Emily Formal Observation Two Rubric

Siena Heights University
Student Teaching
Formal Observation # __2__
Teacher Candidate ___Emily Roberts___
Clinical Instructor _Kevin Grasley__
Date _February 10, 2020__
1
Formal Classroom Observation: __________
Interview Protocol for a Preconference (Planning Conference)
Candidate: ___________________________________________ School: ________________________________________
Cooperating Teacher: _________________________________ Grade Level: ______________________________________
Observer: _______________________________________________ Date: _______________________________________
*Remember you must attach your lesson plan to this document for review during planning conference
Questions for discussion: (to be completed by candidate)

1. To which part of your curriculum does this lesson relate?
2. How does this learning fit in the sequence of learning for this class?
3. Briefly describe the students in this class, including those with special needs.
2
4. What are your learning outcomes for this lesson? What do you want the students to know or be able to do?
5. How will you engage the students in the learning? What will you do? What will the students do? Will the students work in groups, or
individually, or as a large group? Provide any worksheets or other materials the students will be using.
6. How will you differentiate instruction for either individual students or groups of students in the class?
7. How and when will you know whether the students have learned what you intend?
8. What would you like me to specifically observe during the lesson?
3
Notes from the Observation
Time Actions and Statements/ Questions by Teacher and Students Component
4
5
6
Interview Protocol for a Post Conference (Reflection Conference)
Teacher Candidate: ________________________________________ School: _______________________ Date:
1. In general, how successful was the lesson? Did the students learn what you intended for them to learn? How do you know?
2. If you were able to bring samples of student work, what do those samples reveal about those students’ levels of engagement and
understanding?
3. Comment on your classroom procedures, student conduct, and your use of physical space. To what extent did these contribute to
student learning?
4. Did you depart from your plan? If so, how and why?
5. Comment on different aspects of your instructional delivery (e.g., activities, grouping of students, materials and resources). To what
extent were they effective?
6. If you had an opportunity to teach this lesson again to the same group of students, what would you do differently?
7
Formal Observation Summary
Evidence of Teaching
 Expectations by completion of student teaching placement are for candidate to be scored at 2 or 3. If not, successful
completion will be in jeopardy and brought before the division faculty on a case by case basis.
Domain #1: Planning and Preparation

FfT Components / No Opportunity
No Evidence (0) Below Expectations (1) Met Expectations (2) Above Expectations (3) Score
Elements to Observe
1a: Demonstrating Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate’s The teacher candidate’s The teacher candidate’s
Knowledge of plans and practice display plans and practices plans and practice
Content & little knowledge of the reflect some awareness reflect solid knowledge
Pedagogy (InTASC content, prerequisite of the important of the content,
4; CAEP 1.1, 1.3, relationships between concepts in the prerequisite 2
1.4, 1.5, 3.4, 3.5) different aspects of the discipline, prerequisites, relationships between
content, or the relationships between important concepts, and
instructional practices them, and the the instructional
specific to that discipline. instructional practice practices specific to the
specific to that discipline.
discipline.
Evidence:
Emily has demonstrated the alignment of her lessons to the required writing curriculum in her grade level.
1b: Demonstrating Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate The teacher candidate The teacher candidate
Knowledge of demonstrates little or no indicates the actively seeks
Students (InTASC knowledge of students’ importance of knowledge of students’
1,2,7; CAEP 1.1, backgrounds, cultures, understanding students’ backgrounds, cultures,
1.5, 3.4) skills, language backgrounds, cultures, skills, language 2
proficiency, interests, skills, language proficiency, interests,
and special needs, and proficiency, interests, and special needs, and
does not seek such and special needs, and attains this knowledge
understanding. attains this knowledge for groups of students.
for the class as a whole.
8
Elements to Observe
Evidence:
Emily moves around the classroom interacting with students as they write or practice their penmanship. Students share their writing ideas, their facts,
and their opinions with her.
Non-Applicable No Evidence Instructional outcomes Instructional outcomes Instructional outcomes

1c: Setting are unsuitable for are of moderate rigor are stated as goals
Instructional students, represent and are suitable for reflecting high level
Outcomes(InTASC trivial or low-level some students, but learning and curriculum
1; CAEP 1.1, 1.3, learning, or are stated consist of a combination standards. They are
1.4, 3.4) only as activities. They do of activities and goals, suitable for most 2
not permit viable some of which permit students in the class,
methods of assessment. viable methods of represent different
assessment. They reflect types of learning, and
more than one type of can be assessed. The
learning, but the outcomes reflect
teacher makes no opportunities for
attempt at coordination coordination.
or integration.
Evidence:
Emily has listed the instructional outcomes that she is going to cover in the lesson on facts and opinions. She has reviewed and monitored student
questions and responses.
9
Elements to Observe
1d: Demonstrating Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate The teacher candidate The teacher candidate is
Knowledge of demonstrates little or no demonstrates some fully aware of the
Resources (CAEP familiarity with resources familiarity with resources available
1.4, 1.5, 3.4) to enhance own resources available through the school or
knowledge, to use in through the school or district to enhance own 2
teaching, or for students district to enhance own knowledge, to use in
who need them. The knowledge, to use in teaching, or for students
teacher candidate does teaching, or for students who need them.
not seek such who need them. The
knowledge. teacher candidate does
not seek to extend such
knowledge.
Evidence:
Emily has utilized the document camera, the whiteboard, and the speaker system throughout her instruction. Her lesson also follows the school
approved writing curriculum.
1e: Designing Non-Applicable No Evidence The series of learning The series of learning The candidate
Coherent experiences is poorly experiences coordinates knowledge
Instruction (InTASC aligned with the demonstrates partial of content, of students,
1, 4, 7; CAEP 1.1, instructional outcomes alignment with and of resources to
1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 3.4) and does not represent instructional outcomes, design a series of
outcomes and does not and some of the learning experiences 2.5
represent a coherent experiences are likely to aligned to instructional
structure. The engage students in outcomes and suitable
experiences are suitable significant learning. The for groups of students.
for only some students. lesson or unit has a The lesson or unit
recognizable structure structure has a clear
and reflects partial structure and is likely to
structure. engage students in
significant learning.
10
Elements to Observe
Evidence:
Emily has sought to integrated students’ real life experiences into her writing topics. Students have selected topics of interest to them. Animals
and sports are two examples.
1f: Designing Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate’s The teacher candidate’s The teacher candidate’s
Student plan for assessing plan for student plan for student
Assessments student learning contains assessment is partially assessment is aligned
(InTASC 6; CAEP no clear criteria or aligned with the with the instructional
1.1, 1.2, 1.5) standards, is poorly instructional outcomes, outcomes, uses clear
aligned with the without clear criteria, criteria, and is 2
instructional outcomes, and inappropriate for at appropriate for the
or is inappropriate for least some of the needs of students. The
many students. The students. The teacher teacher candidate
results of assessments candidate intends to use intends to use
have minimal impact on assessment results to assessment results to
the design of future plan for future plan for future
instruction. instruction for the class instruction for groups of
as a whole. students.
Evidence:
Emily monitors student writing throughout the writing workshop. She asks students to share their facts and opinions, and she monitors if the
students were successful or not. At the end of the hour, Emily congratulated the students on the facts that she had read or students had shared.
She also suggested that they were going to need more work with opinions.
Domain #2: The Classroom Environment

Elements to Observe
2a: Creating an Non-Applicable No Evidence Classroom interactions, Classroom interactions, Classroom interactions,
Environment of both between the both between the both between the
Respect and teacher candidate and teacher candidate and teacher candidate and
Rapport (InTASC 3; the students and among the students and among the students and among
CAEP 1.1, 3.3) students are negative, students are generally students are polite and 2
inappropriate, or appropriate and free respectful, reflecting
11
Elements to Observe
insensitive to students’ from conflict but may be general warmth and
cultural backgrounds and characterized by caring and are
are characterized by occasional displays of appropriate to the
sarcasm, put-downs, or insensitivity or lack of cultural and
conflict. responsiveness to developmental
cultural or differences among
developmental groups of students.
differences among
students.
Evidence:
With minimal time lost, Emily was able to transition from penmanship practice to the writing workshop. Even with students’ excitement from their
writing of facts and opinions, Emily was able to keep the students engaged through the use of “Scoobie, Doobie, Doo …” student response.
2b: Establishing a Non-Applicable No Evidence The classroom The teacher candidate’s The classroom culture is
Culture for environment conveys a attempt to create a characterized by high
Learning (CAEP negative culture for culture for learning is expectations for most
1.1, 3.3, 3.6) learning, characterized partially successful, with students and genuine
by low teacher candidate little teacher candidate commitment to the
commitment to the commitment to the subject by both teacher
subject, low expectations subject, modest candidate and students, 2.5
for student achievement, expectations for student with students
and little or no student achievement, and little demonstrating pride in
pride in work. student pride in work. their work.
Both teacher candidate
and students appear to
be only “going through
the motions.”
Evidence:
Both students and Emily demonstrated commitment to the subject matter. Student engagement was noticeable through their excitement when
they had their chance to share.
2c: Managing Non-Applicable No Evidence Much instructional time Some instructional time Little instructional time is
Classroom is lost because of is lost because of lost because of classroom
Procedures (CAEP inefficient classroom classroom routines and routines and procedures
3.4) routines and procedures procedures for for transitions, handling
for transitions, handling transitions, handling of of supplies, and 2
12
Elements to Observe
of supplies, and supplies, and performance of non-
performance of non- performance of non- instructional duties,
instructional duties. instructional duties are which occur smoothly.
only partially effective.
Evidence:
Some time was lost as Emily transitioned from the beginning reading about Hibernation and Migration to work with facts and opinions.
2d: Managing Non-Applicable No Evidence There is no evidence that It appears that the Standards of conduct
Student Behavior standards of conduct teacher candidate has appear to be clear to
(CAEP 3.4) have been established made an effort to students, and the teacher
and little or no teacher establish standards of candidate monitors
candidate monitoring of conducts for students. student behavior against 2
student behavior. The teacher candidate those standards. The
Response to student tries, with uneven teacher candidate’s
misbehavior is repressive results, to monitor response to student
or disrespectful of student behavior and misbehavior is
student dignity. respond to student appropriate and respects
misbehavior. the students’ dignity.
Evidence:
Using “Scoobie, Doobie, Doo” and the student response when necessary, Emily was able to refocus student attention during the writing workshop.
Emily also reminded students of the expected behavior when only one or two students lost focus on the lesson.
E “Boys and girls, we can’t hear what Jimmy is saying. We have to be listening.”
E “Boys and girls, we are not being very polite. We need to be listening when someone is reading.”
2e: Organizing Non-Applicable No Evidence The physical The classroom is safe, The classroom is safe,
Physical Space environment is unsafe, or and essential learning is and learning is accessible
(CAEP 3.4) some students don’t accessible to most to all students; the
13
Elements to Observe
have access to learning. students; the teacher teacher candidate
There is poor alignment candidate’s use of ensures that the physical 2
between the physical physical resources, arrangement is
arrangement and the including computer appropriate to the
lesson activities. technology, is learning activities. The
moderately effective. teacher candidate makes
The teacher candidate effective use of physical
may attempt to modify resources, including
the physical computer technology.
arrangement to suit
learning activities, with
partial success.
Evidence:
There are a lot of desks in the center of the classroom. However, students do not seem to have difficulty moving about the classroom.
Domain 3: Instruction
Fft Components No Opportunity

/Elements to Observe
3a: Non-Applicable No Evidence Expectations for learning, Expectations for Expectations for learning,
Communicating directions and learning, directions and directions and
with Students procedures, and procedures, and procedures, and
(InTASC 5; CAEP explanations of content explanations of content explanations of content
1.1) are unclear or confusing are clarified after initial are clear to students. 2.5
to students. The teacher confusion; the teacher Communications are
candidate’s use of candidate’s use of appropriate for students’
language contains errors language is correct but cultures and levels of
or is inappropriate for may not be completely development.
students’ cultures or appropriate for
level of development. students’ cultures or
levels of development.
Evidence:
Emily clarified questions between facts and opinions, and she had students physically demonstrate their belief if a statement was a fact or opinion
by standing after she read a statement. She would repeat or have a student explain her directions.
E continues reading sentences and students stand if the statement is a fact and stay seated if the statement is an opinion.
14
3b: Using Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate’s Some of the teacher Most of the teacher
Questioning and questions are low-level candidate’s questions candidate’s questions
Discussion or inappropriate, eliciting elicit a thoughtful elicit a thoughtful
Techniques limited student response, but most are response, and the 2.5
(InTASC 8; CAEP participation and low-level, posed in rapid teacher candidate allows
1.1, 1.4, 3.4) recitation rather than succession. The teacher sufficient time for
discussion. candidate’s attempts to students to answer. All
engage all students in students participate in
the discussion are only the discussion, with the
partially successful. teacher candidate
stepping aside when
appropriate.
Evidence:
Throughout the writing workshop, Emily continued to ask students questions: “Who can tell me what hibernation is? Who knows what migrations
is? How many of you can think of fact about your topic? Tell me an opinion about your topic.”
3c: Engaging Non-Applicable No Evidence Activities and Activities and Activities and
Students in assignments, materials, assignments, materials, assignments, materials,
Learning (InTASC 1, and grouping of students and grouping of and grouping of students
3, 4, 5, 8; CAEP 1.1, are inappropriate for the students are partially are fully appropriate for
1.4, 1.5, 3.4) instructional outcomes or appropriate for the the instructional
students’ cultures or instructional outcomes outcomes or students’
levels of understanding, or students’ cultures or cultures and levels of 2.5
resulting in little levels of understanding, understanding. All
intellectual engagement. resulting in moderate students are engaged in
The lesson has no intellectual work of a high level of
structure or is poorly engagement. The lesson rigor. The lesson’s
paced. has a recognizable structure is coherent,
structure, but that with appropriate pace.
structure is not fully
maintained.
Evidence:
15
Students were engaged through the hibernation and migration introduction as noted by their viewing of the reading that Emily shared. In the writing of
facts and opinions, 17 students had pencils to paper and were writing.
3d: Using Non-Applicable No Evidence Assessment is not used in Assessment is Assessment is regularly
assessment in instruction, either occasionally used in used in instruction,
Instruction (InTASC through monitoring of instruction, through through self-assessment
6; CAEP 1.1, 1.2, progress by the teacher some monitoring of by students, monitoring
1.5) candidate or students, or progress of learning by of progress of learning by 2
though feedback to the teacher candidate the teacher candidate
students. Students are and/or student. and/or students, and
unaware of the Feedback to students is high-quality feedback to
assessment criteria used uneven, and students students. Students are
to evaluate their work. are aware of only some fully aware of the
of the assessment assessments criteria
criteria used to evaluate issued to evaluate their
their work. work.
Evidence:
Emily asked students to share their responses several times during the writing time. She walked around the classroom and had students share their
facts and opinions with her.
E “You did a nice job writing your facts and opinions. You had a little confusion with opinions.”
3e: Demonstrating Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate The teacher candidate The teacher candidate
Flexibility and adheres to the attempts to modify the promotes the successful
Responsiveness instruction plan, even lesson when needed learning of all students,
(CAEP 3.4) when a change would and to respond to making adjustments as
improve the lesson or student questions, with needed to instruction
address students’ lack of moderate success. The plans and
interest. The teacher teacher candidate accommodating student 2
candidate brushes aside accepts responsibility questions, needs, and
student questions; when for student success but interests.
students experience has only a limited
16
difficulty, the teacher repertoire of strategies
candidate blames the to draw upon.
students or their home
environment.
Evidence:
Emily adjusted her instruction when several students finished their writing of facts and opinions quickly. She asked students to think of a second
topic and continue writing facts and opinions about that new topic.
E “Boys and girls, if you are finished, I am going to ask you to think of another topic and write two facts and two opinions about that topic.”
17
Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities

Elements to Observe
4a: Reflecting on Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate The teacher candidate The teacher candidate
Teaching (InTASC does not accurately assess provides a partially provides an accurate and
9; CAEP 1.1) the effectiveness of the accurate and objective objective description of
lesson and has no ideas description of the the lesson, citing specific
about how the lesson lesson but does not evidence. The teacher 2
could be improved. cite specific evidence. candidate makes some
The teacher candidate specific suggestions as to
makes only general how the lesson might be
suggestions as to how improved.
the lesson might be
improved.
Evidence:
Emily admitted that she wasn’t completely sure about a woodchuck/groundhog relationship, and told students that the class might have to research
that at a later time. She also used two students and their knowledge about basketball as examples of how these two students would be good
sources of information.
A student answers, “a ground hog.” A classmate answers, “a woodchuck.” This brings up the discussion if the animals are the same or not.
E mentions, “We may have to look that up. I’m not really sure if they are the same or not.”
4b: Maintaining Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate’s The teacher The teacher candidate’s
Accurate Records systems for maintaining candidate’s systems for systems for maintaining
(CAEP 3.6) both instructional and maintaining both both instructional and n/a
non-instructional records instructional and non- non-instructional records
are either nonexistent or instructional records are accurate, efficient,
in disarray, resulting in are rudimentary and and effective.
errors and confusion. only partially effective.
Evidence:
18
Elements to Observe
4c: Communicating Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate’s The teacher candidate The teacher candidate
with Families communication with adheres to school communicates frequently
(InTASC 10; CAEP families about the procedures for with families and
1.1) instructional program or communicating with successfully engages
about individual students families and makes them in the instructional
is sporadic or culturally modest attempts to program. Information to n/a
inappropriate. The engage families in the families about individual
teacher candidate makes instructional program. students is conveyed in a
no attempt to engage But communications culturally appropriate
families in the are not always manner.
instructional program. appropriate to the
cultures of those
families.
Evidence:
4d: : Participating Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate The teacher candidate The teacher candidate
in a Professional does not participate in participates in seeks out opportunities
Community professional development professional for professional
(InTASC 10; CAEP activities and makes no development activities development based on
1.1, 3.6) effort to share knowledge that are convenient or an individual assessment
with colleagues. The are required, and of need and actively
teacher candidate is makes limited shares expertise with n/a
resistant to feedback from contributions to the others. The teacher
supervisors or colleagues. profession. The candidate welcomes
teacher candidate feedback from
accepts, with some supervisors and
reluctance, feedback colleagues.
from supervisors and
colleagues.
Evidence:
19
Elements to Observe
4e: Growing and Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate The teacher candidate The teacher candidate
Developing does not participate in participates in seeks out opportunities
Professionally professional development professional for professional
(InTASC 9; CAEP activities and makes no development activities development based on
1.1, 3.6) effort to share knowledge that are convenient or an individual assessment
with colleagues. The are required, and of need and actively
teacher candidate is makes limited shares expertise with n/a
resistant to feedback from contributions to the others. The teacher
supervisors or colleagues. profession. The candidate welcomes
teacher candidate feedback from
accepts, with some supervisors and
reluctance, feedback colleagues.
from supervisors and
colleagues.
Evidence:
4f: Showing Non-Applicable No Evidence The teacher candidate has The teacher candidate The teacher candidate
Professionalism little sense of ethics and is honest and well displays a high level of
(InTASC 9, 10; CAEP professionalism and intentioned in serving ethics and
1.1, 3.6) contributes to practices students and professionalism in
that are self-serving or contributing to dealings with both
harmful to students. The decisions in the school, students and colleagues
teacher candidate fails to but the teacher and complies fully and 2.5
comply with school and candidate’s attempts to voluntarily with school
district regulations and serve students are and district regulations.
time lines. limited. The teacher
candidate complies
minimally with school
and district regulations,
doing just enough to
get by.
Evidence:
Emily has demonstrated professionalism during her work with colleagues and students.
20
Strengths of the Lesson
The students were excited with the topics that Emily offered for them to use in their writings.
The content of the lesson of facts and opinions was thoroughly covered.
Emily moved around the classroom as students completed and shared their facts and opinions.
Emily allowed time for students to share their facts and opinions with their classmates.
Emily admitted that she didn’t know everything about two topics during the class discussion and encouraged student research to find
answers to the questions.
The penmanship lesson, as a class starter, following lunch and recess, was very effective.
Areas for Growth
Consider how you might develop a smoother transition between the opening reading of hibernation and migration, and your follow-up
work with facts and opinions.
Continue to work on developing your voice. How might it sound differently when you need to keep students focused?
Is there any literature/ story/ book that you might be able to use to connect the elements of this lesson?
Continue to reflect and develop your structure of writing lessons.
Specifics to focus on for the next observation

Consider how you might develop a smoother transition between the opening reading of hibernation and migration, and your follow-up
work with facts and opinions.
21
Continue to work on developing your voice. How might it sound differently you need to keep students focused?
Is there any literature/ story/ book that you might be able to use to connect the elements of this lesson?
Continue to reflect and develop your structure of writing lessons and student engagement.
We have participated in a conversation on the above items.
Candidate Signature: ___________________________ Clinical Instructor Signature ___________________________ Date: _______
22

Emily Formal Observation Two Rubric

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Emily Formal Observation Two Rubric

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Siena Heights University

Candidate: ___ School:

Cooperating Teacher: _ Grade Level: ______

Observer: _________ Date: _

Questions for discussion: (to be completed by candidate)

8. What would you like me to specifically observe during the lesson?

Interview Protocol for a Post Conference (Reflection Conference)

Teacher Candidate: __________________ School: _ Date:

Domain #1: Planning and Preparation

Non-Applicable No Evidence Instructional outcomes Instructional outcomes Instructional outcomes

Domain #2: The Classroom Environment

FfT Components / No Opportunity

Fft Components No Opportunity

FfT Components / No Opportunity

Areas for Growth

Continue to reflect and develop your structure of writing lessons.

Specifics to focus on for the next observation

We have participated in a conversation on the above items.

Candidate Signature: _______ Clinical Instructor Signature _ Date: _

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi