okkkkk
Name
Class
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
okkkk
Just from $13/Page
Date
Instructor
Clinical Field Experience –
Connection Across the Curriculum, Curricular Goals, and Community
Introduction
In your introduction, please discuss grade level you observed, class size, etc…
Curricular Goals and Cross-Curricular Connections (2 paragraphs)
Please provide a summary of curricular goals and cross-curricular connections in this first paragraph. What is the teacher’s pre-planning process? How do they ensure their lesson plan activities are aligned to state standards? What were some strategies the teacher used to establish curricular goals? How did students know what their curricular goals were? How were cross-curricular connections considered? If none were observed, discuss this with the mentor teacher.
Assessments Interview
Here you will provide a summary of how the teacher assesses his/her students. How did the teacher assess student understanding before, during, and after the lesson? How are formative and summative assessments used for instructional planning and within the classroom?
Differentiation Interview
How is instruction differentiated to meet students’ learning needs? What factors are taken into consideration when differentiating learning activities? What opportunities allow each student to demonstrate acquired knowledge and skills through a variety of products and performances? How were home extension activities determined?
Observation Summary
Please provide a thorough summary of the lesson you observed.
Conclusion
Please provide a closure. Her you can put your final thoughts and wrap up to your clinical field experience.
Aligned Learning Activities and Differentiation
|
|
|
|
1
No submission
0.00%
|
2
Insufficient
65.00%
|
3
Approaching
75.00%
|
4
Acceptable
85.00%
|
5
Target
100.00%
|
|
100.0 %Criteria
|
|
25.0 %Learning Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not addressed.
|
Learning activities are underdeveloped or poorly described or not aligned to the learning objective.
|
Learning activities are simple, sufficiently explained, and an attempt is made to align to the learning objective.
|
Learning activities are suitable, clearly explained, and logically aligned to the learning objective.
|
Learning activities are creative, comprehensively explained, and expertly aligned to the learning objective.
|
|
25.0 %Differentiation
|
Not addressed.
Differentiation to meet each student’s learning needs is illogical and minimally explained.
|
Differentiation to meet each student’s learning needs is plausible and adequately explained.
|
Differentiation to meet each student’s learning needs is logical and explained in detail.
|
Differentiation to meet each student’s learning needs is innovative and thoroughly explained.
|
|
25.0 %Home Extension Activity
|
Not addressed.
Home extension activity is incomplete or unrelated to demonstrating acquired knowledge and skills.
|
Home extension activity is sufficient to allow the student to demonstrate acquired knowledge and skills.
|
Home extension activity is appropriate and competently allows the student to demonstrate acquired knowledge and skills.
|
Home extension activity is novel and proficiently allows the student to demonstrate acquired knowledge and skills.
|
|
10.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
|
Not addressed.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors are present.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
|
Sources are documented completely and correctly, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
|
|
5.0 %Originality
|
Not addressed.
The work is an extensive collection and rehash of the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people. There is no evidence of new thought or inventiveness.
|
The product shows some evidence of originality. While based on the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people, the work does offer some new insights or inventiveness.
|
The product shows evidence of originality and inventiveness. While based somewhat on the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people, the work extends beyond that collection to offer new insights and inventiveness.
|
The product shows significant evidence of originality and inventiveness. The majority of the content and many of the ideas are fresh, original, inventive, and based upon logical conclusions and sound research.
|
|
10.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)
|
Not addressed.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.
|
Submission includes mechanical errors, but they do not hinder comprehension. Includes some practice and content-related language.
|
Submission is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few minor errors are present. Includes appropriate practice and content-related language.
|
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-developed use of practice and content-related language.
|
|
100 %Total Weightage
|
Class Profile
Student Name
ELL/
Proficiency Level
Socioeconomic Status
Race/ Ethnicity
Native Language
Gender
IEP/
504
Other
Age
Reading Performance Level/Score*
Math Performance Level/Score*
Arturo
Yes – 4
Low
Mexican
Spanish
Male
No
Glasses
Grade level
One year below grade level/98
At grade level/151
Bertie
Yes – 5
Low
Vietnamese
Vietnamese
Female
No
None
Grade level
One year above grade level/210
At grade level/108
Beryl
No
Mid
White
English
Female
No
None
Grade level
Two years above grade level/268
At grade level/163
Brandie
Yes – 4
Low
Liberian
Liberian English
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level/178
One year below grade level/79
Dessie
Yes – 4
Mid
Russian
Russian
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level/113
One year below grade level/65
Diana
Yes – 4
Low
Mexican
Spanish
Female
No
None
Grade level
One year below grade level/79
At grade level/198
Donnie
No
Mid
African American
English
Female
Yes
Hearing Aids
Grade level
At grade level/150
At grade level/124
Eduardo
Yes – 5
Low
Puerto Riccan
Spanish
Male
No
Glasses
Grade level
One year below grade level/88
At grade level/101
Emma
No
Mid
White
English
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level/124
At grade level/135
Enrique
No
Low
Mexican
English
Male
ADHD
None
One year above grade level
One year below grade level/45
At grade level/163
Fatma
Yes – 5
Low
Mexican
Spanish
Female
No
Glasses
Grade level
One year below grade level/21
One year above grade level/289
Frances
No
Mid
Mexican
English
Female
No
Diabetic
Glasses
Grade level
At grade level/116
At grade level/114
Francesca
Yes – 5
Low
Mexican
Spanish
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level/162
At grade level/178
Fredrick
No
Low
White
English
Male
Learning Disabled
None
One year above grade level
Two years below grade level/285
Two years below grade level/15
Ines
Yes – 4
Low
Mexican
Spanish
Female
Learning Disabled
Glasses
Grade level
One year below grade level/50
One year below grade level/55
Jade
No
Mid
African American
English
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level/183
One year above grade level/224
Kent
No
High
White
English
Male
ADHD
Glasses
Grade level
At grade level/178
One year above grade level/208
Lolita
Yes – 5
Low
Navajo
Navajo
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level/110
At grade level/141
Maria
No
Mid
Mexican
Spanish
Female
No
NOTE: School does not have gifted program
Grade level
At grade level/139
Two years above grade level/296
Mason
Yes – 4
Low
Vietnamese
Vietnamese
Male
Yes
High Func-tioning Autism
Grade level
At grade level/154
At grade level/138
Nick
No
Low
White
English
Male
No
None
Grade level
One year above grade level/205
At grade level/180
Noah
No
Low
African American
English
Male
No
Glasses
Grade level
At grade level/193
At grade level/177
Sharlene
No
Mid
White
English
Female
No
None
Grade level
One year above grade level/110
At grade level/125
Sophia
Yes – 5
Mid
Guatamalan
Spanish
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level/129
At grade level/152
Stuart
No
Mid
White
English
Male
No
Allergic to peanuts
Grade level
One year above grade level/231
At grade level/116
Terrence
No
Mid
African American
English
Male
No
None
Grade level
At grade level/189
At grade level/192
Wade
No
Mid
White
English
Male
No
Glasses
Grade level
At grade level/179
One year above grade level/223
Welington
Yes – 3
Low
Cuban
Spanish
Male
Learning Disabled
Glasses
Grade level
One year below grade level/82
Two years below grade level/24
Wendell
Yes – 2
Low
Somalian Refugee
Somali
Male
No
None
Grade level
One year below grade level/51
Two years below grade level/45
Yung
Yes – 4
Low
Burmese
Burmese
Male
No
None
One year below grade level
One year below grade level/98
Two years below grade level/65
*Scaled Scores Key: Above Grade Level = 200 +, At Grade Level = 100-199, Below Grade Level = 0-99
© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Clinical Field Experience: Connection Across the Curriculum, Curricular Goals, and Community
|
|
|
|
1
No Submission
0.00%
|
2
Insufficient
65.00%
|
3
Approaching
75.00%
|
4
Acceptable
85.00%
|
5
Target
100.00%
|
|
100.0 %Criteria
|
|
20.0 %Interview: Curricular Goals and Cross-Curricular Connections
|
|
|
|
|
Not addressed
.
|
Summary of curricular goals and cross-curricular connections is incomplete.
|
Summary of curricular goals and cross-curricular connections is basic.
|
Summary of curricular goals and cross-curricular connections is detailed.
|
Summary of curricular goals and cross-curricular connections is substantial.
|
|
20.0 %Interview: Assessments
|
Not addressed.
Summary of discussion of assessments is incomplete.
|
Summary of discussion of assessments is basic.
|
Summary of discussion of assessments is detailed.
|
Summary of discussion of assessments is substantial.
|
|
20.0 %Interview: Differentiation
|
Not addressed.
Summary of discussion of differentiation is incomplete.
|
Summary of discussion of differentiation is basic.
|
Summary of discussion of differentiation is detailed.
|
Summary of discussion of differentiation is substantial.
|
|
20.0 %Summary of Observation
|
Not addressed.
Summary of the lesson is minimal and connections to the interview and observations are unclear.
|
Summary of the lesson observed is simple and basic connections to the interview and the observations are noted.
|
Summary of the lesson observed is detailed and logical connections to the interview and the observations are noted.
|
Summary of the lesson observed is thorough, and connection to the interview are insightful.
|
|
10.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
|
Not addressed.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
|
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
|
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
|
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
|
|
10.0 %Organization
|
Not addressed
|
An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The ideas presented are compartmentalized; may not relate to each other.
|
The content is adequately organized, generally providing the audience with a sense of the main idea.
|
The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea.
|
The content is well organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas related to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit. Provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea.
|
|
100 %Total Weightage
|
Aligned Learning Activities and Differentiation
|
|
|
|
1
No submission
0.00%
|
2
Insufficient
65.00%
|
3
Approaching
75.00%
|
4
Acceptable
85.00%
|
5
Target
100.00%
|
|
100.0 %Criteria
|
|
25.0 %Learning Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not addressed.
|
Learning activities are underdeveloped or poorly described or not aligned to the learning objective.
|
Learning activities are simple, sufficiently explained, and an attempt is made to align to the learning objective.
|
Learning activities are suitable, clearly explained, and logically aligned to the learning objective.
|
Learning activities are creative, comprehensively explained, and expertly aligned to the learning objective.
|
|
25.0 %Differentiation
|
Not addressed.
Differentiation to meet each student’s learning needs is illogical and minimally explained.
|
Differentiation to meet each student’s learning needs is plausible and adequately explained.
|
Differentiation to meet each student’s learning needs is logical and explained in detail.
|
Differentiation to meet each student’s learning needs is innovative and thoroughly explained.
|
|
25.0 %Home Extension Activity
|
Not addressed.
Home extension activity is incomplete or unrelated to demonstrating acquired knowledge and skills.
|
Home extension activity is sufficient to allow the student to demonstrate acquired knowledge and skills.
|
Home extension activity is appropriate and competently allows the student to demonstrate acquired knowledge and skills.
|
Home extension activity is novel and proficiently allows the student to demonstrate acquired knowledge and skills.
|
|
10.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
|
Not addressed.
Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors are present.
|
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
|
Sources are documented completely and correctly, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
|
|
5.0 %Originality
|
Not addressed.
The work is an extensive collection and rehash of the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people. There is no evidence of new thought or inventiveness.
|
The product shows some evidence of originality. While based on the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people, the work does offer some new insights or inventiveness.
|
The product shows evidence of originality and inventiveness. While based somewhat on the ideas, products, images, or inventions of other people, the work extends beyond that collection to offer new insights and inventiveness.
|
The product shows significant evidence of originality and inventiveness. The majority of the content and many of the ideas are fresh, original, inventive, and based upon logical conclusions and sound research.
|
|
10.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)
|
Not addressed.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.
|
Submission includes mechanical errors, but they do not hinder comprehension. Includes some practice and content-related language.
|
Submission is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few minor errors are present. Includes appropriate practice and content-related language.
|
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-developed use of practice and content-related language.
|
|
100 %Total Weightage
|
