TPAII+Unit+Plan

Unique to the State of Washington is this additional piece.

Link to TPAII

For assignment for this course ** PLANNING: USING KNOWLEDGE OF STUDENTS TO INFORM TEACHING **
 * PLANNING: PLANNING FOCUSED, SEQUENCED INSTRUCTION**
 * EL1: How do the plans support student learning of skills and strategies to comprehend and/or compose text?**
 * EL2: How does the candidate use knowledge of his/her students to target support for students' development of skills and strategies for comprehending and/or composing text? **

**PLANNING: PLANNING ASSESSMENTS TO MONITOR AND SUPPORT STUDENT LEARNING**
 * EL3: How do the informal and formal assessments provide information to understand student progress toward the standards/objectives?**

** REFLECTION: MONITORING STUDENT PROGRESS AND ADJUSTING INSTRUCTION **
 * EL9: How does the candidate monitor student learning and make appropriate adjustments in instruction during the learning segment? **


 * FOR DISCUSSION **

** Appendix A **

Academic Language for Elementary Literacy
Academic language differs from everyday language. The differences include: Academic language also includes instructional language needed to participate in learning and assessment tasks, such as: Academic language takes the form of many genres. Genres are generic designs applicable across multiple topics to guide the process of interpreting or constructing texts. The designs are structured to achieve specific purposes related to a particular cultural (e.g., literary community, parent community) and situational context (e.g., classroom discussion, test, school newspaper, or a creative writing journal featuring student writing.) Examples of genres in elementary literacy:
 * a defined system of genres with explicit expectations about how texts are organized to achieve academic purposes;
 * precisely-defined vocabulary to express abstract concepts and complex ideas;
 * ** more complex grammar in order to pack more information into each sentence;???? **
 * a greater variety of conjunctions and connective words and phrases to create coherence among multiple ideas;
 * textual resources (formatting conventions, graphics and organizational titles and headings) to guide understanding of texts.
 * discussing ideas and asking questions,
 * summarizing instructional and disciplinary texts,
 * following and giving instructions,
 * listening to a mini-lesson,
 * explaining thinking aloud,
 * giving reasons for a point of view,
 * writing essays to display knowledge on tests.
 * representing ideas in words
 * explaining or justifying a position
 * describing an experience using precise language
 * recounting the plot of a story
 * defining and relating concepts key to literacy
 * evaluating or constructing arguments
 * interpreting and explaining how an author indirectly conveys character’s feelings

Examples of linguistic features of genres: Examples of connector words for different purposes: Example of text organization strategies for increasingly complex arguments[16] : • Simple argument: point/proposition, elaboration. An example is: This truck is my favorite toy because I like to make it go fast. • Argument with evidence: Proposition, argument, conclusion • Discussion: statement of issue, arguments for, arguments against, recommendation • Elaborated discussion: statement of issue, preview of pro/con positions, several iterations of point/elaboration representing arguments against, several iterations of point/elaboration representing arguments for, summary, conclusion
 * related clusters of vocabulary to express the content such as toad, pond, dragonflies or birthday, surprised, family, presents
 * connector words that join sentences, clauses, phrases and words in logical relationships of time, cause and effect, comparison, or addition[14]
 * cohesive devices that link information in writing and help the text flow and hold together[15]
 * grammatical structures such as comparisons (The ___ is longer than the__ __.); passive voice, nominalizations where verbs are turned into nouns like add into addition to help condense text and make connections between sentences as in “Plants produce oxygen as a byproduct of photosynthesis. This oxygen production…”
 * text organization strategies
 * Temporal: first, next, then
 * Causal: because, since, however, therefore
 * Comparative: rather, instead, also, on the other hand
 * Additive: and, or, furthermore, similarly, while
 * Coordinating: and, nor, but, so

TPA UPDATE Sept 22 3PM Use link for highlighted and commented sections

Copied and pasted below:

Over the summer, Stanford and Pearson made a number of revisions in the six handbooks that were used in the pilot this spring (Elementary Math, Elementary Literacy, Mathematics, Social Studies, English Language Arts, and Science). The most noticeable change is a change from a 4-point scale to a 5-point scale. The change was made to help make the level 1 and 2 much more distinguishable.
 * __Handbooks & rubrics for field test__**

Note: The six handbooks released by TPAC on September 9 are the national versions. The Washington versions of these will be available within the next few weeks. The only difference between the Washington and national versions will be the addition of rubrics and prompts for student voice. Evidence for student voice will be taken from the existing four tasks rather than constituting a discrete task of its own.

At present, Stanford is working on handbooks for the following domains:
 * Early Childhood
 * Special Education
 * Health and Fitness
 * World Language
 * Generic version of the TPA will be used for ESL/TESOL
 * Mid level Humanities
 * Mid Lev. Math
 * Mid Lev. Science
 * Visual Arts
 * Music
 * Theatre
 * Dance
 * Generic version of the TPA will be used for CTE

Stanford projects that these handbooks will be available by the end of this September.

Please note that a number of rubrics cover multiple WA endorsements:
 * Science (will be used for biology, chemistry, earth and space science, physics, and science)
 * Social studies (will be used for social studies and history)
 * Special education (will be used for special education and early childhood special education)
 * Music (instrumental, vocal, and general)
 * CTE (family consumer science, agriculture, business and marketing education, and technology education)

There are several endorsement areas in which handbooks will not be available. As far as we can determine, these are typically second endorsements or add-on endorsements for which handbooks will not be needed for residency-level student teaching.
 * Traffic safety
 * Reading
 * Library Media


 * Bilingual


 * __Video consent forms__**

WACTE has requested that PESB take a leadership role in resolving questions around video consent forms (needed for creating the required video clips). At this point, we have consulted our AG on the broad legal issues involved, and are in the midst of conversations with the Washington School Personal Association, whose members are typically involved administering school district policies in this area. Our hope is to develop a uniform consent form, as well as to advance district understanding of the TPA.


 * __Policy issues: endorsements__**

In the past year, we’ve received many questions about the implications of the TPA for endorsements. Because the assessment is subject-specific, it has raised the question of whether the TPA might become an endorsement requirement. There are three separate, but related areas of concern:

--Multiple endorsements earned at the initial (residency) level

--Pathway 2 add-on endorsements

--Pathway 3 (university program) add-on endorsements

At this point, the Board has not discussed these issues, but will give //initial// consideration to these questions at the November 2011 meeting. The goal of that discussion will not be to make final decisions, but to provide direction to staff about possible policy changes. PESB staff have had preliminary conversation with a few higher education institutions on this issue, and will be extending that conversation to the field at large before November. It’s clear to us that there are significant implications in making the TPA an endorsement requirement, and our goal is to ensure that the Board has full knowledge of those implications when making decisions.

We’re also aware that institutions are concerned that their candidates will be surprised with new requirements midstream in their program. What we can say is that state practice over the past decade has been consistent in phasing in new endorsement requirements to avoid this kind of disruption.


 * __Student voice__**

At the July PESB meeting, WACTE requested that the Board consider a means of assessing student voice other than through the TPA. The Board did not act on this request. Over the summer, a work group with representatives from higher education, P-12, PESB, Stanford, and Pearson met to finish work on the student voice rubrics, as well as develop a definition that should be helpful. These documents are where sent out electronically to institutions on Wednesday 9/21/11. The full WA handbooks are expected to be available within the next few weeks.


 * __Scorer training__**

Scorer training for the field test will be conducted during the months of January and February. Pearson has confirmed that the scorer training during these months will be for the 6 core content areas that were piloted last spring. For the other content areas, training and scoring will be completed in late spring and early summer. The lack of benchmarking is cited for the delay in these areas being scored with the others. The timing of the scoring may create some challenges for programs with candidates who do their student teaching during the winter quarter (January-March). Pearson is working on a solution to address this concern. More information will be sent out as we receive confirmation on their strategy for the situation. Pearson did state that candidates will be able to provide institutions review access to their portfolios, after they have been submitted for scoring. This will allow institutions an opportunity to review portfolios of their preservice candidates for program completion purposes.

During the past year, the issue of local scoring has surfaced on a number of occasions. We understand the value of programs being able to involve their own faculty in the scoring process, and the field test fully allows for this. Within the next month, we will be approaching programs for information on how many candidates (and in which subject areas) you wish to score locally.

In addition, Pearson and PESB will take a significant responsibility for recruiting scorers at the national, state and local (IHE) levels. IHE will be involved in the recruitment but not to the level they were during the pilot. Pearson stated in a webinar this week that they will consult states on scorer requirements and on recruitment strategies. Scorer training will be online and it is estimated that the training will be 1 ½ days total but this can be completed at different stages. The scorers will receive $75 per portfolio and training compensation will be given. The amount of training compensation has not been finalized. Score reports will be delivered to institutions with all candidates’ scores. The institutions will deliver scores to their candidates. Pearson will be asking for institutions input on the report design.


 * __Costs__**

Although we’ve addressed this question a number of times, it seems to keep popping up, so we’d like to reiterate that during the field test //there will be no costs to candidates//. This will also apply to candidates doing their student teaching in Fall 2012. These candidates will be taking the assessment after the formal field test and before the assessment becomes operational, so there had been concerns about how the scoring would be funded. However, we requested, and Pearson has agreed, that these candidates would be brought under the field test umbrella for purposes of funding the scoring.

Although we do not have a final figure on the cost once it becomes operational, Pearson has recently reaffirmed that the cost will not exceed $300.

As the PESB’s office and the TPA leadership team receives updates on the TPA and as policies are adopted, we are committed to getting out new information to the institutions in a timely manner. If you have questions, you may contact Patti Larriva: patti.larriva@k12.wa.us or Larry Lashway: larry.lashway@k12.wa.us