university supervisor cooperating teacher

12/19/2018 Qualtrics Survey Software

https://purdue.ca1.qualtrics.com/WRQualtricsControlPanel/Ajax.php?action=GetSurveyPrintPreview 1/21

Part 1: Secondary Assessment (NCSS SPA Standards)

Secondary SOCIAL STUDIES Student Teaching FINAL Evaluation

As part of understanding what knowledge, skills, and dispositions our studentspossess, we are asking you to complete an end-of-clinical evaluation. This tool iscomprised of three different parts. The first part is based on the National Councilfor the Social Studies (NCSS) standards for beginning teachers. The second partcontains knowledge and skills as outlined by InTASC and CAEP, our accreditatingbody. The last part asks to you to consider the dispositions that are valued by thefaculty at Purdue University Fort Wayne. In other words, these dispositions align



with our Conceptual Framework. Thank you in advance for the time you put intothis evaluation -- it is very important to us and the Student Teacher.

The results of this evaluation will be collected by Purdue University Fort Wayne andforwarded to the e-mails listed below:

Evaluation Information:

The person completing this form is:

Date of Evaluation mm/dd/yyyy

Teacher Candidate (Student) Name

Teacher Candidate (Student) email

School

Grade Level

University Supervisor Name

University Supervisor email

Cooperating Teacher Name

Cooperating Teacher email

Cooperating Teacher

University Supervisor



Number of students:

College of Professional Studies

Social Studies Performance Evaluation

3.1 Design authentic assessments

3.2 Design coherent and relevant learning experiences that engage learners

TARGETCandidate designs

authentic assessmentsto measure: 1)

disciplinaryknowledge, 2) inquiry,

3) forms ofrepresentations, 4)

civic competence, and5) state standards.

ACCEPTABLECandidate designs

authentic assessmentsthat provided

meaningful informationon students' content

knowledge, as alignedwith state specifiedcontent, and eitherinquiry or forms of

representation.

DEVELOPING

Candidate designsauthentic assessments

that providedmeaningful information

on students' contentknowledge, as aligned

with state specifiedcontent.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate usespredesigned

assessments, that mayor may not be

authentic, withoutmodifying or verifyingalignment with statespecified content.



3.3 Use theory and research to implement instructional practices andauthentic assessment

TARGET

Candidate designsrelevant learningexperiences that

integrate 1)disciplinary

knowledge, 2) inquiry,3) forms of

representations, 4)civic competence, and

5) state standards.

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate designslearning experiences

that lead to knowledgeconstruction for state

specified content.Incorporates eitherinquiry or forms ofrepresentation in

learning experiences.

DEVELOPING

Candidate designslearning experiences

that lead to knowledgeconstruction as aligned

with state specifiedcontent.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate primarilyuses materials createdfor classroom use or

available as anancillary to the

textbook program,whether or not they

are authentic orappropriate for state

specified content.

TARGET

Candidate consistentlyjustifies assessment

and instructionalpractices in theoriesand research (and

cites appropriately).

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate frequentlyconnects theories and

research (citingappropriately) to

support assessmentand instructional

practices.

DEVELOPING

Candidate provides aninaccurate justification

for approach toassessment and

instructional practices.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate does notapplies theory or

research toassessment or

instructional strategiesselected for use.



3.4 Exhibit data literacy by using assessment data to guide instructionaldecision-making and reflect on student learning outcomes

3.5 Engage learners in self-assessment practices

TARGET

Candidate documentsand interprets multipledata sources, beyondsummative measuresof learning, to reflecton student learning

and then justifyeffective instructionaldecisions. Data are

used to supportindividual learners.

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate usesmultiple data sources,including summative

measures of learning,to reflect on studentlearning. Those data

are used to justifyinstructional decisions.

Data are used tosupport individual

learners.

DEVELOPING

Candidate uses atleast one formative

measure or authenticassessment of

learning to make data-drive instructional

decisions regardingcontent knowledge.

Data are used tosupport social studies

learning for a smallgroup of the learners.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate focusesexclusively on

summative measuresof content knowledge,

inquiry, or forms ofrepresentation. Dataare used to support

social studies learningfor the group.

TARGET

Candidate cultivatesstudents’ use ofmetacognitive

strategies for self-reflection.

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate involvesstudents in reflectingon their disciplinary

knowledgeconstruction and theauthenticity of theirwork (process and

products).

DEVELOPING Candidate

inconsistently involvesstudents in self-

assessment process.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate refrainsfrom practicing any

self-assessmentprocesses, keeping

the studentsdependent on the

candidate asevaluator.



4.1 Identify socio-cultural assets and learning demands to plan responsivepedagogy

4.2 Use knowledge of theory and research to plan relevant and responsiveinstruction and assessment

TARGET

Candidate identifiesspecific linguistic,

socio-cultural assets,and learning demands

for both group andindividual learners that

may affect socialstudies learning.

Justifies how theseassets were used toplan and implement

responsive pedagogythat increase students’opportunities to learn

Social Studies.

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate explainsschool and classroom

characteristics thatmay affect SocialStudies learning.Displayed general

knowledge of studentcharacteristics that

may affect SSlearning. Providedlogical connections

between thesecontextual

characteristics andSocial Studies

pedagogy.

DEVELOPING

Candidate discussesminimal or irrelevant

knowledge ofcommunity, school,

classroom, or studentcharacteristics.

Implications for usingthese contextualcharacteristics to

inform Social Studiespedagogy were poorlylinked or inappropriate.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate includesbiased or stereotypical

knowledge ofcommunity, school,

classroom, or studentcharacteristics.

Implications for usingthese contextualcharacteristics to

inform SS pedagogywere missing, poorly

linked, orinappropriate.

TARGET

Candidate operates ina working knowledge

of theory and research(citing appropriately) to

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate connectstheir working

knowledge of theoriesand research (citing

DEVELOPING

Candidate utilizes aninaccurate working

knowledge of theoriesand research when

NOT THERE YET

Candidate does notapply a working

knowledge of theory orresearch to learners’



4.3 Engage learners in ethical reasoning, communicating conclusions, andtaking informed actions

plan and implementinstruction and

assessment that isrelevant and

responsive to learners’socio-cultural assets,

learning demands, andindividual identities.

appropriately) tosupport assessment

and instructionalpractices that are

relevant andresponsive to some

learners’characteristics.

responding to learners’characteristics.

characteristics andthus plans instructionand assessment thatare irrelevant or non-

responsive.

TARGET

Candidate engageslearners in ethical

reasoning to deliberatesocial, political, andeconomic issues,

communicateconclusions, and takeinformed action toward

achieving a moreinclusive and equitable

society.

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate engageslearners in livelydiscussions that

support critical thinkingand reasoning aboutsocial, political, and

economic issues. Theysupport learners as

they developconclusions based onevidence and consider

actions that couldaddress an unjust

society.

DEVELOPING

Candidate engageslearners in discussionsbut fails to support the

use of evidence orreasoning as they

develop conclusions orconsider actions that

could address anunjust society.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate limitsdiscussion on

controversial topics,supporting the statusquo of contemporary

society.



4.4 Select, create, and engage learners with a variety of social studiesinstructional strategies

4.5 Facilitate collaborative, interdisciplinary learning environments

TARGET

Candidate selects,creates, and engageslearners with a variety

of project-basedinstructional strategies,

disciplinary sourcesand contemporary

technologies,consistent with currenttheory and research

about student learning.

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate selects andengages learners with

a variety of socialstudies instructional

strategies, disciplinarysources and

contemporarytechnologies,

consistent with currenttheory and research

about student learning.

DEVELOPING

Candidate encourageslearners to engage in avariety of instructional

strategies andtechnology that do notalways support current

theory and researchabout student learning.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate primarilyengages learners indirect instruction orselects predesigned

materials thatdemonstrate

inconsistencies withcurrent theory and

research about studentlearning.

TARGET

Candidate facilitatescollaborative,

interdisciplinarylearning environmentsin which learners use

disciplinary facts,concepts, and tools,

engage in disciplinaryinquiry, and create

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate facilitatescollaborative,

interdisciplinarylearning environmentsin which learners use

disciplinary facts,concepts, and tools,and engage in eitherdisciplinary inquiry or

the creation of

DEVELOPING

Candidate creates alearning environment

that supportscooperative learning

experiences that focuson shared construction

of disciplinary facts,concepts, and tools.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate plans alearning environment

that focuses onindependent learningof disciplinary facts,concepts, and tools.



5.2 Reflect on their cultural frames in response to dialogue and discoursewith students and colleagues

5.3 Take action to advocate for learners

disciplinary forms ofrepresentation.

disciplinary forms ofrepresentation.

TARGET

Candidate reflects onhow her/his own

cultural frames impactdialogue and

discourse withstudents and

colleagues. Use theresults of the reflection

to make changes inpractices to address

issues such as equity,diversity, access,

power, and/or socialjustice.

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate reflects onhow her/his own

cultural frames impactdialogue and

discourse withstudents and

colleagues. Use theresults of the reflection

to raise questionsabout a couple of

these issues.

DEVELOPING

Candidate reflects oninteractions with othersyet focuses on how the

other parties impactthe dialogue and

discourse. Focuses onhow the other parties’

characteristicsimpact one or more of

these issues.

NOT THERE YET

Candidate ignores orare ignorant to howtheir cultural frames

impact theirinteractions with othersOR Candidate fails toreflect on interactionswith others in terms of

these issues.

TARGET

Candidatedemonstrates civic andethical leadership as

ACCEPTABLE

Candidate discusseswith Cooperating

Teacher changes that

DEVELOPING

Candidateacknowledges and

supports Cooperating

NOT THERE YET

Candidate acts in anauthoritarian manner

rather than a



Comments

** You have completed Part 1. Please verify your answers before hitting thebutton to continue to Parts 2 and 3. **

Part 2 - Unit-wide Assessment (CAEP/InTASC Stnds)

Learners & Learning

she/he advocates forchanges that benefitone or more learners.

could benefit one ormore learners.

Teacher’s leadership inadvocating for one or

more learners.

democratic mannerwhen advocating for

learners.

OR

Candidate fails toadvocate for a learner

because of her/hisperceived position in

the educationalsystem.



The candidate regularly assesses development and learning of each student anduses that information to scaffold to next levels.InTASC #1CAEP 1.1

Content KnowledgeCandidate uses technology effectively to achieve content-specific learning goals.InTASC #5CAEP 1.5

TargetCandidate regularly assesseslearning (e.g., performance,

abilities, and skills) ofindividuals and the group.Data are used to design

responsive curriculum andinstruction to scaffold the next

level of learning.

Acceptable Candidate assesses, albeit

inconsistently, learning (e.g.,performance, abilities, andskills) of individuals and the

group. Data are used todesign responsive curriculum

and instruction to meetlearners’ needs.

Unacceptable Candidate infrequently

assesses learning forindividuals and group.

Curriculum and instruction areselected without reference to

learning characteristics.

Target Candidate engages and

involves students with differenttechnologies to achieve

specific learning goals in thecontent area(s). The

technology tools or apps areused in such a way that

Acceptable Candidate engages students

in technologies that areconnected to the specific

learning goals for the contentarea(s).

Unacceptable Candidate emphasizes

technologies that have limitedutility for enriching learning in

the content area(s).



Content KnowledgeCandidate engages students in making meaning of the content by examining itthrough diverse perspectives and personal responses.InTASC #4CAEP 1.1

Instructional PracticeCandidate uses both formative and summative assessment to document learning.InTASC #6CAEP 1.1

students deepen theirunderstanding of the content.

TargetCandidate engages studentsin discovering meaning of thecontent by questioning and

analyzing ideas from diverseperspectives in content texts,

materials, performances,and/or labs. Students are

challenged to connect theirpersonal responses to otherlarger meanings and criticalstances in the content area.

Acceptable Candidate engages students

in making meaning of contenttexts, materials, performances,

or labs by providing diversematerials and opportunities for

personal response.

Unacceptable Candidate provides content

text, materials, performances,and/or labs from limited

perspectives, thus restrictingthe students’ ability to engage

in making meaning. Or,candidates might over-

emphasize students’ personalresponses to the content.

Target Acceptable Unacceptable



Instructional PracticeThe candidate selects learning experiences that reflect curriculum goals andcontent standards while being relevant to learners.

InTASC #7 CAEP 1.1

Instructional PracticeCandidates use technology to ensure accessibility and relevance for all learners.InTASC #8CAEP 1.1

Candidate balances the use offormative and summative

assessments, as appropriate,to support, verify, anddocument learning.

Candidate uses both formativeand summative assessments

to document learning.

Candidate relies significantlyon one assessment method

over the other. Data are usedto demonstrate what studentsdo not know or are unable to

do.

Target Candidate creates learning

experiences that aremeaningful to learners due tostudents’ contextual variables

and prior knowledge. Theexperiences also align tocurriculum and content

standards

Acceptable Candidate selects learning

experiences based onstudents’ prior knowledge. The

experiences also reflectcurriculum and content

standards, yet sometimes notdirectly.

Unacceptable Candidate follows curriculum

guides or sequence withminimal consideration to howmeaningful experiences arefor learners or for addressing

content standards.



Professional ResponsibilityThe candidate uses a variety of self-assessment strategies to analyze and reflecton his/her practice.InTASC #9CAEP 3.6

Professional Responsibility

Target Technology enhances the

teaching and learning processin a way that is not achievable

without it. Also, it is age-appropriate, matching abilitylevels, interests, and needs.

AcceptableTechnology selected is age-appropriate, matching abilitylevels, interests, and needs.

Unacceptable Technology selected is

appropriate for a subset ofstudents.

Target Candidate creates a plan for

reflecting on practices duringand after instruction. The datagathered via the strategies areanalyzed and used to make a

variety of adaptations/adjustments (e.g.,

organizational, instructional,materials, etc.) that benefit the

students.

Acceptable Candidate creates a plan for

reflecting on practice afterinstruction occurs. The data

gathered via the strategies areanalyzed and used to make

improvements to futureinstructional plans.

Unacceptable Candidate reflects on practice

in an unplanned, unsystematicway or only when prompted by

someone to do so.Experiences are reflected onin a holistic manner withoutreference to specific data. Inaddition, the candidate maylack links between changesmade and data collected.



The candidate understands laws related to learners’ rights and teacherresponsibilities.InTASC #9CAEP 3.6

Professional ResponsibilityThe candidate demonstrates professional ethics and respect for others in the use oftechnology (e.g., learning management system, social media).InTASC #9CAEP 1.5

Target Candidate understands and

appropriately applieseducational laws, especiallyconfidentiality, requirementsfor reporting child abuse andneglect and discrimination/

harassment/bullying.

Acceptable Candidate demonstrates a firm

understanding of educational laws,especially confidentiality,

requirements for reporting childabuse and neglect and

discrimination/harassment/bullying.

Unacceptable Candidate demonstrates

misunderstandings or gapsin knowledge concerning

educational laws, especiallyconfidentiality, requirementsfor reporting child abuse and

neglect and/ordiscrimination/

harassment/bullying.

Target Candidate explicitly teaches

and supports students’application of digital

citizenshipcharacteristics.When

necessary, family members

Acceptable Candidate follows

characteristics of digitalcitizenship when developinglesson plans that incorporate

technology. Reminders orprompts for students are

outlined. When necessary,

Unacceptable Candidate does not

acknowledge, support, orfollow components of digital

citizenship for self orstudents. Family members are

not notified in advance of



**You have completed Parts 1 and 2. Please verify answers before hitting thebutton to continue to Part 3.**

Part 3: Unit-wide Disposition Assessment (CAEP/InTASC Stnds)

College of Professional Studies

Disposition Assessment

Indicator 1: DEMOCRACY & COMMUNITY: Builds a community based on beliefthat each child/adolescent (c/a) can learn to high levels.InTASC #2CAEP 3.3

are notified in advance ofclassroom activities.

family members are notified inadvance of classroom

activities.

classroom activities when itwas necessary.

TargetCommunicates through wordsand actions that each c/a can

learn to high levels.Communicates faith in values,strengths, and competencies

of each c/a and family.Communicates high

ACCEPTABLECommunicates through wordsand actions that each c/a can

learn to high levels.Communicates positive

perspectives about c/a andfamilies. Supplements

prescribed curriculum with

UNACCEPTABLECommunicates through wordsand actions that some (not all)

c/a can learn to high levels.Communicates negative

perspectives about a c/a orfamilies. Sets minimalexpectations for c/a



Indicator 2: DEMOCRACY & COMMUNITY: Values diversity and uses it to createan inclusive classroom.InTASC # 2CAEP 3.3

Indicator 3: HABITS OF MIND: Relentless in belief about the importance ofteachers using critical thinking, reflection, and professional development to grow asa teacher.InTASC # 9

expectations through designand delivery of challenging

curriculum and assessmentsthat foster high-level skills for

each c/a.

enrichment experiences thatreflect some c/a's lives outside

of school.

performance. Seeks minimalinformation about c/a’s livesoutside of school, usually in

response to a problem.

TARGETCulturally responsive practices

are evident in delivery ofinstruction. Works withchildren/adolescents to

address injustices incurriculum, society, or own

lives.

ACCEPTABLECreates a curriculum that

demonstrates valuing diversegroups through classroommaterials, activities, and

assignments.

UNACCEPTABLEA single perspectivedominates classroom

materials, activities, andassignments.

TARGETIndependently reflects on

effectiveness of teaching by

ACCEPTABLEMakes changes to practices in

response to feedback.

UNACCEPTABLEOverly dependent on feedback

from others OR disregards



Indicator 4: HABITS OF MIND: Committed to designing meaningful, intellectuallyengaging curriculum.InTASC # 7CAEP 3.3

Indicator 5: ADVOCACY:Willingness to collaborate to help each child learn.

asking critical questions.Approaches professional

growth from a critical thinking,inquiry perspective. Seeks outopportunities within learning

environment to grow as aprofessional.

Participates in professionaldevelopment opportunities,

including professional learningcommunities, scholarly

endeavors, and/or teacherresearch.

feedback provided. Activelyavoids engaging intellectuallyin professional development

opportunities

TARGET Makes c/a’s habits of mind

visible through inquiries orinvestigations (critiquing,questioning, analyzing,

evaluating). Ties togethermultiple concepts so that

similarities and differences areunderstood by c/a.

ACCEPTABLE Creates a context that is

supportive in developing c/a’shabits of mind. Encourages

multiple pathways for solvingproblems. Judiciously utilizes

worksheets or tests.

UNACCEPTABLE Engages in behaviors that

result in intellectualdependency of c/a, for

example, show, tell, anddemonstrate. Teaches oneway to solve a problem andaccepts only that method.Follows teaching manual,

curriculum guides, orcolleagues without evaluatingpotential engagement levels

by c/a’s.



InTASC # 9CAEP 3.3

Indicator 6: ADVOCACY: Persistent in advocating for and promoting the profession.InTASC # 10CAEP 3.3

COMMENTS - FOR FINAL EVALUATION ONLY:This is the most important part of the rating of the student teacher. Thisnarrative summary should be reasonably detailed, complete, and accurate,including reference to specific examples of the student teacher’s skills. It shouldaddress the student teacher's abilities and readiness to be a first-year teacher. The

TARGET Collaborates with family

members and other teachersto create innovative solutions

that support each child’s/adolescent’s success.

ACCEPTABLE Coordinates actions with

colleagues to meet students’learning needs.

UNACCEPTABLE Important educational

decisions are madeindependently without

communicating with familymembers or colleagues.

TARGET Advocates for the profession

by speaking or actingpublically on issues facingschools, teachers, families,students, or communities.

ACCEPTABLE Projects positive view of

profession whencommunicating with others

about children, adolescents,families, colleagues, or the

profession.

UNACCEPTABLE Initiates or adds to negativity

about c/a, families,colleagues, or profession,

projecting a negative view ofthe profession to others.



Powered by Qualtrics

summary should include your recommendation of the student teacher’s potential asa member of the profession. Please remember that many times candidates arerequired to include this as part of their job application packet.

Final Recommendation

Recommend for licensing

Recommend for licensing with reservations

I do not recommend for licensing

http://www.qualtrics.com/

university supervisor cooperating teacher

Documents