CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

Master of Education in Special Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SPD-590 1/10/2019 4/24/2019

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________

Colorado Early Colleges Fort Collins High School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Colorado
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________

Danielle Miller (Bucciarelli)

COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________

Chandal Bass
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 90.28 points 90.28 %
25 2,500.00 2257 100
0

0
0

0
0

0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0
100
0 0 0 0 0
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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’ 90 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 90
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. )
Leangela checks planners at the first of class and awards points for having planners signed. She problem solves with students who did not get them signed. Angie works hard
developing instruction that is appropriate and meets each student’s unique individually needs. She knows her student’s strengths, interest and needs well as she is now writing
and running IEPs, therefore has to be very aware of these things. Angie has done a great job of collaborating with families, colleagues and other staff members to ensure
students needs are being met and problem solving when necessary. Areas of Growth- Learn about resources in the community that can be beneficial to our students and their
families. Example- The Arc, Matthews House, Campus Connections etc. A suggestion would be to consider using different modalities throughout teaching. A blend of
discussion, hands-on and kinesthetic will increase student learning. However, it is also noted that today seems to be review.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning strengths 87 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 85 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 90 1.00
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. )
Leangela reports that she uses pre and post assessments to inform teaching. Strengths- Since Angie is teaching in a Resource Room, the focus of that is to work on each
student’s individually needs. Her student’s have a wide range of needs and academic levels. She is able to differentiate instruction to meet each student’s learning style including
providing different Lexile leveled readings, group discussion (think-pair-share), modeling, working one-on-one or in small groups, and by providing written and verbal direction
and visuals. She also works closely with the IEP team to access different resources and works closely with her supervisor to ensure the IEP is being followed and students needs
are being met. Areas of Growth- Consider key words (vocabulary to focus on that would be beneficial for employment and post them.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, 89 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
95
1.00
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. )
The learning environment is quiet and calm today. Leangela reminds students to put their cell phones in the box before beginning class. Students feel comfortable sharing
and asking questions during class. It is apparent that Leangela has a great rapport with her students! She checks on students throughout the lesson and approaches
students with sincerity. Strengths- Angie is very organized and does well with her use of time, space and getting students attention. When doing a lesson with the whole
class, students are actively engaged. Areas of Growth- Sometimes students have been observed being off topic when independently working. Although it is important to
build rapport with students and build social skills, it is important to stay on task with the objective. This includes planning for time and when students finish early. Watch for
students talking across the classroom to be respectful of other students working and testing.
3.2 Is an area of strength for Leangela!
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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 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 their 85 1.00
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. )
Leangela goes over the appropriate attire to wear during a job interview. Strengths- Angie does a good job of activating prior knowledge in group. She is able to relate
many of her lessons to real world/ life skills that students can connect with. If students do not have the proper background knowledge, she is able to provide this
information before moving on with the lesson. Since Angie does not have a projector in her room, she has had to get creative when involving technology. She incorporates
technology by allowing student to use the classroom computers to research, write/ use text to speech. Areas of Growth- Leangla’s cooperating teacher recommends
providing a more of a formal prior knowledge assessment such as a KWL chart. For today’s lesson a suggestion might be working on specific vocabulary that could be
used in an interview.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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 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 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 90 1.00
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. )
Angie has done a great job of providing knowledge on real-world problems. In order to support their transition/ post-secondary goals within their IEP, Angie has been
providing lessons on job searching skills such as Interview skills and filling out applications. These are skills that she is able to incorporate writing, reading, math and social
skills. Students are able to make connections on how they will use this in the real world which motivates them. Today’s observed lesson was review on interviewing with an
employer. The lesson connected well with real-world life. Suggestions may include mock interviews, creating a resume, or practicing different areas of the interview process.
5.2 Students are able to share their own ideas and opinions during the lesson today.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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 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 92 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
(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. )
Leangela plans a quiz for students during class today. She reviews with students before they take the quiz. Students were given warning when the quiz was almost done. It is
suggested that a secondary assignment or activity is planned for early finishers. Angie does check on a student and asks why he is not working on his math during this free time.
Strengths- Angie supports general ed teachers in implementing testing accommodations such as extended time, modify tests, read aloud, clarifying questions for students,
providing assistive technology when necessary. Although she is able to interpret the data for a revaluation and use it to create goals and accommodations, an area of growth for
Angie could be to independently assess for a reevaluation using an achievement test such as the WJ IV.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

7.1
Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student’s learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and 91 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 92 1.00
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. )
It is apparent that today’s lesson was built upon previous lessons on getting a job. Strengths- Angie has done a great job of choosing appropriate strategies, accommodations
and method of instruction for each student’s unique needs. There are often times where she will identify thing that are not working, and problem solves and collaborate with
other staff members to figure out how to reach all students. Angie also does well with progress monitoring students and providing interest inventories/transition assessments
to gather data and uses that data to provide appropriate instruction using student’s strengths and interest to her students and shares data with general ed teachers. Areas of
Growth- How can you maximize learning? Many students were sitting doing nothing while waiting on other students to finish the quiz. Students could have been working on
other assignments or an assignment related to this lesson.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

8.1
Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) in 90 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, 90 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,
93
1.00
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. )
Leangela does a nice job proving sincere feedback for students. All students are engaged and if they became distracted, she was able to get their attention quickly. Rapport
is high in this classroom, nice work! Strengths- Angie is able to change her role depending on the students needs. She is often seen not only instructing students, but is able
to coach and advocate for her students when necessary. Angie engages her students by implementing different tools such as individual white boards, student computers,
worksheets and group discussions. She is able to quickly see what her students are understanding or not understanding and is able to adapt her lesson if needed. She does
well with asking open ended questions which triggers their thinking process. Her students feel comfortable in the classroom and are willing to share!
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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 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 90
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 90 1.00
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. )
Leangela has attended a professional development about depression and how it affects students in the classroom. Angie is able to share student data with teachers on growth
and will reach out to teachers when she is feeling she needs data such as a written work sample. Areas of Growth- Leangela’s cooperating teacher reports that a goal for
Angie is to have opportunities to observe students in their general ed classes more. Continue to work on a variety of assessments, practicing administering them and
evaluating their data, in order to get an overall view of students.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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 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 92 1.00
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. )
Leangela has met with the teaching team many times, a couple of those were conducting IEP's and others were team meetings with parents and other content area teachers.
On one occasion, she met with the student, parent and Math teacher regarding the student’s ability to be successful. They discussed resources the student could access and
the current areas where the student is struggling (homework). Strengths- Angie communicates with families and colleagues in a variety of ways including email, phone, in
person one-on-one and in team meetings. Angie has done a great job advocating for changes needed for next semester/next year to ensure we are providing student FAPE
and has made several suggestions in schedules/classes that will better support her students on her caseload. Areas to work on in the Future- Collaborate with advisers on
her student’s schedules for next semester. Angie has a better understanding on student course requirements and course projections this semester.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

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.

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. 90 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. )
According to Leangela: My students are currently learning about the foundations of employment. My students are being measured through pre and post assessments on the
content being covered. I am also evaluating using teacher input and monitoring.

She has a goal to work more with the WJIV assessing and interpreting information gathered.
 CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Leangela Duarte 0578626

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________

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

Total Scored Percentage:

90.28 %
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

Chandal Bass
Chandal Bass (Mar 6, 2019) Mar 6, 2019