Teacher Report Card
Teacher:
Lead:
School:
Date:
Part I.
Tell us how well you know this teacher. Indicate how much contact you had with him/her, and how much insight you feel you were able to gain through that contact.
Part II.
Rate the teacher on each of the following dimensions by circling a score for Pre: (at the beginning of the Summer Institute) and Post: (at the end of the following school year). Also rate how confident you are in your judgements, and include comments to qualify, explain or expand upon your rating.
1. Knowledge about ecological principles and concepts underlying schoolyard inquiry.
|
Pre: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Post: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
No formal knowledge of ecology with many misconceptions. |
Some knowledge in the science of ecology, but many gaps and some misconceptions. |
A good grasp of the major ideas in ecology, with some gaps and misunderstandings. |
An excellent and thorough grasp of ecology. |
Given the information I have, I’d rate the above judgements as:
shaky 1 2 3 4 5 solid
Comments:
2. Knowledge about local natural history.
|
Pre: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Post: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Virtually no knowledge about local organisms, natural history, or ecosystems, and many misconceptions. |
Basic awareness of only the most common organisms (e.g., squirrels, ants), but about little natural history or ecosystems. |
Knows names, life histories and interactions of many of the prominent local species and the ecosystems they are part of. |
Broad knowledge of local flora and fauna, habitats and ecosystems. |
Given the information I have, I’d rate the above judgements as:
shaky 1 2 3 4 5 solid
Comments:
3. Recognition of the teaching potential of the schoolyard.
|
Pre: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Post: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Sees no or only the most obvious opportunities for schoolyard study. |
Sees many of the obvious and some of the subtle opportunities for schoolyard study. |
Looks for and can see the full range of opportunities for ecological study in the schoolyard. |
Can use schoolyard resources for all ecology teaching needs, even when not obvious. |
Given the information I have, I’d rate the above judgements as:
shaky 1 2 3 4 5 solid
Comments:
4. Level of comfort with teaching and learning ecology in the schoolyard.
|
Pre: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Post: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Very fearful, insecure, and uncomfortable with much resistance to teaching outside. |
Willing to use the schoolyard but with some hesitancy and reservations. |
Comfortable teaching and learning outside. |
Actively seeks every opportunity to teach and learn outside. |
Given the information I have, I’d rate the above judgements as:
shaky 1 2 3 4 5 solid
Comments:
5. Level of use of the schoolyard as a teaching resource
|
Pre: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Post: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
No use of the schoolyard to teach. |
Some use of the schoolyard to teach, but only occasional and./or for brief visits. |
Frequent use of the schoolyard for short visits or study over a few sessions. |
Extensive use of schoolyard for long-term and multi-session studies. |
Given the information I have, I’d rate the above judgements as:
shaky 1 2 3 4 5 solid
Comments:
6. Knowledge of and ability to use the inquiry process to ask and answer questions.
|
Pre: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Post: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Totally naive and at a loss about how to ask questions and seek answers through inquiry. |
Can generate and refine simple questions and pursue straightforward methods to answer them. |
Well versed in asking and answering many different kinds of questions. Can pose good hypotheses. |
Very capable of asking and answering the full range of questions, with good insights into the inquiry process, its subtleties and limitations. |
Given the information I have, I’d rate the above judgements as:
shaky 1 2 3 4 5 solid
Comments:
7. Level of use of an inquiry approach to teaching schoolyard ecology. (NOTE: This lumps guided and open inquiry-i.e., whether the question comes from the teacher or from the student is less important here than whether the inquiry is rich and meaningful).
|
Pre: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Post: 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Does schoolyard activities or units that are not inquiry (question) oriented. |
Has kids address questions in short, disjointed activities. |
Kids do inquiry-based units of several sessions, involving many but not all facets of a full investigation. |
All schoolyard ecology units are inquiry based, involving full investigations based on genuine questions. |
Given the information I have, I’d rate the above judgements as:
shaky 1 2 3 4 5 solid
Comments:
Part III (optional)
Write a brief summary of the teacher’s growth and accomplishments, or lack thereof, relative to the central goals of SYEFEST. Give examples if possible. OR, if you have more insights that it would be easier to share over the phone about this person, write CALL ME below.
Lead Teacher/Lead Ecologist/Project Leader
Institution or organization
Address
Phone:
Fax:
Email:
Website:
| 
