Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
John Robinson II 20362132

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Arts in History for Secondary Education

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

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
University High School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Texas
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Dan Pfleging
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Sharron Miles
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 87.48 points 87.48 %
25 2,500.00 2187 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 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’ 85 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 82
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. )
Lesson plans provided by Mr. Robinson had specific items that showed how he was going to differentiate for ELL, Sp.Ed., and Gifted students. In his video simulation, he
followed his plan. During the lesson he would talk to individual students were struggling and provide one on one assistance and resources.
While he and his family were on spring break they went to a yogurt shop, and one of his student was there.
The student approached Mr. Robinson and warmly greeted him and talked a few minutes. Mr.
Robinson was leased that his student knew him and came up and talked to him


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 87 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 85 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 82 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
Evidence: During the video lesson Mr. Robinson frequently checked for understanding and provided feedback regarding his instruction for the task assigned. He also provided
one on one help to students we were struggling.
the students need additional help were ELL students. One student who was new to the country came up at the end of class and was worried about getting the work done. He
reassured her that he was giving her additional time, he would be available to work with her, and he gave her Spanish/English dictionary to help her with words she did not
understand. He used a PowerPoint presentation with graphics and key points of the lesson for the students to follow along. He moved around the room as he discussed the
slides.


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, 87 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
Evidence: This is an area in which Mr. Robinson excelled. He facilitated this lesson and asked guided questions and verbal prompts to stimulate conversations by the
students, and solicit active participation by all students. Most students were on task and engaged. He did have to quietly approach a student who was texting on their phone
and asked her politely to put the phone away. The student completed and he thanked her and redirected the student back to the task.
When students broke into groups for a “think-pair-share”, they were compliant and actively working as a group, and Mr. Robinson walked around the room and monitored
their conversations. Throughout the lesson Mr. Robinson use positive comments to their answers. At the end of lesson students were sharing what they are proud of about
themselves. One student shared that he is into robotics and want to go to college and major in that. Mr. Robinson thanked him for sharing and told him that he has a skill that
he should be pro


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 87 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 87 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
Evidence: Mr. Robinson stated the objective of the lesson and also showed the main idea and graphics supporting the topics throughout the lesson. on the PowerPoint
presentation.
When students were offering responses to open-ended questions, he would restate it and then compliment the student with “Great job!” , “I totally agree!”, “Great
example! You are awesome!” Many times he would ask student to elaborate on their responses by saying “Tell me more.” When the class was looking at Chicano,
African-American, and pop culture murals Mr. Robinson asked the identify specific leaders, products and tell why they thought these were included in the mural. There
were very vigorous discussions about the murals.
The k academic vocabulary was presented and asked the student what the words meant. He allowed time for student to discuss the term and then he would summarize
the meaning. Academic vocabulary for the lesson included: Chicano Movement, mural, collage, express, literature, scientific


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 90 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 90 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Evidence: This whole lesson was personal and relevant to the students. The class is diverse with Hispanic and African Americans being the majority of the class. They were
very interested in the Chicano and African- American murals and had a lot of knowledge about the leaders and movements from the past. Their lesson also related to how
the COVID-19 is impacting them at this time.
The class started with a warm-up question where they were asked to explain what COVID-19 is and how it is affecting life locally, state-wide, nationally, and globally. Then
they were asked to think about another time in U.S. history where day-to-day life was disrupted.


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 86
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 85 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 85 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Evidence: Mr. Robinson walked around the room while presenting the lesson and during the “think-pair-share activity. He asked open-ended questions, called on students my
name to answer, and had them raise hands in they agreed.
While student did “think-pair-share” group work, they also had to write down their comments: (1`) their own personal thoughts about the topics (2) the comments made when the
team shared their thoughts, (3) comments made by other teams that were shared out to the whole group. Mr. Robinson would walk around and monitor their comments written
down during the discussions.


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 90 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 87 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Evidence: Mr. Robinson’s lesson plans were well done. It included: lesson summary and focus, Classroom and student grouping, State and National Learning standard for
this lesson, Targeted objectives, academic language, multiple means of engaging the students, extension activities, anticipatory set, teaching strategies (with each group
specified: i.e. ELL, SpEd, Gifted) Assessment strategies


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 91 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, 87 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
Evidence: Mr. Robinson used a lecture, a PowerPoint Presentation, acted as a facilitator by asking open-ended questions and encouraging students to respond. He coached
students if they gave partial answers to get them to extend their learning and clarification of their thoughts by asking “how” or “why”


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
Evidence: Mr. Robinson strives to connect with his students and the community at large. Due to COVID-19 and the shelter in place that we are experiencing, his best way to
stay connected is with phone calls and Zoom for virtual meetings. He is adept at using Zoom. He and his Cooperating teacher are actively providing online curriculum, lessons,
and support for their students.


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 87 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 90 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Evidence: Mr. Robinson is committed to having an impact on his students. He takes his relationships with the students and staff seriously and is professional in dealing with
all. The time and effort he takes in designing his lessons to get maximum student engagement is very good, and it shows in his lesson delivery. He frequently checked for
understanding in different ways, gave positive reinforcement for academic performance as well as behavior, corrected behavior in a respectful way one on one with the
student. He is highly motivated to succeed and accepts suggestions well. He is showing growth and he did include many of my suggestions from the first observation.

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. 91 1.00
Evidence
He frequently checked for understanding in different ways, gave positive reinforcement for academic performance as well as behavior and he corrected behavior in a
respectful way one on one with the student. He is highly motivated to succeed and accepts suggestions well. He is showing growth and he did include many of my
suggestions from the first observation.

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

87.48 %
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

Sharron Miles
Sharron Miles (Apr 24, 2020) Apr 24, 2020
Clinical Practice Time Log
15 Week Course
70 day requirement over the full experience.
Clinical Practice Time Log Directions:
Congratulations on your advancement to the final stage of your degree program: Student Teaching. We are dedicated to supporting you through this
process and to promote a positive and productive Student Teaching experience.
The purpose of Student Teaching is to help prepare innovative, reflective and creative, professional educators with high ethical and moral standards
who have the understanding, attitudes and skills necessary for effective teaching. During the Student Teaching placement the Teacher Candidate is also
enrolled in a Student Teaching course. The Student Teaching experience is a professional commitment that must be taken seriously.
Please be mindful of the following guidelines when completing the Clinical Practice Time Log:
• Fill out the Clinical Practice Time Log in entirety including:

o Teacher Candidate full name and ID number o GCU Program and placement information o
Name of the Cooperating Teacher and GCU Supervisor o Use the key to document each day in
the time period.
o Dates for made up time
• Print clearly or type. The signatures required at the bottom of the form may NOT be typed.
• The Time Log must be submitted to your GCU Faculty Supervisor to be submitted with Clinical Practice Evaluations #2 and #4.
• Do NOT take a picture of the Time Log, the GCU Faculty Supervisor will need a scanned copy to be attached to Clinical Practice Evaluations
#2 and #4.
The data entered into this document is subject to a verification audit. Candidates who engage in fabricating, falsifying, forging, altering, or
inventing information related to practicum/field experiences, internships, clinical practice, and/or any associated documentation may be subject
to sanctions for violating GCU academic integrity policies, which may include expulsion from GCU.
The GCU Faculty Supervisor will not submit Clinical Practice Evaluation #4 until the attendance day requirement has been met.
©2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

15 Week Course
SAMPLE

15 Week Course

15 Week Course
STUDENT NAME ( Last, First, Middle): STUDENT ID: PROGRAM OF STUDY: Bachelor of Arts in History
Robinson II, John, Alvin 20362132 for Secondary Education
PLACEMENT INFORMATION SCHOOL: GRADE:
DISTRICT: University High School 10th and 11th grades
Waco Independent School District
COOPERATING TEACHER NAME: START DATE: GCU SUPERVISOR NAME:
Daniel Pfleging 02/03/2020 Sharron Miles
KEY Present use: X= student contact or teacher contract day. Absent use: IW=inclement weather, DH=district holiday, IL = illness, O =
Other
WEEK Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Dates 02/03- 02/10- 02/17- 02/24- 03/02- 03/09- 03/16- 03/23- 03/30-
02/07 02/14 02/21 02/28 03/06 03/13 03/20 03/27 04/01
Monday
X X DH X X DH X X X
Tuesday X X X X X DH X X X
Wednesday X
X X X X X DH X X
Thursday X X X X X DH X X
Friday X X X X X DH X X
Days to be
made-up due 1 5
to absences
Cooperating
Teacher’s
Initials
Total Number of Days Completed: ____________________________________

15 Week Course
I hereby certify that the above mentioned GCU Teacher Candidate has completed the required weeks of Clinical Practice (Student Teaching):
Cooperating Teacher Name:_____________________________Signature: _______________________________Date: _______________

Teacher Candidate Name: _______John Robinson___________Signature: ______John Robinson_________Date: _04/1/20_______
GCU Faculty Supervisor Name: _________________________ Signature: _______________________________Date: _______________

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

John Robinson II 20362132

Bachelor of Arts in History for Secondary Education

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

University High School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

John Robinson II 20362132

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Clinical Practice Time Log Directions:

• Fill out the Clinical Practice Time Log in entirety including:

©2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

©2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

©2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Total Number of Days Completed: ____________________________________

©2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Cooperating Teacher Name:_____________________________Signature: _______________________________Date: _______________

©2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

You might also like

Cooperating Teacher Name:_____________Signature: _Date: _