Clinical Practice Evaluation 3

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
Olivia Peed 20463158

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 8/26/2019 12/8/2019

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Swift School
COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Alabama
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Jenny Jones
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Judith Kelly
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:
150 points
EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 100.00 %
25.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 150
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
150 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 100
learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 1.00
100
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. )
Olivia continues to excel in this realm. Her approach to teaching is energetic, hands-on, and organized. She is consistently prepared and goes above and beyond to ensure
that each student's learning goal's are met. Olivia's Cooperating Teacher provided excellent feedback in all pedagogical domains. The lessons that I observed show that she
is 100% on track. Please see the notes.


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
100
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 100
their development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular 100 1.00
learning differences or needs.
Evidence
This standard is satisfied. Please see the notes.


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
100
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 100
environment.
Evidence
Olivia Peed
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ 20463158
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 100 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 100 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in 100 1.00
their content area.
Evidence


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 100
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 100 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence


evaluations)
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 100 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 100 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
100 1
language learning needs.
Evidence


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 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 100 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 100 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence


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) 100 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, 100 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, 100 1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence


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
100
learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
1.00
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside 100
the school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence


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 100
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 100 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence

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

100.00 %
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

Judith Kelly
Judith Kelly (Oct 24, 2019) Oct 24, 2019
Clinical Practice Evaluation 3 – FOR FEEDBACK PURPOSES ONLY*
Formative Feedback Worksheet
* This form is not to be accepted by faculty for official scoring. The GCU Faculty Supervisor will submit
each official Clinical Practice Evaluation to GCU.
Clinical Practice Evaluation 3 again focuses on the InTASC standards. Please consider how the teacher candidate has
performed in relation to the following standards.
Standard 1: Student Development
1.1 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 learning.
1.2 Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote student
growth and development.
Evidence: Olivia continues to keep parents informed through the Remind App and sending home paper copies for
parents who do not have text capabilities. She also provides necessary information in Spanish format when necessary
for Non-English-speaking parents. She works side by side with our faculty and community in the development of
programs and assistance for students in areas academics as well as their well- being.
Standard 2: Learning Differences

2.1 Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning 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 strategies for
making content 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.
Evidence: She is immersed in all aspects of data that is collected for all students. She uses the accommodation
checklists that have been developed for ELL students, students with IEPs, students with 504 Plans, and students with
RTI intervention. Olivia also designs and adapts her lessons for unidentified students by providing them with a variety
of strategies that are geared to multiple learning styles. Olivia has made online reading services available to
accommodate ELL students when learning on the computer.
Standard 3: Learning Environments

3.1 Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by 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 responsiveness
to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning environment.
Evidence: Olivia stays on allocated time from the county/district level for each subject. She manages time between
centers while in Math and Reading. She allows students the opportunity for individual space when needed and group
spacing where applicable. Olivia continues to elevate her awareness of classroom management and addressing
behaviors when needed within the instructional time. She also has developed and implemented her own verbal and non-
verbal ques when managing the students throughout the school day. She is also mindful of students and their
socioeconomical backgrounds and hardships and how they bring those into their school environment.
Standard 4: Content Knowledge

4.1 Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar concepts,
and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2 Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and relevance
for all students.
© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

4.3 Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their
content area.
Evidence: Olivia consistently engages student background knowledge and experiences to tie meaning to their learning.
She is always on the look-out for new ideas/strategies that can be used to bring knowledge to students in a variety of
ways that is meaningful to them. Olivia does well modeling the strategies and concepts to students in a way they can
understand and retain the information.
Standard 5: Application of Content

5.1 Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens 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 their
understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence: Olivia is very involved with our school’s new mission to thorough cover patriotism within our school. She
also implements the Leader In Me program that is used across our school and system. She is focused on our move to
address the needs of the whole child. We also have placed new programs and awareness programs to engage parents in
all aspects of their child’s life and she is immersed in these as well. She also provides insight into future activities and
events that we could offer parents/community members to become more involved.
Standard 6: Assessment
6.1 Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 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
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 language learning needs.
Evidence: Olivia develops her assessments to mirror instruction ensuring validity of testing materials. Standards are
clearly stated and reviewed for each lesson. She then reflects on her lessons to ensure maximized learning for the
standard. After proper review of materials has been done, the assessment is then given. Olivia also uses state, county,
and school assessment data when planning her lessons. She also uses this information when planning intervention and
small group instruction. She is very thorough when planning her lessons/units and assessments. Within her lessons she
ensures necessary verbiage is included to mimic that of the test. Students review formats of test materials prior to the
final assessment.
Standard 7: Planning for Instruction

7.1 Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student’s learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and
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
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3 Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence: Olivia uses student inventories to gain knowledge of student interest and learning styles. She also uses
student conferences to learn more about the students and expectations for learning. Olivia develops her lessons using
the inventories, conferences, data, and observations to differentiate her instruction. This information is used for whole
group, small group, and intervention lessons. In small group and intervention, it is used to place students into groups
based on a variety of learning styles and needs. She also uses assessment reflection to make changes in lessons and
groups when and where needed.
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies

8.1 Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) 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, 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, and helping students
to question).
Evidence: She models standards for the students and then lets them apply them while facilitating their learning. She
steps in when further instruction is needed and listens to students as they explain their work. She sets high expectations
for student learning, reasoning, and reflecting. She incorporates a variety of tools for her instruction including multiple
uses of technology across the curriculum. Olivia probes students for understanding and uses her own experiences to
enable students to feel comfortable in doing so. She gives a variety of examples when explaining things which engages
student interest and triggers their own life experiences. This makes learning meaningful to students when they feel a
connection to the material being presented to them.
Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

9.1 Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, teacher candidates use a variety of data (e.g., systematic
observation, information 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 analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence: Olivia uses formative and summative assessments to evaluate student learning and drive future instruction.
She collects data to provide intervention services for areas of need. This data is also used to expand on student
strengths, thus increasing student expectations. Olivia is very reflective on her teaching and assessments and revises
her future plans and instruction where needed. She uses multiple resources to plan and implement high level instruction
that provides deeper thinking and meaning for students.
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration

10.1 Teacher candidates use technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to build local and 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 enact
system change.
Evidence: Olivia uses the Remind App, email, and parent forms to communicate information to the community, parents,
and colleagues. She utilizes the county translator for assistance in developing Spanish translated document. She keeps
parents with up to date information about student academics as well as meetings and events happening within the
school. Olivia routinely inquires and develops new ideas to assist students in all aspects of their learning experience.
Additional Feedback Areas Below

Overall Feedback
Strengths Opportunities for Growth Suggestions/Ideas to Implement

Provides graphic organizer within Setting expectations before starting Provide exit ticket or a small
lessons small groups will help troublesome review for small groups so they
students within group time will be held accountable thus
Models expectations for lessons
staying on task
Incorporates new materials into
lessons
Vocabulary highlighted throughout
lessons
Manages groups by moving
throughout the room
Uses manipulatives in lessons
Redirects students that are off task
Uses High Five non-verbal cue
Very prepared for lessons but
flexible when necessary
Time is well managed
Prompts students for more
information

Clinical Practice Evaluation 3

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 3

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

Olivia Peed 20463158

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 8/26/2019 12/8/2019

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Olivia Peed 20463158

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Olivia Peed 20463158

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Olivia Peed 20463158

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

Olivia Peed 20463158

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Olivia Peed 20463158

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Olivia Peed 20463158

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Olivia Peed 20463158

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Olivia Peed 20463158

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Olivia Peed 20463158

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Olivia Peed 20463158

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Standard 2: Learning Differences

Standard 3: Learning Environments

Standard 4: Content Knowledge

© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Standard 5: Application of Content

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration

Additional Feedback Areas Below

© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Strengths Opportunities for Growth Suggestions/Ideas to Implement

© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Вам также может понравиться