Description Review the summative student teaching evaluation (Clinical Practice Evaluation 4) locat ...
Description Review the summative student teaching evaluation (Clinical Practice Evaluation 4) located on the Student Success Center. Using the evaluation, assess your current performance on each component of the evaluation (Professional Dispositions, Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Standards, and Specialized Professional Association (SPA) Standards). Reflect on yours areas of strength – what evidence is there to demonstrate your competence in these areas? Share how you plan to strengthen the areas of opportunity. 1 attachments Slide 1 of 1 attachment_1 attachment_1 UNFORMATTED ATTACHMENT PREVIEW Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 GCU Professional Dispositions of Learners Scoring Guide No Evidence Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Foundational (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this disposition or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is insufficient in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. High Expectations Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this disposition and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score Teacher candidates should believe that all students could learn and should set and support realistic expectations for student success. These expectations should be communicated in positive ways. Evidence (The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Respect for the Diversity of Others Score Teacher candidates should be sensitive to individual learning and the social needs of students and embrace the cultural diversity of the community. They should develop and maintain educational communities marked by respect for others. They should interact with their students, fellow educators, administrators, parents, and other community members with courtesy and civility and establish relationships characterized by respect and rapport. Evidence (The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 GCU Professional Dispositions of Learners Scoring Guide No Evidence Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Foundational (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this disposition or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is insufficient in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Fairness Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this disposition and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score Teacher candidates should promote social justice and equity, maintain appropriate standards of confidentiality, and exercise fairness in all areas including assessment. Evidence (The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Professional Conduct Score Teacher candidates should exercise sound judgment and ethical behavior. They should be a positive role model within their community. Evidence (The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 GCU Professional Dispositions of Learners Scoring Guide No Evidence Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Foundational (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this disposition or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is insufficient in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Reflection Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this disposition and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score Teacher candidates should recognize that reflection combined with experience leads to growth as a professional. Educators should be thoughtful about their professional practice, critically examine it, and seek continual improvement. Evidence ((The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Curiosity Score Teacher candidates should promote and support curiosity and encourage active inquiry. Evidence (The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 GCU Professional Dispositions of Learners Scoring Guide No Evidence Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Foundational (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this disposition or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is insufficient in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Honesty Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this disposition and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score Teacher candidates should model integrity by their words and actions. Evidence (The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Compassion Score Teacher candidates should demonstrate professional friendliness, warmth, and genuine caring in their relationships with others while providing intellectual, emotional, and spiritual support. Evidence (The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 GCU Professional Dispositions of Learners Scoring Guide No Evidence Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Foundational (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 0 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this disposition or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is insufficient in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this disposition and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Advocacy Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this disposition and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score Teacher candidates understand the impact of community involvement and servant leadership as it applies to the welfare of others in the educational setting. Evidence (The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Dedication Score Teacher candidates should be committed to the profession of teaching and learning. Evidence (The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this disposition. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Standard 1: Student Development Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this standard and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score 1.1 Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students’ strengths, interests, and needs and enables each student to advance and accelerate his or her learning. 1.2 Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 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. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Standard 2: Learning Differences Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this standard and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score 2.1 Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning strengths and needs and create opportunities for students to demonstrate their learning in different ways. 2.2 Teacher candidates incorporate language development tools into planning and instruction, including strategies 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 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. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Standard 3: Learning Environments Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this standard and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score 3.1 Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, allocating, and coordinating the resources of time, space, and students’ attention. 3.2 Teacher candidates communicate verbally and nonverbally in ways that demonstrate respect for and 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. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Standard 4: Content Knowledge Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this standard and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score 4.1 Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences. 4.2 Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and relevance for all students. 4.3 Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 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. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Standard 5: Application of Content Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this standard and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score 5.1 Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens of interdisciplinary themes (e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy). 5.2 Teacher candidates facilitate students’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand 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. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Standard 6: Assessment Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this standard and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score 6.1 Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and minimize sources of bias that can distort assessment results. 6.2 Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 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 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. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this standard and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score 7.1 Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student’s learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and 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 demonstrate knowledge and skill. 7.3 Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 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. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this standard and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score 8.1 Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) in relation to the content, purpose of instruction, and student needs 8.2 Teacher candidates engage students in using a range of learning skills and technology tools to access, interpret, evaluate, and apply information. 8.3 Teacher candidates ask questions to stimulate discussion that serve different purposes (e.g., probing for student understanding, helping students articulate their ideas and thinking processes, stimulating curiosity, 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. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Distinguished (Usually reserved for master Teacher Candidates) 93 to 100 The performance of the Teacher Candidate consistently exceeds this standard and all expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Score 9.1 Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, teacher candidates use a variety of data (e.g., systematic 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 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. ) Clinical Practice Evaluation # 4 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide No Evidence 0 There is no evidence that the performance of the Teacher Candidate met this standard or expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. Ineffective (Teacher Candidates within this range require a Professional Growth Plan) 1 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) Emerging (Teacher Candidates within this range may benefit from a Professional Growth Plan) Proficient (Target level for Teacher Candidates) 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 The performance of the Teacher Candidate is underdeveloped in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate is developing in meeting this standard and expectations for a Teacher Candidate during student teaching. The performance of the Teacher Candidate meets this standard and exp
