M0026423R0001 Instructional Support Evaluation Form (Attachment 3).pdf
PDF 460 KB Posted
- Attached to
- CDET SEBSP Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- M0026423R0001
- Issued by
- United States Marine Corps
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| (Amendment 1) Attachment 5 Base Ordering Period Estimated Class Schedule.pdf | ||
| (Amendemnt 1) M0026423R0001 Pricing Workbook (Attachment 2).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| M0026423R0001 Amendment 1.pdf | ||
| (Amendment 1) Attachment 4 DD-254.pdf | ||
| M0026423R0001 PPQ (Attachment 1).DOCX | DOCX document | |
| M0026423R0001.pdf | ||
| M0026423R0001 Pricing Workbook (Attachment 2).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
EPME FORM 005, AUG 2010
Faculty Advisor Evaluation Form
NAME of FACULTY ADVISOR (Last, First, Middle Initial)
RANK DATE
LESSON TITLE
ACADEMY COURSE
TYPE OF EVALUATION
EVALUATOR’S NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial)
RANK/TITLE
LESSON PREPARATION (How well was the facilitator prepared to facilitate the lesson content?)
o Excellent o Above Average o Average o Needs Improvement o Poor
TEACHING METHODS (Which method or combination of methods were used to facilitate the lesson? Case method, Socratic discussion, small group discussion, formal lecture, etc. Was the choice effective for this lesson?)
o Excellent o Above Average o Average o Needs Improvement o Poor
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT (How well did the facilitator employ proper classroom management techniques? Did the facilitator display motivation and encourage participation & interaction amongst students? Did the facilitator focus on the learning outcomes and provide a lesson framework?)
o Excellent o Above Average o Average o Needs Improvement o Poor
QUESTIONING TECHNIQUES (Did the facilitator use thought-provoking; open-ended questions & techniques throughout to assess students’ learning?
Did the facilitator respond effectively to questions or student input?)
o Excellent o Above Average o Average o Needs Improvement o Poor
EPME FORM 005, AUG 2010
DELIVERY (How well did the facilitator employ eye contact, movements, gestures, mannerisms, volume, rate, force, inflection, natural pauses, pronunciation, enunciation, and avoid pet words?)
o Excellent o Above Average o Average o Needs Improvement o Poor
OVERALL COMMENTS/SUGGESTIONS (How effective was the lesson? How well are students prepared to accomplish/meet the learning outcomes?)
REFLECTION (Required. Assess the facilitation of your lesson. What worked? What did not? What will you do again next time? How can you improve?)
Faculty Advisor Signature Evaluator Signature
Excellent
Above Average
Average
Needs Improvement
Poor daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text daniel.pappas Typewritten Text
| NAME of FACULTY ADVISOR Last First Middle Initial: |
| RANK: |
| DATE: |
| LESSON TITLE: |
| ACADEMY: |
| COURSE: |
| TYPE OF EVALUATION: |
| EVLUTORS NME Last First Middle Initial: |
| RANKTITLE: |
| o Excellent o Above Average o Average o Needs Improvement o Poor: |
| Lesson Prep: Off |
| Teaching Methods: Off |
| Learning Environment: Off |
| Questiong Techniques: |
| LE: |
| Excellent: Off |
| Above Average: Off |
| Average: Off |
| Needs Improvement: Off |
| Poor: Off |
| Overall Comments: |
| Delivery Box: |
| Teaching Meth: |
| Questioning Techniques: Off |
| Delivery: Off |
| Evaluator Signature: |
| Faculty Advisor Signature: |
| Reflection: |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .