Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research-Informed Conceptualization and Design Principles of Teacher Performance Assessments: Wrestling with System and Site Validity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Innovation and Accountability in Teacher Education

Abstract

The most recent review of Initial Teacher Education (ITE) in Australia titled Action Now: Classroom Ready Teachers (Craven et al. 2014) heralded the introduction of Teacher Performance Assessments (TPAs) as summative assessments of graduate profession ‘readiness’. The conceptualization, research-informed design and implementation of authentic summative TPAs represent a new frontier in Australian teacher education. It was in this policy-driven environment that the Learning Sciences Institute Australia [1] began the conceptualisation and design of the Graduate Teacher Performance Assessment (GTPA), developed in 2015, piloted in 2016 and trialled with the support of a national consortium of 13 universities in 2017. In this chapter, we explore the notion of system and site validity as integral to the conceptualisation and design of TPAs that are expected to be embedded in diverse sociocultural contexts. Further, we examine the assessment notion of fidelity of implementation. Using the case of the GTPA, we locate fidelity at the intersection of the system and site validity and identify and discuss how risks to fidelity of the GTPA implementation, as a policy reform, can be traced back to unresolved tensions and dissonance. These surface when system and site values emerge as part of the change process and are forced to co-exist, effectively in a state of unresolved conflict. In a policy reform context, the latter—site values—have typically been understood as ‘normal’ and taken for granted. Where dissonance occurs between system and site, it can produce blockers to successful implementation of assessment innovation in ITE.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Graduate Teacher Performance Assessment (GTPA) is one teaching performance assessment in use in Australian universities. It was developed by the Institute for Learning Sciences and Teacher Education, Australian Catholic University in 2015, piloted in 2016 and trialed across a consortium of 13 Australian universities in 2017.

  2. 2.

    The Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (graduate level) are also referred to as Graduate Standards and Graduate Teacher Standards (e.g. see https://www.aitsl.edu.au/teach/teacher-standards/career-stages).

References

  • Akiba, M. (2017). Editor’s introduction: Understanding cross-national differences in globalized teacher reforms. Educational Researcher, 46(4), 153–168. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17711908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, C. (2016). Reforming the reform of teacher education: A critical grounded theory of a social approach to change and continuity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Adelaide, Australia: University of Adelaide.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Government. Department of Education and Training. (2015). Teacher education ministerial advisory group—Action now: Classroom ready teachers: Australian government response. Retrieved October 9, 2017 from https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/150212_ag_response_-_final.pdf.

  • Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [AITSL]. (2011). Australian professional standards for teachers. Retrieved May 1, 2017 from https://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers/standards/overview/organisation-of-the-standards.

  • Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [AITSL]. (2015). Accreditation of initial teacher education programs in Australia: Standards and procedures. Retrieved May 30, 2017 from http://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/initial-teacher-education-resources/accreditation-of-ite-programs-in-australia.pdf.

  • Ball, S. J. (2016). Neoliberal education? Confronting the slouching beast. Policy Futures in Education, 14(8), 1046–1059. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210316664259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, J. (2009). Appropriating professionalism: Restructuring the official knowledge base of England’s “modernised” teaching profession. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 30(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690802514268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, L. (2002). The politics of standards and the education of teachers. Teaching Education, 13(3), 305–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. J. J. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T., Rowley, H., & Smith, K. (2015). The beginnings of school led teacher training: New challenges for university teacher education. Manchester Metropolitan University. Retrieved January 5, 2018 from https://e-space.mmu.ac.uk/602385/2/SchoolDirectResearchReport.pdf.

  • Century, J., Rudnick, M., & Freeman, C. (2010). A framework for measuring fidelity of implementation: A foundation for shared language and accumulation of knowledge. American Journal of Evaluation, 32(2), 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charters, W. W., & Waples, D. (1929). The commonwealth teacher-training study. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M., Piazza, P., & Power, C. (2013). The politics of accountability: Assessing teacher education in the United States. The Educational Forum, 77(1), 6–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M., Stern, R., Sánchez, J. G., Miller, A., Keefe, E. S., Fernández, M. B., et al. (2016). Holding teacher preparation accountable: A review of claims and evidence. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. Retrieved January 16, 2018 from http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/teacher-prep.

  • Cowie, B., & Cooper, B. (2016). Exploring the challenge of developing student teacher data literacy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 24(2), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1225668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowie, M., Taylor, D., & Croxford, L. (2007). ‘Tough, intelligent accountability’ in Scottish secondary schools and the role of standard tables and charts [STACS]: A critical appraisal. Scottish Educational Review, 39(1), 29–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craven, G., Beswick, K., Fleming, J., Fletcher, T., Green, M., Jensen, B., et al. (2014). Action now: Classroom ready teachers. Retrieved January 16, 2018 from https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/action_now_classroom_ready_teachers_print.pdf.

  • Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5–6), 523–545. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00015-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delandshere, G., & Arens, S. A. (2001). Representations of teaching and standards-based reform: Are we closing the debate about teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(5), 547–566. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00013-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duckor, B., Castellano, K., Téllez, K., Wihardini, D., & Wilson, M. (2014). Examining the internal structure evidence for the performance assessment for California teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(5), 402–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, F. C. E., & Edwards, R. J. (2017). A story of culture and teaching: The complexity of teacher identity formation. The Curriculum Journal, 28(2), 190–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2016.1232200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewell, P. T. (2013). The lumina degree qualifications profile (DQP): Implications for assessment. Champaign, IL: National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment. Retrieved January 16, 2018 from http://www.learningoutcomesassessment.org/documents/EwellDQPop1.pdf.

  • Flowers, C. (2006). A measure of dispositions for preservice teachers. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 478–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freebody, P., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2004). The assessment of literacy: Working the zone between system and site validity. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 5(2), 30–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furlong, J. (2015). Teaching tomorrow’s teachers. Options for the future of initial teacher education in Wales. Retrieved January 16, 2018 from http://gov.wales/docs/dcells/publications/150309-teaching-tomorrows-teachers-final.pdf.

  • Hamilton, L., Halverson, R., Jackson, S., Mandinach, E., Supovitz, J., & Wayman, J. C. (2009). Using student achievement data to support instructional decision making (NCEE 2009–4067). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved October 9, 2017 from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/dddm_pg_092909.pdf.

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 88 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Oxon, England: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J., Morris, A. K., Berk, D., & Jansen, A. (2007). Preparing teachers to learn from teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M. F., Ell, F., Grudnoff, L., Haigh, M., Cochran-Smith, M., Chang, W., et al. (2017). Assessment for equity: Learning how to use evidence to scaffold learning and improve teaching. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 24(2), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1253541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huston, T. (2016). edTPA, videotape, and occupational identity: A study of pre-service teachers. Teaching Education, 28(2), 194–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2016.1237482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingvarson, L., & Rowley, G. (2017). Quality assurance in teacher education and outcomes: A study of 17 countries. Educational Researcher, 46(4), 177–193. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17711900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klenowski, V., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2014). Assessment for education: Standards, judgement and moderation. London, England: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Korthagen, F., & Vasalos, A. (2005). Levels in reflection: Core reflection as a means to enhance professional growth. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(1), 47–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, J. W., Gearhart, M., Curry, M., & Kafka, J. (2003). Looking at student work for teacher learning, teacher, community and school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(3), 184–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170308500305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingston, K., & Hutchinson, C. (2017). Developing teachers’ capacities in assessment through career-long professional learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 24(2), 290–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1223016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Looney, A., Cumming, J., van Der Kleij, F., & Harris, K. (2017). Reconceptualising the role of teachers as assessors: Teacher assessment identity. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2016.1268090.

  • Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. S. (2016). What does it mean for teachers to be data literate: Laying out the skills, knowledge, and dispositions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 366–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matters, G. (2006). Australian education review: Using data to support learning in schools: Students, teachers, systems. Camberwell, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer D., Dixon, M., Kline, J., Kostogriz, A., Moss, J., Rowan, L., et al. (2017). Employment pathways, mobility and retention of graduate teachers. In D. Mayer, M. Dixon, J. Kline, A. Kostogriz, J. Moss, L. Rowan, et al. (Eds.), Studying the effectiveness of teacher education: Early career teachers in diverse settings (pp. 99–119). Singapore: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mory, E. H. (2004). Feedback research revisited. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 745–784). New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nayfield, I., Pecheone, R., Whittaker, A., Shear, B. R., & Klesch, H. (2015). Educative assessment and meaningful support: 2014 edTPA administrative report. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning and Equity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, P., & Shaw, S. (2014). Validity in educational and psychological assessment. London, England: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ord, K., & Nuttall, J. (2016). Bodies of knowledge: The concept of embodiment as an alternative to theory/practice debates in the preparation of teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 355–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Primo, M. (2006). A multi-method and multi-source approach for studying fidelity of implementation. Retrieved October 9, 2017 from http://source.ucdenver.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=research_reports.

  • Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (2010). Fidelity as a precondition for integrity in grading academic achievement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(6), 727–743. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902977756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (2013). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Journal of Education, 193(3), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinnema, C., Meyer, F., & Aitken, G. (2017). Capturing the complex, situated, and active nature of teaching through inquiry-oriented standards for teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487116668017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. (2016). Functions of assessment in teacher education. In J. Loughran & M. L. Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook of teacher education (Vol. 2, pp. 405–428). Singapore: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stobart, G. (2014). The expert learner: Challenging the myth of ability. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stobart, G., & Gipps, C. (2010). Alternative assessment. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGraw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 202–208). Oxford, England: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Schuwirth, L. W. T., Scheele, F., Driessen, E. W., & Hodges, B. (2010). The assessment of professional competence: Building blocks for theory development. Best Practice & Research: Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 24(6), 703–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2010.04.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt-Smith, C. (2017, September). Reforming initial teacher education in Australia: A national consortium approach. Paper presented at the New International Perspectives on Future Teachers’ Professional Competencies Congress, Hamburg, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt-Smith, C., Alexander, C., Fishburn, D., & McMahon, P. (2017). Standards of practice to standards of evidence: Developing assessment capable teachers. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 24(2), 250–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1228603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt-Smith, C., & Gunn, S. (2009). Towards theorising assessment as critical inquiry. In C. M. Wyatt-Smith & S. Gunn (Eds.), Educational assessment in the 21st century: Connecting theory and practice (pp. 83–102). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt-Smith, C., & Looney, A. (2016). Professional standards and the assessment work of teachers. In L. Hayward & D. Wyse (Eds.), Handbook on curriculum, pedagogy and assessment (pp. 805–820). London, England: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Learning Sciences and Teacher Education, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, Australia

    Lenore Adie & Claire Wyatt-Smith

Authors
  1. Lenore Adie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claire Wyatt-Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lenore Adie .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Learning Sciences and Teacher Education, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Claire Wyatt-Smith

  2. Institute for Learning Sciences and Teacher Education, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Lenore Adie

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Adie, L., Wyatt-Smith, C. (2018). Research-Informed Conceptualization and Design Principles of Teacher Performance Assessments: Wrestling with System and Site Validity. In: Wyatt-Smith, C., Adie, L. (eds) Innovation and Accountability in Teacher Education. Teacher Education, Learning Innovation and Accountability. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2026-2_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2026-2_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-2025-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-2026-2

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation