TOTAL 2014 Exam Scores to Date

  N %Pass 96 91 Pass 41 39 Mastery Level 55 52

Fail 10 9

TOTAL 2014 106 100

Undergrad

Graduate

N % N %Pass 7 77% 89 92% Pass 4 44% 37 38% Mastery 3 33% 52 54%Fail 2 22% 8 8%TOTAL 2014 9 97

Undergrad students are PE, Music and Art.

Graduate students include all Masters programs plus the STEP (5

year BA/MA).

*Two students failed due to uploading issues

Rubric Name N Min Max Mean SD

Planning for Alignment + Development of Knowl + Skills

R1106 2.0 5.0 3.401 .7052

Planning Challenge + Support for Focus Learner

R2106 0.0 5.0 3.236 .8287

Justification of Instruction and Support R3 106 1.0 5.0 3.439 .7768

Supporting Focus Learner Academic Lang Dev

R4106 1.0 5.0 3.255 .6699

Planning Assessment to Monitor + Support Learning

R5106 0.0 5.0 3.217 .8166

Learning Environment R6 106 2.0 5.0 3.368 .5661

Engaging Focus Learner R7 106 2.0 5.0 3.292 .6167

Deepening Learning R8 106 2.0 5.0 3.302 .6387

Supporting Teaching + Learning R9 106 1.0 5.0 3.193 .7450

Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness R10 106 1.0 4.0 3.080 .6905

Analysis of Focus Learner Performance R11 106 1.0 5.0 3.311 .8090

Using Feedback to Guide Further Learning

R12106 1.0 5.0 3.311 .7186

Learner Use of Feedback R13 106 1.0 5.0 2.750 .7079

Explain Focus Learner Academic Lang Use

R14106 1.0 5.0 2.910 .6928

Using Assessment to Inform Instruction R15 106 1.0 5.0 3.142 .7769

Analyze Whole Class Understanding R16 42 1.0 4.0 3.060 .6644

Analyze Indiv Student Work Samples R17 42 2.0 5.0 3.250 .7093

Using Evidence to Reflect on Teaching R18 42 1.0 5.0 3.167 .7938

Mini edTPA’s starting 2 years prior to edTPA state licensure exam

Science mini edTPAhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBaFA4aE9valJjZDA/edit?usp=sharing

Math mini edTPA formathttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBcmJlWTJrS1c4c2s/edit?usp=sharing

Social Studies and Critical Literacy Unit Planhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBMkxTQ0xHZWRBVmhvUmp3aW5oU2tnY0p4NGxv/edit?usp=sharing

Standing Fieldwork Committee created EdTPA Working Group.Chair shared edTPA seminar plan with Dean who secured support from University Administration to run 5 noncredit bearing, tuition-free edTPA seminars (January – March 2014).

1 in Physical Education and Health1 in Special Education1 in Adolescence 1 in our NYC location (mixed content)1 in Childhood Education

Syllabi Childhood https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBME8xUFZ

ueDVYcUE/edit?usp=sharing Adolescent https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBMGpUZD

kxYWxIQ28/edit?usp=sharing

Lesson plan template https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBb2wyd3pCMXJhUTg/edit?usp=sharing

Moodle and Google site https://sites.google.com/a/adelphi.edu/edtpa-draft-childhood-ed/ Plethora of “digestible”, focused resources e.g., Video Thoughts to consider (aligned with “unpacked” rubrics)https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBNF9mQ1lTdGthbWs/edit?usp=sharing

Ongoing!•Program meetings•Curriculum & Instruction department meetings •School of Education retreats

– Using Evidence for Program Improvement – May 13, 2014

– Childhood Retreat- June 25, 2014

Survey ( Survey Monkey) ( N= 32)https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8uGWEpTm5CYbDduNV9LYWczZFk/edit?usp=sharing

Follow-Up Interview ( N = 7)https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8uGWEpTm5CYTlhGdHpNVFNYWUk/edit?usp=sharing

Strengths•It was an incredibly stressful year with all of the changes and new exams. •Reported a high level of support from the School of Ed in terms of the edTPA seminar and prep workshops provided for the exams. •The FT faculty had a strong command of edTPA and all felt that they found a primary faculty to count on for support.

Areas of Need •Some University Supervisors had little or no knowledge of edTPA, and were “in fact either learning along with them...”•Differentiation strategies in early courses. Specific names of strategies and types; need more and earlier. •Assessment course should be better aligned to edTPA requirements, more rigorous.

• Even if NOT a model student, should begin placement in school (at least 1 day a week observing), and complete Task 4 before December.

• Any experience using video analysis/ self-reflection will help prepare for edTPA and make you a better teacher, peers are critical since others’ perspectives are important.

• Recommend ST’s get onto edTPA platform as EARLY as possible (just pay the $$, will have to eventually). There are many resources, and you will see and understand the exact formatting and technical requirements for each section.

• What if some of the method courses paired students with a current ST to come observe with them, and provide some support for videotaping?

Rubric Name N Min Max Mean SD

Planning for Alignment + Development of Knowl + Skills

R1106 2.0 5.0 3.401 .7052

Planning Challenge + Support for Focus Learner

R2106 0.0 5.0 3.236 .8287

Justification of Instruction and Support R3 106 1.0 5.0 3.439 .7768

Supporting Focus Learner Academic Lang Dev

R4106 1.0 5.0 3.255 .6699

Planning Assessment to Monitor + Support Learning

R5106 0.0 5.0 3.217 .8166

Learning Environment R6 106 2.0 5.0 3.368 .5661

Engaging Focus Learner R7 106 2.0 5.0 3.292 .6167

Deepening Learning R8 106 2.0 5.0 3.302 .6387

Supporting Teaching + Learning R9 106 1.0 5.0 3.193 .7450

Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness R10 106 1.0 4.0 3.080 .6905

Analysis of Focus Learner Performance R11 106 1.0 5.0 3.311 .8090

Using Feedback to Guide Further Learning

R12106 1.0 5.0 3.311 .7186

Learner Use of Feedback R13 106 1.0 5.0 2.750 .7079

Explain Focus Learner Academic Lang Use

R14106 1.0 5.0 2.910 .6928

Using Assessment to Inform Instruction R15 106 1.0 5.0 3.142 .7769

Analyze Whole Class Understanding R16 42 1.0 4.0 3.060 .6644

Analyze Indiv Student Work Samples R17 42 2.0 5.0 3.250 .7093

Using Evidence to Reflect on Teaching R18 42 1.0 5.0 3.167 .7938

Rubrics associated with assessment Rubric 3 (preassessment) Rubric 5 (informal and formal

assessments throughout instruction) Rubrics 11-15 (analysis of findings from

1 assessment) Rubrics 16-18 (Elementary Math)

Post-assessment Rubric (how you will score post-assessment) Summary of student learning chart and

analysis of class set of work 3 samples of student work (focus students) Give feedback (written or oral) – write directly

on student work or type in commentary Next steps for instruction based upon what

students did/not learn

Task 3 tends to be the lowest scoring task Possible reasons:

Fatigue by the end of this process Weak background in assessing student work,

developing rubrics, aligning assessments to objectives and rubrics

PERSEVERE UNTIL THE END! IT COULD MAKE THE DIFFERENCE

BETWEEN PASSING AND NOT PASSING!

While preassessing students is not required by edTPA, doing so may help candidates who are new to their placement quickly identify student learning needs and strengths.

Examples of assessments: Think pair share, kwl informal assessments, Oral, written, diagrams, mapping

Make sure IEP/504 accommodations are met (longer time, scribe); if no IEPs/504s than not applicable

Level 4: multiple assessments in multiple ways throughout start out with KWL, then do think-pair-share, then do groupwork where they create multimedia, then give formative assessment assessment is throughout.

Candidate describes how students will use feedback to revise current work: Ex: “If you redo and turn back into me then I will give you higher points” Ideal candidate response on lesson on maps/diagrams: Need to label this better

because that is what scientists/historians/mathematicians do.

Level 2: only addressed vocabulary Level 3: evidence that students demonstrated syntax or discourse Make sure that it is consistent with what candidate identified as language

function initially: analyze, explain, justify with evidence Level 4: talk about patterns (including discussion of subgroups Usually scores are between 2 and 3

Candidates only focus on vocabulary instruction

Language function mentioned in Task 1 is not consistently taught in lessons

Language function is not assessed in formal and/or informal assessments

Candidates (and supervisors and professors!) have unclear idea of what syntax and discourse are.

Short term perspective: edTPA seminar – there are so many technical and

pedagogical layers to the edTPA that guided support is a must

Professors, supervisors should sign up to be scorers Practice! Use real student work from candidate

placements, tied to objectives – (art ed candidate comment – “I didn’t know what I was doing for assessment until I got to be in a real classroom context and knew what skills, content, language I wanted to emphasize with my students)

Practice in creating rubrics that align to candidate-created assessments

K-12 schools’ tight adherence to Engage NY Common Core modules affects candidates’ freedom to design inquiry-based curriculum

Teacher accountability/APPR constraints Videotaping permission

Long term perspective: Connection to research and theory –

foundations, methods courses Academic language throughout coursework Practice assessing real student work Good student teaching placements where

they can see exemplary planning, teaching, assessing modeled

Build strong ties to local schools – ease of videotaping

Corinne Donovancdonovan@adelphi.edu

Emily Kangekang@adelphi.edu

Mary Jean McCarthymccarthy2@adelphi.edu

Devin Thornburgthornburg@adelphi.edu