Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Arizona
SCHOOL STATE:
Derek Chisum
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME:______________________________________________________________________________________
Susan Bejarano
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: _____________________________________________________________________________________________
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0 0 0 0 0 150 0
150
CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 3
INSTRUCTIONS
Please review the "Total Scored Percentage" for accuracy and add any attachments before completing the "Agreement and Signature"
section. Once this evaluation is completed and submitted, the score is final and cannot be changed or altered by the GCU Faculty
Supervisor or by GCU staff.
Total Scored Percentage:
97.80 %
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1:
(Optional)
Attachment 2:
(Optional)
I attest this submission is accurate, true, and in compliance with GCU policy guidelines, to the best of my ability to do so.
Learning Objectives:
Students will be able to factor a system given one of the roots at an 80% mastery level.
Assessment: Students demonstrated problem solving in partner work and verbal engagement
Observation:
1:00 pm: Ms. Miranda Missel began by stamping student agendas. Music played in background.
1:07 pm: Lights were turned on to bring student focus. Previous learning goal and vocabulary words were
addressed. Students were asked to provide thumbs up signal to represent level of comprehension. Ms. Missel
presented problems on board and verbally explained problem solving. She asked for student responses on the next
action to solve problems.
1:18 pm: She asked students to engage in dialogue for problem solving. She wrote problems on the board and
utilized guided questioning.
1:24 pm: Ms. Missel demonstrated use of a graph to figure out problems. She corrected a misconception of a
polynomial. Students asked questions about the graph example on screen.
1:28 pm: Students were provided a worksheet for partner work. She asked students to walk through the steps
initially taken to problem solve. Students began their partner work.
1:32 pm: Students worked on problems. Some students engaged in problem solving dialogue with partners some
did not.
1:36 pm: A student asked a question and Ms. Missel went to front of the room and explained the answer. She went
back to the student to explain and ensure comprehension. Students continued to problem solve and discuss.
Positive and supportive reinforcement: It’s ok..today’s a …..I hope so. Yep, thank you. Let me correct a
misunderstanding of polynomial allows for the correction without singling out any one student.
Informally real time assessing: Raising hands. Thumbs up. Question/answer. Walking to listen/view
student work.
Classroom management: Lights call attention. Raising hands to signal decreases students calling out. Ok
guys..eyes up front.
Warmup activity to transition and prepare students for mathematical learning goals
Focus on real time informal assessments during lesson provides direction to teaching strategies
Scaffolding concepts to support comprehension and build understanding from prior knowledge
Vocabulary focus: reviewing vocabulary words that may have been a learning issue in the previous class
time: roots, polynomial, axis
Reviewing concepts students may have had issue with supports comprehension and students who may not
ask for clarification.
Use of technology to project to screen supports visual learners and an opportunity for modeling problem
solving
Informal assessment of student comprehension (thumbs up) provides an idea of overall need for review,
continuation of concept or remain with same concept a longer period of time.
Student verbal and cognitive engagement increased for this lesson.
Partner discussion is an opportunity to increase student engagement and allow strugglers to be supported
by peer and cement understanding for student who comprehends concept by articulating it. If a student can
teach/explain a concept…that student understands the concept and “cements” knowledge. Having partner
work to complete a worksheet builds collaborative skills and increases individual student engagement.
Use of humor, “That skips my ten minutes of instructions” provides a comfortable learning environment and
builds relationships.
Modeling problems on board with guided verbal directions increases student comprehension and decreases
the need for students to specifically ask for support in front of peers.
Proximity (walking around room) builds focus and allows students to ask for additional support without
“audience” . This is a time to informally assess whole group or individual students.
Lesson Reflections:
Obs. 3: Informal assessment was done while walking amongst students, asking for thumbs up and during
question/answer time. Was there something “new” learned from student responses/performance? Would
you be able to name students who are struggling, have mastered and are ready to move on or need
additional practice? How will support be differentiated and equitable or can it be? Would it benefit learning
to engage partners in problem solving together with one “teaching” and one listening…then present to whole
group? Is there a value increasing student dialogue and partner work? What about self-assessments? Is
there a manner to self-assess?
Obs. 2: Timed work allows for students to engage in problem solving and completing a task with a known
time period. Students had the opportunities to work with each other and when students began completing
the task, the whole group reconvened to receive the correct answers/procedures for problem solving.
Having students know the time frame will increase focus on completion, accountability and build
collaborative skills.
Obs. 2: Partner work was assigned. Some partners did and others did not collaborate or “talk through”
problem solving. What was the expectation for engagement? How can student to student discourse and
collaborative work increase discussion/sharing to reach the expected engagement and learning goal?
Would modeling or walking through what collaborative engagement “looks like” help increase student to
student discourse? Would presenting back to class help increase partner discourse and support learning for
both students?
Informal real time assessments are done throughout the class period. Informal real time assessments
measure student understanding during the class period. High school students will not volunteer lack of
knowledge or request help in front of peers. How can you individually assess student comprehension and
mastery during class time? Would an informal, quick “fist to five” engagement support understanding of
struggling students and those who have achieved concepts without highlighting individuals? Is it feasible to
have targeted students come to you and explain their work/knowledge while the rest problem solve? Would
this be of any value?
Obs. 1: Student engagement can be achieved through student dialogue, actions, cognitive engagement,
listening, etc. Having students participate as listeners to cognitively and verbally engaging increases
thought cognitive processes and actions. Would it serve a purpose to have students share their answers
with each other first before providing answers? This lesson was a review and having students verbally
explain or articulate with partners increases student to student discourse. Typically, teacher to student
discourse and responses through student to teacher discourse can be observed. Student to student
discourse increases cognitive, verbal and auditory engagement. Articulating the concepts cements and
reinforces learning. Is there a time or opportunity to allow students to increase student to student
engagement when learning or reviewing concepts? Can student to student discourse be used as an
informal assessment opportunity?
Obs. 1: Authentic application and realia are means of supporting comprehension and providing a “real
world” connection which in turn promotes comprehension and problem solving application. Would it benefit
learners and differentiate engagement if those who finish “early” can apply the concepts to “real life”
problem solving? How are these mathematical concepts used in careers or professions? Would it support
successful “formal assessments” by applying authentic career or life problem solving to applying/learning
objectives and problem solving?
Thank you for allowing me to observe the third lesson, as well as, implementing real time informal assessments and
increasing student engagement.
Susan Bejarano
Susan Bejarano
Faculty Supervisor
College of Education
Grand Canyon University
602.403.7171
susan.bejarano@my.gcu.edu