Clinical Practice Evaluation 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Cody Bruno 20319792

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 8/12/2019 11/24/2019

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Mesquite Elementary School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Arizona
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Margaret Wootten
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Tami Powell
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 88.52 points 88.52 %
25 2,500.00 2213 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
100
0 0 0 0 0
Cody Bruno 20319792

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’ 90 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 90
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. )
Cody uses multiple modalities to teach content. During the math lesson observed the students were prompted to use both a visual and auditory approach to complete word
problems. Cody also modeled the two modalities to the class.Throughout the whole group instruction Cody assessed and adjusted her lesson based on student's
performance.The cooperating teacher shared that Cody actively participates in the weekly grade level collaboration meetings.
Cody Bruno 20319792


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 89 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 88 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 88 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
Cody delivers instruction to meet the needs of each student in the class. During the math lesson she provided opportunities for students to demonstrate their learning in different
ways. Cody planned for students to read, write, listen and speak throughout the lesson.She consistently referred to academic vocabulary during her whole group instruction.
Cody Bruno 20319792


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, 88 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
90
1.00
environment.
Evidence
Cody provides opportunities for students to have whole group or partner discussions during lessons. She utilizes technology via Ladybug doc camera to visually guide
students through the lesson and model the expectations. The cooperating teacher shared that Cody is very aware of the different needs of the students in her class including
but not limited to cultural awareness and individual academic needs.
Cody Bruno 20319792


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 89 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 90 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 90 1.00
content area.
Evidence
Cody provides students opportunities to listen, respond, and participate in activities that involve academic language. She consistently demonstrated appropriate use of
academic vocabulary throughout her math lesson and respectfully corrected students when needed.
Cody Bruno 20319792


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 87 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 85 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Cody assessed learning objectives in a variety of ways. During whole group instruction she would ask open ended and thought provoking questions to check for
understanding. Cody also incorporated time for students to complete independent practice while she actively roamed throughout the room and observed student work. She
was able to identify individual students needing additional help.
Cody Bruno 20319792


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 87
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 87 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 88 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Cody participates in weekly grade level meetings to collaborate and examine overall grade level progress and to guide planning. She also participates in weekly meetings with
ELA and Math coaches to evaluate student assessment data and determine how to modify assessments or testing conditions based on student needs. The cooperating teacher
added that Cody follows the district assessments that are required as well as helping create her own informal assessments.
Cody Bruno 20319792


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 88 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 89 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 86 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Cody utilized spiraling of previous content within her math lesson leading to students mastering skills and concepts. The activities within the lesson were sequenced
appropriately and she provided multiple ways for students to demonstrate learning.
Cody Bruno 20319792


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 89 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, 89 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,
90
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Cody utilized open ended questions throughout the lesson to stimulate discussion. She provided appropriate wait time to allow students the opportunity to process their ideas
and articulate their thought process. Cody guides the class discussion and stimulates curiosity. The cooperating teacher shared that Cody uses a variety of strategies to try to
engage all students in learning.
Cody Bruno 20319792


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 89
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 89 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Cody utilizes formative and summative assessment data to drive instruction. She also includes informal observations during assigned independent practice to help identify
individual students that may need additional instruction. The cooperating teacher shared that Cody does not hesitate to ask for support when needed and encourages
feedback and guidance to support in her growth as a teacher.
Cody Bruno 20319792


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 89 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 89 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Cody believes strongly in her role as a student advocate. She is dedicated to creating a learning environment that meets the needs of all students in her classroom. The
cooperating teacher shared that Cody is interested in learning about the system and how she can help to make the system more effective.
Cody Bruno 20319792

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
Cody understands the impact she has on student learning. She utilizes the STEP process to plan her lessons and incorporates results from formative and summative
assessments required by the school district to ensure her lessons meet the needs of all students.
Cody Bruno 20319792

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

88.52 %
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

Tami Powell
Tami Powell (Oct 28, 2019) Oct 28, 2019

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Cody Bruno 20319792

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 8/12/2019 11/24/2019

Mesquite Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Cody Bruno 20319792

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Вам также может понравиться