Evaluation 2

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2D
Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Master of Education in Early Childhood Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ECH-680 6/20/2019 8/14/2019

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Claxton Head Start

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Georgia
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Christina Flournoy
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Kelli Adams
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2D
TOTAL POINTS 222.84 points 74.28 %
25 2,500.00 1857
0
0
300
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
300
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)
0 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

1.1
Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students’ strengths, interests, and 75
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 75
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. )
Ms. Broughton has worked with her other colleagues on developing lessons for the children she is working with. She does ask questions on how to promote her student's
growth and development. Ms. Broughton has implemented the suggestions provided to her in the classroom.


Candidate to determine
how the Teacher Candidate
will meet this standard in
future evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 2: Learning Differences Score

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning strengths and needs and create 72
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 72
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 differences or needs. 72
Evidence
Ms. Broughton is working on the ability to deliver lessons to the children in a way which addresses their individual needs, whether this be educational or behavioral. Ms.
Broughton has shown that she is using strategies she is learning to try and improve on her practice. Ms. Broughton was not observed including specific language development
activities within her lessons. I encourage Ms. Broughton to continue to work with her cooperating teachers/colleagues as well as search for additional resources online to assist
her in this area.


Candidate to determine how
the Teacher Candidate will
meet this standard in future
evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 3: Learning Environments Score

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, allocating, and coordinating 72
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 80
backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning environment.
Evidence
Ms. Broughton demonstrated respect and care for the children she worked with. It is apparent that she has their best interest in mind when developing lessons. It was seen in
both of Ms. Broughton observations that she had difficulty when attempting to engage the children she worked with. The children were very young (2-3 yrs old), but with
sound, developmentally appropriate strategies, she should have been able to achieve this. Ms. Broughton had very limited time (4 days) between her observations due to her
not having the correct paperwork in place. I believe this had a tremendous impact on her not having the typical amount of time (3 weeks) to work on developing strategies.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar concepts, and make connections 75
to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and relevance for all students.
72
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their content area. 72
Evidence
During her second observation, Ms. Broughton did make an inquiry with the children as to if they remembered back to a lesson they had about Classroom Rules. The
children were already engaged in coloring and there may have been one that engaged through eye contact. For this lesson, the children (2-3 yrs old) were asked if they
wanted to draw helping hands, walking feet, or inside voice on their paper. She would then label the children's paper to reflect their drawing. When reflecting on the this
aspect of the lesson, I made the suggestion to Ms. Broughton that providing visuals of each classroom expectation may be very helpful for the children with them being so
young. Providing supplementary resources to enhance understanding is always important.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 5: Application of Content Score

5.1
Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens of interdisciplinary themes 76
(e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy).
5.2
Teacher candidates facilitate students’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand their understanding of local 72
and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
During center-time Ms. Broughton followed the lead of several children and left the book she was attempting to read to engage in their pretend play. This was to include using
play food as well as pretending to drive to the grocery store. During this time is a tremendous opportunity for language development. Engaging the children in expanding their
vocabulary is very important. During this time, there was limited vocabulary engagement which truly engaged the children. Always look for every opportunity for vocabulary
enrichment.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 6: Assessment Score

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and minimize sources of bias that can 77
distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to understand each student’s 77
progress and to guide planning.
6.3
Teacher candidates prepare all students for the demands of particular assessment formats and make appropriate modifications in 77
assessments or testing conditions especially for students with disabilities and language learning needs.
Evidence
Ms. Broughton worked with the children through observation as a mode of assessment. She worked collaboratively with her colleagues for guidance in the development of
planning to correspond with aligning the lessons with student observations.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score

7.1
Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student’s learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and accommodations, resources, 75
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 75
skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student knowledge, and student 75
interest.
Evidence
Ms. Broughton collaborated with colleagues in the development of plans which met the developmental needs of each child. She continues to work on how addressing the
developmental needs and using additional resources during lessons will allow children to understand concepts better. Ms. Broughton worked with the children and helped
them in their imaginative play.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score

8.1
Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) in relation to the content, 74
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 74
information.
8.3
Teacher candidates ask questions to stimulate discussion that serve different purposes (e.g., probing for student understanding, helping 74
students articulate their ideas and thinking processes, stimulating curiosity, and helping students to question).
Evidence
When Ms. Broughton is working with the children, she would benefit from varying her role more as the children demonstrate a change in their needs. Providing the children
with a more inquiring question set for this age of children would prove to yield a more developmentally appropriate learning environment as well as a stronger language
experience.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score

9.1
Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, teacher candidates use a variety of data (e.g., systematic observation, information 70
about students, and research) to evaluate the outcomes of teaching and learning and to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the school, as supports for 75
analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Ms. Broughton did collaborate with colleagues to find ways to become stronger in her planning and practice. I know that Ms. Broughton was interested in enhancing her
parental relationships at the beginning of her session. I was unable to see any result of this at the end of her session. I know that she has the professional relationships she
has built.
At the beginning of Ms. Broughton's student teaching, she is provided with the appropriate parent release forms for her to use during her program to video record for her
observations. It clearly states on the forms the Grand Canyon forms are to be used. Ms. Broughton did not follow through with the proper procedure as therefore was not able
to complete her two evaluations until the last 7 days of her first session. Her communication of this and other issues with her Faculty Supervisor was poor. Ms. Broughton has
been strongly encouraged to improve her communication and her ability to take initiative in all she is required to do.


evaluations)
0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
teaching. teaching.
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score

10.1
Teacher candidates use technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to build local and global learning communities that 73
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. 76
Evidence
Ms. Broughton has been in collaborative relationships with her colleagues which she has benefited from. She is strongly encouraged to improve on her communication skills
and taking the initiative on all matters involving her student teaching going into her next session.
Strengths
Ms. Broughton allowed the children to explore their interests in their environment. She used those opportunities as a teachable moment to support children’s language and
cognitive development
Opportunities for Growth

Ms. Broughton should improve on behavior management with the children. Improve communication skills.
Suggestions/Ideas to Implement
Ms. Broughton needs to work on engaging the children in a smaller group to manage behavior during planned activities.

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

evaluations)
No Evidence 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
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. 76
Evidence
Ms. Broughton understands the impact she has on student learning.

INSTRUCTIONS
Please review the "Total Scored Percentage" for accuracy and add any attachments before completing the "Agreement and Signature" section.
74.28 %
Total Scored Percentage:
ATTACHMENTS
Clinical Practice Time Log:
(Required)
(The GCU Faculty Supervisors should not submit the final evaluation until
the Teacher Candidate has completed the number of days required by
their program)
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

Kelli Adams, M.Ed.
Kelli Adams, M.Ed. (Aug 18, 2019) Aug 18, 2019
Kelli Adams
8/14/19
Scanned with CamScanner

Evaluation 2

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

Evaluation 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2D

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Master of Education in Early Childhood Education

ECH-680 6/20/2019 8/14/2019

Claxton Head Start

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score

Opportunities for Growth

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Inde'ra Broughton 20495765

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Scanned with CamScanner

You might also like