Clinical Evaluation 3

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
Melanie Long 20506653

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 1/6/2020 4/19/2020

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Gateway Pointe Elementary

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Arizona
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Taylor McBride
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Kathleen Miller
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:
142.5 points
EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 95.00 %
25.00 2,500.00 2,375.00 150
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
150
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0
150

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 95
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. )
Ms. Long has been participating in team meetings since returning from spring break and the schools closures due to Covid-19. She is in constant communication with Ms.
McBride. the lesson observed was the final lesson on the 5C's that distinguish Arizona. Ms. Long used choral reading, pair share, and small group discussion. The
students completed a worksheet that referenced the reading and completed another page about climate. The students are working on an Arizona booklet.
On-line lessons recreated to meet the needs of the students while being equitable.


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 95
their development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular 95 1.00
learning differences or needs.
Evidence
Ms. Long designs, adapts and delivers instruction that address the needs of each student and relative to their learning differences. She spends time developing the
vocabulary that us required for success within the lesson and for prior and future knowledge.
Ms. Long uses a multitude os outside and on-line resources.


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
95
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
Ms. Long has exceptional classroom management tools. All students are held accountable. They know and understand what is expected of them in the classroom.
When a child answers a question wrong, Ms. Long figures out how to correct he student without making them self-conscious. Ex.. " Concrete is one of thee 5C's." Ms.
Longs suggested another approach and was quick to respond with,"That starts with "C",, too."
Melanie Long
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ 20506653
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 95 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 95 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in 95 1.00
their content area.
Evidence
Ms. Long linked the vocabulary to prior knowledge. During instruction, time is allowed for brainstorming, sharing, and using academic language. Students are given
appropriate tie to complete or nearly complete the lessons. There is time allowed for learning, practicing, and mastery of vocabulary and knowledge.
Ms. long uses the technologies awn hand to facilitate her lessons. (Doc Cam, Smart Board, laptops, desktops. ect.)


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 recent lessons on Arizona, enlightened the students about their home state. This lead to students looking for more information about Arizona. The presented
lessons discussions were about how the 5C's relate to our economy.


evaluations)
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 95 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 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
95 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Ms. Long has created lessons and assessments to match learning objectives as shown in the data. that has been reviewed by the team.
State Testing will not be done due to the Covid-19 school closures.


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 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
Ms. Long and Ms. McBride are choosing appropriate strategies to teach on-line. They ar working together. time is set aside or the trident to visit daily with the teachers using
Zoom. The students are submitting there work back to the teachers for assessment of mastery. During the first week of on-line instruction, the teachers reviewed skills, to
ave the students become familiar with the on-line format. The ey are still using prior data to plan Math and ELA lessons. They will be adding science the socially studies in
the upcoming weeks.


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) 95 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, 95 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, 95 1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Ms Long explains the skills and expectations within the lesson. She asks questions to guide the student to meet the lesson objectives. She observe the students as they
practice, share and collaborate within the group instruction. At the beginning of the lesson, Ms Long presented the students with a clear and concise essential question, he
Models and instructs using multiple learning skills, such as critical thinking, organization planning and time management. Ms. Long asked questions that involved student
recall of prior lessons during the week.


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
95
learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
1.00
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside 95
the school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
During the school closures,, Ms. Long continues to do the instruction. She meet with Ms. McBride, on-line, daily. Ms. McBride is ipresent during on-line class instruction.
They meet with the whole class daily for a noon meeting using Zoom.


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 95
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 95 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
While in the classroom, Ms. Long used the Doc Cam, laptops, r, and desktop computers. While teaching on-line, she is using on-line resources and Zoom. Ms. Long has
stated; I have to say, it is different teaching under these conditions. However, I am with an amazing group of third grade teachers and we are “rocking” this online teaching!
We used this week as a review week for the students to let them become comfortable and familiar with the online teaching. For s. McBrides and my class, we have used
Zoom meetings to “see” the students. We use this time to check in with the students, see how they are doing, let them share anything that they want (we did a show and tell
the last meeting, the students really enjoyed this!). The students have been submitting the work that they do for us through class dojo.

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

95.00 %
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

Kathleen Miller
Kathleen Miller (Apr 7, 2020) Apr 7, 2020
Melanie Longs Reflection on Video Lesson
Ms. Long submitted a video of a Lesson donee right before spring break.
Here are her reflections of the lesson.
Summary of Unit Implementation:

The unit was designed to meet some of the 3rd grade Arizona
standards for social studies. The students learned about the importance
of the 5 C’s; cattle, copper, cotton, citrus, and climate, that have shaped
the economy for Arizona. Throughout the lesson, students were able to
watch videos on the different 5 C’s of Arizona. Students utilized think-
pair-share to discuss concepts. I used a mix of direct instruction, group
work and individual work for the students. During times that we read an
article on one of the 5 C’s, the students choral read with me. This
ensured that the students were following along and also provided the
differentiation for the students that struggle with reading. Students also
worked in their cooperative groups to work on the activity sheet. The
activities were cumulative throughout the unit. Students created a
brochure that consists each of the 5 C’s. The students worked on it daily
to have a complete brochure by the end of the week. This unit was a
continuation of the previous week’s unit lesson introducing the Arizona
government and constitution for the students. Overall, the lesson
implementation went fairly well for the students. There were a few days
that as a class, we ran out of time to complete the brochure activity on
the lesson. We have built in time for the following week to allow the
students to complete the brochure of Arizona.
Summary of Student Learning:

Over the course of the week, the students have learned of the 5 C’s of
Arizona: cattle, copper, cotton, citrus, and climate. The students were
engaged in the lesson and seemed to enjoy the brochure activity. The
students had great discussions at their small groups and during whole group
instruction on what they thought how each of the 5 C’s helped Arizona’s
economy. The depth of knowledge questions that were implemented into the
brochure activity allowed the students to think deeper on how things affect
the economy.
Reflection of Video Recording:

Melanie Longs Reflection on Video Lesson
After reviewing the video of my social studies lesson, I have been able
to see what improvements that I can make to ensure that my future students are
actively engaged in the lesson that is being taught to them. Having the students
come to the carpet during direct instruction leads to less distractions than having
them sit at their desks. During the reading of the article, there are several
improvements that I could have made. I should have been up, walking around
while we were reading. This would allow me to hear the entire class, instead of
only the students closest to me. I should have also stopped after each paragraph
to encourage a discussion of what we read together. This would have helped the
students to review what they have read in smaller segments. During the think-
pair-share discussions, I should have walked towards the back groups to make
sure that they were on topic. As I continue to teach, I will utilize self-reflections
to see what was successful during the lesson and what could be improved upon.
I have to say, it is different teaching under these conditions. However, I am with

an amazing group of third grade teachers and we are “rocking” this online
teaching! We used this week as a review week for the students to let them
become comfortable and familiar with the online teaching. For Taylor and my
class, we have used Zoom meetings to “see” the students. We use this time to
check in with the students, see how they are doing, let them share anything that
they want (we did a show and tell the last meeting, the students really enjoyed
this!). The students have been submitting the work that they do for us through
class dojo.

Clinical Evaluation 3

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 Evaluation 3

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

Melanie Long 20506653

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 1/6/2020 4/19/2020

Gateway Pointe Elementary

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Melanie Long 20506653

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Melanie Long 20506653

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Melanie Long 20506653

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

Melanie Long 20506653

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Melanie Long 20506653

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Melanie Long 20506653

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Melanie Long 20506653

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Melanie Long 20506653

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Melanie Long 20506653

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Melanie Long 20506653

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Summary of Unit Implementation:

Summary of Student Learning:

Reflection of Video Recording:

I have to say, it is different teaching under these conditions. However, I am with

Potrebbero piacerti anche