Gcu Clinical Eval 3

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
Cynthia Maughan 20238040

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
EED-480NB 11/5/2018 1/13/2019

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

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Washington
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Lori Eakman
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
James Lake
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:
187.36 points
EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 93.68 %
25.00 2,500.00 2,342.00 200
0
0
0
0
200
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
200

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 The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the
performance of the Teacher Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate meets Teacher Candidate
Candidate met this standard insufficient in meeting this underdeveloped in meeting developing in meeting this this standard and consistently exceeds this
or expectations for a Teacher standard and expectations for this standard and expectations standard and expectations for a expectations for a Teacher standard and all expectations
Candidate during student a Teacher Candidate during for a Teacher Candidate Teacher Candidate during Candidate during student for a Teacher Candidate
teaching. student teaching. during student teaching. student teaching. teaching. during student teaching.
Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

1.1 1.00
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 94
learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 1.00
94
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. )
Cyndi has gotten to know students through observation, grading of papers, and working one-on-one and in small groups. She plans each lesson accordingly, but also keeps
an eye on the bigger picture with regard to the acquisition of skills and academic understanding. Cyndi engages in conversations about how each lesson is part of a bigger
goal of reaching standards, and is eager to understand how each grade level’s standards build upon each other. Additionally, Cyndi takes the opportunity while facilitating
“morning meetings” to get to know students personal interests and strives to make connections between school and home.


evaluations)
Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning 1.00
94
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 1.00
strategies for making content accessible to English language students and for evaluating and supporting 94
their development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular 94 1.00
learning differences or needs.
Evidence
Cyndi is teaching reading, math, writing, and is planning/facilitating morning meetings. She continues to utilize the websites for reading and math programs and is following
the district’s first grade writing lesson progression for second quarter. Cyndi has participated in grade level meetings discussing strengths and areas for growth around math
and writing and she has implemented suggestions from those meetings in order to address student needs.


evaluations)
Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by 1.00
94
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 1.00
responsiveness to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning 94
environment.
Evidence
Cyndi works hard to ensure students are engaged and included. She has taken seriously our district’s motto of “Everyone Belongs” and she regularly can be seen and
heard making more room for students in morning meeting, helping students talk through challenging moments with peers, and using “everyone responds” strategies and
random sticks to make sure each student has a chance to participate.
Cynthia Maughan
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ 20238040
STUDENT NUMBER____________________

evaluations)
Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar 94 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 94 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in 94 1.00
their content area.
Evidence
Cyndi often reflects with students on prior learning as a way of introducing the day’s lesson in math and reading. In writing, students are expected to build on their writing
topic over a series of days. Cyndi is able to avoid the natural instinct of first graders to proclaim “I’m done” by consistently facilitating connections and challenging students
to improve, edit, and revise their work.


evaluations)
Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

5.1
1.00
Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens 94
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 94 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Cyndi facilitated an introductory discussion around the interactions of the pilgrims and Native Americans that resulted in what is commonly known as the First
Thanksgiving. She used a grade-level appropriate read aloud to provide the background information. In addition, she fields the many questions students have
about their own challenges and those of their peers with sensitivity and clarity.


evaluations)
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 94 1.00
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 94 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
94 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Cyndi has participated in team meetings, grade level data meetings, and professional development around student performance data in reading, writing, and math. She has
contributed her own thoughts from observation and working with students to assist in the decision-making process: identifying students for intervention and next steps with
regard to instruction.


evaluations)
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 94 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 94 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 94 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Cyndi consistently reviews student daily work and assessment results. She targets those students whose misconceptions she can address, and is always looking for ways to
supplement and tailor the questions she asks and the materials she uses to ensure students are able to demonstrate understanding. Cyndi has the patience and interest in
the students that is genuine and honest and builds rapport/relationship with the young students. She provides good instruction, sets expectations, works around the class in
groups and individual learning, provides positive reinforcements, and good questioning that helps students recall prior knowledge.


evaluations)
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

8.1
Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) 94 1.00
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, 94 1.00
interpret, 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, 94 1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
While Cyndi has taken over the class on a daily basis, she is also open to continue her own learning. She engages in conversation with the rest of the first grade team and is
eager to learn about their styles and teaching choices. Cyndi takes notes and also reflects on her own practice, noting what went well with individual students and also what
she would change the next time and why, with regularity. Cyndi utilizes the technology available in order to further student learning and support students who need more
practice. When planning her lessons, she makes notes of questions she can ask to prompt discussion and understanding. She also reflects and discusses with me different or
additional choices she could make during instruction.


evaluations)
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., 1.00
systematic observation, information about students, and research) to evaluate the outcomes of teaching and
94
learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
1.00
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside 94
the school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Cyndi participates in team meetings, grade level data meetings, and professional development around student performance data in reading, writing, and math. She has
contributed her own thoughts from assessment data, observation and working with students to assist in the decision-making process: identifying students for intervention and
next steps with regard to instruction.


evaluations)
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

10.1
1.00
Teacher candidates use technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to build local and 90
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 90 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Cyndi regularly uses technology such as the Internet, document camera, projector, and curriculum websites in order to engage students. When researching how animals move
and protect themselves, Cyndi facilitated student use of the World Book Online site, showing students how to find and listen to articles about their chosen animal and then
assimilate that information for a science project.

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

93.68 %
ATTACHMENTS
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

Dec 3, 2018

Gcu Clinical Eval 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Gcu Clinical Eval 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

EED-480NB 11/5/2018 1/13/2019

Meadows Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

You might also like