Clinical Evaluation 3

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 8/17/2020 11/29/2020

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
S.S. Dixon Intermediate School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Florida
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Melanie Martin
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Danielle Ramseur-Fischer
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:
133.08 points
EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 88.72 %
25.00 2,500.00 2,218.00 150
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
150
0
0
0
0
0
0 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 90
learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 1.00
85
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. )
The Teacher Candidate has collaborated with other professionals to discuss and enact students growth and development. Per the Cooperating Teacher she has sat in on
staff meetings as well as voiced her opinion on student learning and ways to improve student instruction. The Teacher Candidate has used several modes of instruction,
created developmentally appropriate lessons, and designed the lessons to all learners.


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
90
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 88
their development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular 90 1.00
learning differences or needs.
Evidence
Teacher Candidate can design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student's diverse needs. Teacher Candidate used differentiated instruction for diverse learners
and presented a lesson that addressed all learning skills. The lesson focused on students with different modes of learning and was successful at in meeting student needs.
The Teacher Candidate accessed varied resources as well as technology to engage students and increase achievement. The language used was appropriate and should be
addressed more succinctly as time permits.


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
90
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
The Teacher Candidate praised students for a good job, a good use of technology/whiteboard and document camera. It was evident the students have a rapport with the
Teacher Candidate students were raising their hand, not shouting out, and respecting others' answers given. The lesson presented was well received by the students,
group work was valuable and generated shared ideas and knowledge. The TC used students for jobs in the classroom creating an environment that was accountable and
a part of the group. The lesson introduced allowed students to participate and provide their own opinion and background knowledge the lesson was thought out with
students' likes and dislikes in mind. The Teacher Candidate uses a daily folder for plans and ways she can engage students to become critical thinkers and comprehend
the lesson more easily.
Courtney Lemos Rodriguez

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ 20372456
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 90 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 90 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in 90 1.00
their content area.
Evidence
Teacher Candidate uses student reflection during whole group instruction to review work completed daily. Students are able to link new concepts as they review work
completed and answer questions in real-time. Teacher Candidate used technology effectively as she introduced a new skill of in language arts to students. The use of a
whiteboard, video, and document reader. Students were given opportunities to learn the skill and in small groups practice the skill allowing others to constructively explore
ideas and proficiently understand the skill being taught. She did a good job at presenting the lesson so students were engaged and provided opportunities for students to
apply the skill learned in small groups.


evaluations)
Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

5.1
1.00
Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens 88
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 90 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
The lesson students were introduced to was author perspective. She began the lesson with students watching a culturally diverse video of two movie clips with
different perspective and allowed students to discuss the differing perspectives. Students had the opportunity to provide their own opinion and discussions were
enveloped during the discourse. Student were then directed to work on collaboratively addressing other author perspectives and allowing for group work and
perspective. Students viewed a culturally relevant piece and were engaged with finding our more. The TC engaged students by applying real-world discussions,
she developed a diverse and culturally relevant perspective that increased student knowledge to a novel idea of author perspective when writing literature for
audiences.


evaluations)
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 85 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 88 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
88 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Teacher Candidate has created several assessments in core subject areas. TC has worked with colleagues in examining data to develop lessons to improve student learning
as well as performance. Using a daily folder she is able to assess student performance that guides her planning for lessons to increase achievement. The TC prepares
students for assessments with daily practice, engaging students with lessons that increase knowledge and skill, also providing opportunities for students to work in small
groups to hone in on skills that need additional practice.


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 88 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 90 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 85 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Teacher Candidate provides students with multiples ways to demonstrate skill in whole group, small group, and individualized instruction and practice. Teacher Candidate
plans according to past formative and summative assessment data, as well as observations and small group work. Teacher Candidate assessed student interest when
planning lessons to increase comprehension and proficiency. Teacher Candidate looks at learning goals of all students and plans accordingly, as well as the use of strategies
to increase student outcome.


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, 90 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, 90 1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Teacher Candidate has become sufficient in instructing students to introduce the lesson and then coach/mentor during small group instruction. Teacher Candidate provides
opportunities for students to use a range of learning skills, i.e., organizing their work, working independently, and working collaboratively in a group. The Teacher Candidate
used a variety of technology to encourage students to access the information presented, interpret the skill being taught, and apply the information learned independently as
well as collaboratively. I have seen great improvements in this area.


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
85
learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
1.00
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside 88
the school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Per the Cooperating Teacher the Teacher Candidate goes to staff meetings regarding student instructional practices and planning. She has been involved in seeing the
resources used in the classroom and other classrooms, and experiencing how this technique can benefit her while in her own classroom. The Teacher Candidate has been
efficient in understanding student needs and using the data to plan instruction to increase achievement.


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 90
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 90 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Courtney has demonstrated she advocates the students in the assignments she creates, lessons she has planned, and the small group instruction she does daily. The
Teacher Candidate has collaborated with staff and her Cooperating Teacher on making academic changes, as well as improve her instructional practices. The Teacher
Candidate has stated numerous times all children can learn and deserve the best educational possible. The Teacher Candidate has used a myriad of technological tools to
enhance her instruction, engage students to think more critically, and increase achievement and comprehension.

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

88.72 %
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

Danielle Ramseur-Fischer
Danielle Ramseur-Fischer (Nov 16, 2020 11:22 CST) Nov 16, 2020

Clinical Evaluation 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Clinical Evaluation 3

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

Clinical Evaluation 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 8/17/2020 11/29/2020

S.S. Dixon Intermediate School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Courtney Lemos Rodriguez 20372456

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

You might also like