COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
FRANCO-AMERICAN TEACHERS-IN-TRAINING
FINAL EVALUATION
*IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS*
There are three evaluations to be completed: 1) this evaluation form, 2) the Domain E evaluation form, and
3) the Section F (English) evaluation form.
Please attach the completed Domain E and Section F forms to this evaluation.
Teacher-in-Training
University/Academy
School
School District
Grade/Subject
Semester/Year
Mentor Teacher
College Supervisor
DOMAIN A: PLANNING AND PREPARATION
Note: Please use the individual rubrics when scoring each criterion. A 1.5 is used when performance is above the 1 level but
not at the 2 level. A 2.5 is used when performance is above the 2 level but not at the 3 level.
Mentor
Teacher
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
College
Supervisor
A1. Becomes familiar with relevant aspects of students’ background knowledge and experiences
demonstrates detailed understanding of the background, experiences, and skill level of all students
3.0
in the class
demonstrates basic understanding of the background, experiences, and skill level of most students
2.0
in the class
demonstrates limited understanding of the background, experiences, and skill level of most
1.0
students in the class
A2. Articulates clear learning goals for the lesson appropriate to the students.
3.0 develops differentiated learning outcomes and states these clearly on the lesson plan
2.0 develops appropriate learning outcomes and states these clearly on the lesson plan
1.0
develops inappropriate learning outcomes or fails to state goals clearly on the lesson plan
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
A3. Demonstrates an understanding of the connection between the content that was learned
previously, the current content, and the content that remains to be learned in the future
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
consistently able to accurately explain connection of content to what has been learned before and
3.0
what will be learned in the future. Frequently makes connections to the bigger picture
2.0
able to accurately explain connection of content to what has been learned before and what will be
learned in the future
1.0
no explanation given for how instruction is connected to the past or the future; fails to see the
necessity of making these connections and shows no understanding of the standards
A4. Creates or selects teaching methods, learning activities and instructional materials or other
resources that are appropriate to the students and that are aligned with the goals of the
lesson
selects appropriate and varied methods, activities, technology and instructional materials to
3.0
support student learning
2.0 selects appropriate activities, technology and instructional materials to support student learning
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
selects inappropriate methods, activities, technology and instructional materials to support student
learning
A5. Creates or selects evaluation strategies that are appropriate for the students and that are
aligned with the goals of the lesson
plans appropriate evaluations and can articulate ways evaluations should impact future learning
3.0
activities
2.0 plans appropriate evaluations that are linked to learning outcomes
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
does not include evaluations in the lesson plan or includes evaluations that are inappropriate
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
DOMAIN B: CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT
Note: Please use the individual rubrics when scoring each criterion. A 1.5 is used when performance is above the 1 level but
not at the 2 level. A 2.5 is used when performance is above the 2 level but not at the 3 level.
Mentor
Teacher
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
College
Supervisor
B1. Creates a climate that promotes fairness
actively encourages fairness and respect among students and creates a climate that provides access
3.0
to appropriate learning opportunities for all students
2.0 treats students fairly and respectfully
1.0
does not treat students fairly and respectfully or allows the climate to interfere with access to
appropriate learning opportunities for all students or allows students to treat each other unfairly
B2. Establishes and maintains rapport with students
genuine effort is made to establish appropriate rapport with students of diverse backgrounds and
3.0
needs
2.0 an appropriate level of rapport is demonstrated with students
1.0
no rapport is established, or the attempts made are inappropriate
B3. Communicates challenging learning expectations to each student
uses activities or strategies that are specifically designed to actively encourage students to think
3.0
independently, creatively or critically about content
2.0 guides students to think independently, creatively or critically about content
does not provide opportunities for students to think independently, creatively or critically about
1.0
content
B4. Establishes and maintains consistent standards of classroom behavior
demonstrates the ability to change and adapt classroom management plans based on students’
3.0
changing needs and behavior
2.0 effectively and consistently responds to students’ needs and behavior
1.0
is unable to effectively and consistently respond to students’ needs and behavior
B5. Makes the physical environment as safe and conducive to learning as possible
creates a physically and psychologically safe environment and can explain the purpose for these
3.0
choices
2.0 creates an environment that is safe and does not interfere with learning
1.0
creates an environment that is unsafe or disruptive to learning
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
DOMAIN C: INSTRUCTION
Note: Please use the individual rubrics when scoring each criterion. A 1.5 is used when performance is above the 1 level but
not at the 2 level. A 2.5 is used when performance is above the 2 level but not at the 3 level.
Mentor
Teacher
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
College
Supervisor
C1. Makes learning goals and instructional procedures clear to students
ensures that all students understand the learning objectives and can carry out the procedures for
3.0
instructional activities
provides students with clear, accurate information about the learning objectives and procedures for
2.0
instructional activities
presents unclear or inaccurate information about the learning objectives and procedures for
1.0
instructional activities
C2. Makes content comprehensible to students
uses effective content delivery strategies, makes content relevant to students’ prior experiences,
3.0
and uses technology appropriate for presentation of content
2.0 uses effective strategies to present content to students
1.0
C3. Encourages students to extend their thinking
develops and uses activities and methods according to the individual needs of the students that are
3.0
specifically designed to encourage creative, critical, and independent thought
uses various means, including questions and student discovery to encourage students to move
2.0
beyond the facts
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
discourages independent or creative thinking
C4. Checks student understanding through a variety of means, provides feedback to students,
adjusts learning activities as the situation demanded
uses a variety of assessment techniques to monitor and analyze individual and group
3.0 comprehension of the content, makes appropriate instructional adjustments as necessary and gives
all students meaningful, substantive, and specific feedback
2.0 monitors student comprehension of content and provides students with feedback
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
does not use effective strategies to present content to students
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
makes few attempts to determine student comprehension and gives students little feedback
C5. Uses instructional time effectively
provides students with activities of instructional value for the entire time, paces them
3.0
appropriately, and performs non-instructional procedures efficiently
paces instruction appropriately for most of the students and does not spend an excessive amount of
2.0
time on non-instructional procedural matters
paces instruction inappropriately to the content and/or the students and spends substantial amounts
1.0
of instructional time on activities of little instructional value
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
DOMAIN D: PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Note: Please use the individual rubrics when scoring each criterion. A 1.5 is used when performance is above the 1 level but
not at the 2 level. A 2.5 is used when performance is above the 2 level but not at the 3 level.
Mentor
Teacher
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
College
Supervisor
D1. Reflects on the extent to which the learning goals were met
can discuss strengths and weaknesses of instruction and can state how this knowledge will be used
3.0
in future instruction of students with diverse needs
demonstrates some understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of instruction, and is often able
2.0
to state how this knowledge will be used in planning future instruction
cannot identify strengths and weakness of instruction and does not know if learning outcomes have
1.0
been met
D2. Demonstrates a sense of efficacy
always attempts to find ways to enable each student to succeed, is aware of the progress of
3.0 students, seeks resources and alternative methods to help specific students who are not meeting
learning outcomes
2.0 attempts to find ways to enable all students to succeed
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
2.0 seeks information from cooperating teacher and attempts to use it to improve instruction
neither seeks nor uses information from professional sources to improve instruction
D4. Communicates with parents or guardians about student learning
demonstrates knowledge of ways to communicate with parents/guardians and actively initiates
3.0
communication for both positive and negative situations
demonstrates some knowledge of ways to communicate with parents and guardians and does so
2.0
when the opportunity arises
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
makes no attempt to find ways to help students who are not meeting learning outcomes
D3. Builds relationships with colleagues to share teaching insights and coordinate learning
activities for students
3.0 seeks information from varied professional resources and uses it effectively to improve instruction
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
communication with parents and guardians is considered unimportant; little or no attempt is made
**IMPORTANT **
Please complete evaluations for Domain E, specific to the teacher’s content area, and Section F, specific
to the teacher’s ability to teach in English. Attach both forms to this evaluation.
To be Completed by the Mentor Teacher
Name of Teacher-in-Training
Please describe the teaching situation, and then record your overall evaluation of this person’s teaching experience,
noting such things as strengths, areas for improvement, attendance, or any special skills or talents which would support
or enhance this person’s ability as a teacher.
Please Type in box.
This evaluation is provided for purposes of complying with Evaluation Requirements of the Franco-American
Teachers-in-Training Institute through the University of Akron. It is not intended to be a personal or
confidential evaluation respecting this teacher-in-training. Evaluations will be shared with the teacher’s
university/academy in France.
Mentor Teacher Signature
Date
To be Completed by the College Supervisor
Name of Teacher-in-Training
Please record your overall evaluation of this person’s teaching experience, noting such things as strengths, areas for
improvement, or any special skills or talents which would support or enhance this person’s ability as a teacher. Please cite
specific examples to support your observations.
Please Type in box.
This evaluation is provided for purposes of complying with Evaluation Requirements of the Franco-American
Teachers-in-Training Institute through the University of Akron. It is not intended to be a personal or
confidential evaluation respecting this teacher-in-training. Evaluations will be shared with the teacher’s
university/academy in France.
Recommended for validation?
College Supervisor Signature
Yes
Date
No
Teacher-in-Training Acknowledgement
Name of Teacher-in-Training
The foregoing Evaluation performed by
and
has been made available for my inspection and comment.
Teacher-in-Training Signature
Date
Comments (if any):
Please Type in box.
Teacher-in-Training Signature
Date