CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

David Rothe 20910000

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME STUDENT NUMBER

Master of Education in Secondary Education

PROGRAM:

SEC-590 1/19/2023 5/3/2023

COURSE: START DATE: END DATE:

Rogers High School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME:

Washington
SCHOOL STATE:

Katherine Charters
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME:

Thomas Falash
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME:

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 143.64
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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.
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.
Proficient
(Target level for Teacher
Candidates)
80 to 92
The performance of the
Teacher Candidate meets
this standard and
expectations for a Teacher
Candidate during student
teaching.
Distinguished
(Usually reserved for master
Teacher Candidates)
93 to 100
The performance of the
Teacher Candidate
consistently exceeds this
standard and all expectations
for a Teacher Candidate
during student teaching.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

1.1
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 97
learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 96
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. )

The lesson design for the Greek Mythology unit addressed and accounted for the any special needs for all his students to participate in the planned activity. He
applied differentiated instructional activities, delivery, and individual assessment to assure students were able to show their understand of the expectations
demonstrating success and reflecting their understanding through utilizing video presentation, group discussion, and primary source documents to find evidence
and delineate their opinion and findings in a writing closure activity.

He utilized a variety of instructional techniques and guided instruction to help students work toward achieving understanding toward subject mastery. David
conducted visual and verbal checks on student’s applying time on task behavior and gave additional assistance to those needing more redirection or
encouragement. In addition, he provided several opportunities, as a whole group, to review prior introduced Boston Massacre information/noted and how they
would to be used to complete the assigned activity. Direct whole group instruction, coupled with video clips, review of vocabulary, and additional information was
utilized. David provided clear directions and expectations for each activity. He continues to utilize ongoing personal contact and technology resources i.e., phone
call, text, email, and written communication with his end goal to improve student performance and success in his class.

David works with his cooperating/mentor teacher to aid his understanding of the targeted lesson strategies and focus for all students to meet set academic
standard success. He incorporated multiple modalities to teach lesson content and aid students to be fully engaged in their learning through visual auditory, and use
of a variety of teacher guided practice. David continues to monitor and construct lesson plans and activities to ensure students are on point with district and state
grade-level history standards.

In future lesson design and delivery, discussed were methods and opportunities to encourage students to engage and increase participation through optimizing
lesson delivery, activity planning, and ways to promote higher-level responses. Incorporating continued use of group-based activities and/or specific teacher
guided strategies.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning 96
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 96
strategies 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 96
learning 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. )

David accounts for and addresses student’s individual learning. This is done by utilizing teacher guided and independent learning activities. Student expectations are
established and checked monitoring their understand of what is expected and how they will demonstrate individual success on the assigned activity. This is done by
maintaining a structured yet open learning environment where he secures the attention of all students by use of appropriate verbal and nonverbal communication
strategies. David monitors students understanding by asking appropriate questions and teacher modeling. Using walkabouts and guided questioning techniques, he
monitors individual, and groups of students checking their understanding of the lesson expectations and assesses progress. This allows his to give individualized
time to those students who may need extra coaching i.e., ELL, students with special needs, or those needing further guidance.

During the guided practice instructional activities, David used strategies to involve all students in participation and giving them opportunity to demonstrate their
understand and of the lesson objectives. His monitoring of the group assures all student have equal opportunity to participate. He employs behavioral strategies for
the group to show respect for others, appropriate, and respectful behaviors, as individual are interacting with other classmates and the teacher. From prior lessons,
he planned and checked lesson vocabulary and/or skills needed, reviewed the expected learning assessed outcomes and how individual can demonstrate their
understanding of the lesson. This may include multiple forms depending on the learning need of the student.

David works and cooperates with other school personnel keeping an open mind in discussions and planning with his (CT) regarding instruction lesson development,
delivery, and classroom management techniques. He is eager to learn and wants to see all his students experience success. Observed during the lesson was the
planning and delivery of the lesson for a student with a visual impairment. David works with support personnel and help make available the necessary
accommodations for the student to fully participate in the activity.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by 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
responsiveness to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning
95
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. )
David continues to refine procedures and his practices to manage the classroom learning environment. He addresses and sets the expectations to ensure students
have a full understanding of appropriate self-management and group interaction to insure a safe and orderly transitions. He has developed solid expectations and
monitors for acceptable student conduct in and out of the classroom. David utilized strategies for positive reinforcement and verbally acknowledged appropriate
student participation and responses. He acknowledges the importance and is continuing to build on his interpersonal relationships with his students.

Discussed was considering and building various strategies within the lesson design give students ample opportunity be more engaged and show case their skills.
Although this group of students presented themselves as a ‘quiet bunch’ finding a way to increase individual or whole group discussion might be in order. Developing
public speaking is an important skill to master for the future. Having students stand to respond and give reminders for visual attending was noted and effective.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar 96
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 96
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in 96
their 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. )

David opened the activity in a group discussion reviewing and checking for student’s prior knowledge of vocabulary and terms from Greek Mythology through a
review of prior taught activity using guided practice and Q & A and visual Smartboard slides, while checking to see their understanding of the new materials to be
introduced i.e., Smartboard, worksheets, notes, handouts provided. Taking this information, he was able to adjust the focus of the lesson and instructional delivery
with respect and to account for the students’ prior understanding. This was an effective and appropriate way to introduce the new material.

Utilizing a multitude of methods and tools i.e., overhead, group discussion, and teacher modeling, David drew the student’s attention to the objectives and
expectations for the lesson’s independent activity. He is fully aware cultural diversity of the students and provides equitable opportunity for student participation in
class. Students are extended every opportunity to interact with the teacher and other students by appropriate methods expressly taught and monitored. He provides
constructive feedback holding student accountable for their individual/group learning/behavior. He provides multicultural opportunities in support of student
diversity in the room through visual/technology means, selection of appropriate materials, and teacher led discussion. David continues to develop a strong teacher
voice in setting the expectations for learning success in his classroom.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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 96
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
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. )

David utilized solid strategies to engage his students to aid them in their understanding of the lesson content, with a goal of relating the material to everyday real-life
themes/activities or content known by the students. This was done through a variety of means i.e., Smartboard, PowerPoint presentation, video projector,
whiteboard, and a supportive technology. He modeled correct use of academic language and instructional terms in his lesson/activity. This is also extending this
practice with colleagues. He engages and seeks out opportunities in his lesson design and delivery way to encourage students and provided opportunities to listen,
respond, and participate in oral academic content language subject matter and demonstrate their subject matter understanding. In group interactions and
discussions, he models appropriate understand of social and cultural perspectives in issues students are interested in local and world events. David allows for all
students to freely express their thoughts and opinions without bias or judgement but is aware to redirect and guide comments that may be nonfactual or not true.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 96
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 95
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
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. )

David utilizes prior student data in planning, adjustment of lesson objectives, and assessment of goals in lesson/unit development. He works with his (CT) to ensure
the lesson content and planning is on track and is sufficiently designed to achieve maximum positive outcomes and meet state set standard/benchmarks. He displays
the ability to adjust during guided instruction based on visual and verbal student responses. David considers overall data collected when making necessary
adjustments to future lesson content/activities, considering reteaching, or redirect the next lesson building on student success.

In measuring assessment success and adjusting lessons/activities, he utilizes individual and group student data i.e., performance, verbal, written, both
formal/informal in adjustments for individuals especially those identified as ELL, Sped, or 504 accommodated students. He designs and modifies lessons and adjust
assessment formats based on data and accommodation specificized. This was evident in the lesson observed where a student with a visual impairment was actively
engaged in the activity. David makes sure student are given examples to follow and clear expectations for success are defined and understood by all.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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 96
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 96
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 96
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. )
In his unit/lesson planning, both formative and summative assessment data are used to demonstrate student success and mastery of lesson/activity objectives. This
allows David to determine and adjust instructional strategies and differentiate expectations for each student based on need, ability, or specialized instructional goals.
He makes use of accommodation strategies and tools available to help ensure students can demonstrate success i.e., guided teacher instruction, notes/response
sheets, walkabouts, and individualized teacher/student contact time.

By gathering lesson/student data, he can adjustment, establish new, or readdress instruction prior knowledge of content. David demonstrated a focused understand
of scaffolding of lesson design and sets up students for success by clearly explaining expected outcomes and ways for students to show mastery. He demonstrated
his awareness of cultural differences, abilities of students, and planned accordingly making the necessary adjustments to time, content, instructional strategies.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

8.1
Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) 95
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, 95
interpret, evaluate, and apply information.
8.3
Teacher candidates ask questions to stimulate discussion that serve different purposes (e.g., probing for
96
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. )

David sets and demonstrates expectations and behaviors needed for success before for each activity and transition. He assumes various roles throughout the day
i.e., instructor, coach, facilitator, and audience. He moves smoothly in between each in support of his students. He plans for all students based on skill level his
approach to lesson design and delivery methods. He assesses student success and offers feedback in redirecting responses and will check for understand of the
content of material read. David often ties lesson material into real life examples to help student internalize and understand the concepts or aspects of the physical
education activity. He consistently applies student management systems promoting the safety and health of all students.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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., 96
systematic 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 96
the 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. )

David collects and utilizes a variety of student performance data, both formal and informal, in assessing, monitor, and recording group and individual progress
toward learning goals. He communicates frequently with his colleagues and cooperating teacher/mentor to discuss, monitor, and plan for meeting building, district,
and state standards/benchmarks. He takes a high degree of interest in keeping parents informed and encourages them to become actively engaged in their
student’s learning. He participates in schoolwide trainings and other district learning opportunities. He is actively engaged with his (CT) and colleagues in promoting
student growth opportunities in all disciplines, especially history.

David is a strong advocate for his students and is proactive in ensuring all student are engaged and participating in their learning. He is continually striving to meet
the needs of all his students as demonstrated through in lesson design, planning, and daily interactions with all students. This show by his commitment and hours of
preparation. David seeks out colleagues and administration to help problem-solve issues in supporting his students. He continues to build positive interpersonal
relationship with students in and out of the classroom. He has taken on added responsibility in coaching school extra-curricular activities (Track) and has attended
several school activities in support of her students and school.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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 96
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 96
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. )

David effectively utilizes classroom technology and other tools to engage students in the learning process. He works to build classroom and school community
awareness by having students’ work together in teams to promote communication and understanding of uniqueness and individual skills/talents. He encourages
students and families to take part in school and local community sponsored events. David is a strong advocate for student in all aspect of school, home, and
community life and takes opportunities to give back to community. He is an active member of his grade level PLC Team.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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

Total Scored Percentage:

95.76 %

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

Thomas Falash esigned on Friday, April 21, 2023 12:39 PM
Course: English 10 Date: 04/10/2023
RHS Instructional Format:
Daily Learning Target(s):

I can learn about Ancient Greece and identify the qualities and aspects they possessed that made them unique.
Planning

Literacy Target(s):

I can read through my Ancient Greece packet and answer the questions in-order to better understand Ancient Greek
life.

Opener:

Write the Title and Page # of your independent reading book. If you did not finish your IRU project
Beginning

from last quarter, please work on it and/or turn it in.

Instructional Strategies & Student Activities:

Students are embarking on the Greek Mythology unit (their final unit). Students were Focus Strategies:
introduced to Ancient Greece (Democracy, Philosophy, Heroes, Mythology, etc.). They
have had a light discussion and watched a video. At the end of the period on Monday they  Writing
were given a packet that is correlated to a work sheet. They will read through the packet
 Inquiry
and answer the corresponding questions. They had just under half the period to work on
this packet on Monday. For Tuesday, they will start the class off with their independent  Collaboration
reading books and then transition back into the Ancient Greece packet. The goal is to
 Organization
finish and submit the packet by the end of the class on Tuesday.
 Reading
During

 Student
Reflection

 Formative
Assessment

 Student
Choice in
Learning

 Student
Choice in
Assessment

Closer:

What is one thing from your reading that stuck with you most? What is one thing you learned from
Ending

your packet that is still applicable to modern life? Answer in complete sentence(s).