Elm490clinical Practice Evaluation 3

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
Aubrey Goddard 20366281

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 8/13/2018 11/25/2018

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Bud Beasley Elementary School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Nevada
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Jessica Lara
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Catherine Tully
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:
132.54 points
EVALUATION 3 TOTAL
POINTS 88.36 %
25.00 2,500.00 2,209.00 150
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
150 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
86
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. )
During formal observation, and as reported by her Cooperating Teacher, Ms. Goddard utilizes multiple instructional strategies during guided reading. She models what a
fluent and accurate reader looks like and sounds like during guided reading groups and during read aloud lessons. When a new text is introduced, Ms. Goddard models how
to conduct a picture walk, previews new/difficult vocabulary, introduces characters and setting, and guides students to make predictions. Some students are directed to read
on their own, while struggling students are given increased support. Ms. Goddard is constantly involved with predicting and monitoring which students might need extra
support prior to her lessons through taking into account prior observations, an awareness of developmental levels of individual students, and pre-assessments. One way that
collaboration with colleagues and/or other professionals is accomplished is by her keeping Tier 2/Tier 3 notes on students in her intervention group.


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 90
their development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular 86 1.00
learning differences or needs.
Evidence
Ms. Goddard is adept in her observation of student learning patterns and uses the knowledge gleaned to plan her lessons. Her awareness allows her to identify potential
misconceptions in advance and adjust her lessons accordingly. Multiple strategies are used to help each of her students maximize their learning. Students who are struggling
and those in need of more challenging learning activities are identified and differentiated instruction is provided to meet each of them at their own level. When introducing new
math concepts in a whole class lesson, Ms. Goddard was observed modeling the new concept, allowing students to talk about it, and then assigning them practice while she
circulated through the room observing their work and assisting as appropriate. She consistently uses academic vocabulary as she teaches. For example, she identifies math
strategies by academic name/definition. These are also posted in the classroom. New/difficult vocabulary is previewed across all subjects.


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
85
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
To increase active engagement, Ms. Goddard randomly calls on students using a system where she selects popsicle sticks with student names. She also uses strategies
such as pair-share, table talk, and proximity to keep all students focused. Different grouping strategies are incorporated. For instance, Ms. Goddard often uses a whole
group configuration to introduce new concepts, small groups to ensure understanding and correct unintended misconceptions, and independent work for practice of
concepts and to allow for observation of students and offering one-on-one support. Ms. Goddard uses learning centers for coordination of resources. She plans
appropriate activities for the centers, allowing for differentiated instruction. This is especially evident as one center involves students working with her in a small group.
She was observed providing students with graduated assistance in reading during this time and assessing progress. Ms. Goddard manages the environment in a positive
way.
Aubrey Goddard
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ 20366281
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
During an observed reading lesson, students were required to reflect on prior knowledge with regard to phonics, fluency, and comprehension strategies. In mathematics,
students were observed using prior knowledge (i.e. strategies taught previously) to solve math problems. As students reviewed letter sounds and vowel sounds using their
classroom word wall and oral recitation, it was obvious they had done this many times before and were able to read/recite enthusiastically. The student teacher routinely
incorporates the various technology resources in the classroom such as the Smart Board, Elmo, computers, and iPads. She uses all of the online programs that are
encouraged school-wide at her site such as Reflex, Envision Math, Infinite Campus, Powerpoint, Freckle, and Raz kids. Academic vocabulary was supported in various
ways as evidenced by the classroom being a print-rich environment with academic vocabulary across subject areas posted and readily used by student teacher and
students.


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 84
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 84 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Ms. Goddard has designed lessons that cross over multiple content areas. She recently developed a unit of study to introduce students to the real story behind
Thanksgiving. A prior social studies unit taught students about 9-11 and how this tragedy was able to unite our citizens. Both of these units provided students with
opportunities to read, write, draw, speak, listen, etc. and resulted in student discussions at higher levels - at times allowing them to think about real world issues
and problems and how history can help our understanding of what is occurring in current times. Ms. Goddard explores available teaching resources in the building,
on educational websites, and through collaboration with her colleagues to ensure lessons are high interest and relevant according to her Cooperating Teacher.


evaluations)
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and 92 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 90 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
Evidence of this standard is that Ms. Goddard administers running records on each student at least once per week during guided reading instruction.These records allow her
to provide students with reading materials at their individual instructional levels. Students are monitored and the guided reading groups are flexible with students able to move
between groups in accordance with their progress. Her running records also allow her to look for patterns, such as consistent mistakes, or reading strategies that are a good
fit for certain students. In grading student work, the Cooperating Teacher reports that Ms. Goddard uses rubrics to minimize bias. She creates measurable learning objectives
and ensures that students understand what they are to learn and why. Assessment data is examined closely and analysis allows her to plan appropriate instruction.
Assessment is modified for special education students according to Individualized Education Plans and for higher level students.


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 91 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 88 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Examination of Ms. Goddard's lesson plans indicate Content Standards and Learning Objectives specific to the lesson to be taught. She includes a statement of prior
knowledge, materials needed, specific sequenced learning activities, grouping strategies, and pacing. It is noted that Ms. Goddard allows students to demonstrate their
learning in a variety of ways including the use of active boards, white boards, think time, partner talk, etc. A wide variety of activities and delivery methods increases
participation and keeps students engaged. It was observed that Ms. Goddard showed flexibility and an ability to think on her feet when her usual plan for delivering a lesson
could not be implemented as she intended due to technology issues. She adapted easily and instruction proceeded smoothly. During Reading/Language Arts Centers, Ms.
Goddard showed evidence of differentiated instruction through the different (leveled) materials she provided for students based on assessment data.


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) 87 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, 85 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, 85 1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Ms. Goddard varies her role in the instructional process at times by being a facilitator, rather than always an instructor. She is working on the gradual release of responsibility
to allow students to be empowered to increase their own knowledge and skill set, rather than having her bear the sole responsibility for their learning. The Cooperating
Teacher reports that Ms. Goddard frequently asks questions of students at the beginning of her lessons to stimulate curiosity and to probe for background knowledge. For
instance, in social studies, Ms. Goddard began with posing the question, "What is the REAL story behind the first Thanksgiving?" Students then had to research the answer
through reading. She did not give them the answer, but gave them the resources to find the answers themselves. As the unit progressed, Ms. Goddard continued to engage
students through posing open-ended inquiries and probing questions. She is encouraged to challenge students to now become the question-askers.


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
89
learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
1.00
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside 85
the school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Ms. Goddard uses both formative and summative assessments to drive her instruction. She is familiar with the use of running records to gauge student reading levels (i.e.
accuracy, fluency, and comprehension), informal and formal observation, DRA, and MAPS. She conducts intervention groups for students in Tier 2 and Tier 3, and is
responsible for documenting student progress through maintenance of an informational notebook. Through multiple means of assessment, the outcomes of teaching and
learning are constantly evaluated and planning/practice is adapted accordingly. Ms. Goddard locates new books for her students that are aligned with their interests and their
instructional level to maximize learning. It is observed that Ms. Goddard asks many questions to ensure her lessons and her delivery of lessons are optimal. She asks for
feedback and is open to suggestions and constructive critique. She is encouraged to continue to seek technology resources to support her reflective practice.


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 92
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 92 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Family communication with school is critical to student success and Ms. Goddard facilitates this communication through creating and distributing a weekly newsletter that goes
home with students on Fridays. In this newsletter, weekly objectives, upcoming events, and personal reminders are included. She also engages with families through Class
Dojo, which is an online behavior management program. Ms. Goddard recently participated in Parent Teacher Conferences and her contributions to the discussions held were
quite valuable, according to her Cooperating Teacher. Families appreciated her observations. Ms. Goddard meets weekly with her second grade Professional Learning
Community (PLC) and works effectively with other professionals in the building to plan for, research, and accommodate student success. During professional conversation, it
is apparent that Ms. Goddard's first concern is always for her students. She is empathetic and an advocate for each of the students in her class.

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

88.36 %
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

Catherine Tully
Catherine Tully (Nov 8, 2018) Nov 8, 2018

Elm490clinical Practice 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

Elm490clinical Practice Evaluation 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 8/13/2018 11/25/2018

Bud Beasley Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

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

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Aubrey Goddard 20366281

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

You might also like