Gcu Eval 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Dana Davis 20364149

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 8/13/2018 11/25/2018

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

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Larissa Knowlton
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Chandal Bass
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 87.32 points 87.32 %
22 2,200.00 1921 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
100
0 0 0 0 0
Dana Davis 20364149

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’ 87 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. )
According to her cooperating teacher, Dana has created many appropriate lessons that are differentiated for the students. She keeps in mind each student’s background,
experiences, interests, strengths, and areas of need when planning for instruction. Anchor charts were listed around the room along with their Success Criteria Notes. These
notes list the ways students need to answer questions in order to be successful. One student was praised for using her multiplication chart which was available in her desk. A
jeopardy lesson was created in order for students to practice their math facts before the test. Students were interested and engaged in the lesson. Technology became a
problem mid lesson, but Dana did a nice job of working with the problems and creating an opportunity for students to continue to learn.
Feedback- Consider setting individual goals or small group goals for students to achieve. This focuses the students on a specific skill set and allows them to succeed often
Dana Davis 20364149


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 86 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
0.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 87 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
Students were encouraged to use their notes to help if they forgot a step in the process. During the game, a student shut down and stopped working. While other students were
walking, Dana passed by and quietly talked with him without anyone else really noticing. The Jeopardy questions increased in difficulty as the points increased. 5 point questions
were geared towards her more advanced students. Students who struggles more were placed with students who were more comfortable with the content. (No ELL in this
group). Worksheets are differentiated based on level. CT reports Dana uses academic lang. and school-wide verbiage when instructing.
Suggestions- Research ways to best differentiate lessons and student groups. Lessons should be accessible to all levels of students through different resources and
manipulatives. Setting learning goals for students will help with this.
Dana Davis 20364149


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, 91 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
91
1.00
environment.
Evidence
This standard is a strength for Dana. Students were sitting in groups of 3 today. The class was engaged and ready to work. They were excited about the lesson for the day.
Students in one group felt comfortable telling another group that their comments made them upset during the game. The group apologized all while continuing to stay on
task. It is apparent there is a good community built in the classroom. Dana adds a calm aspect to the classroom. It is apparent that students feel comfortable and respect
her. The class is able to joke around and continue to stay on task. Dana referenced the "Learning Pit" poster on the board. This concept shows students that everyone will
fall into a pit for learning, but they need to use a "Growth Mindset" to dig their way out.
Dana Davis 20364149


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 87 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 88 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 88 1.00
content area.
Evidence
Students use the interactive whiteboard to look at the Jeopardy questions on the board. Students use their whiteboards to come up with their answer. Dana gave
adequate time for students to answer and asked the class if they were all ready to give the answer. Dana commented on specific positive behaviors students were
exhibiting. Vocabulary Review- divisor, quotient, dividend, remainder was done at the beginning of the lesson. “Turtle method”- similar content that was brought up at the
beginning of the lesson 4 weeks prior.
CT reports- Stimulating student reflection and background knowledge occurs daily in Dana's instruction. She reminds students that they are mathematicians and
historians and they need to use their academic vocabulary. She also uses resources to supplement her instruction.
Dana Davis 20364149


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 87 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
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
✔ 0.00
“How many of you have watched Jeopardy?” Dana explained the game to students who haven’t seen it.
Dana shared that students are having a hard time with estimation. She used the example that if a student was to go to the store and buy 5 items, it would be easier to use
estimation rather that exact amounts.
CT reports Dana does a nice job of managing the classroom economy that demonstrates real-world examples throughout the day.
Suggestions-Find ways to better connect unit concepts to everyday life. Why is multiplication and division important? Pull in higher level thinking questions to help connect
concepts.
Dana Davis 20364149


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 87
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 87 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 0
language learning needs.
Evidence
Learning objective was stated at the beginning of the lesson. Dana reminded students they are playing Jeopardy today to review for the test coming up tomorrow. According
to her cooperating teacher, Dana has created assessments to go along with instruction. She uses data, both formative and summative, to drive her instruction.
It is apparent that Dana uses data to drive instruction in the classroom for the general population. How is this data used for students on IEP's? What accommodations or
modifications are listed within the IEP for assessment or instruction?
Dana Davis 20364149


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 86 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 88 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 88 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Dana plans lessons based on how students perform on the previous lesson. She is able to adapt lessons to how students understand the content. Students are engaged in
the lesson. The 2 lessons observed were game based. Students worked individually and as a group. She plans the groups so that all students are practicing the content,
then working together as a team to give an answer. Most lessons are dif. to some degree. The following strategies are used: less questions, reteach worksheets, check for
understanding, and choose resources based on needs.
Suggestions- Consider ways to better accommodate students with lower abilities. Provide calculators, math fact sheets, etc to take away the calculation part of the
assignment while teaching the actual process of multiplication or division. In order to increase the ability to get through all the content necessary, consider backwards
planning each unit or work with teammates to divide the lesson planning.
Dana Davis 20364149


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 86 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, 87 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,
84
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
The learning objective was stated at the beginning of the lesson. Students were asked how that pertains to what they did yesterday. An interactive whiteboard was used for
the game. One group didn’t get the answer correct, but were encouraged to go back and look to find their mistake.
Instructional Strategies used- Think-Pair-Share, Personal Math Trainer, Group Work, Technology
Centers were ready if the game was over before the period got over. Students have been grouped into centers based on students who were stronger or needed more
assistance. Students could also be grouped based on areas of need in a specific skill set. 8.3-Work towards asking higher level questions when students are working on their
skills. Why does this apply? How do you know?
Dana Davis 20364149


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 87
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 86 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Dana’s cooperating teacher reports that using data has been a huge part of her experience. She has collaborated with coworkers and school staff to help her adapt planning
and teaching.
Recommendation- The more communication you have with families, the easier it is to have the hard discussions. Consider a weekly newsletter in your own classroom or other
ways to communicate. The practice of positive phone calls home is a great start to this communication!
Dana Davis 20364149


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 89 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 89 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
It is apparent that Dana is very active in her community. She is the sponsor for a group called "Friends of Rachel" (FOR). It is a kindness group. Dana is active in sports for
her kids and the local church. Dana has made various phone calls home to parents about positive behaviors that are happening at school. Dana participated in a professional
development opportunity and went to Loan Tree to view a visible learning school. Every month the school starts late for professional development. This month they discussed
visual learning. She would like to learn more about flexible seating. She is the leader for MYF which is a church youth group for high school aged kids. Dana reports that
she loves helping them thrive in their lives and their spirituality.
Dana Davis 20364149

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. 93 1.00
Evidence
It is apparent that Dana is dedicated to her students and to bettering herself through this learning process. Dana is kind and open to suggestions. She actively listens to her
students and supporting staff. Dana's strengths are her compassion and leaderships within in the classroom and the community.
Dana Davis 20364149

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

87.32 %
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

Chandal Bass
Chandal Bass (Oct 6, 2018) Oct 6, 2018

Gcu Eval 2

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Gcu Eval 2

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Dana Davis 20364149

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 8/13/2018 11/25/2018

Haxtun Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Dana Davis 20364149

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Anda mungkin juga menyukai