Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement Part 1 - Signed

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 8/13/2018 11/25/2018

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
George J Anderson Elementary School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Texas
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Patty Bachellor
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Kathy Hoernke
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 96.92 points 96.92 %
25 2,500.00 2423 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’ 100 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 95
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. )
Karen designed a lesson that would integrate some science for the students. At the 2nd grade, they do not have many chances to explore science concepts, but Karen found a
book that would allow the students to learn about the seasons. She designed the activity piece to fit the needs of the various academic needs in the classroom. The GT
students had extensions to the activity. Those with accommodations and special needs have specific steps to their piece. Karen took each kid into consideration so that each
could learn from the lesson and excel at their readiness.


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 100 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 98 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 98 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
The lesson outline clearly explained how she was adjusting the activity portion of the lesson based on the student needs and levels of academic readiness. I was very impressed
with the amount of forethought that went into this lesson as well as planning for materials. She took a big leap to integrate some science into the class and allow the students a
more hands-on approach to the learning.


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, 100 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
100
1.00
environment.
Evidence
This particular lesson took a great deal of planning of materials, levels for each of the students needs, and guidance throughout the activity. All of the supplies were cut and
organized into bins for each group before the class. The book was selected that would model the concept of seasons for the students. Karen did a great job of helping each
student understand the signs of each of the seasons and managed to show them illustrations as well as share things they can relate to in their own community (Halloween,
snow, flowers, etc.).


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 95 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 98 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 98 1.00
content area.
Evidence
The lesson on the season incorporated so many content areas and opportunities for students to discuss their observations of the seasons, ask questions, and create a
chart of apple trees for each season. The book that was read to start the lesson was about an Apple Farmer. The book took the students through the 4 seasons with the
apple tree. After the story, the students were able to make their own apple trees to represent the seasons. They had a variety of colored paper, textures of paper, and
supplies to create their trees. As they designed them, they continually discussed the pictures in the book to help them remember the key features of the trees for each
season. All of the students were engaged and loved being creative with their trees.


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 98 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 95 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
The 2nd grade classes typically focus on reading, writing, and math. They typically do not have any science units. Karen took a leap to design a lesson that would
incorporate some science. The students were able to share stories and observations of the various seasons. The story focused on the life of an apple tree throughout the
seasons. The students were able to learn about the uses of apples, the importance of the environment on its growth, and the role we play in picking the apples and caring for
the trees. The students had a great time with the story and the hands-on art piece by making their own trees. Students shared their ideas about how to use the apples when
they were ready to be picked. That is a great way for students to learn from each other.


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 95
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 95 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 98 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Karen did an excellent job taking each students level of academic skills and needs into consideration as she designed the product piece of the lesson. She showed a very
clear understanding of the needs and limitations of the students in her classroom. This particular class consists of GT students, autistic learners, low academic skills, and on-
level learners. This lesson took each student into consideration and provided each one with something new to learn and expand on.


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 100 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 95 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 95 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
It is clear to me that Karen truly understands the needs and skills of her students. It takes a lot of work to develop a lesson that will appeal to each one and provide each one
with that extension they may need to go beyond. She organized bins at each table based on the student levels and needs. The GT students had extra materials to go
beyond the basic requirements on their apple tree designs. Some groups had more limited choices to help them focus more and complete the project (they need more
structure and clearly defined goals).


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 95 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, 95 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,
95
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
During the story, Karen stops after each page to ask questions of the students. She is giving them time to make observations with the pictures and learn how to draw
conclusions from the images. This also allows the students to ask questions and share their ideas and thoughts. The students are very engaged in the story time. They are
very inquisitive and love to share their own stories.


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 95
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 95 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Karen and Patty (the cooperating teacher) work very well together to plan out lessons to meet the needs of this group. This particular lesson was suggested and designed by
Karen. She asked permission to go beyond the typical lesson requirements to integrate science and art into the lesson. She spent time searching for a book at their level that
focused on the seasons that would also fit with the art piece of the activity by creating their own apple trees for the seasons.


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 95 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 100 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
The very fact that she went beyond the typical lessons to integrate a science component to the lesson shows that she is looking to make an impact with the students as well
as the learning community at her school. It is very easy for a student teacher to simply follow the lessons that have been done. I am very pleased with her initiative to search
for new ideas and new strategies for meeting the learning objectives of the class through a more integrated approach. The students loved working on their apple trees. They
would have been happy to extend that assignment even longer. All students were engaged and the cooperating teacher and I were very impressed with Karen's hard work.

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. 95 1.00
Evidence
Karen knows she has a very challenging group in her class with all of the accommodations and learner needs. There are some very low learners mixed in with GT and on-
level. This group is very demanding of the teacher's attention and support. Karen has learned that everything must be ready to go before every class. The structure and
timing of everything makes a big difference in the flow of the class as students transition to each activity. Again, I am very impressed with her willingness to step outside the
box to try new things with the class and provide them with more opportunities to explore their skills and creativity. As she moves from one group to the next, she is able to talk
with the students about their designs and dig deeper into their level of understanding. Karen has done an excellent job of taking the students' learning needs and limitations
into consideration. It takes a lot of work to design a lesson that addresses every level in the classroom.

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

96.92 %
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 Hoernke
Kathy Hoernke (Oct 4, 2018) Oct 4, 2018

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement Part 1 - Signed

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

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 Part 1 - Signed

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 8/13/2018 11/25/2018

George J Anderson Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Karen Sepulbeda 20330198

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Potrebbero piacerti anche