Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A case study of elementary teacher candidates’ preparation for a high stakes teacher performance assessment

  • Published:
Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Increased accountability demands are being placed on teacher preparation programs across the USA to demonstrate competencies of their teacher candidates. As a means of evaluating teacher candidates’ instructional effectiveness and readiness for their own classrooms, some programs are using standardized teacher performance assessments, with faculty navigating how to respond to these requirements while maintaining a focus on desired learning outcomes of methods courses. This study’s elementary teacher preparation program is located in one of the states recently requiring successful completion of the Elementary Education edTPA, which includes four tasks with one focused on mathematics (i.e., Math Task 4). A case study design was used to explore the preparation of teacher candidates (N = 51) for edTPA during a mathematics methods course emphasizing Cognitively Guided Instruction that included a simulated Math Task 4 assignment. The study specifically investigated changes in mathematical beliefs across the course and perspectives on engagement in the simulated Math Task 4. Data were collected via two belief surveys: an open-ended questionnaire and individual interviews of six participants. The quantitative findings show two important course intentions—that pedagogical beliefs would shift toward more cognitive alignment and teaching efficacy beliefs would increase—were not realized. The qualitative data provide insights into some of the struggles associated with edTPA, including pronounced anxiety and substantial misalignment with classroom placements, serving as a filter for learning and change during the course.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AACTE. (2018). How are states using edTPA for program approval and/or licensure? Retrieved from http://edtpa.aacte.org/state-policy.

  • Adkins, A. (2016). The benefits of edTPA. Educational Leadership,73(8), 55–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Althauser, K. L. (2018). The emphasis of inquiry instructional strategies: Impact on preservice teachers’ mathematics efficacy. Journal of Education and Learning,7, 53–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Au, W. (2013). What’s a nice test like you doing in a place like this? Rethinking Schools,27(4), 22–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2010). Teaching skillful teaching. Educational Leadership,68(4), 40–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beswick, K. (2006). The importance of mathematics teachers’ beliefs. The Australian Mathematics Teacher,62(4), 17–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beswick, K. (2012). Teachers’ beliefs about school mathematics and mathematicians’ mathematics and their relationship to practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics,79, 127–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunch, G. C., Aguirre, J. M., & Tellez, K. (2009). Beyond the scores: Using candidate responses on high stakes performance assessment to inform teacher preparation for English learners. Issues in Teacher Education,18, 103–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cady, J. A., Meier, S. L., & Lubinski, C. A. (2006). Developing mathematics teachers: The transition from preservice to experienced teacher. Journal of Educational Research,99, 295–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., & Empson, S. B. (2014). Children’s mathematics: Cognitively guided instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann and NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., & Levi, L. (2003). Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in elementary school. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross Francis, D. L. (2015). Dispelling the notion of inconsistencies in teachers’ mathematics beliefs and practices: A 3-year case study. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,18, 173–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can be learn from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education,40, 291–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L., & Hyler, M. E. (2013). The role of performance assessment in developing teaching as a profession. Rethinking Schools,27(4), 10–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enochs, L., Smith, P., & Huinker, D. (2000). Establishing factorial validity of the mathematics teaching efficacy beliefs instrument. School Science and Mathematics,100, 194–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., Jacobs, V. R., & Empson, S. B. (1996). A longitudinal study of learning to use children’s thinking in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,27, 403–434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fosnot, C. T. (2006). Contexts for learning mathematics. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., Ansell, E., & Behrend, J. (1998). Understanding teachers’ self-sustaining generative change in the context of professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education,14, 67–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgia Department of Education. (2016). Mathematics frameworks units. Retrieved https://www.georgiastandards.org/Frameworks/Pages/BrowseFrameworks/math.aspx.

  • Greenblatt, D., & O’Hara, K. E. (2015). Buyer beware: Lessons learned from edTPA implementation in New York state. Thought and Action,42(2), 57–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, L. C., Oesterle, S., Swars Auslander, S., & Kajander, A. (Eds.). (2016). The mathematics preparation of elementary teachers: Issues and strategies for content courses. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J. (2003). What research says about the NCTM standards. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 5–23). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, B. A. (2007). The challenges of staffing urban schools with effective teachers. The Future Children,17, 129–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, E., & Kilpatrick, J. (2015). Understanding teacher affect, knowledge, and instruction over time: An agenda for research on productive disposition for teaching mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,18, 401–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lannin, J. K., & Chval, K. B. (2013). Challenge beginning teacher beliefs. Teaching Children Mathematics,19, 508–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ledwell, K., & Oyler, C. (2016). Unstandardized responses to a “standardized” test: The edTPA as gatekeeper and curriculum change agent. Journal of Teacher Education,67(2), 120–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liljedahl, P. G. (2005). Mathematical discovery and affect: The effect of AHA! experiences on undergraduate mathematics students. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology,36(2–3), 219–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. New York: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maasepp, B., & Bobis, J. (2014/2015). Prospective primary teachers’ beliefs about mathematics. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 16(2), 89–107.

  • Madeloni, B., & Gorlewski, J. (2013). Wrong answer to the wrong question. Rethinking Schools,27(4), 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathematics Assessment Project. (2016). Teaching for robust understanding (TRU) framework. Retrieved from http://map.mathshell.org/trumath/intro_to_tru_20161223.pdf.

  • Meuwissen, K. W., & Choppin, J. M. (2015). Preservice teachers’ adaptations to tensions associated with the edTPA during its early implementation in New York and Washington states. Education Policy Analysis Archives,23(103), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscardini, L. (2014). Developing equitable elementary mathematics classrooms through teachers learning about children’s mathematical thinking: Cognitively Guided Instruction as an inclusive pedagogy. Teaching and Teacher Education,43, 69–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCTM. (2006). Curriculum focal points. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCTM. (2007). Navigations. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCTM. (2014a). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCTM. (2014b). Procedural fluency in mathematics. Retrieved from: http://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/Position-Statements/Procedural-Fluency-in-Mathematics/.

  • NGACBP & CCSSO. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: Authors.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (2001). The strands of mathematical proficiency. In J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, & B. Findell (Eds.), Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics (pp. 115–155). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pecheone, R. L., & Whittaker, A. (2016). Well-prepared teachers inspire student learning. Phi Delta Kappan,97(7), 8–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, P. L., Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. P., & Loef, M. (1989). Teachers’ pedagogical content beliefs in mathematics. Cognition and Instruction,6, 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philipp, R. A. (2007). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs and affect. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 257–315). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philipp, R. A. (2008). Motivating prospective elementary school teachers to learn mathematics by focusing on children’s thinking. Issues in Teacher Education,17(2), 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philipp, R. A., Ambrose, R., Lamb, L., Sowder, J. L., Schappelle, B. P., & Sowder, L. (2007). Effects of early field experiences on the mathematics content knowledge and beliefs of prospective elementary teachers: An experimental study. Journal for Research on Mathematics Education,38(5), 438–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polly, D., McGee, J. R., Wang, C., Lambert, R. G., Pugalee, D. K., & Johnson, S. (2013). The association between teachers’ beliefs, enacted practices, and student learning in mathematics. The Mathematics Educator,22(2), 11–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratner, A. R., & Kolman, J. S. (2016). Breakers, benders, and obeyers: Inquiring into teachers educators’ medication of edTPA. Education Policy Analysis Archives,24(35), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, S. J. (2000). Developing computational fluency with whole numbers. Teaching Children Mathematics,7(3), 154–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santagata, R., Yeh, C., & Mercado, J. (2018). Preparing elementary school teachers to learn from teaching: A comparison of two approaches to mathematics methods instruction. Journal of the Learning Sciences,27, 474–516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saran, R., & Gujarati, J. (2013). Moving toward positive mathematics beliefs and developing socio-mathematical authority: Urban preservice teachers in mathematics methods courses. Journal of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research,9, 100–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • SCALE. (2015). edTPA elementary education assessment handbook. Retrieved from http://education.ucsc.edu/academics/mac-info/edtpaelehandbook.pdf.

  • Schifter, D., Bastable, V., & Russell, S. J. (2008). Developing mathematical ideas: Casebooks. Parsippany, NJ: Dale Seymour/Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2015). What counts, when? Reflection on beliefs, affect, attitude, orientations, habits of mind, grain size, time scale, context, theory, and method. In B. Pepin & B. Roesken-Winter (Eds.), From beliefs to dynamic affect systems in mathematics education (pp. 395–404). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skott, J. (2015). Towards a participatory approach to ‘beliefs’ in mathematics education. In B. Pepin & B. Roesken-Winter (Eds.), From beliefs to dynamic affect systems in mathematics education (pp. 3–23). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. E., Swars, S. L., Smith, S. Z., Hart, L. C., & Haardoerfer, R. (2012). Effects of an additional mathematics content courses on elementary teachers’ mathematical beliefs and knowledge for teaching. Action in Teacher Education,4, 336–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowder, J. T. (2007). The mathematical education and development of teachers. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 157–223). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele, D. F. (2001). The interfacing of preservice and inservice experiences of reform-based teaching: A longitudinal study. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,4, 139–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M. A., & Silver, E. A. (2009). Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction. New York: Teachers College Press and NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, J., & van Es, E. A. (2015). An exploratory study of the influence that analyzing teaching has on preservice teachers’ classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education,66(3), 201–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swars, S. L., Hart, L., Smith, S. Z., Smith, M., & Tolar, T. (2007). A longitudinal study of elementary pre-service teachers’ mathematics beliefs and content knowledge. School Science and Mathematics,107(9), 325–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swars, S. L., Smith, S. Z., Smith, M. E., Carothers, J., & Myers, K. (2018). The preparation experiences of elementary mathematics specialists: Examining influences on beliefs, content knowledge, and teaching practices. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,21(2), 123–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swars, S. L., Smith, S. Z., Smith, M. E., & Hart, L. C. (2009). A longitudinal study of effects of a developmental teacher preparation program on elementary prospective teachers’ mathematics beliefs. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,12, 47–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teacher Preparation Program Effectiveness. (2016). Retrieved from http://education.gsu.edu/teacher-preparation-program-effectiveness/.

  • Technical Education Research Centers. (2012). Investigations in number, data, and space. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Scott Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A. G. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 127–146). New York: Macmillan Library Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyminski, A. M., Land, T. J., Drake, C., Zambak, V. S., & Simpson, A. (2014). Pre-service elementary mathematics teachers’ emerging ability to write problems to build on children’s mathematics. In J. Lo, K. R. Leatham, & L. R. Van Zoest (Eds.), Research trends in mathematics teacher education (pp. 193–218). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • University of Chicago School Mathematics Project. (2007). Everyday mathematics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vacc, N. N., & Bright, G. W. (1999). Elementary preservice teachers’ changing beliefs and instructional use of children’s mathematics thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,30, 89–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Es, E. A., & Conroy, J. (2009). Using the Performance Assessment for California Teachers to examine pre-service teachers’ conceptions of teaching mathematics for understanding. Issues in Teacher Education,18, 83–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Es, E. A., Haymore Sandholtz, J., & Shea, L. M. (2014). Exploring the influences of a partner-based teacher credential program on candidates’ performance outcomes. Peabody Journal of Education,89(4), 482–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, J. L. M. (2008). The relationship among elementary teachers’ content knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,11, 139–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M., & Cooney, T. (2002). Mathematics teacher change and development: The role of beliefs. In G. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Toerner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 127–148). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Early Childhood and Elementary Education, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 3978, Atlanta, GA, 30302-3978, USA

    Susan Swars Auslander, Stephanie Z. Smith & Kayla Myers

  2. Department of Elementary and Early Childhood Education, Kennesaw State University, 1000 Chastain Road, Kennesaw, GA, 30144-5591, USA

    Marvin E. Smith

Authors
  1. Susan Swars Auslander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephanie Z. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marvin E. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kayla Myers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan Swars Auslander.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Interview protocol

  1. 1.

    How would you describe your experiences with preparing and implementing the EdTPA math task in the math methods course?

  2. 2.

    What did you learn by preparing and implementing the EdTPA math task in the course?

  3. 3.

    What about the course prepared you for the EdTPA math task?

  4. 4.

    How could your preparation for the EdTPA math task in the course be improved?

  5. 5.

    Are you ready for the EdTPA math task during student teaching? Why or why not? (Probe for concerns, etc.)

  6. 6.

    Do you think the EdTPA math task you did in the course impacts you as a future teacher of mathematics or not? If so, how? If not, why?

  7. 7.

    Any final thoughts you would like to share about your experiences with the EdTPA math task this semester?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Swars Auslander, S., Smith, S.Z., Smith, M.E. et al. A case study of elementary teacher candidates’ preparation for a high stakes teacher performance assessment. J Math Teacher Educ 23, 269–291 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-018-09422-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-018-09422-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation