Evaluation 5-8 Weeks

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Mattie Spriggs 20416859

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ELM-490 8/12/2019 11/24/2019

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
Plantation Park Elementary School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Louisiana
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Tracie Simmons
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
April King
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 90.04 points 90.04 %
25 2,500.00 2251 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
100
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)
No Evidence 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 No Evidence

1.1
Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students’ 91 1.00
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 91
student growth and development. 1.00
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. )
Spriggs is participating in family nights at the school, parent conferences, and other meetings with colleagues to learn the students better and find ways to meet their needs in
instructional practice. She sends messages to parents in the students' daily notebook as a form of daily communication. As expected, she is able to adjust her lessons on the
spot to meet learning needs of the students.
Her lessons align with the district mandated standards and curriculum. She is able to gage when students need additional practice and when they are ready to work on their
own.


Candidate to determine
how the Teacher Candidate
will meet this standard in
future evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning strengths 92 1.00
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
for making content accessible to English language students and for evaluating and supporting their 92 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 92 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
Spriggs incorporates activities many learning modalities into her lesson. In a previous math lesson, she had the students to solve math problems using a giant number line. The
number line was outside and written in chalk. The students were able to hop on the line to solve addition and subtraction problems. Spriggs also uses number bonds to help
students setup math equations. She allows students to verbally respond to problems and then coaches them in the way to write their responses.
She plans according to the pacing guides provided and the assessment data from assignments and weekly tests. She uses appropriate academic vocabulary and develops
assignments that mirror state assessments.


Candidate to determine how
the Teacher Candidate will
meet this standard in future
evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, 90 1.00
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
responsiveness to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning
91
1.00
environment.
Evidence
Spriggs offers a peaceful learning environment. There are very few behavioral concerns. Behavioral concerns are addressed quickly and students are reminded of the
expectations. Spriggs allows the students to answer freely at times as they work through the lesson. Engagement is high and she is mindful of students who have remained
silent or appear confused.
One area requiring attention is transitional time. Students are aware of what they need to do and where they need to go. They just have time doing it quickly and quitely. This
takes time with lower grades.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar 91 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 their 90 1.00
content area.
Evidence
Spriggs demonstrates a healthy understanding of the content she is required to teach. She is able to get the students' attention with fun activities and procedures. Spriggs
pulls in appropriate materials to fill in learning gaps and bring students to the appropriate level of rigor.
During a recent visit, Spriggs offered the students several guided problems to complete until the students felt comfortable working on their own.
She used the correct academic language for the content area.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
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 88 1.00
interdisciplinary themes (e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy).
5.2
Teacher candidates facilitate students’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand 88 1.00
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
Spriggs is able to put things into grade appropriate terms with ease. She explains and restates so that the students are able to comprehend. Then she restates it in the
appropriate language.
Spriggs' opening activities captures the learners' attention and gets them engaged in the lessons. She brings up the background and makes connections where possible.
Spriggs continues to support the diversity in the classroom and ties in their cultural perspectives in her reading lessons as much as possible.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
1.00
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and minimize 90
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 90 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Spriggs uses daily Exit Tickets to assess student performance each day. She uses pre-test data to assist her in planning future lessons and RTI activities. She uses post-test data
in the same manner. Assessment from district provided assessments and teacher-created assessments improves her ability to determine which standards need to be taught and
which ones need to be reviewed or retaught. Spriggs makes sure that her assessments mirror district level and state assessments.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
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 90 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 90 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
Spriggs follows appropriate sequencing of lessons based on standards and assessment data. She uses the data from assessments to develop lesson actitivities, small group
composure, and whole group lessons. She looks at formal assessments and uses her observation of written and oral responses as well.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
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 89 1.00
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, 89 1.00
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,
89
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Spriggs is able to switch her role in the classroom as she teaches her full days now. She uses appropriate questioning technigues. She is able to ask a question and probe
until the students conceptualize the problem and get an appropriate answer. She also asks questions to help her determine where the students have misunderstood some
things.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
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 1.00
observation, information about students, and research) to evaluate the outcomes of teaching and learning and 89
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 89 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Spriggs participates in data meetings, faculty meetings, grade level meetings, and department meetings in order to build her professional knowledge. She offers ideas and
obsorbs the knowledge provided by her colleagues. She has offered advice to another student teacher on the campus. Spriggs reflects on lessons at the end of the day and
maintains a journal. Her journal entries include new ideas, successes, failures, and questions for her cooperating teacher.
She communicates well with others.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
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 90 1.00
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
Spriggs uses a great deal of technology to communicate with parents and other professionals. She is committed to engaging the students and their families into the
educational process.
She provides input for the daily notebook, parent conferences, and other forms of communication.

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

evaluations)
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. 92 1.00
Evidence
Spriggs understandsd her impact on student learning and has adjusted her teaching strategies to help the students move in the right direction. She realizes that student
performance on assessments is a reflection of their retention of knowledge and demonstrates their understanding of concepts.

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

90.04 %
ATTACHMENTS
Clinical Practice Time Log:
(Required)
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
A. King (Sep 30, 2019) Sep 30, 2019

Mattie Spriggs
September 30, 2019
Observation 2
First Grade Math Lesson

Objectives: Students will solve subtraction math stories by drawing and using horizontal marks to cross
off what is taken away with 80% accuracy.
When I entered the room, Mrs. Spriggs was going over some spiral review activities with the students.
The students were seated on the carpet and Spriggs was seated in front of them.
Spriggs transitioned into the math lesson with a math story. The story was presented to the students on
the SmartBoard. “8 ducks are swimming in the pond. 4 ducks fly away. How many ducks are still
swimming in the pond?”
She then used the CUBE method to guide the students through solving the problem.
C-Circle the numbers.

U-Underline the question
B-Box in the math words
E-Evaluate
S-Solve
The students used a number bond to write an equation and then solve. 8-4=4
After the group solved the problem, Spriggs called the students by groups to go to their stations. The
group called Thunder came to meet her on the floor on the carpet. The Lightening group went to work
on computers.
At the carpet, Spriggs gave an overview of what the students would be working on in their session.
Spriggs then read the math story. She drew the number of circles to represent the number of students
in the math story, 6. Then, they discussed how many needed to be crossed out, 2. They then drew a
number bond to write the equation.
The students had to put the whole first, 6 and then identify the parts, 2 and 4. And developed the
equation 6-2=4. She then had them to develop the related addition problem.
She then gave the students a white board to work on with their partner. She read the scenario to the
students and gave them time to work on their number bond.
As the students worked, Spriggs offered support and reminders. She gave each group an opportunity to
share. She made sure that students had time to get the correct answers.
They good several problems together at the carpet. After, they were done, Spriggs had the students put
away the materials and get clipboards. Once the students got their clipboards, they got a pencil and
went to their spots. They were then provided a math handout to complete on their own.
Spriggs had the students to write their name on their paper and put their hands on their head to show
they were done with the task.
Spriggs led the students through working on 3 problems together. She read the math story. Then had
the students to cross out the correct number of objects and fill in the number bond. They wrote the
subtraction fact and the related addition equation.
After the students finished the remaining problems on their own as an exit ticket. Spriggs helped the
students as needed and made sure that they understood what was required of them. Once the students
met with her about their performance, she sent them to turn in the clip boards and sit on the red line
for transition.
Notes:
Spriggs’ cooperating teacher, Mrs. Simmons notes that Spriggs maintains excellent classroom
management. She is very mindful of what is going on in class. She learns from missteps and makes the
necessary changes immediately. She asks questions and offers assistance to other student teachers on
campus as well.
Spriggs should also work on stating what she is about to do so that students are sure about the
expectations. She also has to stop calling on a child to answer the question because the other students
check-out of the lesson when their name is not called.
Mrs. Simmons suggests that Spriggs be sure to give out points steadily for positive behavior by students.
She also suggests a better use of transitional times. For example, when the students are getting clip
boards, let the other partner grab the paper and pencil to avoid excessive traffic.

Evaluation 5-8 Weeks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluation 5-8 Weeks

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 5-8 Weeks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education

ELM-490 8/12/2019 11/24/2019

Plantation Park Elementary School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Mattie Spriggs 20416859

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

A. King (Sep 30, 2019) Sep 30, 2019

First Grade Math Lesson

C-Circle the numbers.

You might also like