Evaluation 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Sonya Wier 20458305

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 1/28/2019 5/12/2019

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Buena Vista Elementary

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
New Mexico
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Cristina Barbosa
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Michon Henegar
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 94.52 points 94.52 %
25 2,500.00 2363 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
100
0 0 0 0 0
Sonya Wier 20458305

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’ 95 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 95
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. )
Sonya plans lesson that are engaging and follow the state standards.
Sonya Wier 20458305


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 93 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 95 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 93 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
Sonya provides multiple ways for students to understand vocabulary and apply it to their learning. Continue to focus on differentiated instruction for all students.
Sonya Wier 20458305


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, 97 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
97
1.00
environment.
Evidence
The classroom is very positive and organized. Sonya ensures that the students stay on task. Classroom management is a strong skill set that Sonya possesses.
Sonya Wier 20458305


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 95 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
Evidence was provided that Sonya is able to balance each lesson with connecting prior knowledge, using technology, and using other proven strategies to help the
students learn the concepts. The environment is a warm, caring, and respectful classroom.
Sonya Wier 20458305


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 93 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 95 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Continue to focus on making real world connections.
Sonya Wier 20458305


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 95
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 95 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Continue to use formative and summative data to guide your instruction.
Sonya Wier 20458305


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 95 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 93 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Find multiple ways to formatively assess the students growth and to identify areas of need.
Sonya Wier 20458305


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 95 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, 93 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,
93
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Use Bloom's Taxonomy to create questions that guide students to think critically.
Sonya Wier 20458305


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 95 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Continue to work with your colleagues to gain insight and to provide support to other colleagues on your team.
Sonya Wier 20458305


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 95 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Sonya consistently is aware and is an advocate to help students succeed in the classroom.
Sonya Wier 20458305

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. 100 1.00
Evidence
Sonya is very aware of the standards and objectives that must be met, in order for each student to have the opportunity to move forward academically.. She provides multiple
strategies to help her students learn and grow. She is positive and is always willing to receive feedback to move forward in her teaching practices.
Goals:
1. Review Bloom's Taxonomy and ensure that your lesson are encouraging students to think critically.
2. Continue to focus on formative and summative assessments.
3. Provide more "think time" before asking a question. Use timers or visual cues to reinforce this.
Sonya Wier 20458305

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

94.52 %
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

Michon Henegar
Michon Henegar (Mar 24, 2019) Mar 24, 2019
Clinical Practice Time Log
15 Week Course
70 day requirement over the full experience.
STUDENTID:
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Total Number of DaysCompleted: ---,3~'i-,-- _

I hereby certify that the above mentioned GCU Teacher Candidate has completed the required weeks of Clinical Practice (Student Teaching):
Cooperating Teacher Name:

Teacher Candidate Name:
,=..~l:,'
d)hU; ..... _ltHt Signature' f\u
c~L:JL
-,----'J!il!t...<~L]+-""";a__::!...ll~...!.l..4-.-s=.,-+++-\-\-------S'ignature;
J~ Jtctt. Date: 3/1 ~
Date: 3/ i .31 II '\
i <J
GCU Faculty Supervisor Name: Signature: ' Date: 3/15/2019 _
The GCU Faculty Supervisor will not submit Clinical Practice Evaluation #4 until the attendance day requirement has been met.
©2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - FOR FEEDBACK PURPOSES ONL v-
Formative Feedback Worksheet
* Thisform is not to be accepted byfaculty for official scoring. The GCU Faculty Supervisor will submit
each official Clinical Practice Evaluation to GCu.
Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 focuses on the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) standards.
Please consider how the teacher candidate has performed in relation to the following standards.
Standard 1: Student Develo ment
1.1 Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students'
stren hs, interests, and needs and enables each student to advance and accelerate his or her learnin .
1.2 Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote student
owth and develo ment. •
Standard 2: Learnin Differences

2.1 Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student's diverse learning strengths and
needs and create 0 ortunities for students to demonstrate their learnin in different wa s.
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 development of English
roficienc .
2.3 Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning
Comments:
4.1 Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar concepts,
and make connections to students' ex eriences.
4.2 Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and relevance
for all students.
4.3 Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their
content area.
Comments:
Standard 5: A lication of Content
5.2 Teacher candidates facilitate students' ability to develop diverse social a~d cultural perspectives that expand their
understandin of local and lobal issues and create novel a roaches to solvin roblems.
Comments:
© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Overall Feedback
Opportunities for Growth Suggestions/Ideas to Impl ement
fis[
- flits. Wei r
c;Joe.s Q 11
DOk:_ Q<JeS fI fYI5 Ikrc is
e): c elle,}
-f/tnt
!Vw((_
fgr
.i:
J ob /n ~ /vt fa de(/elop
os/(r'/j queSfi()(/ /mprove lYIerd-
a60uf !lti kg her /eve as f;m~ I
fle£!dr'/[3 -fhJ fh:(/ t///j 806 by (
wtV (or/((ed Ih
cia:)
- G .s 1(./ dell 15
_ PoSi if ;rd; (Yl.ore £; Me her{
Ije
(/c
LJ
ftadzlllj rcc..
- U~;rJ Dm'tr
'e.sOUf'- es -lOr
ELft l' 8fEO
- Exctl leil t

7.1 Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student's learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and
accommodations, resources, and materials to differentiate instruction for individuals and ou s of students.
7.2 Teacher candidates develop appropriate sequencing of learning experiences and provide multiple ways to
demonstrate know led e and skill.
7.3 Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student
knowled e, and student interest,
Comments: '() lA/) '...
£{./L caxeo
~Wl/)u./) •
Standard 8: Instructional Strate ies

8.1 Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) in
relation to the content, u ose 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 a I 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, and helping students
to uestion).
Comments: <-('f'v2D
9.1 Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, teacher candidates use a variety ?f data (e.g., ~ystematic
observation, information about students, and research) to evaluate the outcomes of teaching and learning and to adapt
lannin and ractice.
9.2 Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the
school, as su orts for anal sis, reflection, and roblem solvin .
Standard 10: Leadershi and Collaboration
Additional Feedback Areas Below

Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 - FOR FEEDBACK PURPOSES ONL Y"
Formative Feedback Worksheet
* This form is not to be accepted by faculty for official scoring. The GCU Faculty Supervisor will submit
each official Clinical Practice Evaluation to GCU
Clinical Practice Evaluation 2 focuses on the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InT ASC) standards.
Please consider how the teacher candidate has performed in relation to the following standards.
Standard 1: Student Development

1.1 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 learning.
1.2 Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote student
growth and development. .
Comments: 'IIS+~ti on ~o.5 dif(trtnHa+(d ~o (l\\ 5~tnt5 ecu1c\
FrHc;pct~ i,", ~ ItA t'"n.i ~ .
Standard 2: Learning Differences
2.1 Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student's diverse learning 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 strategies for
making content 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
Comments: Partners k~SbhS \'olth e.sL -teQclteY so s+c.cekra +s I\qV(
Q(.ce,!> ~ VOCQ.bfl'O-ry.
Standard 3: Learning Environments
3.1 Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing,
allocating, and coordinating the resources oftime, space, and students' attention.
3.2 Teacher candidates communicate verbally and nonverbally in ways that demonstrate respect for and responsiveness
Comments. 5"~~'lobS
to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning environment.
c,\~(
P'::1Q.yt:tA
lU'\ \N'U~
f},.. l<:Ar"l~
a.b\e. -\. 3 tr..)
fi.,~. shu:lOth
ro.....
the\f' '-(Q.rn.(I~,
Iw:I
Standard 4: Content Knowledge
4.1 Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar concepts,
and make connections to students' experiences.
4.2 Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and relevance
for all students.
4.3 Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their
content area.
Comments: She '-'.tilhc.d +i)e COIvIb;"...tlon ,,-I- khI10
~et' S "i>por+ $~"+S n(
as ~I\
4v a.cc~s prior I<N>~'~.
'''gj
0:5
Standard 5: Application of Content
5.1 Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens of
interdisciplinary themes (e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy): . .
5.2 Teacher candidates facilitate students' ability to develop diverse SOCIala~d cultural perspectives that expand their
understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Comments: S~ \.l,~a. dive.~ +orlc.S for +h.t. ~ton-l.l ~n~~j( ~
(/~~S·
© 2018. Grand Canyon Unlversitv. All Rights Reserved.
Standard 6: Assessment
6.1 Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 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
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 langu~e learning needs.
Comments: fhk~1MlM wa.S 4:tl~~ wl11, \C(lft'l,:) b\A.+<.cmc..
Standard 7: Planning for Instruction

7.1 Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student's learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and
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
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3 Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student
knowledge, and student interest.
Comments:
~ \'l'~On WQ~ (..')(~q_kd ~<S p\a.t\heQ .
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies
8.1 Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) 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, 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, and helping students
to question).
Comments: ~~e uJiliz.c.J ,hs~~~~ lo~ c:t.~ ~l\ ~S c 61 \"~r~+~",, ~ -k.ce(~n1s .
S
Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

9.1 Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, teacher candidates use a variety of data (e.g., systematic
observation, information about students, and research) to evaluate the outcomes of teaching and learning and to adapt
planning and practice.
Comments: U$(5 ~~~
o.~
rtf-kcffoh
~~(;.t ts r\'\-.
~o,
9.2 Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
+0 &bx.r~ \AJ~+ i.5 v.::>or ~r "j
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration
10.1 Teacher candidates use technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to build local and global
learning communities that engage students, families, and colleagues.
10.2 Teacher candidates advocate to meet the needs of students, to strengthen the learning environment, and to enact
system change.
Comments: (,~, l'\\it.$ ~ r~~~for ~Ai ~n.J \€-p fc,r "pc.~i A4C sMIt-ts_
Additional Feedback Areas Below

Overall Feedback
Strengths Opportunities for Growth Suggestions/Ideas to Implement
Dok' kv(' -Th\t\t " '~~a.'

+,~
Knows VJh~h
0rFrhAni fie ~
lh4tlJ rA.l$ed
1-0 lXsK for V'i \-h IF 0f-
hdp lr'l ~.I? we.\' (J.s f, t'lj~(S to
P rtpa.r i~') visuCt \ r~r!sen+-
<)uond~
~YW\&t{i~/ t\,\l\k 4-1 ww:
'S \,lW\M4. +i\](_
e_)(~ to
":>t~MI5
(l~S~~m.tvth . ~Ihk)

Evaluation 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

Evaluation 2

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Sonya Wier 20458305

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 1/28/2019 5/12/2019

Buena Vista Elementary

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Sonya Wier 20458305

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Total Number of DaysCompleted: ---,3~'i-,-- _

Cooperating Teacher Name:

©2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Standard 2: Learnin Differences

Standard 5: A lication of Content

© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Opportunities for Growth Suggestions/Ideas to Impl ement

© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Standard 8: Instructional Strate ies

Standard 10: Leadershi and Collaboration

Additional Feedback Areas Below

© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Standard 1: Student Development

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

Comments: U$(5 ~~~

Additional Feedback Areas Below

© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Strengths Opportunities for Growth Suggestions/Ideas to Implement

Dok' kv(' -Th\t\t " '~~a.'