Who is Watching? What Do They Want? A Foucauldian Analysis of Teacher Candidates’ Experiences with the edTPA

Abstract

Background/Context

This article is a policy discussion of the edTPA preservice portfolio assessment; it uses Foucault's work and our data to suggest a more critical and activist approach to the assessment. Currently 764 teacher education programs in 40 states have included the edTPA as part of their requirements. In Illinois, it is a newly required high-stakes portfolio assessment required for teacher licensure.

Purpose/Objective

We studied our teacher candidates’ experiences with edTPA portfolio. We wanted to know how they experienced this new assessment and how that might inform our program. As instructors, we had heard many complaints from our candidates, and we wanted to examine their experiences from their perspectives.

Participants

In this study, we collected narrative accounts from two different cohorts of teacher candidates in Year 1 (2015–16) and Year 3 (2017–18) to better understand their perspectives (total N = 37). The participants were interviewed at the end of their student teaching semester after they had completed their portfolio.

Research Design

We collected narrative accounts from two different cohorts of teacher candidates in Year 1 (2015–16) and Year 3 (2017–18) to better understand their experiences with the edTPA (total N = 37). We gave participants a choice of whether to do individual or focus group narratives. Participants were interviewed at the end of their student teaching semester after they had completed their portfolio.

Findings

As teacher educators, we aimed to support our candidates’ development into critically engaged educators. However, we found that the regulatory powers in the policies and procedures of the edTPA had a negative effect on our candidates’ experiences with it. We also did not give them the tools they needed to sufficiently analyze this particular assessment, despite having discussed testing policies in the schools and their negative implications for teachers and students. Further, we found a normalization of the edTPA between Year 1 and Year 3 of implementing this assessment that suggested a trend toward normalization over time—from energetic critique in Year 1 to acceptance and a just-get-it-done attitude in Year 3.

Conclusions

We conclude with implications for teacher educators, including a call for more critical engagement with this and other disciplinary technologies that our candidates may be subject to. As teacher educators, we advocate for a more explicit critical analysis with candidates to help them more deeply understand the history, context, and implications of corporatized, standardized assessments in teacher education, in particular the edTPA, and testing in the schools.