Clinical Practice Evaluation 3

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
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:
137.76 points
EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 91.84 %
25.00 2,500.00 2,296.00 150
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 150 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 93
learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 1.00
90
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. )
Mr. Robinson lesson plan clearly showed that he allows for individual student needs for each lesson. He addressed special populations in this lesson plan (i.e. 504, Sped) He
allows additional time to complete written work This lesson specifically was of high interest to his class since his class is very diverse. He collaborates with his Cooperating
teachers to share ideas, activities, and resources.


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
94
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 86
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
He observed and monitored all students during the lesson. He planned for students to have opportunities to speak, read, and write throughout the lesson, and it was
implemented as it was planned. He put more academic vocabulary in the lesson plan that was done during the lesson. He used vocabulary in his lesson as did the students.
He used a PowerPoint, and had the student read a Malcomb X speech prior to this lesson so they souls have a frame of reference for the class.


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
He designated an appropriate amount of time and resources for this lesson. Students did most of their work in small collaborative groups. A large amount of time was
given to share their opinions, views, and ideas. Mr. Robinson used guided questions to get them to share differing perspectives and demonstrate tolerance.
John Robinson II
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ 20362132
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
The students had been given an assignment to read before class to prepare for the discussion. The warm-up activity was answering questions based on that material.
They broke into groups for the lesson after the warm-up. They had to come up with questions about what they had read. Students were given time to collaborate and write
down questions to be shared out in large group discussions. Mr. Robinson asked how their answers connected with prior learning or personal experiences. Students
shared responses. Academic vocabulary was used by the teacher as well as students. It would be good to have them listed on the board, or given to students. Again, the
ac academic vocabulary in the lesson plan was for the whole unit of study, not just this one lesson.
Give students academic vocabulary as a warm up or an exit ticket. This can be writing the definition, matching the word to the definition, or hands on activities)


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
This is an area where Mr. Robinson excelled. He frequently guides students to relate the learning to real work experiences. Students openly shared their thoughts,
ideas, and experiences with their classmates. Mr. Robinson also shares his life experiences on a specific topic when it is appropriate. He has an excellent working
relationship with his students and does a great job of engaging them in the content and discussions


evaluations)
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 80 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 80 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
He used classroom monitoring to assess small group discussions and validate the participation of all students. He asked questions and called on specific students to check
for understanding. He ended class by asking a series of questions to address the Essential Question for the lesson and had students raise their hands to show their answer.
The lesson was relevant to the students, many students shared experiences from their own culture as examples. The diversity of the class lent itself to students giving
diverse cultural points of view.


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 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 90 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Mr. Robinson uses the GCU planning template, and he follows his lesson plan. His plans include activities that align directly with the learning objective. He did get assessment
data from all learnings during this lesson in several ways: oral responses, written response, and raising hands.


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) 90 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, 87 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, 92 1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
: Mrs. Robinson was primarily an instructor and facilitator throughout this lesson. However, Mr. Robinson did use accommodations for disabilities, language needs and/or
different learning styles.


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
Mr. Robinson meets regularly with his Cooperating Teacher and keeps is GCU faculty Advisor update on his status. His courses with GCU is his primary professional learning
community, and his Cooperating teacher is providing support for lesson feedback and resources. Mr. Robinson wants feedback and strives to become a stronger teacher
throughout this process. He welcomes recommendations for improvement.


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 93
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
: Due to the COVID-19 issues, and schools being closed, Mr. Robinson relies on using his computer and telephone to communicate with students, Cooperating Teacher and
Field Supervisor. He is diligent about communicating with all.
Have home/ online assignments include the use of technology, if possible (. i.e. create a 4 slide PowerPoint about Malcolm X or MLK.; have them search the internet to find an
article about MLK. Write major points in the article and include the citation.)

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

91.84 %
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

Sharron Miles
Sharron Miles (May 3, 2020) May 3, 2020

Clinical Practice Evaluation 3 - Signed

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 3 - Signed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

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

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

You might also like