an “end in view.” The New Educator, 9(1), 77-93.

32.

Zeichner

(2006). Reflections of a university-based teacher educator on the future of college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 326-340.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.06 MB

0.22 MB

Sense Making and Professional Identity in the Implementation of edTPA

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material