Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Dual Placement Encrypted - 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2D
Emily Fuentes 20361154

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Early Childhood Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ECH-480 1/6/2020 3/1/2020

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Cactus Wren Elementary School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Arizona
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Jennifer Montree
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Deborah Hurst
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2D
TOTAL POINTS 296.88 points 98.96 %
25 2,500.00 2474
300
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
300
0 0 0 0 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)
0 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

1.1
Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students’ strengths, interests, and 98
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 student growth and 98
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. )
Emily created a unit on friendship because the class had two new students. She did an excellent job picking out developmentally appropriate read alouds, connecting activities,
and creating assessments to show learning. Students had fun learning new songs and transitions that had to do with friendship. Emily communicated students' strengths and
areas of growth with her cooperating teacher throughout the unit and adjusted her instructions to meet the needs of all students. Ms. Fuentes incorporated a variety of
modalities (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and tactile) throughout her lesson plans and was very adept at assessing and adjusting learning based on student performance.


Candidate to determine
how the Teacher Candidate
will meet this standard in
future evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 2: Learning Differences Score

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning strengths and needs and create 100
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 100
accessible to English language students and for evaluating and supporting their development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning differences or needs. 95
Evidence
Emily created a pre and post assessment on characters. Students would listen to a story and a subsequent lesson characters, and then draw a character from the story. During
the week she created an ongoing anchor chart with the students where they put examples of characters from the stories they read during the week. At the end of the week she
asked them to draw a character from the story and compared the pre and post data. She used the data from the assessments to pull small groups of students to address and
strengthen specific skill areas. Emily made a habit of regularly stopping during read alouds to introduce new vocabulary and discuss the words with students. She added the
new vocabulary words to the class word wall along with pictures to assist students with identifying each new word.


Candidate to determine how
the Teacher Candidate will
meet this standard in future
evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 3: Learning Environments Score

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, allocating, and coordinating 100
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 100
backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning environment.
Evidence
Ms .Fuentes always used physical and/or musical transitions for students when coming to the carpet. She also used excellent questioning techniques and strategies to
check for understanding as each student was dismissed to choice time. This was an excellent example of informal observation! Emily used sign language to to
communicate with and redirect students. She made sure to always remind the class in the morning of the rules, using the corresponding matching sign as a visual reminder.
Students know all of the signs and acknowledged the rule when she would redirect them. Emily is a natural teacher and demonstrates outstanding management. She is
able to capture student interest and attention, keep students engaged, and redirect as necessary.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar concepts, and make connections 100
to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and relevance for all students.
98
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their content area. 98
Evidence
Emily consistently used real world application to gain attention and check for prior knowledge in the beginning of her lessons. Students were easy to participate and share
experiences, which she would weave into the lesson. She also used real world application to help promote problem solving skills. Ms. Fuentes used the Smartboard daily
for calendar activities and Chromebooks were available to students during choice time. Students regularly used Starfall, a developmentally appropriate site for
preschoolers. Emily set up sign in sheets and timers so that all students could have an opportunity using the technology at choice time, if there were interested.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 5: Application of Content Score

5.1
Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens of interdisciplinary themes 100
(e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy).
5.2
Teacher candidates facilitate students’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand their understanding of local 100
and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Keeping in mind that the class was beginning a unit study on buildings, Emily took pictures of the students in front of their homes during home visits. She then posted them
on the study board so that students each had a personal connection to the study. Ms. Fuentes also found pictures of buildings from around the world and taught a lesson on
building diversity. She provided a variety of creative ideas for this particular unit as well as applying content knowledge to real-world connections throughout her experience
in this placement.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 6: Assessment Score

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and minimize sources of bias that can 100
distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to understand each student’s 100
progress and to guide planning.
6.3
Teacher candidates prepare all students for the demands of particular assessment formats and make appropriate modifications in 100
assessments or testing conditions especially for students with disabilities and language learning needs.
Evidence
Emily created a pre and post assessment on characters where students drew a picture of a character on Monday and then again on Friday. She used the data from the
assessments to pull small groups of students to address and strengthen specific skill areas. When working on a comprehension activity, students listened to a read aloud (It
Looked Like Spilt Milk) while props were used to show each part of the story. At the conclusion of the story, students were able to retell the story using the props. Emily has
used a variety of modalities throughout her instruction to engage students and increase performance. She is keenly aware of student needs and is able to quickly monitor
and adjust instruction as needed.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score

7.1
Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student’s learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and accommodations, resources, 100
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 demonstrate knowledge and 100
skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student knowledge, and student 98
interest.
Evidence
Ms. Fuentes planned her lessons with each student's weekly goals in mind. She used the goal page and then planned lessons, materials, and small groups based on each of
those needs. For example, two students in the classroom were working on communication skills, so Emily created and played a game of memory with them. She asked them
to identify the picture before they could turn it back over. This was an outstanding activity for these students!


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score

8.1
Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) in relation to the content, 95
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, evaluate, and apply 98
information.
8.3
Teacher candidates ask questions to stimulate discussion that serve different purposes (e.g., probing for student understanding, helping 100
students articulate their ideas and thinking processes, stimulating curiosity, and helping students to question).
Evidence
Emily used read alouds regularly to create higher level thinking through her outstanding questioning techniques. She does an impeccable job of asking questions that promote
problem solving and critical thinking, instead of solving problems for the students.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score

9.1
Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, teacher candidates use a variety of data (e.g., systematic observation, information 98
about students, and research) to evaluate the outcomes of teaching and learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the school, as supports for 100
analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Ms. Fuentes invited a friend to come and speak to the class about basketball when they were doing a study on balls. She was also instrumental in assisting her cooperating
teacher invite special guests to visit the classroom and share experiences. Emily is not afraid to ask questions or seek feedback. She is reflective and always eager and
willing to accept suggestion and implement them. Ms. Fuentes clearly recognizes and values the importance of reflection for continued professional development and growth.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score

10.1
Teacher candidates use technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to build local and global learning communities that 100
engage students, families, and colleagues.
10.2
Teacher candidates advocate to meet the needs of students, to strengthen the learning environment, and to enact system change. 98
Evidence
Emily personally bought and brought in a variety of balls to help the students have a hands-on experience during their ball study to ensure they had the necessary resources
and opportunities to support their learning. She consistently made modifications and accommodations where/when necessary to meet individual needs and help each child
succeed.

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

evaluations)
No Evidence 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
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. 100
Evidence
Emily demonstrates a clear understanding of her impact on student learning. She did an excellent job of creating units from start to finish that centered around friendship and
new student introductions. She was able to assess in several different ways. She created and administered a pre and post assessment as well as informal assessments with
observations and anecdotal notes. Emily used prior anecdotal data to guide and drive her instruction, and then wrote and scored new anecdotes through informal classroom
observation. She has done an outstanding job and is a natural teacher!

INSTRUCTIONS
Please review the "Total Scored Percentage" for accuracy and add any attachments before completing the "Agreement and Signature" section.
98.96 %
Total Scored Percentage:
ATTACHMENTS
Clinical Practice Time Log:
(Required)
(The GCU Faculty Supervisors should not submit the final evaluation until
the Teacher Candidate has completed the number of days required by
their program)
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

Debbie Hurst
Debbie Hurst (Mar 4, 2020) Mar 4, 2020

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Dual Placement Encrypted - 2

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 - Dual Placement Encrypted - 2

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2D

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Bachelor of Science in Early Childhood Education

ECH-480 1/6/2020 3/1/2020

Cactus Wren Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score

Emily Fuentes 20361154

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Emily Fuentes 20361154

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Potrebbero piacerti anche