CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

PROGRAM:
Master of Education in Secondary Education

SEC-590
COURSE: START DATE: 1/5/2023 END DATE: 4/19/2023

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME:

Graham Kapowsin High School

Washington
SCHOOL STATE:

Sarah Eschmeyer
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME:

GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME:

Paul Oisboid

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS
87.88

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide
No Evidence
(The GCU Faculty
Supervisor should create a
plan with the Teacher
Candidate to determine
how the Teacher Candidate
will meet this standard in
future evaluations)
No Evidence
There is no evidence that
the performance of the
Teacher Candidate met this
standard or expectations
for a Teacher Candidate
during student teaching.
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson
Ineffective
(Teacher Candidates within
this range require a
Professional Growth Plan)
0 to 49
The performance of the
Teacher Candidate is
insufficient in meeting this
standard and expectations
for a Teacher Candidate
during student teaching.
Foundational
(Teacher Candidates within
this range require a
Professional Growth Plan)
50 to 69
The performance of the
Teacher Candidate is
underdeveloped in meeting
this standard and
expectations for a Teacher
Candidate during student
teaching.
Emerging
(Teacher Candidates within
this range may benefit from a
Professional Growth Plan)
70 to 79
The performance of the
Teacher Candidate is
developing in meeting this
standard and expectations for
a Teacher Candidate during
student teaching.
CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
STUDENT NUMBER 20841249
Proficient Distinguished
(Target level for Teacher (Usually reserved for master
Candidates) Teacher Candidates)
80 to 92 93 to 100
The performance of the The performance of the
Teacher Candidate meets Teacher Candidate
this standard and consistently exceeds this
expectations for a Teacher standard and all
Candidate during student expectations for a Teacher
teaching. Candidate during student
teaching.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

1.1
Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students’ 87
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 86
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. )

Ms. Nichelson is creating her own units based on district standards. She actively researches different ideas online and through collaboration with her mentors and
colleagues. She has incorporated a variety of outside materials such as music, art, pictures, videos and other forms of technology to augment her instruction. In
the observed lesson she read an elegy and then led a discussion regarding it. This discussion ranged from meaning to how it was written. This led into the
assignment of reading, interpreting and writing individual elegies.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

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
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 88
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 88
differences or needs.
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. )

Vocabulary plays an important role in the teaching of elegies and poetry. She reviews the vocabulary throughout the direct instructional phase of the class either
reiterating definitions or having the students share their understanding. She has allowed all students the opportunity to either submit work electronically or by hard
copy, whichever they felt most comfortable doing. Students requiring accommodations are provided such while those who are higher level are given "more
challenging prompts." What is very obvious about the way Ms. Nichelson interacts in the classroom is that she does not sit down at anytime. While the students are
working individually she is in constant motion assisting or checking in with each student.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, 88
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 88
responsiveness to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning
environment.
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. )

Definite progress has been observed in this area during this lesson. There is very little talking out during the period with the students waiting to be called on. When
they were working individually she was able to bring the class back to her by using nonverbal techniques. She is very calm (except for the dances!!) and
demonstrates respect for every student in the class. It is obvious that her respect towards the students is being reciprocated by them back to her.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar 88
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 88
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 87
content area.
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. )

Ms. Nichelson shared that she spends quite a bit of time looking for additional resources that her students would appreciate. Whether it be an elegy that they might
truly enjoy hearing or watching a video that reinforces instruction. Units begin with a review of previously taught material focusing on pertinent vocabulary words
that will also be used in the current unit. Students are given the opportunity to work on their own, with a partner or in groups throughout the unit.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

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 87
interdisciplinary themes (e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy).
5.2
Teacher candidates facilitate students’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand 87
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
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. )

Students are given numerous opportunities to share personal experiences that relate to the instructional content. Ms. Nichelson will lead a discussion towards how certain aspects
of what they are learning either play a role in their outside lives or relate to materials being taught in other classes. She chose five different elegies for the students to review and
analyze prior to writing their own.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and minimize 88
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 88
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 88
appropriate modifications in assessments or testing conditions especially for students with disabilities and
language learning needs.
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. )

For this unit the students will have to write their own elegy either using the tone of their choice. There are additional tasks that have to be completed and it is an all or
nothing grade. It will be interesting to find out how many students complete the requirements to get the all grade and how many do not. She has shared that she will
meet with her mentors to review the submitted work and discuss possible modifications of instructional delivery.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

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 88
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 88
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 88
knowledge, and student interest.
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. )
As previously mentioned, Ms. Nichelson meets daily with her mentors to reflect on that day's lesson. They review techniques used, whether they were successful,
how understanding was checked and what modifications might be needed in the future. Ms. Nichelson is using a number of delivery methods for each class to
determine which method works best for that group of students whether it be direct instruction, overhead, computer etc.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

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 88
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, 88
evaluate, and apply information.
8.3
Teacher candidates ask questions to stimulate discussion that serve different purposes (e.g., probing for 89
student understanding, helping students articulate their ideas and thinking processes, stimulating curiosity,
and helping students to question).
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. )

During this observed lesson, Ms. Nichelson started out as the instructor/facilitator. She shared an elegy and then led a discussion on it's meaning and how it was
written. When students would answer she would regularly ask a follow up question. It was nice for this observer to see the students get more interested in the
meaning of the elegy as the discussion progressed. Later in the period students were given time to work on their unit projects. Ms. Nichelson shared that she was
able to determine that her students were not as interested in the presented elegy as they were the day before when she shared a personal story. It is nice to see her
able to adjust her plans on the spot when noticing students losing focus.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

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
89
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 89
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
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. )

Ms. Nichelson and her mentor both shared that Ms. Nichelson works closely with her mentors and her departmental colleagues on a regular basis. She apparently
is always asking questions, borrowing ideas and to review unit plans.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

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 89
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 89
enact system change.
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. )

Ms. Nichelson, as also stated before, uses as much technology as she can. She first determines which class benefits from the use of technology (and how much) and
incorporates it into her instruction. This is evident from the current unit where the students have the option of submitting all assignments electronically or on
paper. Her interactions with her students demonstrate how she wants them all to succeed to the best of their ability but understanding that she might not be able
to reach all of them.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

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. 87

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. )

Ms. Nichelson is quickly finding out what kind of teacher she wants to be. Her comfort level in the class has become very noticeable as she is very happy working with her students.
Given time and experience she will become an excellent teacher and will impact (is impacting) students every day.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME Elizabeth Nichelson STUDENT NUMBER 20841249

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

Total Scored Percentage:

87.88 %
ATTACHMENTS

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

Paul Oisboid esigned on Thursday, March 2, 2023 3:15 PM
 ttl
t-lt i
14 0)
qJ
f

iE
liE I
i I

I
>t..

I
I
€) g)
lH 4)
:. \t)
1,,,: I
i EI
{) I
i,
l:l I
I
I 6l I

1.. q) E I
6)
I -.-t
I 'N lH
Its
{,
>in a! I

I
i
() qJ
cc) i
(J
lli' lr rEd o *r,l
It ! !o >.+ i

I 13 L
l
G
ls
1..- ,61 lfr :
q}
ii
ia'! -,lH
iF. f -s.lH
td ! ',th
frt
u-
g
>c? *.) o ($

'-
latl
-
el-' I

I=E ii(
^i
tE E ':)
E)
(9
>cI 0
!t
i

lF -,t
i
J

it ,fiH i3 "; i-J

I
rt)
t) r- i

>- (!)
I
6J
lB
rtr;"it lu
-1(,
i-j--_]--
lB tI
r
.:(
(U
q) I

I ()

iit t)
B= I k

lil 0
C)

&E)
q
cc
I
k d
d)
Jlr
rll
I
6
{) o
B-
I

lil 6
i
bo
Ill-+t lroi
\1
xk I
lcc
til o
(,
;j,
<)1r
N
.v
,/\ ?
llzl ><
I

B* N _.u }<1 6t
r.l d
i
i! U
t() ai at
I
i ili
*1 >t
ILI .- g 4i
i! i U
AJ,,
"A r.J E
L
(J a
L

X X X X ln
{,'ilFr
?.:iF (n
I r\ qt
-I
)( I
iil< w1 r E
| -tl dn -, i2E o, bD .grIbt &
I Ui Olc- t- t\l cJ tt {t)
77 (t) a ;f
i -(i
!i Yl3 S x
(]i
us !i I
I

X X X X f,- x U i
ilil
6)
(J
ls i- \B :JN ) t.s
I

I
I
I Q
(} I
I
(G
(J
E I
a irY) $ft
€-
X XX itil U
I

iEiliEHru NN' i

F Nl8
A
sd
i(,FsfilU
E
I
c)
{,
F* $
=c$
ntt
>< >< IJI h lI
I
I
!

{<
N} N]
.-ra]
I
o rJJ

-t -; Xi X X ,/ X
it
I
I
I i I
a c.l
L
ti
L
I
q)
q) I () r{
ln B
I I
I I

"i B.* I L'

>!
ii
I
I
I o
"i
JJ
I t
t* ta
{i }- I (l)
I I

() X xl )
tfi
ia
I

{,
t)
(}
B* *.)FJ
a-> ..{) -1_
I () I
I
I
I

t.-,-t
lH 11 ''9,
I
i
I
\^l.
st e
a

#
a! I I
B
Y
i
u -9i c) I
l

s
I
rlF H al) I

B* 491
()
s.5
H=d U ,\ /\ X lo I

()
l c]
dl, 4 ::q)
I I
--)
s iHn c)
I I

*B
..1Afr
d,? & 6)>:
X XX
!
i
6)9) L.Z - ryf:
ao^
(J.{"
F6G E HE,H
Z,Z
o-
U
g)
iD rlq 5
{) x -"! er!:!'
c) 6,
g
a I I

(}
Q

'. SS \ri cto <D ai

z G3 6
()'=i trl'' (t) 5 U a, *
--v
d 6)-=
.EB r
o €flHJ! 6
6 o .E
dr 0 o. (lt
L.; z
p
-r)o
* utE
lU 'Il3 Uu trl
H @
6

o o
{,
13
o
d
t
uQ
(r
-98
G'^-d
g.E
6 l.(!) z{)
6! .?
k
U
s Hir B n 2 F
d: 5
()t-Ji o d
t1;)

dE F.n F I& HO
6
() E
E" (t)

ri ,tt d)

3z Br$ ;v
TA
a) F" F(
H tsle 3.^
d= o0
i.i !{ g 6
<:
EE-
Or>O (I).
U 3
d=, H € L . EE z a) d
L k 3
zfla'iH: E10 EE tsTI E T ;;,;"e 6'
() d) t&
t!, Eo
o (0 ()
n
Hqe-di
EE "a? x_,
(J IT
L)-
frl
!, TEigE EEg
ds
{E tE
6
]i
=
?
=
Eu
trB 5E d o f i
F.
EO
u)( Ir
o o
(J