Responding to Edtpa Task 1 Commentary Prompts

Welcome friends to PassedTPA. Today we will consider strategies for responding to Task 1 commentary prompts. The purpose of edTPA, according to handbook statements, is to measure novice readiness to teach. However, since most of the portfolio consists of candidates’ written response to commentary prompts, it is also, to some degree, a measure of writing proficiency. Two types of writing frequently required for assembling a portfolio include descriptive and analytical. Descriptive writing should be logical, well-ordered, with sufficient detail so the assessor comprehends the lesson plans, the students, and explanations supporting decisions about instruction. Analytical writing consists of explanations and interpretations based on evidence. Evidence for Task 1 includes lesson plans, the Context for Learning, and instructional materials. These should be referenced often in the commentary. Some general strategies to consider when responding to commentary prompts include 1) break down questions into their component parts, 2) maximize page limits by supporting claims with evidence and including one or more examples per prompt, and 3) note that writing prompts often correspond to rubrics, such as prompt 1 and rubric 1. However, also note that this correspondence is not perfectly true, since prompt 5 corresponds to rubric 5 and 2. Again, many prompts include multiple questions. Here is an example commentary prompt. Breaking down the prompt shows that there are three things to address, including 1) identifying learning activities that enable students to practice the language function, 2) describing how these activities enable students to practice the language function, and 3) citing the specific lesson where these activities are shown. There is evidence to show that portfolios that earn more points maximize the allowable page limits of writing for the commentary. Effective commentary writing is descriptive and analytical. Two ways to maximize page limits with descriptive and analytical writing is to include one or more examples per prompt and to refer to the evidence often. The commentary structure for Task 1 includes five parts. Central focus and learning targets, knowledge of students to inform teaching, supporting student learning, supporting through language, and monitoring student learning. Let’s consider each part. First, it is necessary to describe the central focus, and how the central focus is aligned with learning targets and learning activities. It is also necessary to show how the lessons build on each other. One way to show alignment and lessons that build is by having a central focus clearly related to learning targets, and learning targets that overlap with one another. Pause this presentation and examine these learning targets and the central focus to see how these elements are aligned and logically sequenced. Including a central focus and learning targets that are aligned and logically sequenced enables responses to commentary prompts that are descriptive and analytical. Pause this presentation and read this sample response. Notice how the response references the evidence, Lessons 1, 2, and 3, and also provides examples throughout. Also notice how the element of academic language is considered at the beginning of the entry. Note that this is a sample entry and that it is incomplete according to the ellipses (….) shown at the end of paragraphs. The real entry would be longer. Another part is to describe student prior learning, experience, background, and interest and then make connections between this information and the central focus and learning targets as an example of how knowledge of students is used to inform teaching. There are numerous sources for describing student prior learning, such as previous assessment results. One succinct source is a preassessment of knowledge and skills deployed as the lesson sequence begins. A well-designed preassessment may also be carefully aligned with the central focus and learning targets to specifically address alignment and how lessons build. Another source for describing student experience, background, and interest is the Context for Learning. The more care taken to write the Context for Learning, the more convincing and useful it is as a source of evidence. Use of previous assessment data, specifically preassessment data, along with the Context for Learning, enables a thorough response to the questions dealing with student prior learning, experience, background, and interest. Pause this presentation and read this sample response. Notice numerous references to evidence, in this case the preassessment and lesson plans. Also notice that there is some analysis, interpreting what the evidence means, along with examples. Supporting student learning includes explaining adaptation of tasks and materials according to knowledge of students, such as performance on the preassessment; identification of learning needs of the whole class and a few individual students; explanation of how students identify resources for getting help as they engage in student voice; and identifying common misconceptions or misunderstandings associated with lesson content. Again, here is a sample entry for supporting student learning. Notice the entry begins with a sample list of instructional practices, for describing. Then, the plans for Lesson 1 are referenced to support the claim that the practices listed were used. Some reference to theory or research is also included, and this element will be discussed more later. Finally, a specific example is provided, showing analysis of the whole class and of a few individuals. Supporting students through language means addressing elements of academic language, including enabling students to practice the language function (or the verb in the central focus); identifying additional language demands, like work with vocabulary, writing or speaking activities, or constructing tables, graphs, or using symbols; and supporting students as they practice elements of academic language. Two ways to show evidence of supporting students with language is by carefully writing and aligning the central focus and learning targets. Here is a sample Central Focus, showing the language function - analyze. The learning target for the lesson shows “observe” and “record” as cognitive activities readily associated with analysis. In this lesson, students will analyze, by making observations and recording results. The activity for this lesson also shows clear evidence students have an opportunity to practice the language function and associated language demands – in this case speaking and writing about the results of an observation, and also using tables and graphs – which is syntax associated with the activity. Here is an example entry describing an activity to enable students to practice the language function. Notice the response identifies the specific activity and lesson where students practice the language function. The response is supported with description of the activity, and additional reference to Lesson 3 as evidence. Monitoring student learning is the last area for Task 1 Commentary prompts. Monitoring student learning includes opportunities enabling teacher and student assessment of learning; explanation of how assessments are adapted for specific student needs; description of when students engage in student voice assessment; and the specific strategy used to engage students in student voice. Lessons that include multiple opportunities for informal assessment, along with at least one formal assessment, are effective sources of evidence for responding to questions about monitoring student learning. In addition, segments on lessons showing opportunities for assessment of student voice are additional sources of evidence. Here is an example entry describing the use of informal assessments to monitor student learning. Notice again reference to the lessons as evidence, and a few examples supporting the claim that lessons include multiple informal assessments. Notice also the use of informal assessment results for making decisions about the next steps within the lesson. There is usually at least one rubric for each task that requires connection to theory or research for justification. Whenever the rubric calls for justification using theory or research, ensure that the corresponding commentary response includes one or more citations. Also ensure that you integrate the citation with enough writing to indicate that you used the reference to inform your decisions. EdTPA does not require a particular citation format, such as APA. It is unnecessary to provide a reference list at the end of the commentary, but including a reference list is helpful if there is room. Finally, cite theory and research you are familiar with, such as textbooks or articles studied in coursework. In summary, edTPA is a measure of readiness to teach, but it is also, to some degree, a measure of writing proficiency. Descriptive and analytical writing is required. Commentary prompts often include multiple questions. And there is evidence to show that portfolios that maximize page limitations are often more effective. In addition, commentary prompts correspond to rubrics, for example, commentary prompt one corresponds to rubric one. Commentary prompts are organized around five themes. It is helpful to include one or more examples, with frequent reference to evidence in the response. And, there is one rubric for each task requiring justification of decision-making from theory or research. Thanks again for joining me for this module of PassedTPA, responding to Task 1 commentary prompts.