Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement Part 1 - Signed

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Vicky Dessources 20539776

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Master of Education in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-590 1/30/2020 5/13/2020

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Hollywood Park Elementary School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Florida
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Elena Cardet-Carrion
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Gwendolyn Johnson
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 86.6 points 86.6 %
25 2,500.00 2165 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 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 85
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. )
The teacher candidate has been doing well planning instruction with the department and cooperating teacher. Lessons are taught according to student's ability levels. She
planned and taught a lesson she created that was appropriate and followed the school curriculum. She took into account the students’ strengths, interests, and needs of the
students by creating visuals, provided a video, and the use of technology.


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 85 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 85 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
The teacher candidate works closely with her cooperating teacher to promote learner growth and development to all learners, including her diverse students. She taught a lesson
on perimeter and area of a rectangle, discussed the steps, providing the formula to find the length times the width. She started explaining the steps, and demonstrated the
process as she worked several problems.


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, 90 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
The teacher candidate manages the learning environment to demonstrate their learning. She is doing an excellent job engaging students throughout the school day.
Students are actively engaged in the lesson. She uses verbal and nonverbal cues to let students know when they are doing a good job or need to be redirected. She is
respectful to all students at all times by conversing with them on a one-to-one level. Students who are struggling the teacher candidate will work with them in a small group
setting.


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 85 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 85 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 85 1.00
content area.
Evidence
The teacher candidate makes an effort to review and link new information to all lessons. She does her research to find resources to help all students learn and practice.
She engages in quality discussions with her students to use prior knowledge to attain learning of targeted goals.


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 80 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 80 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
The teacher candidate accesses resources, supports, and specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning differences or needs by engaging in conversations
with staff, and reviewing test data. The teacher candidate has incorporated many opportunities for students to learn about different cultures as she focuses on their
similarities.


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 85
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
The teacher candidate has spent a lot of time working with the department looking at classroom data. She uses pre-assessment data to determine student's a point of reference in
the lesson. She has come up with many strategies to help students based on the data.


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 90 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
The teacher candidate is doing well with planning instruction based on learning goals, strategies and data. She is continuing to work on bringing rigor with her lessons. The
teacher candidate remains with the cooperating teacher to meet with grade level teachers after school to discuss how they will introduce a lesson utilizing the KWL chart and
graphic organizers to determine what student's needs are. She uses the district pacing guide to to keep students on track.


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 90 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, 90 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
The teacher candidate continues to work on varying her role in the instructional process as instructor, facilitator, coach, and audience. The teacher candidate ask open-ended
questions and do partner discussions with classmates to discuss and share their ideas.


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 85
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 85 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
The teacher candidate meets with our PLC (Professional Learning Community) team and grade level team to discuss data and plans with cooperating teacher instruction
based off need. She contributes to the group and takes what is discussed and distributed and uses it in the classroom. She has a very professional attitude.


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 90 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
The teacher candidate meets the needs of our students by using a variety of teaching practices such as whole group and small group instruction. She uses resources and
technology and students are paired in many different ways depending on the lesson/information being taught. She is definitely an advocate for the children and in our
meetings with our grade level team, she always speaks up when needed. If a student needs additional support, she is comfortable doing that on her own. She is strong in
classroom management and that is a big help when it comes to strengthening the learning environment. She does not allow things to interrupt the learning of other students..

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
The teacher candidate loves her role as educator. She is a life-long learner and works extremely hard in preparing herself so that she can impart her knowledge to meet the
needs of her students.Preparing student today will help to better prepare them for the future.

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

86.6 %
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

Dr. Gwendolyn Johnson
Dr. Gwendolyn Johnson (May 17, 2020) May 17, 2020

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - Single Placement Part 1 - Signed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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 Part 1 - Signed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Master of Education in Elementary Education

ELM-590 1/30/2020 5/13/2020

Hollywood Park Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Vicky Dessources 20539776

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

You might also like