Eval 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Desiree Henderson 20464381

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Master of Education in Special Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SPD-590 8/30/2018 12/12/2018

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Heritage Elementary
COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Arizona
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Jennifer McKee
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Ronald Graham
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 98.64 points 98.64 %
25 2,500.00 2466 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0
100
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’ 98 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 98
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. )
Desiree has designed lesson plan that supports instruction that takes into account student needs and interests, to advance individual learning. Students respond to text that
highlights comparison for the individual reading skills.


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 100 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 98 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 98 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
Individual learning skills are addressed for individual students. Desiree utilizes language development tools in planning the instruction and she incorporates English Language
tools and provides strong strategies (read and reflect - explains instruction - students introduced to new words). Story is re-read and student reflection discussed.


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, 100 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
100
1.00
environment.
Evidence
Desiree manages the learning environment and actively engages students, in the interaction of content materials. She is well organized and co-ordinates students efforts in
using time, space, and student attention. Students are given respect and communication is both to and for students and the different perspectives students bring to the
environment.


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 100 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 100 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 100 1.00
content area.
Evidence
Student's are involved in the Fry's sight word list and prior content knowledge is linked to new concepts in reading and discussion the new academic terms and knowledge
in the content area. Students are engaged in meeting new ways to demonstrate the students do understand the aspect of addressing comprehension skills.


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 96 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 98 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Students are engaged in applying content knowledge of the life cycle of a frog. Activities determining how the sight words help identify the sequence of events tied to a sight
word. Students have a complete writing activity and follow up as a sequence of supporting their understanding of the progressive cycle.


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 100
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 98 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 98 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Assessment techniques take on importance in using formative and summative assessments to identify a reflection of the sequence of story lines, identifying the sight words
used to provide an instructional sequence of information. The comparison of the life cycle of another entity that allows students to compare and reflect about the events in
the live of another animal.


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 100 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 98 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 98 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
The planning for instruction gives the opportunity to get students to recognize their learning goals is well defined. The appropriate sequencing of students exhibiting learning
and provide several ways for students to demonstrate new knowledge and skills. Planning includes both formative and summative assessment data to monitor student
programs and success.


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 98 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, 98 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,
98
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Desiree varies her role in the instructional process; as an instructor, facilitator, coach, and audience. She includes using a wide range of discussion on the lesson sight words.
One notable on is the use of a Q and A session that allows students to engage at their own knowledge level to evaluate and apply new information.


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 98
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 98 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Desiree works with district staff, teachers, and students in a very professional manner. She is very aware of how to use data and to use sources of information to adapt her
planning and practice. She employs strategies to include planning and practice. She employs strategies to include analysis of student outcomes for reflection and problem
solving.


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 98 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 100 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Desiree uses technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to engage her students, communicating openly with colleagues and most importantly with families
of her students. She endeavors to meet the needs of students by strengthening the learning environment and enact proper changes of instruction.

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. 100 1.00
Evidence
Desiree is very adept at demonstrating in all situations the tremendous impact and how impacts her impact on student learning. She does extremely well on her assessment
outcomes on the STEP instrument used in both formative and summative assessments.

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

98.64 %
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

Ronald Graham
Ronald Graham (Oct 24, 2018) Oct 24, 2018

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

Eval 2

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Master of Education in Special Education

SPD-590 8/30/2018 12/12/2018

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Desiree Henderson 20464381

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Anda mungkin juga menyukai