Courtneykuiken Evaluation2 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Courtney Kuiken 20365860

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 1/7/2019 4/21/2019

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Rum River Elementary School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Minnesota
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Angel Landry
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Laurie Ollhoff
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 94.56 points 94.56 %
25 2,500.00 2364 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 100 0 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’ 93 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 94
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. )
Courtney is a natural teacher. She relates easily to each student. In a very short time, she has gotten to know the students and their interests.


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 95 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 97 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 94 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
2.1 Many school districts utilize curriculum where teachers are not to deviate from the plan. Courtney managed to create a lesson that helped students at multi-levels. For
example, asking after each sentence ask if anyone has any other edits. Students worked independently and then in a group. 2.2 Courtney design a lesson using the Wonders
program. Each day the students have new challenges that they work on. This is a high language development program. Courtney does a good job including academic language
as well as helping students develop English grammar and literacy concepts. 2.3 Courtney developed a worksheet that assesses what grammar errors students are able to correct
on their own. This worksheet connection prior knowledge to independent practice. Courtney and I discuss resources that could be developed for future lessons.


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, 93 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
93
1.00
environment.
Evidence
3.1 and 3.2 Courtney established herself as the teacher. She establishes a learning community where students worked and learned together. Courtney moves around the
room offering support and challenging students to think beyond their frustrations.


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 98 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 95 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 95 1.00
content area.
Evidence
4.1 The worksheet Courtney developed is a progressive use of prior direct teaching. Students are challenged to practice the skills/knowledge to the independent practice
of editing.
Students are provided with a writing prompt design to draw out student’s idea as they related to the reading for the day. 4.2 After student practiced their editing skills
independently students corrected the sentences together on the SmartBoard. Courtney showed a student how to use the technology to edit like a professional editor
(using red ink).4.3Students applied prior knowledge to their independent practice. Courtney modeled professional editing. One student needed to insert a word and
Courtney use the professional language of “carrot” for the insert.


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 90 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 90 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
5.1 and 5.2 Courtney engaged the student in applying the literacy areas taught in this lesson to their own writing. The students were able to self-assess their own work as the
class discussed editing and reading for meaning. Courtney and I discussed ways she might help students apply the learning of future lessons.


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 92
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 97 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 96 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
6.1 Courtney used the material and methods within the Wonders curriculum to build and connect, the lesson I observed, to skills the students already mastered. 6.2 Courtney
collaborates with her CT to examine prior performance data to inform the lesson I observed. 6.3 Courtney embedded academic language that will help students apply what they
know to the state assessment tests (MCA). Courtney modeled reading for meaning portion to help students identify key language to help understand the reading.


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 95 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 95 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 96 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Courtney lesson intentionally includes concepts from the GCU coursework on best practices for teachers. Being plan-ful and intentional helps her apply and bring her
learning to how she teachers.


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 96 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,
95
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
8.1-8.3Courtney provided opportunities for independent practice, she also modeled the possess for the students.
Questioning strategies were open-ended questions. The questions were designed to elicit students thinking. Courtney called on boys and girls equally. Courtney modeled
inclusive behavior giving all students opportunities to practice their learning and share their learning/ideas with the class. Courtney was very intentional in the decisions she
made. Courtney fluidly moved between the different roles the students needed to master the content.


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 96
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 97 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Courtney used mistakes as an opportunity to let students know that teachers can make mistakes. Courtney is organized and comes prepared for her lessons. She works
closely with her CT to design lessons uses the district curriculum. Courtney also demonstrated mastery using the technologies (SmartBoard, TE electronic version, etc.).


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 95 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 93 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Attends team meetings, school meetings, and attended conferences. Courtney helped prepare and organize conference materials.

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. 96 1.00
Evidence
Courtney embeds the concept that GCU teaches as best practices. I predict that she will be an outstanding teacher.

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

94.56 %
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

Laurie Ollhoff
Laurie Ollhoff (Mar 6, 2019) Mar 6, 2019

Courtneykuiken Evaluation2 2

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

Courtneykuiken Evaluation2 2

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 1/7/2019 4/21/2019

Rum River Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Courtney Kuiken 20365860

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen