One of the more noteworthy developments in university-based teacher education today is the proliferation of preservice teacher assessment, and in particular, teacher performance assessment (TPA). Indeed, more than 160 teacher education programs in more than 25 states recently adopted the edTPA, a Stanford University developed teacher performance assessment tool (formerly the Teacher Performance Assessment Consortium or TPAC), to determine teacher candidates' eligibility for a teaching credential (AACTE, 2012a). The scaling up of teacher performance assessment is taking place in the face of an increasingly negative discourse about and growing scrutiny of university-based teacher education and has therefore generated strong reactions from the teacher education community. Some leaders in the field have endorsed the edTPA, arguing, for example, that it will offer teacher educators evidence of candidates' abilities to facilitate K-12 student learning and bring credibility to the profession (AACTE, 2012b; Darling-Hammond & Hyler, 2013; Hollins, 2012). Others have voiced concern about, for example, potential threats to program quality and faculty professionalism posed by edTPA's status as a high-stakes assessment, as well as its partnership with Pearson-a for-profit education corporation (Au, 2013; Sawchuk, 2013; Winerip, 2012). This article describes the efforts of a collective of seven teacher educators, representing three of California's many university-based teacher education programs, to respond with agency to some of the opportunities and concerns presented here. While we are able to identify some of the key differences between candidates' degrees of contextualization, we are left with more questions than answers.