Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement Encrypted

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Veronica Van Erem 20357907

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 9/10/2018 12/23/2018

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Peshastin-Dryden Elementary School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Washington
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Vicki Harrod
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Kathy Stgermaine
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 80 points 80 %
25 2,500.00 2000 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
100
0 0 0 0 0

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 performance of the The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the
the performance of the Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate meets Teacher Candidate
Teacher Candidate met this insufficient in meeting this underdeveloped in meeting developing in meeting this this standard and consistently exceeds this
standard or expectations standard and expectations this standard and standard and expectations for expectations for a Teacher standard and all
for a Teacher Candidate for a Teacher Candidate expectations for a Teacher a Teacher Candidate during Candidate during student expectations for a Teacher
during student teaching. during student teaching. Candidate during student student teaching. teaching. Candidate during student
teaching. teaching.
Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

1.1
Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students’ 80 1.00
strengths, interests, and needs and enables each student to advance and accelerate his or her learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 80
student growth and development. 1.00
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 lesson plan is very directed and by the book. The mentor teacher has expressed to the student teacher the need to express herself and go beyond the canned plan.This of
course can come from lack of confidence and personal comfort level. The instruction is appropriate for the age and development needs of the class. experience will create this
dimension but the student teacher also needs to begin to make a plan to improve status as a teacher of the community


Candidate to determine
how the Teacher Candidate
will meet this standard in
future evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning strengths 80 1.00
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 strategies
for making content accessible to English language students and for evaluating and supporting their 80 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 80 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
The class room was organized in groups that were appropriate to their learning styles and needs, The student teacher needed to use some more learning directions toward the
whole class "eyes on me" etc so she can begin to show that she is in charge.


Candidate to determine how
the Teacher Candidate will
meet this standard in future
evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, 80 1.00
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
responsiveness to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning
80
1.00
environment.
Evidence
The student teacher follows the script of the lesson and encourages learning step by step. This is a very active elementary class room. She interacts well with the students
and moves around the learning environment encouraging and supporting each individual.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar 80 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 80 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 80 1.00
content area.
Evidence
The lesson was a STEP standard 4 unit. She followed the lesson and went from white board directions, individual work to group work. The student teacher has been a
para educator in the best and seems to struggle at times giving directions as the leader of the class to just someone who supports the process. The content is well
covered and complete. The student needs to express herself more by creating a personal teaching style.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

5.1
Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens of 80 1.00
interdisciplinary themes (e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy).
5.2
Teacher candidates facilitate students’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand 80 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
This was not a social or cultural experience. It was a decoding reading lesson.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
1.00
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and minimize 80
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 80 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 80 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
This is a basic lesson that will fit into the common core requirements for Washington State testing, The assessment is directed by the teacher teaching, reteaching and
checking for learning. Most of the these guided lessons are supported by daily work and support from the state common core standards,


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
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 80 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 80 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 80 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
the student teacher used various teaching styles to support her lesson. The room had six students together that used cooperating learning as well as individual instruction. I
do not know if the guided lesson form the teacher manual comes with has added suggestions for providing appropriate, accommodations and other resources. If the student
teacher is unsure of the lesson delivery for the day she should work within her strengths be careful with slang and appropriate pronouncing of words.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

8.1
Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) in 80 1.00
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, interpret, 80 1.00
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,
80
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
The student teacher has a good sense of humor and connects with the students easily. The lesson is very directed with not much incorporation of learning styles. It was a
direct instruction with student feed back The student teacher sat down and read the book from the over head white board. The technology for the school could be only
supporting this stye of learning, I did not see any computers or ipads.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
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., systematic 1.00
observation, information about students, and research) to evaluate the outcomes of teaching and learning and 80
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 80 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
The mentor teacher has expressed the concern to me that the student teacher is very insecure with her teaching ability. The student teacher needs to begin to take notes from
her mentor teacher, work on becoming more confidence and secure in her ability to deliver her instruction from a teachers point of view, watch her pronunciation of words and
control her expression in regard to her view of the children's learning ability. It is a difficult transition from a para professional to a teacher. The direction and style is very
different. These skills need to be practiced so they can become a part of a successful professional teacher.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

10.1
Teacher candidates use technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to build local and global 80 1.00
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 80 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
The student teacher is a very genuine focused teacher that cares about the student and their ability to grow. She was a successful para educator and has made the transition
to become a well respected leader of the educational community. She is a very personal happy individual that is comfortable in the classroom.

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Teacher candidates demonstrate an understanding of their impact on student learning as evidenced in the
Student Teaching Evaluation of Performance (STEP) and other formative and summative assessments. 90 1.00
Evidence
The student teacher is very aware of the impact that she is having on the students learning in her class and the community. She has put forth a lot of effort and energy to
complete this process of becoming a certified teacher in the state of Washington. Experience will help her gain confidence and once she becomes part of a permanent
learning community she will be able enjoy her success. Teaching is a very personal experience. The school is like a family. This student teacher has the caring, knowledge
and ability to be successful educator.

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

80 %
ATTACHMENTS
Clinical Practice Time Log:
(Required)
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

Kathy Stgermaine
Kathy Stgermaine (Nov 12, 2018) Nov 12, 2018

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement Encrypted

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement Encrypted

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 9/10/2018 12/23/2018

Peshastin-Dryden Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Veronica Van Erem 20357907

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Potrebbero piacerti anche