Gcu Eval 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2D
Cynthia Maughan 20238040

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
EED-480NA 9/10/2018 11/4/2018

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:

EVALUATION 2D
TOTAL POINTS 279.6 points 93.2 %
25 2,500.00 2330
0
0
0
0
300
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
300
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)
0 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

1.1
Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students’ strengths, interests, and 94
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 student growth and 94
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 taken the time to get to know students individually and through their academic work. She understands well student strengths and challenges. Cyndi front loads each
lesson by anticipating what students may have difficulty with and plans accordingly. Cyndi reflects on each lesson and thinks in terms of next steps for the class as a whole and
individual students who need more practice. Cyndi attended parent teacher conferences and introduced herself personally to parents. She has attended some of our building
professional development in which we discuss student work and plan next steps as a team. Cyndi attended our first grade level data team meeting which analyzed student
performance to determine who required additional program pull-out support.


Candidate to determine
how the Teacher Candidate
will meet this standard in
future evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 2: Learning Differences Score

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning strengths and needs and create 94
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 94
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 differences or needs. 94
Evidence
Cyndi is teaching reading and math and is planning/facilitating morning meetings to this point. She has practiced with and utilized the complex websites for our district math and
reading programs in order to access the needed resources for each day’s lessons. She is tailoring her lessons to meet students’ needs. Cyndi is spending more time practicing
medial sounds during reading and giving students more opportunities to practice difficult vocabulary words. She is using pre-assessments in math to target individual students
during each day’s lesson and provide additional supports (manipulatives, number charts, and expanders) for students who are struggling with tens and ones.


Candidate to determine how
the Teacher Candidate will
meet this standard in future
evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 3: Learning Environments Score

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, allocating, and coordinating 94
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 94
backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning environment.
Evidence
Cyndi has employed a variety of strategies to engage students and build relationships. She acknowledges the inevitability of making mistakes, how doing so is expected and
respected in our classroom. She nonverbally corrects students who seek attention inappropriately by calling on and thanking those students who are actively
listening/meeting classroom expectations. She circulates the room well using proximity to engage and help students and is responsive to each student.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar concepts, and make connections 94
to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and relevance for all students.
94
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their content area. 94
Evidence
Cyndi taught a series of lessons in math on place value, writing number names, and representing two-digit numbers over 20. She began each lesson by asking open-
ended questions which prompted connections to prior learning. Cyndi ensured helpful resources were available and organized and she modeled the use of math
vocabulary like digits and place value daily.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 5: Application of Content Score

5.1
Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens of interdisciplinary themes 94
(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 94
and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Cyndi was able to relate tens and ones/place value to dimes and pennies. She ensured plastic coins were available first for all students. In early lessons, only some students
felt comfortable using them to represent tens and ones and even fewer students used them correctly. By the time Cyndi actively taught the use of dimes and pennies,
students were able to make their own connections between coins and groups of tens and ones. Most, if not all, students in that later lesson were able to utilize the coins to
represent tens and ones accurately.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 6: Assessment Score

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and minimize sources of bias that can 94
distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to understand each student’s 94
progress and to guide planning.
6.3
Teacher candidates prepare all students for the demands of particular assessment formats and make appropriate modifications in 94
assessments or testing conditions especially for students with disabilities and language learning needs.
Evidence
Cyndi uses pre-assessments to target students who need additional help during a math unit. She analyzes the daily morning math review to address any misconceptions and
works with students individually to clarify concepts.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score

7.1
Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student’s learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and accommodations, resources, 94
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 demonstrate knowledge and 94
skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student knowledge, and student 94
interest.
Evidence
Cyndi is utilizing the district resources and materials and is following the suggested pacing calendar. She is responsive to student need, however, and has the flexibility to take
the time to reteach, when necessary. Cyndi recognizes when students need to be pulled from their team in order to focus independently and she recognizes when students
need additional instruction, manipulatives, or explanation. She consistently thinks of ways to assist students by asking questions in order to facilitate understanding, rather
than by providing information or answers.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score

8.1
Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) in relation to the content, 94
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, evaluate, and apply 94
information.
8.3
Teacher candidates ask questions to stimulate discussion that serve different purposes (e.g., probing for student understanding, helping 94
students articulate their ideas and thinking processes, stimulating curiosity, and helping students to question).
Evidence
Cyndi uses the technology needed to implement the math and reading programs. She smoothly assists students with classroom Chromebooks without making them reliant on
an adult to solve their problems (login, navigation). Cyndi strives to ask relevant questions in order to stimulate thinking and connections. She participates as an audience
member while students share their writing and also shares her writing (an alternate ending to ‘Creepy Carrots’ while modeling the use of interesting details).


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score

9.1
Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, teacher candidates use a variety of data (e.g., systematic observation, information 94
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 school, as supports for 94
analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Cyndi is gradually assessing students in small groups. She is mindful of their progress and challenges as demonstrated in the first quarter of the school year, and is providing
daily supports to students based on that information.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score

10.1
Teacher candidates use technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to build local and global learning communities that 84
engage students, families, and colleagues.
10.2
Teacher candidates advocate to meet the needs of students, to strengthen the learning environment, and to enact system change. 84
Evidence
Cyndi needs to attend first grade team meetings, early release ACT days for professional development with our first grade team, and data team meetings
consistently.Increase student think time and opportunities to share their thoughts with shoulder partner. Don’t be afraid of quiet time after posing a question. Students need
time to think of their answer and how to provide evidence. This is difficult to balance with needing to keep a brisk pace to each lesson.
Rather than thinking of the teacher as the holder of information and students as empty vessels…step back to allow students to make their own connections and “do the work”
(reading numbers, counting aloud, practicing with manipulatives, etc.)

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

evaluations)
No Evidence 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
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. 94
Evidence
Cyndi takes very seriously her responsibility to our students. She is focused and dedicated to their success and learning growth. She is also responsive to their ability to get
along with each other in a respectful manner and she understands the connection between student connectedness to their school/teacher/classmates in a positive way and
their ability to learn.

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

93.2 %
ATTACHMENTS
Clinical Practice Time Log:
(Required)
(The GCU Faculty Supervisors should not submit the final evaluation until
the Teacher Candidate has completed the number of days required by
their program)
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
Nov 5, 2018

Gcu Eval 2

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 Eval 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2D

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

EED-480NA 9/10/2018 11/4/2018

Meadows Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Cynthia Maughan 20238040

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

You might also like