1. Candidate Support for edTPA: Formative and Summative Models
Dr. Shawnee Wakeman
Dr. Laura Hart
UNC Charlotte

2. Context – UNC Charlotte COED
Approx 2400 candidates in 40 programs (total)
14 initial teacher licensure programs (UG/GC)
Elementary, Middle Grades, Secondary, Special Education, SPEL (Dual), B-K, TESL, Foreign Language, Arts
Currently in Year 4

3. With edTPA  Two layers of candidate support:
Prior to Student Teaching
Built into Coursework
Formative practices
Ongoing discussions and review

4. Building into Coursework
Identified upper-level program courses that aligned with domains of edTPA (Planning, Implementation, Assessment)
Embedded “practice tasks” into these courses
Becomes part of course grade
Data are recorded through TaskStream assessment system; compared later to final results
Program wide support and accountability (faculty identified what “fit” into their course regarding major concepts within edTPA even if not practice task)

5. Small group At your EPP:
What would be the pros of embedding formative pieces into coursework?
What would be the cons / challenges of embedding formative pieces into coursework?
(brainstorm aloud? – 3 minutes)

6. UNC Charlotte Pros and Cons
Formative supports:
Pro: Candidates get experience prior to student teaching -- rubrics, directions, video clips, reflection
Pro: Candidates get extensive feedback prior to student teaching
Con: Rubrics are designed for student teaching semester; difficulties with clinical access
Con: Faculty push-back on a new assignment – extra work
Con: Faculty ratings across multiple sections

7. During Student Teaching
Struggled with logistics of edTPA support:
1. What is supervisor role?
2. What is faculty role?
3. How do we manage this?
Advice: Faculty should be involved. Faculty are best suited to answer edTPA questions.

8. Traditional Model of ST Supervision
University Supervisor
Seminars
Classroom visits
ST Capstone project
University Supervisor:
Typically not FT TT faculty
Usually PT adjunct (some FT through OFE)
Managed centrally by Office of Field Exp (OFE)
Responsible for “everything Student Teaching”

9. Step 1: Who handles edTPA Support?

10. Step 2: Restructuring ST Supervision
University Supervisor + Faculty Support
Classroom visits
University Supervisor
Seminars
Faculty Support
ST Capstone project (NOW edTPA)

11. Student Teaching Summative Supports
edTPA support sessions are embedded into seminar schedule
Conducted by faculty (not necessarily the supervisor) -- different for each program (ELED vs. SPED for example)
Focus: “pulling it all together” -- target on completion of each task as part of portfolio
Review formative work (directions, rubrics)
Identify possible learning targets
Troubleshoot
Lots of reminders

12. Peer review prior to submission – within edTPA guidelines for feedback
Two sessions for this is target; checklists; membership of groupings critical
Common info and support for uploading to Pearson site
University supervisors are welcome to attend; bridge to CTs
On-line supports developed in some programs for distance education students (MDSK, SPED)
Think creatively about peer reviews, support uploads, etc.

13. Small group At your EPP:
What would be the pros of embedding summative support pieces into the student teaching semester?
What would be the cons / challenges of embedding summative support pieces into the student teaching semester?
(brainstorm aloud? – 3 minutes)

14. UNC Charlotte Pros and Cons
Summative student teaching supports:
Pro: Candidates get timelines for completion; work groups keep them on track
Pro: Candidates get feedback prior to submission (small group model)
Pro: Candidates have direct access to faculty for common questions
Con: Pull outs from student teaching semester (had this anyway with seminar)
Con: early submission deadline (mid-October/March) increases pressure to complete

15. Communication about edTPA
TPALs
Faculty group that meets 4 times a year (twice a semester)
Share information, updates, policy recommendations – faculty input
Within programs
Identified point person in programs – facilitate conversation about edTPA formative/summative supports throughout the year
Working meetings – standing agenda items

16. To what extent did you have opportunities to practice edTPA tasks, knowledge and skills prior to student teaching?

17. Which of the following have you utilized to complete edTPA?

18. I received feedback on my final edTPA project prior to submission from the following:

19. My university coursework prepared me to complete edTPA
My university coursework prepared me to complete edTPA. (1=SD, 2=D, 3=A, 4=SA)

20. Thanks!