Elm 590 - Clinical Evaluation 3

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
Gloretta Johnson 20626306

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Master of Education in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-590 2/11/2021 5/26/2021

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Missouri Ridge School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
North Dakota
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Zuri Rye
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Louise Lorge
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:
145.56 points
EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 97.04 %
25.00 2,500.00 2,426.00 150
0
0
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
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 95
learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 1.00
97
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. )
Candidate has a class of advanced math students and she is consistent in creating lessons that challenge and inspire them to higher learning. She takes into account their
personal strengths and encourages them to surpass their own expectations each day. .I have observed her differentiating lessons and giving students time to address their
interests through math lessons. She is in constant contact with her colleagues, learning communities and other professionals through staffings, workshops, PD, Google and
other communication avenues allowing for inspiring exchange of ideas and cutting edge teaching methods..


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
95
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 98
their development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular 100 1.00
learning differences or needs.
Evidence
She is very adept at creating lessons that address each of her students' learning style. She allows for a variety of teaching methods for the same concept. This enables the
students to grasp a concept and present their understanding in various ways as well. She has 1 ELL student that has tested out of the program but still completes an exit
ticket for each class. She also allows the student extra time to formulate answers and on tests. This student feels comfortable to ask for any extra help or explanation she may
need. She totally utilizes the specialists in her school for any extra help in learning differences or needs.


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
98
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 99
environment.
Evidence
She has a very well managed classroom. Everything is organized and best arranged for smooth transitions and maintaining student attention with a minimum of
distractions. I observed the students' have ownership in their room and take pride in maintaining order and neatness. She uses verbal and non verbal communication and
always demonstrates respect for all of her students.
Gloretta Johnson
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ 20626306
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 99 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 96 1.00
their content area.
Evidence
Each class starts with a quick review of the previous lesson and throughout the lesson the students are encourages through discussion and questioning, to refer to
previous knowledge base. She effectively uses available technologies and other resources to enrich and supplement the school curriculum. This allows for a
personalization and immediacy in her lessons as they include current and real-world issues. She sets the example with her consistent and correct use of academic
language and encourages her students to follow her lead with positive reinforcements both verbal and through gestures.


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 94
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 95 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Candidate successfully uses cross-curricular themes and concepts to build on the fact that all knowledge is interconnected. She creates opportunity for her
students to apply the knowledge learned in class to solve real-world problems and work in groups to discuss and brainstorm. Candidate teaches in a large school
district and is blessed with a culturally diverse student population. This naturally facilitates a comfortable atmosphere to explore cultural differences and similarities
which she does through class discussions, lessons and student planned presentations and projects.


evaluations)
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 98 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 99 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
99 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
She employs the assessments included in the current curriculum as well as her own immediate assessments of class work, student responses, focus and involvement. The
curriculum assessments naturally minimize sources of bias and any distortion of results. She personally, and in conjunction with colleagues and administration, examine the
test data and makes detailed plans to increase learning and teaching methods. She works assessment concepts and formats into many of her lessons reminding her learners
that this may be something they will see on an assessment in the future.


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 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 97 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 97 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
I observed this candidate treating each of her learners as individuals and making sure they were being educationally reached at their appropriate learning level. He plans
include differentiation and notes any special needs items that need to be addressed. She closely follows the established curriculum and follows the sequencing as appropriate
for her students. She allows for a variety of ways for her learners to evidence their comprehension and mastery including. oral, written, project based and test data. She uses
this information to plan for her instruction.


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) 93 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, 96 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, 97 1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
She is very adept at varying her role in the classroom. During group discussion she becomes audience, facilitator and coach making sure everyone is joining in and being
recognized. She uses tech tools to access, interpret and evaluate her learners knowledge base and then applies this information to improve her teaching skills. She is
consistent in asking leading and higher level thinking questions and I have observed her students become stimulated and engaged through her skills 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
99
learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
1.00
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside 99
the school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
These 2 standards are very strong points for this candidate. She, in conjunction with her colleagues and district, are diligent in their review and study of test data and other
observations in order to increase and improve student learning and retention. She also uses this information as a best practice to improve her personal classroom performance
as a teacher. She is in communication with available professionals as well as master teachers and administration in order to benefit from their expertise and knowledge.


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 98
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 99 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
She avails herself of the many apps that allow for parent/student communication including Class Dojo, texts, emails, phone and personal visits. She is involved in several
learning communities including teacher chats on Google. She is a strong advocate for her school, community and students. She realizes they all must be strong for one to
thrive. She is aware that growth cannot happen without change and works to make transitions easier for teachers as well as students.

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

97.04 %
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

L. Marie Lorge
L. Marie Lorge (Apr 28, 2021 12:56 MDT) Apr 28, 2021

Elm 590 - Clinical Evaluation 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Elm 590 - 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

Elm 590 - Clinical Evaluation 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Master of Education in Elementary Education

ELM-590 2/11/2021 5/26/2021

Missouri Ridge School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

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

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Gloretta Johnson 20626306

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

You might also like