2. TOTAL 2014 Exam Scores to Date N% Pass 9691  Pass 4139  Mastery Level 5552 Fail 109 TOTAL 2014 106100 UndergradGraduate N%N% Pass 777%8992%  Pass 444%3738%  Mastery 333%5254% Fail 222%88% TOTAL 2014 997 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

3. Rubric Name NMinMax Mean SD Planning for Alignment + Development of Knowl + Skills R1 1062.05.0 3.401.7052 Planning Challenge + Support for Focus Learner R2 1060.05.0 3.236.8287 Justification of Instruction and Support R3 1061.05.0 3.439.7768 Supporting Focus Learner Academic Lang Dev R4 1061.05.0 3.255.6699 Planning Assessment to Monitor + Support Learning R5 1060.05.0 3.217.8166 Learning Environment R6 1062.05.0 3.368.5661 Engaging Focus Learner R7 1062.05.0 3.292.6167 Deepening Learning R8 1062.05.0 3.302.6387 Supporting Teaching + Learning R9 1061.05.0 3.193.7450 Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness R10 1061.04.0 3.080.6905 Analysis of Focus Learner Performance R11 1061.05.0 3.311.8090 Using Feedback to Guide Further Learning R12 1061.05.0 3.311.7186 Learner Use of Feedback R13 1061.05.0 2.750.7079 Explain Focus Learner Academic Lang Use R14 1061.05.0 2.910.6928 Using Assessment to Inform Instruction R15 1061.05.0 3.142.7769 Analyze Whole Class Understanding R16 421.04.0 3.060.6644 Analyze Indiv Student Work Samples R17 422.05.0 3.250.7093 Using Evidence to Reflect on Teaching R18 421.05.0 3.167.7938

4. Mini edTPA’s starting 2 years prior to edTPA state licensure exam Science mini edTPA https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBaFA4aE9valJjZDA/edit?usp=sharing Math mini edTPA format https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBcmJlWTJrS1c4c2s/edit?usp=sharing Social Studies and Critical Literacy Unit Plan https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBMkxTQ0xHZWRBVmhvUmp3aW5oU2tnY0p4NGxv/edit?usp =sharing

5. 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 Health 1 in Special Education 1 in Adolescence 1 in our NYC location (mixed content) 1 in Childhood Education

6.  Syllabi  Childhood  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBME8xUFZueDVYcUE /edit?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBME8xUFZueDVYcUE /edit?usp=sharing  Adolescent  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBMGpUZDkxYWxIQ2 8/edit?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1Cgs9SZmYkBMGpUZDkxYWxIQ2 8/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

8. Ongoing! Program meetings Curriculum & Instruction department meetings School of Education retreats – Using Evidence for Program Improvement – May 13, 2014 – Childhood Retreat- June 25, 2014

9. 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

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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?

14. Rubric Name NMinMax Mean SD Planning for Alignment + Development of Knowl + Skills R1 1062.05.0 3.401.7052 Planning Challenge + Support for Focus Learner R2 1060.05.0 3.236.8287 Justification of Instruction and Support R3 1061.05.0 3.439.7768 Supporting Focus Learner Academic Lang Dev R4 1061.05.0 3.255.6699 Planning Assessment to Monitor + Support Learning R5 1060.05.0 3.217.8166 Learning Environment R6 1062.05.0 3.368.5661 Engaging Focus Learner R7 1062.05.0 3.292.6167 Deepening Learning R8 1062.05.0 3.302.6387 Supporting Teaching + Learning R9 1061.05.0 3.193.7450 Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness R10 1061.04.0 3.080.6905 Analysis of Focus Learner Performance R11 1061.05.0 3.311.8090 Using Feedback to Guide Further Learning R12 1061.05.0 3.311.7186 Learner Use of Feedback R13 1061.05.0 2.750.7079 Explain Focus Learner Academic Lang Use R14 1061.05.0 2.910.6928 Using Assessment to Inform Instruction R15 1061.05.0 3.142.7769 Analyze Whole Class Understanding R16 421.04.0 3.060.6644 Analyze Indiv Student Work Samples R17 422.05.0 3.250.7093 Using Evidence to Reflect on Teaching R18 421.05.0 3.167.7938

15.  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)

16.  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

17.  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!

18. 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.

19.  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.

20.  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.

21.  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

22.  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.

23. 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

24.  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

25. 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

26. Corinne Donovan cdonovan@adelphi.edu Emily Kang ekang@adelphi.edu Mary Jean McCarthy mccarthy2@adelphi.edu Devin Thornburg thornburg@adelphi.edu