Eval 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Lacey Sheeley 20489413

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 2/10/2020 5/24/2020

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Lura M. Sharp Elementary

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
New York
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Michelle Majerus
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Tasha Frigmanski
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 92.8 points 92.8 %
25 2,500.00 2320 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
100
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)
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’ 93 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 92
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. )
Teacher candidate demonstrates an understanding that students are individual in their development and needs, additionally she is mindful that students are approaching the
instruction with different strengths, weaknesses interests and background.The teacher candidate had the opportunity to attend regular meetings and collaborate with other
professionals in regards to students that were struggling behaviorally or academically. . She collaborates with other teachers in the school to find solutions to issues that arise
for students both in the school setting, and within the school community, She has been willing to stay after school hours to attend meetings to show support.


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 93 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 93 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 93 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
The teacher candidate uses a variety of resources and supports to help her meet the diverse needs in the learning environment. She worked closely with her mentor teacher on
how to meet the students needs. She has learned that students have very unique differences that require extra teacher support, accommodations or preferred working styles.
She is very mindful of these differences as she is developing teaching plans.


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, 94 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
93
1.00
environment.
Evidence
During the lesson, the teacher candidate did a great job managing the learning environment. It was a small group, but there were still some behaviors that needed attention.
The teacher candidate used a variety of behavioral strategies and a variety of other techniques to engage students and command their attention. Additionally, she allocated
equitable time to each student and answered questions as they came in, The teacher candidate understands that the classrooms is comprised of various diverse
backgrounds. She demonstrates sensitivity to all students and demonstrates respect for each student.


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 94 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 93 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 94 1.00
content area.
Evidence
Teacher candidate does a great job stimulating student previous learning and linking new concepts for students. She does a nice job on integrating supplementary
resources and technologies to ensure accessibility for students. During my observation, the teacher candidate provided review on concepts while using visuals to link
previous learning and make connections for students, as well as checking for student understanding which gave her insight on which students needed additional support
with the content.


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 91 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 92 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
This area was not observed first hand, however the mentor teacher provided information that the teacher candidate does a great job applying content knowledge through a
real world lens for students, as well as expanding student's understanding. She mentioned that he does a great job applying content in a way that students can relate to and
assisting students with understanding how perspectives can be different based on social and cultural differences. The teacher candidate also does a great job facilitating this
understanding and helping students create an approach to developing problem solving techniques for themselves instead of just giving them the answer.


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 90
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 91 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 90 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Teacher candidate uses a variety of assessment to aide in understanding each student's progress and guide instruction. Together with the cooperating teacher, the teacher
candidate analyze he data before planning for the next week. She uses the MobyMax website, which provides data from the work and skill level. She is also keeping track of
assignments outcomes, which helps her in knowing which students need a re-teach.


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 93 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 93 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 91 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
When the teacher candidate was asked about how she plans for instruction, she indicated that she takes into consideration a variety of questions, such as: Will the students
be able to understand this lesson? How can I help the struggling readers? How do I help the student with the IEP? Lastly, will this lesson be useful to the students?
She also takes into consideration any struggling readers or students with IEP's, so that she can provide the necessary accommodations. She also tries to ensure that in
addition to teaching the standards that she is making the lesson fun and exciting for the students to increase participation and engagement.


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 94 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, 94 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,
94
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
The teacher candidate uses a variety of instructional strategies to engage student and uses a variety of learning skills and technology to apply information. The teacher
candidate asks questions throughout the lesson to probe for understanding, and helping students articulate questions and ideas. During the lesson observation, the teacher
candidate used visuals to assist her with applying information and capturing the students attention. The teacher candidate is encouraged to continue to use multi-modalities
included both high and low tech for providing instruction to students to ensure access to all students.


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 94
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 93 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
The teacher candidate has participated in many facets of professional learning within her current placement. She attends weekly staff meetings, as well as meeting with her
mentor teacher throughout the week. The teacher candidate actively seeks opportunity that strengthens and grows her as a 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 94 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 94 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
The teacher candidate uses a variety of technological tools and communication strategies for building a learning community. Some of the ways in which she accomplishes this
is simply through working and engaging with students. She takes time to listen to what they have to tell her. She goes out of her way to make them feel important and valued.
She also provides communication to parents and encourages them to contact her whenever they have a question through email or school phone. The teacher candidate works
hard to strengthen the learning environment through building relationships with all stakeholders. Its important to her that she shows respect and understanding to everyone,
and feels that really goes a long way with building a strong community.

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
Teacher candidate demonstrates an understanding of their impact on student learning and development. Teacher candidate makes adjustments to instruction and practice
based on feedback from STEP, site supervisor, mentor teachers and her professional learning community. Teacher candidate is very open to new ideas that can impact
student learning, engagement, participation and overall success and development of students.

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

92.8 %
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

Dr. Tasha M. Frigmanski
Dr. Tasha M. Frigmanski (Mar 30, 2020) Mar 30, 2020

Eval 2

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

Eval 2

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 2/10/2020 5/24/2020

Lura M. Sharp Elementary

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Lacey Sheeley 20489413

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Potrebbero piacerti anche