Points 93.48: Clinical Practice Evaluation 2S

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Samantha Swerda 20540296

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 9/14/2020 1/10/2021

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

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Georgia
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Tracey Stockdale
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Stacy Bonner
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 93.48 points 93.48 %
25 2,500.00 2337 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 100 0 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’ 94 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 92
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. )
Cooperating Teacher Ms. Tracy Stockdale, GCU Faculty Supervisor Ms. Stacy Bonner and Ms. Samantha Swerda identified some of Ms. Swerda's work in these Standards:
- Samantha has been taking the diverse needs of our learners into account when she is delivering and planning lessons. She
incorporates many hands-on activities and movement so that our learners are continually getting the movement they need.
Being back in the school, the students are spending a lot of time sitting at their desks, so movement breaks are a must. Samantha
is currently teaching a life science unit, one where the kiddos have been acting out vocabulary words and raising living creatures.
Samantha is always asking the students what they are interested in and tries to incorporate some of their interests into our classroom.


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 95 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 93 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 93 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
Cooperating Teacher Ms. Tracy Stockdale, GCU Faculty Supervisor Ms. Stacy Bonner and Ms. Samantha Swerda identified some of Ms. Swerda's work in these Standards
- Samantha collaborates with the second grade team to ensure that she is incorporating various learning strategies and styles in her daily instruction. As mentioned above, she
includes many hands-on activities. Samantha changes up her instruction in response to students needs. For example, if the students are needing a break, she will add activity.
This past week she had the students act out their phonics/spelling words. Samantha collaborates with the special education teacher to ensure the students are making growth
and have access to everything they need. We have one ESOL student in our class and will be collaborating with the ESOL teacher soon. Samantha uses various strategies to
meet the diverse needs of that student, including picture clues and schedules.


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, 93 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
95
1.00
environment.
Evidence
Samantha set up the classroom when we returned to the brick and mortar learning environment. She used her knowledge of the students to create a seating chart. When
new students have arrived, she allocates for the needed resources that they need. Samantha uses a variety of attention getting techniques, including hand signals to get the
students' attention. She is continually doing "thumbs up, thumbs, down, thumbs sideways" temperature checks to assess the students learning and ensuring that they feel
comfortable answering the question. The students hold their thumbs to their chest as it is only between the teacher and the student. Samantha is teaching a reading unit on
fairy tales from around the world. This gives her a chance to bring in a variety of cultural backgrounds, making connections to our diverse group of learn


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 95 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 92 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 95 1.00
content area.
Evidence
Cooperating Teacher Ms. Tracy Stockdale, GCU Faculty Supervisor Ms. Stacy Bonner and Ms. Samantha Swerda identified some of Ms. Swerda's work in these
Standards:
Samantha is always incorporating ways for the students to access academic language. This week she did a great lesson on shades of meaning of words. In science,
Samantha took the students outside to demonstrate the word drift. She had the students make paper seeds and let them go, talking about how they drift. In our life
science unit, Samantha will be having the students act out and learn academic language. Samantha has also had the students "turn and talk" with their desk partner.
They practice their speaking and listening skills. Before the lessons begin, she always goes over the standards and taps into the students prior knowledge. What do you
remember about? Samantha brings in extra ideas and resources. We will be adding more technology as the computers come out of quarantine! She has designed
powerpoint/Google


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 92 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Now that we are back in the classroom, Samantha will have more opportunities to engage students in real-world problems. We have been including a variety of cultural
perspectives through our reading and social studies unit. Our math curriculum entails a variety of real-world story problems, which we can start to incorporate into the daily
routine. This was hard during our remote learning because we had such a limited time with the students each day in each curricular area. Samantha is currently teaching a
personal narrative unit, where the students have to be able to show that they have learned a lesson from their personal story. As the students are writing, they will be using
their knowledge to relate it to the real-world problem.


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 95
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 95 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 95 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
If there is one thing our school is good at, it is looking and analyzing data. Samantha gives the assessments that our district has designed. The district has a committee to create
them. After they are given, Samantha grades them using the designated rubrics and adds the scores to the spreadsheets. She then looks for trends among the second grade
learners. Samantha collaborates with the special education teacher to ensure that the students are getting the proper accommodations for the learners.


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 92 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 95 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 95 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Samantha will be starting to differentiate more of her lessons. We spent the last two weeks setting the stage for the learners. Samantha uses the formative assessment and
unit check-ins to create her lessons. She recently graded the summative assessments and found gaps in the learning that she will work to close through small group
intervention. Samantha has attended our STAR meetings and helped pick out a few interventions for struggling readers (sight words).


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 93 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,
95
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Samantha is always questioning and asking the students to share their thinking. She often gives students “think time” and ensures more than one student is able to share out
their strategies. Samantha is able to instruct the students, but at the same time take a moment to facilitate the students' learning. She does a great job with class discussions.
We will be continuing to add more and more technology as we gain access to it. However, Samantha does incorporate a variety tools to access and evaluate student learning-
especially during our remote learning status


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 95
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 93 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Samantha is always collaborating with the team. She attends focused collaboration two times a week and everything discussed revolves around data. We discuss students
reading levels, scores on assessments, and formative/summative school assessments. Samantha also uses learning logs to document student learning. She has a reading,
science, and math learning log for the students. Once a week Samantha encourages the students to "Show Their Shine", giving them an opportunity to share in and celebrate
their learning!


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 92 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 93 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
We are working on using technology to communicate with stakeholders. Samantha does communicate with colleagues via technology and attends our professional
development days in which she is able to collaborate with stakeholders from other schools. Samantha is starting to attend our IEP meetings. She recently attending a special
education meeting. Samantha is always meeting with me to discuss concerns about students that she may have.

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. 92 1.00
Evidence
- Ms. Swerda demonstrates an understanding the her professional growth will have a positive impact on her students' learning.

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

93.48 %
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

Stacy Bonner
Stacy Bonner (Oct 27, 2020 12:17 PDT) Oct 27, 2020

Points 93.48: Clinical Practice Evaluation 2S

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Points 93.48: Clinical Practice Evaluation 2S

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

Points 93.48: Clinical Practice Evaluation 2S

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 9/14/2020 1/10/2021

McBride Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Samantha Swerda 20540296

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

You might also like