Clinical Practice Evaluation 3

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
Nicole Arata 20450081

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Master of Education in Secondary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SEC-590 8/16/2018 11/28/2018

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
James Campbell High School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hawaii
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Joana Sebastian
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Hanlan Bowler
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:
127.85 points
EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 85.23 %
22.00 2,200.00 1,875.00 150
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0 0 0 150 0 0 0
150

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 85
learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 1.00
83
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. )
Nicole provided whole and large group instruction during the lesson. During that time she directed the students in marking the text and guided them in problem-solving. She
randomly called on the students to share their thinking as well as choose volunteers to respond to questions. Whenever possible try to incorporate more of the students'
interests (ex. create word problems and make references to current events in their lives) . She collaborated with her co-teacher and cooperative teacher prior to teaching the
lesson.


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
85
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 78
their development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular 82 1.00
learning differences or needs.
Evidence
Nicole modeled and encouraged the students to use the active reading strategies (marking the text and labeling diagrams) before writing their expressions. Student were
instructed in smaller groups and were provided with calculators to assist with calculations and checking work. I'm wondering what type of anchoring charts could be
displayed in your classroom for visual learners (especially for the ELL and SPED populations).


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
89
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 90
environment.
Evidence
Most of the students were engaged in the learning environment. I noticed that sometimes Nicole called on students who may have been distracted or who were not
raising their hands. Transitions went smoothly as students were instructed to pick up a calculator at the beginning of class and she numbered the students' desks for
easy transition into groups. Nicole provided just the right amount of wait time after poising a question and when modeling marking of the text.
Nicole Arata
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ 20450081
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 87 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 85 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in 85 1.00
their content area.
Evidence
Nicole provided opportunities for reflections (self, partner, class) when questioning the students about their problem-solving techniques. She made multiple references
and connections to their previous lessons' concepts and vocabulary. During the lesson, consider making more references/connections between the content and student
experiences/interests as you did in your lesson plan (ex. meal preparation/recipes proportions, travel routes time/distance).


evaluations)
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 0.00
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 0.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Consider reflecting on how the content applies to real world problems. Try investigating math modeling. You also may consider integrating one real world
topic/theme and teach multiple skills using the same topic.


evaluations)
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 91 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 0.00
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
90 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Nicole conducted informal assessments using verbal checks for understanding. During the whole and large group guided practice she also visually checked on the students'
work. At the end of class she collected a self-assessment (mastered, needs to be clarified, and did not understand). While the student survey added valuable feedback to
the learning environment it must be bias and subjective for some students. Consider using an objective "exit ticket," (brief quiz) to determine what skills/concepts student
really know and what areas still needs to be addressed.


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 90 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 84 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 86 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Nicole created a lesson plan targeting specific learning objectives. She prepared the necessary materials and instructional strategies prior to teaching the lesson. She
provided verbal and written ways for the students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills. Consider differentiating instruction more (ex. notes on a graphic organizer,
playing a game, doing a gallery walk, writing a short summary).


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) 90 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, 89 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, 88 1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Nicole varied her role during the instructional process. How would you incorporate playing more of the "audience," role in your lesson? What do you think would happen with
the students' thinking? She asked some probing questions. Try asking some more higher order questions to help students learn to analyze (ex. why, how). What types of
questions do you think would pique the students' curiosity? Try asking these types of questions at the beginning of the lesson.


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
80
learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
1.00
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside 81
the school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Nicole used informal observations to evaluate learning outcomes when planning for instruction. Consider using more formative/summative data to drive instruction. She
reached out to her supervisor and cooperative teacher for support and analysis. Continue reaching out to trusted mentors and try others: instructional coaches, reading
specialists, other teachers/admin for support and guidance.


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 75
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 82 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Nicole used technology and communication strategies in the classroom with the learners. Consider using these strategies to build local communities (ex. working with a
buddy class on a project using a technology platform, build a learning community with parents/families by communicating regularly with virtual/printed newsletters or by inviting
them into showcase a project/presentation). Continue advocating to meet the needs' of the students' by finding appropriate learning styles for each student. Try researching
specific learning modifications and accommodations to help each student succeed. Track and analyze pre/post assessment data then use the data to guide your instruction.

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

85.23 %
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

Hanlan Bowler
Hanlan Bowler (Oct 24, 2018) Oct 24, 2018

Clinical Practice Evaluation 3

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Clinical Practice Evaluation 3

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

Nicole Arata 20450081

Master of Education in Secondary Education

SEC-590 8/16/2018 11/28/2018

James Campbell High School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Nicole Arata 20450081

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Nicole Arata 20450081

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Nicole Arata 20450081

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

Nicole Arata 20450081

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Nicole Arata 20450081

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Nicole Arata 20450081

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Nicole Arata 20450081

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Nicole Arata 20450081

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Nicole Arata 20450081

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Nicole Arata 20450081

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen