1. Association of Independent Liberal Arts Colleges of Education February 17, 2012 Sarah Hick, Hamline University Mike Hillis, Pacific Lutheran University Frank Kline, Pacific Lutheran University Dennis Sterner, Whitworth University

2. Frank Kline, Pacific Lutheran University

3.  A performance assessment  Conducted when students are teaching  Allows for a complex and nuanced view of teaching  Subject specific  Performance being judged is a “learning segment” of 3 – 5 lessons

4.  Planning instruction and assessment  Context for learning  Lesson plans/materials/assessment tools  Planning commentary  Instructing and engaging students in learning  Video clips (2-10 min. clips)  Instruction commentary  Assessing student learning  Student work samples  Evidence of feedback  Assessment commentary  Analyzing teaching  Analyzing teaching commentary

5.  External scoring—Pearson  Cost to candidate  Field test--$0  After field test < $300  Submitted electronically  Direct submission to Pearson  Through portfolio vender  Pearson hires scorers to review

6.  Planning:  Planning for understanding  Using knowledge of students  Planning assessment to monitor and support  Instruction:  Engaging students in learning  Deepening student learning  Assessment:  Analyzing student work  Using feedback to guide further learning  Using assessment to inform instruction  Analyzing Teaching:  Analyzing teaching effectiveness  Academic Language:  Understanding development and demands  Scaffolding students’ development  Developing students’ academic language  Student Voice (Washington Only):  Eliciting student understanding of targets  Supporting student use of resources and monitoring their own progress  Reflection on student voice evidence to improve instruction

7.  The TPA doesn’t include everything!  Classroom management  Relations with family/community  Collaborative skills  Etc.  The TPA privileges certain skills:  Writing  Video production

8. Mike Hillis, Pacific Lutheran University

9.  Peck, Gallucci, & Sloan (2010) suggested that there are three major domains that impact the implementation of program wide reforms: ▪ 1) Negative rhetorical climate ▪ 2) Scarcity of resources ▪ 3) The protections and privileges of academic freedom

10.  Faculty and staff responses:  “Another mandate? But we’re not done with the previous one.”  “Are we really to believe this will ultimately change anything for the better?”  “What’s the real agenda here? An underhanded way to attack teacher education?”  “What’s wrong with you professional schools?”

11.  Faculty and staff responses:  “And when will we have the time for this?”  “We have to have our candidates ready by when?”  “Who has to pay for this? Do we receive any stipends for completing this additional work?”

12.  Faculty responses:  “As long as it doesn’t affect me, I see no problem with the development of the tool.”  “Any change to the curriculum must be approved by a faculty vote, right?”  “Why can’t you just say ‘no’?”

13.  Respecting the concerns of faculty and staff  Frustrations with the TPA implementation have been pervasive and need to be continually acknowledged  Continuous communication strategies with faculty, staff, candidates, and the field.  Yes, more meetings, but it’s also critical to clarify your institution’s process through documentation ▪ E.g., “the TPA Corner”

14.  Flexibility of plans  “It’s a moving target” ▪ E.g., Washington State’s student voice addition  Faculty acceptance may come haltingly ▪ E.g., Proposal to integrate TPA tasks into our unit wide assessment system  Integration through coursework  Work with individual faculty members to consider implementing pieces of the TPA into their courses

15.  Educate key individuals at your institution  Administrators who will be asked to lead the efforts for full implementation  Faculty members who will be involved in preparing candidates for this assessment  Field directors who will work closely with the K-12 schools, candidates, and supervisors  University supervisors who will be working with candidates during the time of submission

16. Sarah Hick, Hamline University

17. Districts Schools Principals Cooperating Teachers Students Who expect Teacher- centered instruction Non-critical thinking learning tasks

18.  Clarify instructional expectations with co-op teacher and principal before placement.  Co-construct ideas to support candidate success.  Coach candidates in how to respond to challenges, negativity.  Propose a 3-hour “escape” from curriculum.  Have candidates take baby-steps towards student-centered learning right away.

19.  RELEASE FORMS!  Lack of availability of video cameras.  Student behavior.  Unfulfilled promises of video support.  Teacher in view, students not.  “Taping Day” crisis.

20.  Be proactive with cooperating teachers  Inform early, address pitfalls often.  Involve them in release form “round up”  Encourage candidates to:  Record early and often;  Highlight and read release form to class;  Film the classes with the most release forms;  Cluster non-signers off camera;  Teach well, film lots, choose lesson for TPA later!

21.  Forge partnerships with particular schools and districts.  Spread the word—inform and recruit!  Rank cooperating teacher suitability above other considerations n making placements.

22. Dennis Sterner, Whitworth University

23.  The “Unfunded Mandate”  Basic Understanding of the TPA  Summary of What SOE Needs to Accomplish  Timeline of Implementation  Human Resource Time for Faculty and Staff  Curricular Modifications  Possible Parent Reactions  Salary/Stipend Implications  Faculty;  Cooperating Teachers;  Supervisors

24.  Understanding of TPA  Subject Specific Implications for Content and Pedagogy

25.  Library  Admissions  Business Office  Financial Aid  Student Life

26. Frank Kline, Pacific Lutheran University

27.  Washington Association for Colleges of Teacher Education (WACTE)  Legislative mandate to test ▪ Basic skills ▪ Content ▪ Pedagogy  Pedagogy Performance Assessment (PPA) ▪ Developed by WACTE with State support

28.  WACTE as a tool for support  Tactical Support Team ▪ Representatives from programs involved in a Pilot Test ▪ Support from University of Washington  Inservice opportunities ▪ Scoring training during Pilot Test ▪ Part of the 3 regular WACTE meetings ▪ Field Placement officers

29.  Don’t do this alone!  Other universities can help!  State agencies can be a source of support

30. Dennis Sterner, Whitworth University