CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

PROGRAM:
Master of Education in Secondary Education

SEC-590
COURSE: START DATE: 1/19/2023 END DATE: 5/3/2023

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME:

Rogers High School

Washington
SCHOOL STATE:

Katherine Charters
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME:

GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME:

Thomas Falash

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS
94.62

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide
No Evidence
(The GCU Faculty
Supervisor should create a
plan with the Teacher
Candidate to determine
how the Teacher Candidate
will meet this standard in
future evaluations)
No Evidence
There is no evidence that
the performance of the
Teacher Candidate met this
standard or expectations
for a Teacher Candidate
during student teaching.
TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe
Ineffective
(Teacher Candidates within
this range require a
Professional Growth Plan)
0 to 49
The performance of the
Teacher Candidate is
insufficient in meeting this
standard and expectations
for a Teacher Candidate
during student teaching.
Foundational
(Teacher Candidates within
this range require a
Professional Growth Plan)
50 to 69
The performance of the
Teacher Candidate is
underdeveloped in meeting
this standard and
expectations for a Teacher
Candidate during student
teaching.
Emerging
(Teacher Candidates within
this range may benefit from a
Professional Growth Plan)
70 to 79
The performance of the
Teacher Candidate is
developing in meeting this
standard and expectations for
a Teacher Candidate during
student teaching.
CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
STUDENT NUMBER 20910000
Proficient Distinguished
(Target level for Teacher (Usually reserved for master
Candidates) Teacher Candidates)
80 to 92 93 to 100
The performance of the The performance of the
Teacher Candidate meets Teacher Candidate
this standard and consistently exceeds this
expectations for a Teacher standard and all
Candidate during student expectations for a Teacher
teaching. Candidate during student
teaching.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

1.1
Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students’ 92
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 92
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. )

David’s instructional lesson design accounted for the unique learning needs of all students and planned for differentiated instructional delivery and individual
assessment to assure students were able to show their understand of the expectations to demonstrate success reflecting in their understanding of writing issues
i.e., ‘Research Synthesis Essay.’ He utilized a guided direct guided instruction activity to assist all
students work toward mastery of the objectives and end lesson goals of producing their work in one of multiple forms i.e., podcast, essay, info graphic, or poster.
The choice was given to students to decide on which method to showcase their understanding and goal attainment for the assignment. This method of checking for
understand gives all students the opportunity to work to their fullest potential utilizing their strength area.

David communicates to parents and students through utilizing a variety of modalities to communicate with students and parents to answer any questions they may
have through personal contact, phone call, written communication, and email. David actively continues to plan and work with colleagues to assure students are on
point with district and state grade-level expectations. He works with his cooperating teacher to ensure his understanding of the lesson strategies and focuses on
meeting to discuss goals for academic instruction. He incorporated multiple modalities to teach lesson content to aid students to be fully engaged in their learning
and to peak and maintain their interest and participation through visual, auditory, and use of standard printed materials.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning strengths 94
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 94
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 96
differences or needs.
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. )

David addresses individual student’s students learning needs on an ongoing basis and during guided and independent learning instruction. He verbally reviewed and
modeled the learning expectations for the students checking for their understand of what is expected and how they will demonstrate their individual success during
the activity session. He does this by maintain an open and structured learning environment and securing the attention of all students and use of appropriate verbal
and nonverbal communication. He is constantly monitors students by use of asking appropriate questioning and modeling of the objectives during guided practice
instruction. He utilized walkabout strategy and direct Q & A to monitor individual and groups of students in checking their understanding of the lesson expectations.
He provided redirection of skills and gave individualized time to those students who may need extra coaching i.e., ELL, students with special needs, or those needing
further guidance.

During the guided practice instructional activities, David used Q & A strategies to involve all students encouraging participation and giving them the opportunity to
demonstrate their individual understanding of the concepts for the upcoming check in assessment on ‘Environmental Issues’ they care about; why does it impact
them; how it impacts them now or in the future. David delivered a guided instruction opening and utilized group participation around the topic. He monitors individual
understanding to assure all student have equal opportunity to participate and employs behavioral strategies to show respect for others, appropriate, and respectful
behaviors, as individual are interacting with other classmates and the teacher. In each lesson, he plans for and pre-teaches any vocabulary or skills needed, reviews
the expected learning mastery outcomes, and how individual students can demonstrate their understanding of the lesson objectives. This may include multiple forms
depending on the learning need of the student.

David works well with his cooperating mentor, learning specialist, and other school personnel and other departments who work with his students. He established a
system of reporting to keep abreast of individual progress for those students being served.

Note: An area of discussion was what I call ‘head on a swivel’ to better monitor students for use of cell phones, headphones, etc. He instructed students to put all
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, 93
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 94
responsiveness to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning
environment.
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. )

David has refined and establish procedures and practices in managing the classroom learning environment and time allotted for subject matter. He understands
and has improved in his practice attending to the time management aspect of the instructional day allow for more time on task and focused learning for all students.
He addresses and sets the expectations for student behavior daily to ensure students have a full understanding of appropriate self-management and group
interaction to insure a safe and orderly learning environment. He has solid expectations and monitors inappropriate behaviors readdressing, if needed. He utilized
positive reinforcement and verbally acknowledged appropriate student responses, and behaviors.

During the lesson activity, he has built in time for to monitors students utilizing a ‘Walkabout Strategy’ stopping to listen, interact, and redirect and focus student’s
discussion, if needed. This strategy allows his to spend individual time to assist students on any questions, clarification, and redirection/guidance they may need. The
use of technology and other teacher tool were utilized to aid student during activity.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar 94
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 96
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 96
content area.
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. )

In planning and new activity or lesson, David checked for individual prior knowledge through activities or guided practice and group Q & A in checking to see where
students were with their understanding of their conflict resolution skills to be assessed. He utilized group discussion and interactions on environmental issues of
interest. Taking this information, he easily adjusts the focus, lesson content, and instructional delivery method to account for the students prior understand and
appropriate way to reintroduce skills. He utilized appropriate instructional tools and materials in order to assess the goals of the lesson. He is constantly aware of
providing equitable opportunities for student participation and sensitive to cultural diversity in his class. Student are extended every opportunity to interact with the
teacher and other students by appropriate methods expressly taught and monitored. He is developing a strong teacher voice both verbally and nonverbally in setting
the expectations for learning in his classroom and in providing feedback to students holding them accountable for their individual/group learning and behavioral
actions. He provides multicultural opportunities in support of student diversity in the room through books, charts, art, and other visual/technology means.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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 95
interdisciplinary themes (e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy).
5.2
Teacher candidates facilitate students’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand 94
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
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. )

David plans and engages students in understanding the lesson instructional content and works to relate the skills to everyday real-life activities known by the students i.e., work, play,
peer interactions, understanding news media, etc. Using teacher guided instruction he set the tone and expectation for individual success. Following the whole group guided set up
instruction, students were able to understand the concept of the build more understanding of activity expectations.

David models the correct use of academic language in his delivery to students and colleagues. He seeks out opportunities in his lesson design and delivery to encourage students to
provided opportunities to listen, respond, and participate in academic language development i.e., understanding, independent activity, etc. In class discussions, he models appropriate
understand of social and cultural perspectives in issues students are interested in local and world events. He allows for all students to freely express their thoughts, opinions, and
model current skill level without bias or judgement, but is aware to redirect and guide students who may not grasp a full understand of each skill. Students feel comfortable in
expression opinions and sharing with their classmates.

Note: David was adept working in his personal knowledge/stories into the discussion i.e., brown lawn/wildfire example bringing into real time who burned soil generates back more
quickly and generally stronger. This was a great example of building relationships with students in a timely manner.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and minimize 96
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 95
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 96
appropriate modifications in assessments or testing conditions especially for students with disabilities and
language learning needs.
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. )

David considers prior student data to plan and adjust lesson objectives and goals in planning for how students would demonstrate success and understand of the
subject matter. He works with his (CT) to ensure the lesson content is on track and is sufficiently designed to achieve maximum positive outcome. He displays the
ability to adjust on the fly when need during guided instructions based on data received visually and orally by the students. He looks at the overall data collected to
make the necessary adjustments to lesson content to reteach or redirect the next lesson to build on student success.

In measuring assessment success and making necessary adjustments, he utilized all student data i.e., verbal, skill show and go, skill check list to adjust for each
student especially those identified as ELL, Sped, or 504 accommodated students. He designs and modifies assessment formats based on date and accommodation
needs specificized. Student are shown teacher model examples to show and the expectations for success are defined and understood.

Note: David provided a ‘Check List’ for the Synthesis Research project and utilized guided practice with the whole group to increase their understand on
environmental issues on a several levels i.e., globally, internationally, nationally, and local. He gave time for think-pair-share to draw out student ideas shared with the
class.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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 96
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 96
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 94
knowledge, and student interest.
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. )
In planning for students to demonstrate success and mastery of the lesson design objectives, David utilizes both collected assessments and data i.e., guided practice
worksheet and student self-evaluation. This allows his to make the necessary adjustment to instruction and lesson objectives to differentiate outcome expectations
for each student based on need, ability, or specialized instructional goals. He makes use of accommodation strategies and tools available to help ensure students can
intake and demonstrate success. i.e., guided instruction, worksheets, walkabouts, visual assist, and individualized teacher/student contact time.

In utilizing the gathered lesson/student data, he makes adjustment or redirects instruction to establish new or to readdress prior knowledge of content taught. He
demonstrated a focused understand of scaffolding of lesson objectives and set up students for success by clearly explaining expected outcomes and ways to show
mastery. He is aware of cultural differences and abilities of students and plans accordingly making the necessary adjustments to time, content, instructional
strategies.

Note: Handing back a prior written assignment, David discussed with the group the general outcomes of the assignment. He gave praise for their efforts but
recognized the effort afforded by the group could have been better. He gave student an opportunity to improve their grade on the assignment by reworking or
finishing up thoughts, as it was a timed writing piece. Students had the option to rework or accept the grade they earned. He conducted his walkabout and helped
students and encouraged them to push deeper in the process. In addition to his help, he provided additional resources to review and utilized in the timed writing re-
write opportunity.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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 96
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, 94
evaluate, and apply information.
8.3
Teacher candidates ask questions to stimulate discussion that serve different purposes (e.g., probing for 95
student understanding, helping students articulate their ideas and thinking processes, stimulating curiosity,
and helping students to question).
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. )

David knows the various roles played throughout the day i.e., instructor, coach, facilitator, and audience. He moves smoothly in between each role in support of his
students. He sets and demonstrates student expectations for success and behavior for each activity and transition in the class to ensure consistent student
management, safety, and health of all students. David is constantly keeping the individuals/groups on point, while monitoring the independent work and offers
feedback in redirecting skill responses and will check for understand. He often ties material into real life examples to help student internalize and understand the
concepts or theme of the physical education activity.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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
95
observation, information 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 95
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
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. )

In collaboration with his students, David collects and utilizes a variety of student data collected, to monitor and record individual progress toward activity goals. He
communicates frequently with his colleagues to monitor and plan for meeting building, district, and state standards/benchmarks. He is in communication with his
parent group and is active in his local community activities. He takes a high interest in keeping parents informed and encourages them to become actively engaged
in their student’s learning. He gathers assessment data in preparation for student/parent conferences, progress communication, and district progress reporting.
He participates in schoolwide trainings and other district learning opportunities. He is actively engaged with his (CT) and colleagues.

As a strong advocate for his students, David takes an active role to ensure all student are engaged and participating in their learning. He is continually striving to
meet the needs of all his students in lesson design, planning, and daily interactions with his students. This show by his commitment and hours of preparation. David
seeks out colleagues and administration to help problem-solve issues in supporting his students. Example, he worked with the students and parent to supply the
required GCU documentation required to fully participate in videotaped lessons.

In addition to his regular teaching assignment, David works with students in extracurricular activities (track). This affords him the opportunity to foster and build
positive relationship with his students and the general student population, parents/guardians, and community.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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 94
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 94
enact system change.
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. )

David is adept in utilizing classroom technology tools to engage his students in the learning process i.e., overhead, teacher constructed materials, etc. He works to
build classroom and school community awareness by having students’ think-pair-share demonstrate understand, visual target information posted, and other
means available. He encourages students and families to take part in school and local community sponsored events. He is a strong advocate for his student in all
aspect of school, home, and community life.

David consistently models positive problem-solving and conflict resolution traits to all students. He shows through example and puts his words and beliefs into
action in all situations. He carries the belief with him in the classrooms, coaching, and community settings and continually works to resolve conflict preserving the
respect and dignity of all involved pushing for a peaceful resolution.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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. 94

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. )

David continues to demonstrate a solid understanding of the (STEP), as supported by his use of formative and summative assessments and data collected to guide in instructional
planning. This data was discussed with (CT) and colleagues to help drive adequate progress towards meeting benchmarks and standards established by the district and state. He
understands the importance of assessment data in planning for student growth, planning instructional content, and adjusting content of lessons to support student success, as
needed.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME David Rothe STUDENT NUMBER 20910000

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

Total Scored Percentage:

94.62 %
ATTACHMENTS

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

Thomas Falash esigned on Thursday, March 16, 2023 3:54 PM