Brandy Eval 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Brandy Norris 20472148

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Master of Education in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-590 1/10/2019 4/24/2019

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Chief Shikellamy Elementary

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Pennsylvania
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Kristin Bingaman
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Heather Greer
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 92.88 points 92.88 %
25 2,500.00 2322 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 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’ 92 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 93
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. )
Brandy accommodates all students based on their needs. She provides ways for students to learn when they need individualized attention. Brandy is able to communicate with
parents using a management system daily. Brandy has been observed providing developmentally appropriate reading instruction that aligned with strengthening their 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 92 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 92 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 92 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
Brandy has created lessons based on student learning, which fits the needs of all of the students. She has helped to structure the room in such a way that all students are
capable of learning. She has integrated students based on their learning capacities; independent students sitting with students who need more help. She has highlighted key
words during lessons, so that all students recognize the language being used and discusses the subject in various phrases. Brandy has been observed providing individualized
supports, such as verbal feedback and pointing for direction.


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, 94 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
94
1.00
environment.
Evidence
Brandy has helped move desks around to make the classroom more conducive to learning. She has mixed students based on personalities, learning techniques, and
behaviors. The students have been receptive to her teaching in the classroom. Brandy has been observed communicating with her students during a small group lesson.
She provides verbal feedback to questions, along with non verbal feedback (shaking her head yes and no).


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 91 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 91 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 91 1.00
content area.
Evidence
Brandy begins her lessons by reviewing what has already been taught, so that the students can recall what they already know. She uses their answers to guide her
lessons. She uses multiple resources, which add to her lessons. She uses multiple means to teach the students; worksheets, white boards, books, the interactive board to
help reach all students.


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 91 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 91 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Brandy interacts with the students daily discussing events in their own personal lives. She is able to connect to all students on a professional as well as personal level, so that
the students respect her.


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 93
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 93 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 93 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Brandy does a fantastic job of looking into what it is that students will be learning and how to gauge how well the students understand the lesson. She is able to create
assessments that match the objectives. She implements modifications for all students. She makes adaptations for individual students and also works one-on-one with particular
students to check for understanding. She helps grade assessments as well as making decisions as to how tests are to be graded. Brandy was observed using verbal checks for
understanding, while reading a story in a small group setting.


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 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
Brandy uses the curriculum guides for first grade and plans her lessons accordingly. If she has any questions she makes sure to ask her cooperating teacher for feedback on
ideas are and how to present a topic to the students. She uses multiple means of instruction and uses various means of assessments as well. She knows the students very
well and forms her lessons from this knowledge.


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 93 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, 94 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,
94
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Brandy has been an instructor, audience, coach, and facilitator in the classroom. She uses the Promethean board in the classroom to teach the students, as well as using the
classroom management program (Dojo). Brandy was observed asking higher level questions throughout her lesson and calls on all of the students to help keep them engaged
throughout the lesson.


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 94
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 94 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Brandy works collaboratively with other teachers in the school, especially in the grade level. She takes note as to what they do as well as asks questions about their
instructional techniques. She has been a help in the current process of deciding on best assessment practice as a grade level in language arts. Brandy was observed
managing a small reading group in a very professional manner.


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 94 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 94 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Brandy uses the Promethean board every day with the students. Students come up to the board to write their answers. This is a great way to check for understanding.
Brandy was observed providing small group reading instruction. She provides ways for students to gain verbal reading skills, models appropriate interactions, and supports
the students according to their educational needs.

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
Brandy is aware of how assessments impact the planning for instruction.

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

92.88 %
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

Heather Greer
Heather Greer (Mar 19, 2019) Mar 19, 2019

Brandy 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

Brandy Eval 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Brandy Norris 20472148

Master of Education in Elementary Education

ELM-590 1/10/2019 4/24/2019

Chief Shikellamy Elementary

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Brandy Norris 20472148

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

You might also like