edTPA (Educative Teacher Performance Assessment) Submission, Ethics, and Strategy for Success Syllabus

Is it acceptable to reuse another candidate's lesson plans or commentary in edTPA?

No. Submitting another person's work as your own—including peers' plans or commentaries—is plagiarism and a violation of the candidate agreement, even if you modify it.

What distinguishes legitimate use of published curricular materials from a plagiarism violation in edTPA?

You may USE published materials in teaching if you cite/attribute them, but the analysis and commentary must be your own words; passing off published or AI-generated text as your own original commentary is a violation.

Does using a template or program-provided lesson-plan format violate originality rules?

No. Using a standard format/template is allowed; what must be original is the content—the planning decisions, rationale, and analysis you write into it.

Whose permission must be obtained before videotaping students for the edTPA Instruction task?

Written consent/release forms must be obtained from the parents or guardians of minor students (and from adult students themselves) before any video is recorded for submission.

How should a candidate handle a student whose guardian denied video consent?

That student must be seated outside the camera's view or otherwise excluded from the recorded frame so they do not appear in the submitted video clips.

What must candidates do to protect privacy when submitting student work samples and documents?

Remove or redact personally identifiable information (full names, student IDs, school identifying details); use first names only or pseudonyms/initials as the handbook directs.

What federal U.S. law underlies edTPA's strict student-privacy and consent requirements?

FERPA (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act), which protects the confidentiality of student education records and information.

Why must permission/consent forms be retained even though they are not uploaded to the portfolio?

They are kept on file by the candidate/program as proof that consent was obtained; scorers don't see them, but they are required documentation for compliance and audits.

What are the possible consequences of an edTPA originality or security violation?

Score invalidation/cancellation, being barred from submitting, removal from the program, and reporting to the state—jeopardizing teacher licensure.

What is the difference between a 'condition code' and a violation finding on edTPA?

A condition code flags a technical/procedural problem (e.g., missing or unreadable file) that prevents scoring of a part; a violation finding indicates a breach of the candidate agreement (plagiarism, sharing secure materials) with disciplinary consequences.

Why is sharing secure edTPA handbook materials or scored portfolios prohibited?

The materials are copyrighted, secure assessment content; distributing them (including posting prompts or sample work online) is a security violation that can void scores and trigger sanctions.

What typically happens to a portfolio that receives a condition code rather than a numeric score?

The affected task or rubric cannot be scored until the issue is fixed; the candidate usually must correct and resubmit that portion, sometimes for an additional fee, before earning a passing total.

What does 'backward planning the portfolio' mean for edTPA preparation?

Starting from the final submission deadline and the required evidence, then mapping backward to set milestones for planning, teaching/recording, collecting work, and writing—so every piece is ready on time.

In backward design of the learning segment, what should be identified first?

The central focus and the standards/learning objectives (the desired results), then the assessments that measure them, and finally the lessons and activities—mirroring Understanding by Design's three stages.

Why should video recording be scheduled early in a backward-planned edTPA timeline?

Video depends on consent forms, working equipment, and capturing the right lesson; building in slack lets you re-record if a clip is unusable, since Task 2 cannot be reconstructed after the segment is over.

What is a key risk of not backward-planning the assessment evidence?

You may finish teaching the segment without having collected the specific focus-student work samples and feedback Task 3 requires, leaving you unable to complete the portfolio without re-teaching.

What is the recommended first step when drafting an edTPA commentary?

Read the exact prompt and its associated rubric(s), then answer each numbered sub-prompt directly and explicitly, because scorers map your text to specific rubric language.

What does it mean to 'cite evidence' when revising an edTPA commentary?

Pointing scorers to specific artifacts—e.g., referencing a particular lesson plan, a timestamp in the video clip, or a named focus student's work—to support each claim you make.

What is the difference between describing and analyzing in an edTPA commentary, and which earns higher scores?

Describing recounts what happened; analyzing explains WHY decisions were made and HOW they affected student learning, citing principles/research. Analysis and justification earn higher rubric scores than description alone.

What revision strategy helps ensure a commentary hits the higher rubric levels?

Score your own draft against each rubric's level descriptors, then revise to add the missing higher-level elements (e.g., connections to research, attention to varied student needs, and justified next steps).

Why must commentary language consistently connect to the 'central focus' and academic-language demands?

Multiple rubrics assess coherence and language; repeatedly tying your reasoning to the central focus, language function, vocabulary, and supports demonstrates the integrated, deliberate teaching scorers reward.

What kind of support from a cooperating teacher or supervisor is permitted during edTPA?

General guidance—pointing to handbook resources, discussing teaching practice, and giving feedback on understanding the prompts—is allowed, as long as the candidate produces all written and analytical work independently.

What kind of support crosses the line into an edTPA violation?

Editing, rewriting, or co-authoring the candidate's commentary; telling the candidate what to write; or providing answers/another's portfolio. Support must not alter the candidate's original responses.

What is the rule about getting feedback on a draft edTPA commentary before submission?

Others may not read and edit your actual edTPA responses; faculty can support your general understanding and skills, but reviewing/correcting your specific submission language is prohibited.

How can a candidate use support appropriately during the planning phase?

By discussing curriculum, standards, and students with mentors and using program seminars to build skills—then independently making and writing up the planning decisions in the portfolio.

What information does an edTPA score report provide?

A total scaled score, individual rubric scores (each rated 1–5), and a breakdown by task (Planning, Instruction, Assessment) showing performance on each of the 15 (or field-specific number of) rubrics.

What is the typical number of rubrics on an edTPA, and how are they distributed across tasks?

Most handbooks use 15 rubrics—5 for Planning (Task 1), 5 for Instruction (Task 2), and 5 for Assessment (Task 3)—though a few fields have additional rubrics.

How is the edTPA total score calculated from rubric scores?

Each rubric is scored 1–5 by trained scorers and the rubric scores are summed; for a 15-rubric handbook the total ranges from 15 to 75, and the total is compared to a state-set passing cut score.

What does a rubric score of 3 generally represent on the edTPA 1–5 scale?

A score of 3 reflects the performance of a candidate ready to teach—solid, intentional practice—while 1–2 indicate developing skill and 4–5 indicate advanced, well-integrated practice.

Why do passing (cut) scores differ from state to state on edTPA?

Each state sets its own licensure cut score (e.g., a total such as 35–42 on a 15-rubric handbook); the same raw score may pass in one state but not in another.

What are a candidate's options if they do not pass the edTPA overall?

They may retake/resubmit—either the entire portfolio or only the specific task(s) that fell short—by re-registering for those parts, paying the applicable fee, and submitting in a later scoring window.

What is the advantage of a task-level retake over a full retake on edTPA?

A task-level retake lets the candidate resubmit only the deficient task (with its evidence and commentary) at a lower per-task fee, keeping passing tasks intact instead of redoing the entire portfolio.

After a failed submission, how should a candidate use their score report to plan a retake?

Identify the lowest-scoring rubrics, read those rubric descriptors to see what the next level requires, and target revisions (or re-teaching, if needed) precisely to those gaps rather than redoing everything.

What is a 'targeted improvement strategy' for raising an Assessment (Task 3) rubric score?

Strengthen the analysis of student-learning patterns, provide more specific and usable feedback to focus students, and clearly describe research-based next steps tied to the assessment evidence.

What targeted strategy improves a weak academic-language rubric score?

Explicitly identify the language function, vocabulary/symbols, syntax, and discourse demands of the central focus, then show the specific supports you planned and the evidence students used the language.

When resubmitting, what must remain consistent if only one task is retaken?

The retaken task must still align with the same learning segment, central focus, and students used in the originally passing tasks, so the portfolio remains coherent across Planning, Instruction, and Assessment.