Clinical Field Experience B: Social Studies Pre- Assessment Clinical Field Experience B: Social Studies Pre-Assessment 1 No Submission 0.00% 2 Insufficient 69.00% 3 Approaching 74.00% 4 Acceptable 87.00% 5 Target 100.00% 100.0 %Content 30.0 %Pre-Assessment Not addressed. Pre-assessment is incomplete and is poorly developed in the social studies content area, with weak alignment to standards. Pre-assessment does not determine learning gaps and needs of students. Pre-assessment is complete, but is underdeveloped in the social studies content area, somewhat aligned to appropriate standards. Pre-assessment inadequately determines learning gaps and needs of students. Pre-assessment is adequately developed in the social studies content area, aligned to appropriate standards, in order to determine learning gaps and needs of students. Pre-assessment is expertly and thoughtfully developed in the social studies content area, proficiently aligned to appropriate standards, in order to determine learning gaps and needs of students. 30.0 %Reflection Not addressed. Reflection includes a poor and unrelated description of how the pre-assessment provides data to determine learning gaps and needs. Explanation of the challenges in developing and delivering the pre-assessment is unfocused and missing key details. Reflection includes a rudimentary description of how the pre-assessment provides data to determine learning gaps and needs. Explanation of the challenges in developing and delivering the pre-assessment could include more details. Reflection is sound and competent with basic description of how the pre-assessment provides data to determine learning gaps and needs, including a relevant explanation of the challenges in developing and delivering the pre-assessment. Reflection is thorough and comprehensive with detailed description of how the pre-assessment provides data to determine learning gaps and needs, including a thoughtful explanation of the challenges in developing and delivering the pre-assessment. 10.0 %Future Professional Implications Not addressed. Conclusions and applications to future practice are poor and do not reflect growth and development as a professional. Conclusions and applications to future practice are entry level and minimally reflect growth and development as a professional. Conclusions and applications to future practice are direct and reflect growth and development as a professional. Conclusions and applications to future practice are insightful and thoughtfully reflect growth and development as a professional. 30.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Not addressed. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistent language or word choice is present. Sentence structure is lacking. Submission includes .

1. Clinical Field Experience B: Social Studies Pre- Assessment
Clinical Field Experience B: Social Studies Pre-Assessment
1
No Submission
0.00%
2
Insufficient
69.00%
3
Approaching
74.00%
4
Acceptable
87.00%
5
Target
100.00%
100.0 %Content
30.0 %Pre-Assessment
Not addressed.
Pre-assessment is incomplete and is poorly developed in the
social studies content area, with weak alignment to standards.
Pre-assessment does not determine learning gaps and needs of
students.
Pre-assessment is complete, but is underdeveloped in the social
studies content area, somewhat aligned to appropriate standards.
Pre-assessment inadequately determines learning gaps and needs
of students.
Pre-assessment is adequately developed in the social studies

2. content area, aligned to appropriate standards, in order to
determine learning gaps and needs of students.
Pre-assessment is expertly and thoughtfully developed in the
social studies content area, proficiently aligned to appropriate
standards, in order to determine learning gaps and needs of
students.
30.0 %Reflection
Not addressed.
Reflection includes a poor and unrelated description of how the
pre-assessment provides data to determine learning gaps and
needs. Explanation of the challenges in developing and
delivering the pre-assessment is unfocused and missing key
details.
Reflection includes a rudimentary description of how the pre-
assessment provides data to determine learning gaps and needs.
Explanation of the challenges in developing and delivering the
pre-assessment could include more details.
Reflection is sound and competent with basic description of
how the pre-assessment provides data to determine learning
gaps and needs, including a relevant explanation of the
challenges in developing and delivering the pre-assessment.
Reflection is thorough and comprehensive with detailed
description of how the pre-assessment provides data to
determine learning gaps and needs, including a thoughtful
explanation of the challenges in developing and delivering the
pre-assessment.
10.0 %Future Professional Implications
Not addressed.
Conclusions and applications to future practice are poor and do
not reflect growth and development as a professional.
Conclusions and applications to future practice are entry level
and minimally reflect growth and development as a
professional.
Conclusions and applications to future practice are direct and

3. reflect growth and development as a professional.
Conclusions and applications to future practice are insightful
and thoughtfully reflect growth and development as a
professional.
30.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation,
grammar, language use)
Not addressed.
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede
communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or
sentence construction are used.
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader.
Inconsistent language or word choice is present. Sentence
structure is lacking.
Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not
hinder comprehension. Varieties of effective sentence structures
are used, as well as some practice and content-related language.
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice
reflects well-developed use of practice and content-related
language. Sentence structures are varied and engaging.
100 %Total Weightage
Class Profile
Student Name
English Language Learner
Socioeconomic
Status
Ethnicity
Gender

4. IEP/504
Other
Age
Reading
Performance Level
Math Performance
Level
Parental
Involvement
Internet Available
at Home
Arturo
Yes
Low SES
Hispanic
Male
No
Tier 2 RTI for Reading
Grade level
One year below grade level
At grade level
Med
No
Bertie
No
Low SES
Asian
Female
No
None
Grade level
One year above grade level
At grade level
Low
Yes
Beryl

5. No
Mid SES
White
Female
No
NOTE: School does not have gifted program
Grade level
Two years above grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Brandie
No
Low SES
White
Female
No
Tier 2 RTI for Math
Grade level
At grade level
One year below grade level
Low
No
Dessie
No
Mid SES
White
Female
No
Tier 2 RTI for Math
Grade level
Grade level
One year below grade level
Med
Yes
Diana

6. Yes
Low SES
White
Female
No
Tier 2 RTI for Reading
Grade level
One year below grade level
At grade level
Low
No
Donnie
No
Mid SES
African American
Female
No
Hearing Aids
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Eduardo
Yes
Low SES
Hispanic
Male
No
Tier 2 RTI for Reading
Grade level
One year below grade level
At grade level
Low
No
Emma

7. No
Mid SES
White
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Low
Yes
Enrique
No
Low SES
Hispanic
Male
No
Tier 2 RTI for Reading
One year above grade level
One year below grade level
At grade level
Low
No
Fatma
Yes
Low SES
White
Female
No
Tier 2 RTI for Reading
Grade level
One year below grade level
One year above grade level
Low
Yes
Frances

8. No
Mid SES
White
Female
No
Diabetic
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Francesca
No
Low SES
White
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
High
No
Fredrick
No
Low SES
White
Male
Learning Disabled
Tier 3 RTI for Reading and Math
One year above grade level
Two years below grade level
Two years below grade level
Very High
No
Ines

9. No
Low SES
Hispanic
Female
Learning Disabled
Tier 2 RTI for Math
Grade level
One year below grade level
One year below grade level
Low
No
Jade
No
Mid SES
African American
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
One year above grade level
High
Yes
Kent
No
High SES
White
Male
Emotion-ally Disabled
None
Grade level
At grade level
One year above grade level
Med
Yes
Lolita

10. No
Mid SES
Native American/
Pacific Islander
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Maria
No
Mid SES
Hispanic
Female
No
NOTE: School does not have gifted program
Grade level
At grade level
Two years above grade level
Low
Yes
Mason
No
Low SES
White
Male
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes

11. Nick
No
Low SES
White
Male
No
None
Grade level
One year above grade level
At grade level
Med
No
Noah
No
Low SES
White
Male
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Sharlene
No
Mid SES
White
Female
No
None
Grade level
One year above grade level
At grade level
Med
Med

12. Sophia
No
Mid SES
White
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Stuart
No
Mid SES
White
Male
No
Allergic to peanuts
Grade level
One year above grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Terrence
No
Mid SES
White
Male
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes

13. Wade
No
Mid SES
White
Male
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
One year above grade level
Med
Yes
Wayne
No
High SES
White
Male
Learning Disabled
Tier 3 RTI for Math
Grade level
One year below grade level
Two years below grade level
High
Yes
Wendell
No
Mid SES
African American
Male
Learning Disabled
Tier 3 RTI for Math
Grade level
One year below grade level
Two years below grade level
Med
Yes

14. Yung
No
Mid SES
Asian
Male
No
NOTE: School does not have gifted program
One year below grade level
Two years above grade level
Two years above grade level
Low
Yes
© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Social Studies Differentiation
Part 1: Lesson Plan
Grade level:
Social studies standard:
Arts standard:
Learning objective:
1-2 learning objectives:
Description of the learning activity that integrates social studies
and the arts (100-150 words):

15. Formative Assessment:
Differentiation for three students on the "Class Profile" (i.e.,
How will the following three students meet the designed
objective? What additional choices or options can be offered to
address the needs of these students?) At least one student must
be below and one must be above grade level.
Student name: ___________ - explanation of differentiation:
Student name: ___________ - explanation of differentiation:
Student name: ___________ - explanation of differentiation:
Part 2: Reflection
Class Profile
Student Name
English Language Learner
Socioeconomic
Status
Ethnicity
Gender
IEP/504
Other
Age
Reading
Performance Level

16. Math Performance
Level
Parental
Involvement
Internet Available
at Home
Arturo
Yes
Low SES
Hispanic
Male
No
Tier 2 RTI for Reading
Grade level
One year below grade level
At grade level
Med
No
Bertie
No
Low SES
Asian
Female
No
None
Grade level
One year above grade level
At grade level
Low
Yes
Beryl
No
Mid SES
White
Female
No

17. NOTE: School does not have gifted program
Grade level
Two years above grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Brandie
No
Low SES
White
Female
No
Tier 2 RTI for Math
Grade level
At grade level
One year below grade level
Low
No
Dessie
No
Mid SES
White
Female
No
Tier 2 RTI for Math
Grade level
Grade level
One year below grade level
Med
Yes
Diana
Yes
Low SES
White
Female
No

18. Tier 2 RTI for Reading
Grade level
One year below grade level
At grade level
Low
No
Donnie
No
Mid SES
African American
Female
No
Hearing Aids
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Eduardo
Yes
Low SES
Hispanic
Male
No
Tier 2 RTI for Reading
Grade level
One year below grade level
At grade level
Low
No
Emma
No
Mid SES
White
Female
No

19. None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Low
Yes
Enrique
No
Low SES
Hispanic
Male
No
Tier 2 RTI for Reading
One year above grade level
One year below grade level
At grade level
Low
No
Fatma
Yes
Low SES
White
Female
No
Tier 2 RTI for Reading
Grade level
One year below grade level
One year above grade level
Low
Yes
Frances
No
Mid SES
White
Female
No

20. Diabetic
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Francesca
No
Low SES
White
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
High
No
Fredrick
No
Low SES
White
Male
Learning Disabled
Tier 3 RTI for Reading and Math
One year above grade level
Two years below grade level
Two years below grade level
Very High
No
Ines
No
Low SES
Hispanic
Female
Learning Disabled

21. Tier 2 RTI for Math
Grade level
One year below grade level
One year below grade level
Low
No
Jade
No
Mid SES
African American
Female
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
One year above grade level
High
Yes
Kent
No
High SES
White
Male
Emotion-ally Disabled
None
Grade level
At grade level
One year above grade level
Med
Yes
Lolita
No
Mid SES
Native American/
Pacific Islander
Female

22. No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Maria
No
Mid SES
Hispanic
Female
No
NOTE: School does not have gifted program
Grade level
At grade level
Two years above grade level
Low
Yes
Mason
No
Low SES
White
Male
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Nick
No
Low SES
White
Male

23. No
None
Grade level
One year above grade level
At grade level
Med
No
Noah
No
Low SES
White
Male
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Sharlene
No
Mid SES
White
Female
No
None
Grade level
One year above grade level
At grade level
Med
Med
Sophia
No
Mid SES
White
Female

24. No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Stuart
No
Mid SES
White
Male
No
Allergic to peanuts
Grade level
One year above grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Terrence
No
Mid SES
White
Male
No
None
Grade level
At grade level
At grade level
Med
Yes
Wade
No
Mid SES
White
Male

25. No
None
Grade level
At grade level
One year above grade level
Med
Yes
Wayne
No
High SES
White
Male
Learning Disabled
Tier 3 RTI for Math
Grade level
One year below grade level
Two years below grade level
High
Yes
Wendell
No
Mid SES
African American
Male
Learning Disabled
Tier 3 RTI for Math
Grade level
One year below grade level
Two years below grade level
Med
Yes
Yung
No
Mid SES
Asian
Male

26. No
NOTE: School does not have gifted program
One year below grade level
Two years above grade level
Two years above grade level
Low
Yes
© 2018. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Social Studies Differentiation Plan Rubric:
Details:
Differentiation and modifications are an important component
of preparing lesson plans that utilize strategies and resources
aimed at identified student learning goals. It guides the teacher
in creating differentiated instruction to meet the diverse needs
of all students.
Part 1: Template
For this assignment, use the lesson plan information you have
already been working with (including any revisions you would
like to make) to complete the “Social Studies Differentiation”
template that includes:
· Social Studies and the arts standards and grade level
· Learning objectives
· 100-150 word description of the learning activity that
integrates social studies and the arts
· Instructional strategy
· Using the "Class Profile," select three students who are
performing below or above grade level (at least one of each)
and complete the template, describing how you will

27. differentiate the instruction and assessment for the students.
· Formative Assessment
Part 2: Reflection
In 250-500 words, summarize and reflect on the process of
designing an activity that integrates both social studies and the
arts, along with how the questioning strategies and
differentiation techniques help enhance your learning activity.
How can you collaborate with and incorporate the input,
contributions, and knowledge of families, colleagues, and other
professionals in order to meet the diverse needs of students?
Support your findings with at least two scholarly resources.