“The edTPA took away from my student teaching experience”: The impact of the edTPA on student teaching experiences

Abstract

This colloquium brings forward the “inside” voices of early childhood student teachers in order to critically examine the impact of the edTPA (Educative Teacher Performance Assessment) on student teaching experiences, especially the “educative” function that the edTPA claims.

Undoubtedly, the edTPA (Educative Teacher Performance Assessment) is dramatically changing the landscape of teacher education in the USA, as 790 educator preparation programs in 41 states and the District of Columbia are participating in the edTPA as part of the licensure decision, teacher certification, and/or program accreditation (American Association, 2016; Pecheone and Whittaker, 2016). The edTPA is a high-stakes, standardized-teaching, performance-based assessment which was developed by the Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning and Equity and is being administered and scored by Pearson, a for-profit education and assessment service corporation. The edTPA is the first nationally available standards-based, educator-designed assessment for student teachers (Burns et al., 2015).

The edTPA, consisting of three tasks—planning, instruction, and assessment—is completed during the student teaching semester. It is argued that the edTPA can serve dual functions: formative and summative. The edTPA definitely serves as a summative assessment, as its main goal is to better measure pre-service student teachers’ readiness to teach and teacher education program quality (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Stanford Center, 2015), and thus to professionalize the field. As for its “educative,” formative function, the edTPA developers and supporters argue that the edTPA can support student teachers’ ongoing growth and learning, as well as teacher education program improvement (Peck et al., 2014; Wei and Pecheone, 2010). Does the edTPA provide “educative” benefits, as promised? Despite the claims, analysis of the open-ended questionnaire that the early childhood student teachers completed at one university in New Jersey captured many concerning points that mirror the critiques articulated by many researchers.

We have to realize that student teachers are often asked to complete the edTPA by the middle of the student teaching semester, in order to allow for retakes in the same semester if necessary (Othman et al., 2017). It is no wonder that many students expressed that they were “stressed,” “drained,” and “nervous” about the edTPA process. Many also mentioned “feeling relieved” after completing it. One student expressed: “I was genuinely drained throughout and after the edTPA process. I felt as though my anxiety was really bad this semester and I noticed myself having more mental breakdowns and anxiety.” Another student responded: “I felt that I was very overwhelmed. I often lost sleep and woke up thinking I missed the deadline.” As shared in Clayton (2018), student teachers in this study also shared a sense of loss by commenting: “the edTPA took away from their student teaching experience with edTPA it consumed all my time.”

Due to the heavy focus on the completion of the edTPA within a tight time frame and the emotional burden and distress the student teachers were experiencing, they tended to catch up with tasks rather than fully invest their energy and time in getting to know and developing relationships with their students and cooperating teacher (Heil and Berg, 2017; Sandholz, 2012). One student added:

I wanted to spend so much time on researching new techniques to teach and ways to make my instruction fun. However, I felt as though I had to dedicate most of my free time to edTPA instead of bettering myself as a teacher.

Moreover, another student articulated: “Instead of focusing on making the best lessons possible for my students, I found myself more concerned about my tasks for edTPA.” Comments like these raise a serious concern. Considering that a relationship-based practice is central to quality early childhood care and education, the edTPA experience is not only creating an extra burden during the student teaching semester, but also limiting the opportunity to focus on young children’s needs and interests and implement a relationship-based practice.

There were a few students who articulated the positive aspects of completing the edTPA, such as:

The positive was that it caused me to write more detailed and thoughtful lesson plans.

I believe it was also a positive experience for me because it was a week-long lesson that introduced [my] style of teaching to my students.

However, negative comments outweighed the positive comments. The student teachers shared that “I found that edTPA only provided a snapshot of a few days of teaching and not my development from January to May” and “It is concerned too much with a score and judges you on 15 minutes of your teaching.” This “snapshot” approach might not document well the complex nature of the student teaching experience (Paugh et al., 2018). Moreover, the student teachers criticized the unhelpful feedback they received from the edTPA scoring: “I just wish there was more feedback given with the scores about how to improve rather than general statements.” In order to improve teaching and learning, it is essential for student teachers to receive constructive, thoughtful feedback immediately, and to make necessary and thoughtful adjustments to improve their teaching (Paugh et al., 2018). These student teachers genuinely wanted to become better teachers. They wanted to receive authentic feedback, not just numbers on a report, and valued the comments and discussions they had with their mentor and cooperating teacher. Mere scores or general statements from the edTPA report were inadequate, unsatisfactory, and certainly not “educative.”

The edTPA also cultivates a feeling of detachment among the participants, including the young students and the cooperating teachers. The student teachers shared that:

I think edTPA is a lot for the students as well. It was a lot for them to deal with the camera coming out every time, pulling out my students for feedback and evidence of learning.

Students often felt that they were performing and that’s not something that I wanted the students to feel when I came to the classroom. My CT [cooperating teacher] also didn’t seem too thrilled about this portion of the student teaching experience.

Another student teacher added: “one of my students needed to have everything scribed for the student. For edTPA I need to have him actually answer my assessment himself because the work had to be genuinely from the student.” The assessment part did not do this young student any justice. Even though the student teacher believed that “we should be allowed to offer different formats of assessment,” the student teacher followed the best (compliant) way to complete the edTPA (Cronenberg et al., 2016). I would say that the edTPA experience is not authentic, but subtractive for all parties involved.

Student teaching is considered to be critical to learning and becoming a confident teacher (National Council, 2011). It is a time for student teachers to experiment with their pedagogical knowledge skills, learn about the different and unique characteristics of young children, and hone those skills through observation, reflection, and mentor guidance. The heavy focus on the completion of the edTPA tasks inhibits student teachers from taking an inquiry-based approach to learning; rather, they fall into compliance mode. Oftentimes, the important parts of teaching and learning, such as teachable moments, relationships, and dispositions, get lost. Many students unequivocally expressed the detrimental effect of the edTPA on their student teaching experience, as it is not “educative,” but a subtractive learning experience. It seems as though the edTPA is a disservice to our student teachers, as well as the young children in the classroom. Clearly, it is time to rethink the meaning of professionalization of the field and re-examine the edTPA experience in order to make it truly “educative.”