Points %: Clinical Practice Evaluation 3

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
Katelyn Magill 20148425

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education and Special Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SPE-448NB 2/24/2020 4/26/2020

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Anthem Elementary School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Arizona
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Melissa Mendelsohn
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Margaret Jacobs
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:
190.88 points
EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 95.44 %
25.00 2,500.00 2,386.00 200
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
200 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0
200

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

No Evidence Ineffective Foundational Emerging Proficient Distinguished
(The GCU Faculty (Teacher Candidates within (Teacher Candidates within (Teacher Candidates within (Target level for Teacher (Usually reserved for master
Supervisor should create a this range require a this range require a this range may benefit from a Candidates) Teacher Candidates)
plan with the Teacher Professional Growth Plan) Professional Growth Plan) Professional Growth Plan)
Candidate to determine how
the Teacher Candidate will
meet this standard in future
evaluations)
No Evidence 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
There is no evidence that the The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the
performance of the Teacher Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate meets Teacher Candidate
Candidate met this standard insufficient in meeting this underdeveloped in meeting developing in meeting this this standard and consistently exceeds this
or expectations for a Teacher standard and expectations for this standard and expectations standard and expectations for a expectations for a Teacher standard and all expectations
Candidate during student a Teacher Candidate during for a Teacher Candidate Teacher Candidate during Candidate during student for a Teacher Candidate
teaching. student teaching. during student teaching. student teaching. teaching. during student teaching.
Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

1.1 1.00
Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual
students’ strengths, interests, and needs and enables each student to advance and accelerate his or her 97
learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 1.00
95
student growth and development.
Evidence
(The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this standard. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for
improvement and the actionable steps for growth. )
The teacher candidate develops appropriate instruction as observed in ZOOM via Google lesson taught to her student (it was designed for 3 students but only one student
logged on to the lesson). She stated the objective to be that the students would work on being able to summarize a video clip by writing 2-3 sentences explaining what
happened. This along with making predictions of various scenarios was the focus of lesson.This student has IEP goals related to the material and strategies used. The
teacher candidate has maintained consistent collaboration with her supervising teacher during this school closure period via online and phone communication.


evaluations)
Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning 1.00
95
strengths and needs and create opportunities for students to demonstrate their learning in different ways.
2.2
Teacher candidates incorporate language development tools into planning and instruction, including 1.00
strategies for making content accessible to English language students and for evaluating and supporting 94
their development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular 96 1.00
learning differences or needs.
Evidence
The teacher candidate ensures that her students are treated fairly in the ways she interacts with them. She used strategies such as showing the student the clip of the movie
and had him explain in words what they saw in the fewest words possible. She also used much questioning such as: Who was involved? Where did it take place? Why was it
happening? What happened? When did it happen? She was observed setting classroom expectations for the student being taught in her online lesson. When the student had
a hard time giving the correct answer immediately, the teacher candidate reminded him to remember what the concept/objective of the lesson was.. She supported him in
answering correctly before calling on another student.


evaluations)
Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by 1.00
94
organizing, allocating, and coordinating the resources of time, space, and students’ attention.
3.2
Teacher candidates communicate verbally and nonverbally in ways that demonstrate respect for and 1.00
responsiveness to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning 95
environment.
Evidence
The teacher candidate demonstrated skill in managing the learning environment by how she had her student engaged fully in the lesson. She responded to each of his
questions and, when creating 'off track' responses immediately gave him verbal and nonverbal support in thinking though questions and giving an accurate answer.. Her
verbal and non-verbal language created a positive setting and one where the student was comfortable in interacting with her. Her supervising teacher reports that such
behavior is the norm in all her interactions with students.
Katelyn Magill
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ 20148425
STUDENT NUMBER____________________

evaluations)
Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar 97 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 97 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in 97 1.00
their content area.
Evidence
The teacher candidate reminded her student about the previous lesson when starting to learn how to make predictions. She used a short video from the movie 'Frozen" to
support the instruction and comprehension.skills they had worked on during a previous lesson and how to question oneself in coming up with a meaningful predication..
She demonstrated her awareness of reading development per use of varied strategies such as having student read passages and connect meaning to the
question/answer periods that followed. She used visuals of pictures and sections that the student and teacher could fill out.to words such as using her right hand to touch
left arm for each sound identified. She used a most appropriate book: 'Are You My Mother?" She also had the student play a related game on the computer.


evaluations)
Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

5.1
1.00
Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens 95
of interdisciplinary themes (e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy).
5.2
Teacher candidates facilitate students’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand 95 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
The teacher candidate was working via the ZOOM lesson with a 6th grade level student who demonstrate lower grade level skills. She was able to apply the
content of the lesson with the value of learning to predict. She used a purposeful strategy of frequent questions with him answering. He was given scenrio such as
about a rainbow and other real-life examples that he made predictions about what had or will happen. The student was learning how to use the online learning
access to write out response too. The teacher candidate was able to ask comprehension questions and create discussion that was clearly enjoyable to the student.


evaluations)
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 96 1.00
minimize sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 94 1.00
understand each student’s progress and to guide planning.
6.3
Teacher candidates prepare all students for the demands of particular assessment formats and make
appropriate modifications in assessments or testing conditions especially for students with disabilities and
95 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
The teacher candidate used frequent comprehension checks serving as formative assessments throughout the online lesson. The main assessment was having the student
summarize the clip on the form given. She also gave him an extension activity to make a Flipgrid with his response.


evaluations)
Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

7.1
Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student’s learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and 95 1.00
accommodations, resources, and materials to differentiate instruction for individuals and groups of students.
7.2
Teacher candidates develop appropriate sequencing of learning experiences and provide multiple ways to 96 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 96 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
The teacher candidate provided the supervising teacher with a brief but sufficient lesson plan that demonstrates skills in planning for quality and differentiated instruction. She
noted the objectives at the start of the lesson and followed her plans through the formative/summative assessing that took place throughout lesson and to the end. She used
various resources and materials.


evaluations)
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

8.1
Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) 92 1.00
in relation to the content, purpose of instruction, and student needs
8.2
Teacher candidates engage students in using a range of learning skills and technology tools to access, 97 1.00
interpret, evaluate, and apply information.
8.3
Teacher candidates ask questions to stimulate discussion that serve different purposes (e.g., probing for
student understanding, helping students articulate their ideas and thinking processes, stimulating curiosity, 96 1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
The teacher candidate used the instructional role of being an instructor, facilitator and coach. She is aware of how she can take the role of being the audience. She used
various strategies in sync with materials very effectively such as a video, online instruction, ability to write on response paper and have student do the same, She used
effective discussion strategies.


evaluations)
Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

9.1
Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, teacher candidates use a variety of data (e.g., 1.00
systematic observation, information about students, and research) to evaluate the outcomes of teaching and
94
learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
1.00
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside 96
the school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
The teacher candidate is implementing best practices for students while in collaboration regularly with those more experienced than her. She continues to reflect on her
instruction, results, use of materials, data collected, etc. Previous to the school closure, she has started learning how to write IEPs, responsibilities in maintaining compliance,
scheduling meetings, etc. She is also learning how to vary her questioning to varied depths of knowledge depending on topic and students.


evaluations)
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

10.1
1.00
Teacher candidates use technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to build local and 96
global learning communities that engage students, families, and colleagues.
10.2
Teacher candidates advocate to meet the needs of students, to strengthen the learning environment, and to 96 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
The teacher candidate has done an good job per the observations and interviews completed by this supervising teacher. As well, her cooperating teacher observes she is on
her way to becoming an outstanding educator with passion and tremendous skills as demonstrated in the short time at the school site. She is, without a doubt, on her way to a
very successful career in education!

INSTRUCTIONS
Please review the "Total Scored Percentage" for accuracy and add any attachments before completing the "Agreement and Signature" section.
Total Scored Percentage:

95.44 %
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1:
(Optional)
Attachment 2:
(Optional)
AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

This evaluation reflects the results of a collaborative conference including feedback from the Cooperating / Mentor Teacher. The GCU Faculty
Supervisor and Cooperating /Mentor Teacher should collaboratively review the performance in each category prior to the evaluation meeting.
I attest this submission is accurate, true, and in compliance with GCU policy guidelines, to the best of my ability to do so.
GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Dr. Margaret Jacobs
Dr. Margaret Jacobs (Apr 23, 2020) Apr 23, 2020

Points %: Clinical Practice Evaluation 3

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Points %: Clinical Practice Evaluation 3

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education and Special Education

SPE-448NB 2/24/2020 4/26/2020

Anthem Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Katelyn Magill 20148425

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

S-ar putea să vă placă și