|
CPAST
MID-TERM 11-22 - Mentor
|
|
General overview
Directions – The
form will be used twice during the course of the term and will be provided by
the Program Coordinator to the University Supervisor, Cooperating Teacher,
and Student Teacher.
Each member
of the team (Cooperating Teacher, University Supervisor, and Student
Teacher)
1) Completes
the evaluation in week 5 or 6 (Mid-term) of the student teaching experience
AND in week 13 or 14 (Final) 2) Brings the completed form to the mid-term and
final 3-way conference
At the
Mid-term 3-way conference
1) Goals are
set for the remainder of the student teaching experience
2) The
University Supervisor records the consensus ratings and enters into the
University data system by the end of week 7 At the Final 3-way
conference
1)
Suggestions and comments are made to assist in the transition to teaching
role
2) The
University Supervisor records the consensus ratings and enters into the
University data system by the end of week 14
Additional
information about and support for using the form can be found in the VARI-EPP
Student Teaching Form Training Modules, the “Glossary” and the “Look Fors”
document.
How to apply scoring
Advocacy: Any
action within professional boundaries that speaks in favor of, recommends,
argues for a cause, supports or defends, or pleads on behalf of others. This
may be to advocate for the profession, an individual student, or other
ideas.
Analysis:
Careful and critical examination of data and/or processes to identify key
components and potential outcomes.
Assessment:
“Process of monitoring, measuring, evaluating, documenting, reflecting on,
and adjusting teaching and relearning to ensure that learners reach high
levels of Achievement
Contemporary
Tools: Electronic/digital record-keeping tools such as an online gradebook
and progress monitoring systems, spreadsheet software, etc.
Cooperating
Teachers: (Also known as “mentor teachers”) Teachers in schools who mentor
and supervise student teachers in their classrooms for the duration of a
student teaching and/or field experience.
Critical
Thinking: Refers to the “kind of thinking involved in problem solving” and
includes an ability to “examine assumptions, discern hidden values, evaluate
evidence, and assesses conclusions.”
Culturally
Relevant: Incorporating the tenets of culturally relevant/responsive teaching
(i.e., “teachers create a bridge between students’ home and school lives,
while still meeting the expectations of the district and state curricular
requirements. Culturally relevant teaching utilizes the backgrounds,
knowledge, and experiences of the students to inform the teacher’s lessons
and methodology.”).
Data-informed
decisions: “Focuses on using student assessment data and relevant background
information to inform decisions related to planning and implementing
instructional strategies at the district, school, classroom, and individual
student levels.”
Developmental
Theory (General): Theories that describe the stages of development of
children/adolescents (e.g., Erikson’s Theory of Psychosocial Development,
Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development, Piaget’s Cognitive Development
Theory, Behavioral Theories, and Sociocultural Theories).
Developmental
Theory (Content-Specific): Content-specific teaching that organizes
activities and learning tasks to help learners move from one level to the
next.
Diagnostic
Assessment: (Also known as “pre-assessment”) “Involves the gathering and
careful evaluation of detailed data using students’ knowledge and skills in a
given learning area.”
Differentiation
of Instruction: “To respond to variance among learners” (e.g., learners with
exceptional needs and second language learners) by modifying “content, and/or
process, and/or products, and/or the learning environment” according to
learners’ “readiness, interest, or learning profile.”
https://www.livetext.com/doc/11846176?print=1
1/9
6/11/24, 2:37
PM CPAST MID-TERM 11-22
Digital
Tools: Technologies that enable learners to engage with the teacher and/or
content on an individual level. Examples: SMART Boards, learner response
systems (i.e., clickers), and computers, tablets, etc.
Evidence:
Artifacts that document and demonstrate how [the student teacher] planned and
implemented instruction
Feedback:
“Information communicated to the learner that is intended to modify the
learner’s thinking or behavior for the purpose of improving learning.”
Formative
Assessment: “Assessment used continuously throughout learning and teaching,
allowing teachers to adjust instruction to 1
improve
learner achievement.”
Fosters: To
promote the growth or development of, encourage.
Funds of
Knowledge: “Historically accumulated and culturally developed bodies of
knowledge and skills essential for household or individual functioning and
well-being.”
Goals: See
definition for “Measurable Goals.”
Learner: Any
P12 student in the student teacher’s classroom.
Learning
Environment: Any setting where learning occurs. The term may refer to the
physical environment (e.g., the classroom), as well as the classroom
management procedures and activities that enable teaching and learning to
take place.
“Look Fors”
Document: A document accompanying this form containing a non-exhaustive list
to describe examples of the qualities and behaviors a student teacher is
expected to demonstrate for a given level of performance.
Measurable
Goals: “Provides information for describing, assessing, and evaluating
student achievement.” Mentor Teachers: See definition for “Cooperating
Teachers.”
Objectives/Targets:
P12 student (learner) learning outcomes to be achieved by the end of the
lesson or learning segment.
Problem
Solving: A mental process that involves discovering, analyzing, and solving
problems. The ultimate goal of problem-solving is to overcome obstacles and
find a solution that best resolves the issue.
Program
Coordinator: Faculty or staff member from a college or university who
coordinates/manages the administrative components of a teacher educator
licensure program.
Research:
"The use of rigorous, systematic, and objective methodologies to obtain
reliable and valid knowledge."
Student
Teacher: (Also known as "intern" or "candidate") An
individual participating in a full-time field experience in a P12 classroom
in order to obtain professional education licensure/certification.
Student
Teaching: (Also known as "clinical practice") A full-time field
experience in a P12 classroom that occurs in the final semester (culminating
experience) of an educator preparation program and is required to obtain
professional education licensure/certification.
Summative
Assessment: "Assessment activities used at the culmination of a given
period of time to evaluate the extent to which instructional objectives have
been met."
Targets: See
definition for 'Objectives/Targets.'
Technologies:
See definition for 'Digital Tools.'
University Supervisor
(US): The university instructor assigned to the student teacher who regularly
observes his/her performance to provide feedback on strengths and weaknesses.
The US coordinates the student teacher’s evaluation, and is responsible for recording
the consensus scores using this form.
|
|
Section
Weight: 0%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds
Expectations (3.000 pts)
|
Meets
Expectations (2.000 pts)
|
Emerging
(1.000 pt)
|
Does
Not Meet Expectations (0.000 pt)
|
|
A.
Focus for Learning:
Standards
and Objectives /Targets
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.3
InTASC 2017.7.a
|
Plans
align to appropriate P-12 state learning standards
AND
Goals are
measurable
AND
Standards,
objectives/targets, and learning tasks are consistently aligned with each
other
AND
Articulates
objectives/targets that are appropriate for learners and attend to
appropriate developmental progressions relative to age and content-area
|
Plans
align to appropriate P-12 state learning standards
AND
Goals are
measurable
AND
Standards,
objectives/ targets, and learning tasks are consistently aligned
with each other
AND
Articulates
objectives/targets that are appropriate for learners
|
Plans
align to appropriate P 12 state learning standards
AND/OR
Some
goals are measurable
AND/OR
Standards,
objectives/targets, and learning tasks, are loosely or are not
consistently aligned with each other
AND/OR
Articulates
some objectives/targets that are appropriate for learners
|
Plans do
not align to the appropriate P-12 state learning standards
AND/OR
Goals are
absent or not measurable
AND/OR
Standards,
objectives/targets, and learning tasks are not aligned with each other
AND/OR
Does not
articulate objectives/targets that are appropriate for learners
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
B. Materials and Resources
(1.000, 4.8%)
CAEP-Initial2022.R1.3 InTASC2017.7.b
|
Uses a
variety of materials and resources that
1.
Align with
all objectives/targets
2.
Make
content relevant to learners
3.
Encourage
individualization of learning
|
Uses a
variety of materials and resources that
1.
Align with
all objectives/targets
2.
Make
content relevant to learners
|
Uses materials and resources
that align with some of the objectives/targets
|
Materials and resources do not
align with objectives/targets
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
C.
Assessment of P-12 Learning
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.3 InTASC 2017.6.b
|
Plans a
variety of assessments that
1.
Provide opportunities for learners of varying abilities to illustrate
competence (whole class)
2. Align
with the appropriate P-12 state learning standards
3. Are
culturally relevant and draw from learners’ funds of knowledge
4.
Promote learner growth
|
Plans a
variety of assessments that
1.
Provide opportunities for learners to illustrate competence (whole class)
2. Align
with the appropriate P 12 state learning standards
3. Are
culturally relevant and draw from learners’ funds of knowledge
|
Planned
assessments
1.
Provide opportunities for some learners to illustrate competence (whole
class)
2. Align
with the appropriate P-12 state learning standards
|
Planned
assessments
1. Are
not included
OR
2. Do not
align with the appropriate P-12 state learning standards
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
D. Differentiated Methods
(1.000, 4.8%)
CAEP-Initial2022.R1.1 InTASC2017.2.c
|
Lessons
make meaningful and culturally relevant connections to
1.Learners’
prior knowledge
2.
Previous lessons
3. Future
learning
4. Other
disciplines and real-world experiences
AND
Differentiation
of instruction supports learner development
AND
Organizes
instruction to ensure content is comprehensible, relevant, and
challenging for learners
|
Lessons
make clear and coherent connections to
1.
Learners’ prior knowledge
2.
Previous lessons
3. Future
learning
AND
Differentiation
of instruction supports learner
development
AND
Organizes
instruction to ensure content is comprehensible and relevant for learners
|
Lessons
make an attempt to build on, but are not completely successful at
connecting to
1.
Learners’ prior knowledge,
2.
Previous lessons,
OR
future
learning
AND
Differentiation
of instruction is minimal
AND
Organizes
instruction to ensure content is comprehensible for learners
|
Lessons
do not build on or connect to learners’ prior knowledge
AND/OR
Explanations
given are illogical or inaccurate as to how the content connects to
previous and future
learning
AND/OR
Differentiation
of instruction is absent
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
E.
Learning Target and Directions
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.3 InTASC 2017.7.c
|
Articulates
accurate and coherent learning targets
AND
Articulates
accurate directions/explanations throughout the lesson
AND
Sequences
learning experiences appropriately
|
Articulates
an accurate learning target
AND
Articulates
accurate directions/ explanations
AND
Sequences
learning experiences appropriately
|
Articulates
an inaccurate learning target
AND/OR
Articulates
inaccurate directions/explanations
|
Does not
articulate the learning target
OR
Does not
articulate directions/ explanations
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
F.
Critical Thinking
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.2 InTASC 2017.5.d
|
Engages
learners in critical thinking in local and/or global contexts that
1.
Fosters problem solving
2.
Encourages conceptual connections
3.
Challenges assumptions
|
Engages
learners in critical thinking that
1.
Fosters problem solving
2.
Encourages conceptual connections
|
Introduces
AND/OR models critical thinking that
1.
Fosters problem solving
2.
Encourages conceptual connections
|
Does not
introduce AND/OR model critical thinking that
1.
Fosters problem solving
2.
Encourages conceptual connections
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
G.
Checking for Understanding and Adjusting Instruction through Formative
Assessment
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.3
InTASC 2017.8.b
|
Checks
for understanding (whole class/group AND individual learners) during
lessons using formative assessment
AND
Differentiates
through planned and responsive adjustments (whole class/group and
individual learners)
|
Checks
for understanding (whole class/group) during lessons using formative
assessment
AND
Differentiates
through adjustments to Instruction (whole class/group)
|
Inconsistently
checks for understanding during lessons using formative assessment
AND
Adjusts
instruction accordingly, but adjustments may cause additional confusion
|
Does not
check for understanding during lessons using formative assessment
OR
Does not
make any adjustments based on learners’ responses
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
H. Digital Tools and Resources
(1.000, 4.8%)
CAEP-Initial2022.R1.3 InTASC2017.5.l
|
Discusses
AND uses a variety of developmentally appropriate technologies (digital
tools and resources) that
1. Are
relevant to learning objectives/ targets of the lesson
2. Engage
learners in the demonstration of knowledge or skills
3. Extend
learners’ understanding of concepts
|
Discusses
AND uses developmentally appropriate technologies (digital tools and
resources) that
1. Are
relevant to learning objectives/ targets of the lesson
2. Engage
learners in the demonstration of knowledge or skills
|
Discusses
developmentally appropriate technologies (digital tools and resources)
relevant to learning objectives/ targets of the lesson
AND
Technology
is not available
|
One of
the following:
A. Does
not use technologies (digital tools and resources) to engage learners AND
Technology is available in the setting
OR
B. Use of
technologies is not relevant to the learning objectives/ targets of the
lesson
OR
C. Does
not discuss technologies AND Technology is not available in the setting
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
I.
Safe and Respectful Learning Environment
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.1
InTASC 2017.3.d
|
Actively
involves learners to create and manage a safe and respectful learning
environment through the use of routines and transitions
AND
Establishes
and promotes constructive relationships to equitably engage learners
AND
Uses
research-based strategies to maintain learners’ attention (individual and
whole group)
|
Manages a
safe and respectful learning environment through the use of routines and
transitions
AND
Establishes
and promotes constructive relationships to equitably engage learners
AND
Uses
research-based strategies to maintain learners’ attention (individual and
whole group)
|
Attempts
to manage a safe learning environment through the use of routines and
transitions
AND/OR
Attempts
to establish constructive relationships to engage learners
AND/OR
Attempts
to use constructive strategies to maintain learners’ attention
(individual and whole group)
|
Does not
manage a safe learning environment
OR
Does not
establish constructive relationships to engage learners
OR
Does not
use constructive strategies to maintain learners’ attention (individual
and whole group)
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
J.
Data- Guided Instruction
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.3
InTASC 2017.6.l
|
Uses
data-informed decisions (trends and patterns) to set short and long term
goals for future instruction and assessment
AND
Uses
contemporary tools for learner data record-keeping and analysis
|
Uses
data-informed decisions to design instruction and assessment
AND
Uses
contemporary tools for learner data record-keeping
|
Uses minimal data to design
instruction and assessment
|
Does not use data to design
instruction and assessment
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
K.
Feedback to Learners
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.3
InTASC 2017.6.d
|
Provides
feedback that
1.
Enables learners to recognize strengths AND areas for improvement
2. Is
comprehensible
3. Is
descriptive
4. Is
individualized AND Provides timely feedback, guiding learners on how to
use feedback to monitor their own progress
|
Provides
feedback that
1.
Enables learners to recognize strengths OR areas for improvement
2. Is
comprehensible
3. Is
descriptive AND Provides timely feedback
|
Provides
minimal feedback that
1.
Enables learners to recognize strengths OR areas for improvement
OR
Feedback
is provided in a somewhat timely fashion
|
Does not
provide feedback
OR
Feedback
does not enable learners to recognize strengths OR areas for improvement
OR
Feedback
is not provided in a timely fashion
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
L.
Assessment Techniques
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.3
InTASC 2017.7.d
|
Evaluates
and supports learning through assessment techniques that are
1.
Developmentally appropriate
2.
Formative AND summative
3.
Diagnostic
4. Varied
|
Evaluates
and supports learning through assessment techniques that are
1.
Developmentally appropriate
2.
Formative AND summative
|
Assessment
techniques are
1.
Developmentally appropriate
2.
Formative OR summative
|
Assessment
techniques are
1.
Developmentally inappropriate
OR
Not used
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
M.
Connections to Research and Theory
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
InTASC 2017.9.c
|
Discusses,
provides evidence of, and justifies connections to educational research
and/or theory
AND
Uses
research and/or theory to explain their P-12 learners’ progress
|
Discusses and provides
evidence of connections to educational research and/or theory
|
Mentions connections to
educational research and/or theory
|
No
connections OR inaccurate connections to educational research
and/or theory
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
N.
Participates in Professional Development (PD)
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
InTASC 2017.9.b
|
Participates
in at least one professional development opportunity (e.g. workshops,
seminars, attending a professional conference, joining a professional
organization)
AND
Provides
evidence of an increased understanding of the teaching profession as a
result of the PD
AND
Reflects
on own professional practice with evidence of application of the
knowledge acquired from PD during student teaching
|
Participates
in at least one professional development opportunity (e.g. workshop,
seminar, attending a professional conference)
AND
Provides
evidence of an increased understanding of the teaching profession as a
result of the PD
|
Participates
in at least one professional development opportunity (e.g. workshop,
seminar, attending a professional conference)
|
Does not
participate in any professional development opportunity (e.g. workshop,
seminar, attending a professional conference)
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
O.
Demonstrates Effective Communication with Parents or Legal
Guardians
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
InTASC 2017.10.d
|
Provides
evidence of communication with parents or legal guardians in accordance
with district policies (e.g., letter of introduction, attends parent
teacher conferences, communication via email or online)
AND
Provides
information about P-12 learning to parents or legal guardians to
promote understanding and academic progress
AND
Interacts
with parents or legal guardians in ways that improve understanding and
encourage progress (e.g. exchange of email, face-to-face discussion,
etc.)
|
Provides
evidence of communication with parents or legal guardians in accordance
with district policies (e.g., letter of introduction, attends parent
teacher conferences, communication via email or online)
AND
Provides
information about P-12 learning to parents or legal guardians to promote
understanding and academic progress
|
Provides evidence of
communication with parents or legal guardians in accordance with district
policies (e.g., letter of introduction, attends parent teacher
conferences, communication via email or online)
|
Does not
provide evidence of communication with parents or legal guardians
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
P.
Demonstrates Punctuality
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
InTASC 2017.9.o
|
Reports
on time or early for daily student teaching
AND
Additional
teacher engagements (e.g., IEPs, teacher committees)
|
Reports
on time for daily student teaching
AND
Additional
teacher engagements (e.g., IEPs, teacher committees)
|
Inconsistently
reports on time for daily student teaching
AND/OR
Additional
teacher engagements (e.g., IEPs, teacher committees)
|
Does not
report on time for student teaching
AND/OR
Additional
teacher engagements (e.g., IEPs, teacher committees)
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
Q.
Meets Deadlines and Obligations
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
InTASC 2017.9.o
|
Meets
deadlines and obligations established by the cooperating teacher and/or
supervisor
AND
Informs
all stakeholders (cooperating teacher, supervisor, and/or faculty
members) of absences prior to the absence
AND
Provides
clear and complete directions and lessons for substitutes/cooperating
teacher without reminders
|
Meets
deadlines and obligations established by the cooperating teacher and/or
supervisor
AND
Informs
all stakeholders (cooperating teacher, supervisor, and/or faculty
members) of absences prior to the absence
AND
Provides
clear and complete directions and lessons for substitutes/cooperating
teacher
|
Most of
the time meets deadlines and obligations established by the cooperating
teacher and/or supervisor
AND
Informs
some stakeholders (cooperating teacher, supervisor, and/or faculty
members) of absences prior to the absence
AND
Provides
incomplete directions and lessons for substitutes/ cooperating teacher
|
Frequently
misses deadlines or obligations established by the cooperating teacher
and/or supervisor
AND/OR
Does not
inform stakeholders (cooperating teacher, supervisor, and/or faculty
members) of absences prior to the absence
AND/OR
Does not
provide directions and lessons for substitutes/cooperating teacher
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
R.
Preparation
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
InTASC 2017.3.d
|
Prepared
to teach on a daily basis with all materials (lesson plans,
manipulatives, handouts, resources, etc.)
AND
Materials
are easily accessible AND organized
AND
Prepared
for the unexpected and flexible
|
Prepared
to teach on a daily basis with all materials (lesson plans,
manipulatives, handouts, resources, etc.)
AND
Materials
are easily accessible AND organized
|
Not
consistently prepared to teach on a daily basis with all materials
(lesson plans, manipulatives, handouts, resources, etc.)
AND/OR
Materials
are easily accessible OR organized
|
Not
prepared to teach on a daily basis with all materials (lesson plans,
manipulatives, handouts, resources, etc.)
AND/OR
Materials
are not organized NOR easily accessible
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
S.
Collaboration
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
InTASC 2017.10.b
|
Demonstrates
collaborative relationships with cooperating teacher AND/OR members of
the school community (other teachers, school personnel, administrators,
etc.)
AND
Works
with and learns from colleagues in planning and implementing instruction
to meet diverse needs of learners
|
Demonstrates
collaborative relationships with cooperating teacher AND/OR members of
the school community (other teachers, school personnel, administrators,
etc.)
AND
Attempts
to work with and learn from colleagues in planning and implementing
instruction
|
Demonstrates
collaborative relationships with cooperating teacher AND/OR members of
the school community (other teachers, school personnel, administrators,
etc.)
|
Does not
demonstrate collaborative relationships with cooperating teacher AND/OR
members of the school community (other teachers, school personnel,
administrators, etc.)
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
T.
Advocacy to Meet the Needs of Learners or for the Teaching Profession
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
InTASC 2017.10.j
|
Recognizes
and articulates specific areas in need of advocacy, including the
1. Needs
of learners (e.g. academic, physical, social, emotional, and
cultural needs; OR adequate resources, equitable opportunities)
OR
2. Needs
of the teaching profession (e.g. technology integration, research based
practices) AND Takes action(s) based upon identified needs, while
following district protocols
|
Recognizes
and articulates specific areas in need of advocacy, including the
1. Needs
of learners (e.g. academic, physical, social, emotional, and cultural
needs; OR adequate resources, equitable opportunities)
OR
2. Needs
of the teaching profession (e.g. technology integration, research based
practices)
|
Recognizes
areas in need of advocacy, but cannot articulate the
1. Needs
of learners (e.g. academic, physical, social, emotional, and cultural
needs; OR adequate resources, equitable opportunities)
OR
2. Needs
of the teaching profession (e.g. technology integration, research based
practices)
|
Does not
recognize areas in need of advocacy, including the
1. Needs
of learners (e.g. academic, physical, social, emotional, and cultural
needs; OR adequate resources, equitable opportunities)
OR
2. Needs
of the teaching profession (e.g. technology integration, research-based
practices)
|
|
|
Meets (2.000 pts)
|
|
|
|
|
Exceeds Expectations (3.000
pts)
|
Meets Expectations (2.000
pts)
|
Emerging (1.000 pt)
|
Does Not Meet Expectations
(0.000 pt)
|
|
U.
Responds Positively to Feedback and Constructive Criticism
(1.000,
4.8%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
InTASC 2017.9.n
|
Is
receptive to feedback, constructive criticism, supervision, and responds
professionally
AND
Incorporates
feedback (e.g., from cooperating teacher, university supervisor) to
improve practice
AND
Proactively
seeks opportunities for feedback from other professionals
|
Is
receptive to feedback, constructive criticism, supervision, and responds
professionally
AND
Incorporates
feedback (e.g., from cooperating teacher, university supervisor) to
improve practice
|
Is
receptive to feedback, constructive criticism, and supervision
AND/OR
Incorporates
feedback inconsistently
|
Is not
receptive to feedback, constructive criticism, and supervision
AND/OR
Does not
incorporate feedback
|
|
|
Exceeds (3.000 pts)
|
|
|
Section
Weight: 0%
|
|
PART
A: SCHOOL SETTING RUBRIC (Used for University purposes, not an official
element of CPAST Form)
|
|
|
|
|
|
City
(3.000 pts)
|
Suburban
(2.000 pts)
|
Town
(1.000 pt)
|
Rural
(0.000 pt)
|
|
School
Setting (1.000, 100.0%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suburban
|
|
|
Section
Weight: 0%
|
|
PART
B: METHOD OF DELIVERY RUBRIC (Used for University purposes, not an official
element of CPAST Form)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virtual
Only (3.000 pts)
|
Hybrid
(2.000 pts)
|
In
Person Only (1.000 pt)
|
|
Method
of Instructional Delivery (This section's scoring will not affect the
student's overall score. The point values are for reporting purposes
only.) (1.000,
100.0%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Person Only
|
|
|
Section
Weight: 0%
|
|
SCRIP
Dispositions Assessment Rubric (Used for University purposes, not an official
element of CPAST Form)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
A.
Social Responsibility
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
CAEP Revised
Advanced
2022.RA1.1f
InTASC-2017.9.m
NASDTEC-MCEE 2015.3
|
The
candidate demonstrates a sense of fairness, justice, and equity for all
students
AND
demonstrates
empathy and sensitivity to human needs.
|
The
candidate demonstrates a sense of fairness, justice, and equity for all
students.
|
The
candidate states that all students can learn BUT the candidate’s actions
do not confirm the belief.
|
No
evidence provided.
|
|
|
Advanced
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
B.
Social Responsibility
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
CAEP Revised
Advanced
2022.RA1.1f
InTASC-2017.10.c
NASDTEC-MCEE 2015.3
|
The
candidate interacts effectively with students and/or teachers to provide
a positive, structured, safe learning environment and creates a learning
environment where student access, success, and achievement are priority.
|
The
candidate interacts effectively with students and/or teachers to provide
a positive, structured, safe learning environment.
|
The
classroom environment is lacking in positive affirmation, structure, OR
safety.
|
No
evidence provided.
|
|
|
Proficient
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
C.
Commitment
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
CAEP Revised
Advanced
2022.RA1.1f
InTASC-2017.10.p
NASDTEC-MCEE 2015.1
|
The
candidate follows through on commitments and takes responsibilities
seriously while meeting deadlines.
AND
The
candidate demonstrates a persevering commitment to the mission and vision
of the school and each student’s learning success.
|
The
candidate follows through on commitments and takes responsibilities
seriously while meeting deadlines.
|
The
candidate makes commitments that he/she is unable to keep.
|
No
evidence provided.
|
|
|
Proficient
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
D.
Commitment
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
CAEP
Revised
Advanced
2022.RA1.1f
InTASC-2017.9.k
NASDTEC-MCEE 2015.1
|
The
candidate shows the extraordinary self- discipline and work ethic
essential to be planned, prepared and organized for successful
instruction and learning/ or leadership and supervision to occur.
AND
The
candidate consistently completes assigned tasks ahead of time.
|
The
candidate shows the self discipline and work ethic essential to be
planned, prepared and organized for successful instruction and learning/
or leadership and supervision to occur.
AND
The
candidate completes assigned tasks on time.
|
The
candidate’s lack of planning, preparation, or organization hinders
successful instruction or leadership.
OR
The
candidate completes assigned tasks after the deadline.
|
No
evidence provided.
|
|
|
Proficient
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
E.
Reflective Practice
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial2022.R1.4
CAEPRevisedAdvanced2022.RA1.1f
InTASC-2017.9.h
NASDTEC-MCEE2015.2
|
The candidate thoughtfully
considers educational matters, the practice of teaching, and utilizes
data to make informed decisions regarding educational matters and the
practice of teaching to implement change.
|
The candidate thoughtfully
considers educational matters and the practice of teaching to make
informed decisions.
|
The candidate spends little
time reflecting on the practice of teaching to make informed decisions.
|
No evidence provided.
|
|
|
Proficient
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
F.
Reflective Practice
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
CAEP Revised
Advanced
2022.RA1.1f
InTASC-2017.9.c
NASDTEC-MCEE 2015.2
|
The
candidate makes choices after pondering ideas, experiences, research, and
engages in collaboration with colleagues when appropriate.
|
The
candidate makes choices after pondering ideas and experiences.
|
The
candidate acts quickly before thinking about the results.
|
No
evidence provided.
|
|
|
Advanced
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
G.
Integrity
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
CAEP
Revised Advanced
2022.RA1.1f
InTASC-2017.9.o
NASDTEC-MCEE 2015.2
|
The
candidate models exemplary citizenship and displays moral
leadership.
AND
The
candidate values honesty inside and outside of the classroom.
AND
The
candidate abides by a professional code of ethics and standards of
practice.
|
The
candidate models good citizenship and acts in an ethical and moral
manner.
AND
The
candidate values honesty inside and outside of the classroom.
|
The
candidate does not follow the rules or the law.
OR
The
candidate acts in a way which causes others to question his/her ethics or
morals.
|
No
evidence provided.
|
|
|
Advanced
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
H.
Integrity
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
CAEP
Revised Advanced
2022.RA1.1f
ISTE.2.3
ISTE.LDR.3
InTASC-2017.10.g
NASDTEC-MCEE 2015.5
|
The
candidate demonstrates exemplary commitment to consuming, creating,
distributing, and communicating information through all technologies to
build local and global learning communities, both personally and
professionally.
|
The
candidate demonstrates a positive commitment to consuming, creating,
distributing, and communicating information through all technologies.
|
The
candidate lacks professional discretion when consuming, creating,
distributing, and/or communicating through the use of all technologies.
|
No
evidence provided.
|
|
|
Proficient
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
I.
Professionalism
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
CAEP
Revised Advanced
2022.RA1.1f
InTASC-2017.10.c
NASDTEC-MCEE 2015.2
|
The
candidate demonstrates exemplary behavior; possesses patience,
self-control, and flexibility when obstacles or difficult situations
occur.
AND
The
candidate effectively manages personal emotions and feelings and reacts
reasonably to situations.
AND
The
candidate acts confidently and maturely taking responsibility in
leadership.
AND
The
candidate maintains enthusiasm and passion for the teaching profession
and views learning as a life-long activity.
|
The
candidate demonstrates appropriate behavior; possesses patience,
self-control, and flexibility when obstacles or difficult situations
occur.
AND
The
candidate manages personal emotions and feelings and reacts reasonably to
situations.
AND
The
candidate acts confidently and maturely.
|
The
candidate is impatient or inflexible, lacks personal management skills
and confidence.
|
No
evidence provided.
|
|
|
Advanced
|
|
|
|
|
Level
3: Met-Advanced (3.000 pts)
|
Level
2: Met-Proficient (2.000 pts)
|
Level
1: Not Met-Developing (1.000 pt)
|
Level
0: No Evidence (0.000 pt)
|
|
J.
Professionalism
(1.000,
10.0%)
CAEP-Initial
2022.R1.4
CAEP
Revised Advanced
2022.RA1.1f
InTASC-2017.9.c
NASDTEC-MCEE 2015.2
|
The
candidate effectively uses the English language in speech and
writing.
AND
The
candidate consistently supports writings with research and professional
perspectives.
|
The
candidate effectively uses the English language in speech and writing.
|
The
candidate has many errors in written communication.
|
No
evidence provided.
|
|
|
Proficient
|
|
|
Section
Weight: 0%
|
|
SUGGESTED
LETTER GRADE RUBRIC (Used for University purposes, not an official element of
CPAST Form)
Please provide a suggested letter grade to signify
the candidate's overall performance and effort in student teaching.
|
|
|
|
|
|
A
(4.000 pts)
|
B
(3.000 pts)
|
C
(2.000 pts)
|
D
(1.000 pt)
|
F
(0.000 pt)
|
|
Please
provide a suggested letter grade to signify the candidate's overall
performance and effort in student teaching. (1.000, 100.0%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A
|
|
|
Section
Weight: 0%
|
|
|
|
|
What went well?
Areas of strength?
|
|
Question Comments :
|
|
Mr.
Gentry has developed positive relationships with students and has continued
to create a safe learning environment for all students. He continues to
manage student behaviors effectively to allow students the best opportunity
to learn. Mr. Gentry does a great job of incorporating different activities
that meet the learning targets that align with our priority standards and
provides areas of differentiation for all students to grow.
|
|
|
|
|
Possible
opportunities for growth
|
|
Question Comments :
|
|
Mr.
Gentry is working on transitions between activities to make the transitions
from one activity to another a smoother process as well as working on the
speed of his instruction. He currently does a good job but is looking to
improve in these two areas to help each of his lessons run smoother.
|
|
|
|
|
Section
Weight: 0%
|
|
|
|
|
Goals for
Improvement: Pedagogy and Dispositions Following the Three-way Midterm
Evaluation between the Student Teacher, University Supervisor, and
Cooperating Teacher, the Student Teacher will identify three specific and
measurable goals for improvement for the duration of the student teaching
experience. The University Supervisor and Cooperating Teacher will then
affirm and/or suggest goals for the Student Teacher. As part of the final
summary evaluation, goals for the Resident Educator Program should be identified.
|
|
Connection
to 3- way form
|
Goal
(must have a minimum of one goal) with Details
|
|
Action
Plan: Next Steps to help Candidate achieve goal
|
|
|
|
Candidate
will
|
Supervisor
will
|
Cooperating
Teacher will
|
|
L.
Assessment: Feedback to Learners
|
I will
focus on providing specific (not general) feedback to individuals and to
groups-with a focus on task and process.
|
I will
prepare feedback ahead of time using data.
|
I will
pay attention to feedback during observations
|
I will
review candidate feedback before lesson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluation
Score Summary
|
|
Title:
|
Score
|
Weight
|
Adj. Score
|
|
|
Primary Evaluation >
|
0.00
|
0.00%
|
0.00
|
Finalized
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
|