When Anxiety Rules: Report from the edTPA front lines

I am pleased to host one of my current student teachers from the Manhattan campus of Mercy College, Melina Milanovic. She just passed the EdTPA with flying colors, but she has some important thoughts to share. Pass this along, it should go viral.

EDTPA! Where should I begin? How about the handbook? The handbook is a great place to begin because the handbook is where the anxiety starts. A teacher candidate might have heard about the edTPA in passing, I know I have. However, the reality of what is being asked of a teacher candidate only becomes real once the handbook is read, and though you feel like student teaching is the completion of this long journey, it is only the beginning. The first time I read the handbook I remember feeling overwhelmed. I thought how would I be able to complete this much work in a seven-week placement? Will my cooperating teachers understand? How will I get to know these kids in a short amount of time in order to plan, teach, and assess during this learning segment? To be honest, if you are dedicated enough it is possible. It is possible to finish the edTPA in about two months. I would say on average I spent three hours a day on edTPA for 60 days. That is only the amount of time I spent working on the edTPA, but not the amount of time I spent thinking about the edTPA. I even had people around me such as co-workers, and family members that are not teachers, being informed about edTPA because of my constant talking about it. They kept asking, "Why do you want to be a teacher again?" It is important to not let edTPA take that away from you, the reason why you are becoming a teacher! Always keep the end goal in mind. 

Spending this much time on edTPA comes with sacrifices. First, you can forget about taking your time to plan lessons that you will teach outside of edTPA in your first placement. It is nearly impossible to plan, teach, and assess lessons outside of edTPA. Of course it needs to be done because your cooperating teacher and your college program expect you to take the role of the teacher. However, you will definitely not be as prepared as you could have been because of the edTPA. Also, you must be quick to learn about your students, the community of the school, and the culture of the school. Luckily, I am student teaching in my own neighborhood, and I know the diversity and culture of my students. However, I can imagine the difficulty of trying to figure this out without any prior knowledge. Also, you must take full control of the classroom and not treat yourself as a guest. Thus, there is really no time to transition into the role of a lead teacher; you need to act quickly in order to become the lead teacher!  

Next, you can forget about focusing on your student teaching experience as a whole. I am currently in my second placement and I am burned out. I am not even excited to be here, which is saddening because this is the experience I have looked forward to since the start of my first education class. The edTPA literally drains your energy. That is the best way to describe it! By the time you reach the second placement you are mentally done. Many people might still even be working on edTPA during their second placement. Fortunately, I am not worrying about it during this placement, and can focus on the students I am teaching. 

I mentioned reading the handbook, but I did not mention reading it over twenty times?! Is that necessary? Well, for me it was. As a result, I can now sit down and discuss any page of the handbook with anyone that would ask me a question about it. I can tell you about the elementary edTPA as well as I can spell my last name. How does this benefit me as a teacher? In short, it doesn't. The edTPA is only a repetition of what I have learned in college, but with more rigorous requirements, different fancy language, and of course an expensive fee of $300.00 (yes, American). 

In the end I earned a 61 out of 90 points on my portfolio. The portfolio I did my very best on, and worked on without any help from anyone. When I say I did my best I am not exaggerating. I spent long days, long nights, weekends, free time, and time that I did not even know I had to spare on this portfolio. I did the maximum for this portfolio. If nine pages were required, I wrote nine. If six were required, I wrote six. Thus, the commentary total across my four sections came out to about 32 single spaced pages, excluding my 12-page lesson plans, my context for learning forms, my student work, my videos, my instructional materials, and my assessments. So, I guess I am a teacher that is classified as a "61" even though I worked as a teacher that left no room for error. Thanks Pearson for the mastery score! I can only imagine how one can reach a 90 out of 90, if I poured everything I had to receive this 61. Do they take into consideration that we are practicing to teach? They sure do not grade like they have taken this into consideration. 

Student teaching is not figuring out the kind of teacher you want to be, it is about figuring out the kind of teacher edTPA wants you to be. Remember everyone, plan and plan until you cannot plan anymore. Then teach under edTPA's exact requirements until you cannot teach anymore.  Then assess and continue to assess until you cannot assess anymore!

Try to use your built-in teacher compass and not lose sight of who you want to be as a teacher. Do not let edTPA discourage you, instead embrace and learn from it. I decided not to do that, and I spent the semester frustrated. If I could go back, I would try to be more optimistic, which is easier said than done, because this experience almost leaves no room for optimism. You are like a robot that is programmed to only one way of teaching, the edTPA way. I would suggest using any resources that are available to you in order to help you during this process, and take it seriously! Be as explicit as that handbook tells you to be because it seems like that is what they are looking for. Also, remember that teachers are creative. There is always room for creativity, which can be beneficial for both your students and you. 

A Bandage on a Wound

As they say, there's good news and bad news from Albany this week. The good news is that the Regents voted on an extension of teacher certification safety nets for the Content Specialty Tests as well as a change in the policy on the safety nets. 19 of the 41 CST exams have been revised, and another 14 are coming next month. It's no longer required to take the new exam, fail, and take and pass the old exam. The dates for extension of these safety net policies vary depending on the exam so be sure to read the fine print here. Good luck understanding some of the tangled jargon: 

This safety net for those previously revised CSTs will expire on June 30, 2017.  These safety nets will expire before the safety net for the newly revised tests (those being released in November 2016) because those students and institutions have already had time to prepare for the revised exams since those examinations will have been operational for over two years when the safety net expires.

It's appropriate that the metaphor here is a safety net because making your way through to certification is akin to a high wire trapeze act.

The bad news is that we still don't know what the outcome will be on the work of the edTPA task force, and our future teachers are still feeling the pain. Take 9 minutes and listen to the voices of these people at SUNY Oneonta and Hartwick College speaking to Regent Cashin and others at a recent forum.

The other bad news is that all that has really happened is the problems with the tests and the process of becoming a teacher in New York State have been kicked down the road without a vision for a real solution. Pearson continues to profit on problematic tests. Cuomo's victory in requiring a 3.0 GPA and normed test for admission to teacher education programs is still in place, and is still going to cause precipitous drops in enrollment. Legislative action is our only hope. Please, write to your representatives and Regents and implore them to do something. They have been listening, but they need your input and advice. 

Good News About the Lederman Lawsuit on APPR

Today Judge McDonough ruled that Sheri Lederman had met the burden of proof for showing that her APPR VAM-based "ineffective" rating was "indisputably arbitrary and capricious." The recent actions of the New York State Regents to impose a four year moratorium on the use of VAM in teacher evaluations had led the state to seek a settlement with Lederman, but she held on for this important victory. The judge did rule that the second category of relief was moot by the actions of the Regents. What will be most useful moving forward is the language about inherent bias in the use of VAM. Judge McDonough wrote in his 15 page summary posted by Leonie Haimson that he found:

"...convincing and detailed evidence of VAM bias against teachers at both ends of the spectrum (e.g. those with high-performing students or those with low-performing students)....and most tellingly...a 'bell curve' that places teachers in four categories via pre-determined percentages regardless of whether the performance of students dramatically rose or dramatically fell from the previous year" (p. 11). 

I wrote about the hearing and Judge McDonough's difficulties with bell curve logic back in August. It seems increasingly that the public is understanding the many problems with standardized, normed testing and the inappropriate ways it is being used. Evidence is mounting that national tests such as PARCC are created to produce high rates of failure and are not even aligned with the common core standards. See for example this recent account of a teacher revealing in detail inappropriate content and questions on the 4th grade PARCC posted by Teachers College professor Celia Oyler on her blog.  Alan Singer also reported on his Huffington Post blog about high numbers of parents and students opting out  of the state tests, and outrage about the content and difficulty level.

This is a day for celebrating, but the truth is, this testing nonsense is not going away anytime soon. Time to open our eyes and make our outrage known. 

Software to Indict Plagiarists and the edTPA

Remember that memo that Deputy Commissioner John D’Agati of New York State’s Education Department wrote back in July about what would happen to candidates of questionable moral character caught cheating on the edTPA? Here’s a piece to refresh your memory:

“As part of the edTPA scoring process, originality detection software is employed to compare all edTPA submissions nationwide against all other edTPA submissions received, including outside written sources and other sources of material. The software reports any substantial degree of matching between submitted edTPA portfolios. In cases where there is substantial matching, a specially trained portfolio reviewer may then elect to seek enforcement action against the candidate(s) involved and/or refer the candidate(s) to the State Education Department for enforcement action.” (7-23-15)

Now there’s another memo released a few days ago, and the originality detection software used at my college, called Safe Assign, picked up a 46% match! See if you can figure out why:

“It is important that candidates be made aware that, as part of the edTPA submission process, originality detection software is employed to compare all edTPA submissions against all new submissions, including outside written sources and other sources of material. In cases where there is substantial matching, a candidate’s edTPA score may be voided, and the candidate may not be eligible for the edTPA Safety Net. In cases when candidates have already received their teaching certificate, the Department may seek revocation of the certificate. Candidates will be given the opportunity to appeal a decision to void their scores, and that process will be explained in any communication they would receive if their score is voided.” (10-28-15)

All that’s really new in the latest memo is an acknowledgement that candidates should not be prevented from collaborating with each other pursuant to SCALE’s guidelines regarding acceptable forms of support, which was revised in April of 2014 after some questioned the extent to which peers were permitted to help each other through the edTPA process (I wrote about that too). In that document, SCALE stated the obvious: “within their coursework and key program assignments and activities, candidates receive feedback from instructors and fellow candidates.” Professor Laura Davies, in a thoughtful essay on the first D’Agati memo and the questioning of originality in the edTPA process from September 23^rd  raises important issues about the harmful unintended consequences of generating so much fear regarding collaboration, a prominent feature of the work of teaching in a profession that suffers from teachers’ isolation from each other.

Recently the first significant empirical study of the edTPA rollout in New York and Washington was published, and among the findings of Meuwissen and Choppin is confirmation that candidates, desperate for clarity and help navigating the complex handbook instructions and rubric guides to ensure a passing score on the edTPA, have found clever secretive ways to get and give support to each other, mostly through social networking. Candidates interviewed in the study also mediated support tensions in their placements in schools, which can place considerable constraints on the teaching they do for the edTPA. Just working out the logistics of which students will be videotaped, what curriculum will be used, and when and where to do the taping is a source of stress and despair more often than not in my own experience with student teachers.

Now imagine the candidate that finally submits an edTPA portfolio, believing to have properly cited the use of the school’s curriculum in the lesson plans and commentary, turning up a high percentage of matching in the originality detection software used by scorers at Pearson. Theoretically such a portfolio is flagged and sent to a specialist to determine the degree of culpable intentionality in the presumed crime. Similarly, imagine a candidate being flagged by the software for using common phrases and routine descriptions in the commentaries that are similarly flagged by the software as matching other text. Alan Singer addressed this problem here. The software doesn’t judge, that’s up to a specialist at Pearson. But how exactly does that specialist make a judgment, one that could jeopardize employment, either due to delays in receiving a score, or due to a guilty verdict where none is merited?

What’s more, why would ANY candidate agree to allow the edTPA portfolio to be used by SCALE, Pearson, or the college or university, when there is a risk that at some point some stranger could plagiarize from that portfolio without the knowledge of the author, and that author could be subjected to having his or her license revoked?

While we’re considering what is legally unfair about all of this, have a look at the fine print regarding candidate’s compliance with edTPA rules (italics are mine):

From edTPA.com site:

“edTPA Rules of Assessment Participation

COMPLIANCE WITH ASSESSMENT RULES

By registering for edTPA, you are agreeing to abide by the current Rules of Assessment Participation for edTPA and all rules, procedures, and policies contained on the current edTPA.com website and/or in the current edTPA Handbook for the content area for which you have registered.

For the purpose of these Rules of Assessment Participation, the following definitions apply:

•       "Evaluation Systems." Evaluation Systems, a business of NCS Pearson, Inc. (referred to throughout as Evaluation Systems).

•       "Program." The educator preparation program in which an edTPA candidate is enrolled as indicated by the candidate at the time of registration.

•       "State Agency." The educator certification agency in any state in which an edTPA candidate is pursuing certification with this assessment.

Rules of Assessment Participation for edTPA

1     PURPOSE OF ASSESSMENT: I understand that this assessment is administered for the purpose of fulfilling a program requirement and/or a state teacher licensure requirement and is only to be taken by individuals to fulfill such requirement(s). I certify that I am taking this assessment for which I have registered, to fulfill a program requirement or for the purpose of teacher licensure.

2     ORIGINALITY OF SUBMISSION: I understand that by submitting my edTPA materials, I am confirming that I am the person who has completed the assessment, that I have primary responsibility for teaching the students/class during the learning segment profiled in this assessment, that the video clip(s) submitted show me teaching the students/class profiled, that the student work included in the documentation is that of my students and completed during the learning segment documented in this assessment, that I am the sole author of the commentaries and other written responses to prompts and other requests for information in this assessment, and that I have cited all materials in the assessment whose sources are from published text, the internet, or other educators.

3     PERMISSIONS AND CONFIDENTIALITY: I understand that I am responsible for obtaining appropriate permissions from the parents/guardians of my students and from adults that appear on the video clip(s) I submit. I agree to produce such permissions if requested after I submit my assessment. I have ensured confidentiality of individuals appearing in the video clip(s) I submit by uploading the video only to the designated Pearson ePortfolio system, an integrated third party edTPA Platform Provider system, or other secure system designated by my program. I understand that I may use my assessment materials according to the parameters of the release forms obtained for children and/or adults who appear in the video. Because parents/guardians and/or adults have not typically granted permission for public use of the videos in which they or their children appear, I will not display videos publicly (i.e., personal websites, YouTube, Facebook) without expressed permission for this purpose from those featured in the video.

4     ASSESSMENT MATERIALS: I acknowledge that I am not permitted to reproduce or share any of the information or materials from edTPA handbooks or support materials (Making Good Choices or other materials with Stanford copyright) for commercial purposes. If I do reproduce information or materials from the edTPA handbooks or related materials for personal use, I will properly attribute the copyright of such materials to Stanford University.

5     USE OF ASSESSMENT: I agree that my edTPA submission, including text, graphics, digital files and video or audio recordings, without the use of my name or other identifying information, may be used by Stanford University and/or Evaluation Systems edTPA program development and implementation, including scorer training associated with the program. If I provided consent as part of my response to registration questions, my submission, without use of my name or other identifying information, may also be used for continued edTPA program activities conducted by Stanford University and/or Evaluation Systems such as future validity and reliability studies of the edTPA. Stanford University and Evaluation Systems will not show candidate materials publicly, make them available in a non-secure way, or use them as exemplars for marketing purposes.

6     SCORE REPORTING AND CANCELLATION: I understand that my results will be reported to me; to the program authorized by me during registration and/or State Agency, if applicable; and to any other institution, entity, or person authorized or required by law to receive this information. edTPA results are anonymously provided to SCALE with candidate responses to registration background questions which address edTPA placement context and demographics of edTPA candidates, including educator preparation program and state affiliation, for the purpose of edTPA assessment analyses and assessment development. edTPA results received by SCALE will not include candidate name or other personally identifying information such as date of birth or partial social security number. I understand that any information provided as part of registration may be used to report scores or to contact me regarding assessment- or program-related issues. Once I submit my assessment, I cannot cancel the scoring or score reporting.

7     CONFORMITY WITH PROCEDURES: I understand that if my submitted artifacts, videos, and/or related documentation do not conform to the current rules, requirements and polices as specified in the edTPA Assessment Handbook, and the edTPA website, my submission or portions thereof may not be scored, my score may be voided and other actions as described in Rule 11 may be taken as deemed appropriate by Evaluation Systems, my program, and/or State Agency. If my complete submission or portions thereof cannot be scored because it does not conform to requirements, no refund of my fee will be issued, and no portion of my fee can be applied to the cost of any future edTPA registration or associated services. If my submission cannot be scored due to a system error occurring after submission, I will have the opportunity to resubmit my portfolio without paying additional fees. I understand that my submitted assessment materials, or a portion thereof, may be reviewed by authorized individuals at the program in which I am enrolled, as indicated at the time of registration, and/or the relevant State Agency responsible for educator certification in order to investigate compliance with the Rules of Assessment Participation, as needed.

8     RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS REGARDING edTPA: I understand and agree that liability for assessment activities, including but not limited to the adequacy or accuracy of assessment materials, of the registration processes, of scoring, of score reports, of information provided to me in connection with edTPA and the adequacy of protection of candidate information, will be limited to score correction or edTPA retake at no additional fee. I understand and agree that liability for data loss or file corruption associated with my edTPA submission will be limited to an additional edTPA submission at no additional fee. I waive any and all rights to all other claims, specifically including but not limited to claims for negligence arising out of any acts or omissions of Stanford University, Evaluation Systems, and/or the state or program which is requiring completion of the edTPA (including the agents, employees, contractors, or professional advisors of Stanford University, Evaluation Systems, or such entity).

9     PROGRAM CHANGES: I understand that the edTPA assessment and associated policies and procedures are subject to change at the sole discretion of Stanford University and Evaluation Systems. State Agencies or individual programs may make changes to their policies and requirements related to the edTPA at their discretion.

10    OBJECTION TO PROCEDURES: If, for any reason, I object to the procedures presented in these Rules of Assessment Participation, I must advise Evaluation Systems, in writing, of the basis of my objection at least six (6) weeks before I plan to register for edTPA for my objection to be taken under consideration. If my objection is not honored, I will not be registered for edTPA.

11     COMPLIANCE: I understand that if I fail to comply with the rules, requirements, and policies specified or referenced on the current edTPA website, including these Rules of Assessment Participation, or if I take any prohibited actions, my results may be voided, no refund will be issued, no portion of the assessment fee can be applied toward the cost of any future assessment fees, my registration may be canceled, I may be prohibited in the future from registering for edTPA. Legal proceedings and actions may be pursued as well as other remedies deemed appropriate by Evaluation Systems, my program or State Agency, as appropriate. In addition, I understand that assessment fraud may be grounds for denial, revocation and/or suspension of a teaching license.

RULES: I understand that should any of these rules or any other requirement or provision contained on the current edTPA.com website be declared or determined by any court to be illegal or invalid, the remaining rules, requirements, and provisions will not be affected and the illegal or invalid rule, requirement, or provision shall not be deemed a part of the current edTPA website. The headings of each of the Rules of Assessment Participation for edTPA are for convenient reference only. They are not a part of the rules themselves; they do not necessarily reflect the entire subject matter of each rule; and they are not intended to be used for the purpose of modifying, interpreting, or construing any of these Rules of Assessment Participation for edTPA. I agree that any legal action arising in connection with my registration for or participation in edTPA shall be brought in the state and federal courts governing St. Paul, Minnesota, and I consent to the personal jurisdiction of such courts.

Voiding of Scores:

If you violate one of the Rules of Assessment Participation or if doubts are raised about the validity or legitimacy of your registration or your scores, Evaluation Systems may notify the educator preparation program and/or State Agency you identified during the registration process, as applicable.

Evaluation Systems reserves the right to void your scores if in their sole opinion, or after consultation with the educator preparation program and/or State Agency you identified during the registration process (as appropriate), there is adequate reason to question your scores' validity or legitimacy, due to misconduct including, but not limited to, a violation of the rules set forth on the current edTPA website, including the Rules of Assessment Participation.

Further action may be taken, including remedies deemed appropriate by Evaluation Systems, your educator preparation program or State Agency, as applicable.

Please note that software may be employed to screen submissions for originality of content. Submissions determined to violate edTPA rules regarding the originality of the submitted material will be subject to actions described above.”

We’re always warned to read the fine print, but that doesn’t really mean we have much power to do anything about it, especially when it is a requirement of employment. Now, imagine that candidate I described above, waiting since last spring to receive an edTPA score, getting nowhere with Pearson, SCALE, or the program, and knowing only that the portfolio is in a limbo of administrative review. Maybe that’s not hypothetical. Maybe that is reality.