Field Experience / Internship
Advanced Licensure Programs
The Field Experience / Internship Portfolio is a key assessment used across all advanced-licensure programs to evaluate candidate performance on components of the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Advanced Standards. This assessment measures candidates’ ability to:
- RA1.1.a -- Interpret data and draw conclusions.
- RA1.1.a – Apply data-informed conclusions to inform decisions and practice.
- RA1.1.c -- Create and sustain environments that support the learning and development of all learners.
- RA1.1.d – Engage in and lead collaborative efforts with stakeholders.
- RA1.1.e -- Select and implement technology to achieve desired outcomes.
- RA1.1f – Demonstrate ethical and professional practice.
Across programs, candidates are expected to develop a deep understanding of the concepts and principles within the field of preparation. By completion, candidates apply specialized knowledge and professional practices across clinical contexts to advance learning and development for all students.
The rubric that follows outlines the specific standards and performance expectations assessed through this portfolio.
Information About the Assignment
In this assessment, candidates develop a professional portfolio comprised of artifacts generated during their internship, clinical hours, or practicum experiences. These artifacts reflect work completed within their specific program area.
Instructions
- Collectively, select artifacts for the portfolio that address all six components being
measured:
- Able to interpret data and draw conclusions.
- Able to use conclusions to inform decisions or practice.
- Create and sustain environments that support the learning and development of all learners.
- Engagement and leadership in collaborative efforts with stakeholders.
- Select and implement technology to achieve desired outcomes.
- Engage in ethical and professional practice.
- For each of the six components listed above, at least two artifacts must be included in the portfolio. One artifact can address more than one component. For example, components a, b, and e could be addressed by the same artifact. However, each cover page should only address one component. The reflection response is based on the targeted component.
- Each artifact needs to be preceded with the Artifact Cover Page. This cover page will
provide the title and overview of the two artifacts and denote which component was
addressed.
- Next, three reflective questions will be answered on how each candidate meets the
six components listed above. The reflection response is based on the targeted component.
For each component’s cover page, address the following:
- How did you enhance the learning and development opportunities for all students?
- How did you use data/evidence to develop a supportive school environment?
- How did your knowledge and skills grow in your field of specialization?
- Next, three reflective questions will be answered on how each candidate meets the
six components listed above. The reflection response is based on the targeted component.
For each component’s cover page, address the following:
To answer these questions, critical thinking is required. Although individual artifacts are being addressed, evaluate how other aspects of the field experience may have supported your learning/development being illuminated.
Each cover page should be no more than one single-spaced page.
Field Experience/ Internship Portfolio Evaluation Rubric
RA1.1.a. Application of Data Literacy
| Standard | Exceeds Standard | Target / Meets Standard | Progressing Towards Standard | Does Not Meet Standard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Able to interpret data and draw conclusions. |
Draws precise, accurate, and strongly justified conclusions grounded in comprehensive data analysis. Clearly interprets patterns, trends, and relationships across data sources. |
Draws accurate and appropriate conclusions from data analysis. Interpretation reflects relevant patterns and supports reasonable conclusions. |
Draws partially accurate or weakly supported conclusions from data analysis. Interpretation shows gaps in reasoning or limited connection to the data. |
Draws inaccurate, unsupported, or inappropriate conclusions. Misinterprets data or fails to identify meaningful patterns or relationships. |
|
Able to use conclusions to inform decisions or practice. |
Effectively applies well-supported conclusions from data to inform decisions or actions. Demonstrates clear alignment between data findings and practice, with decisions reflecting depth of insight. |
Applies appropriate conclusions from data to inform decisions or actions. Connections between data findings and practice are evident. |
Applies partially supported or unclear conclusions to decisions or actions. Alignment between data findings and practice is limited or inconsistently articulated. |
Applies inaccurate or unsupported conclusions, or fails to use data to inform decisions or actions. Practice is not meaningfully connected to data findings. |
RA1.1.c. Develop Supportive School Environments
| Standard | Exceeds Standard | Target / Meets Standard | Progressing Towards Standard | Does Not Meet Standard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Creates and sustains environments that support the learning and development of all learners. |
Designs and articulates a comprehensive approach to developing supportive school environments that fully address the needs of diverse learners. Identifies and aligns effective, evidence-based strategies that promote inclusion, equity, and positive developmental outcomes. |
Describes appropriate approaches to developing supportive school environments that address the needs of diverse learners. Identifies relevant strategies that support inclusion and equitable learning opportunities. |
Describes limited or partially appropriate approaches to developing supportive school environments. Strategies for supporting diverse learners are unclear, incomplete, or lack alignment to learner needs. |
Describes inappropriate or ineffective approaches to developing supportive school environments. Does not identify strategies that meaningfully support diverse learners. |
RA1.1.d Leading and/or participating in collaborative activities with others such as peers, teachers, colleagues, administrators, community organizations, and parents
| Standard | Exceeds Standard | Target / Meets Standard | Progressing Towards Standard | Does Not Meet Standard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Demonstrates engagement and leadership in collaborative efforts with stakeholders. |
Leads collaborative activities with stakeholders through clear direction, shared decision-making, and sustained engagement. Facilitates progress toward defined goals and supports meaningful stakeholder contributions. |
Participates actively in collaborative activities and assumes a leadership role within a defined task or component. Contributes to group processes and supports progress toward shared goals. |
Participates in collaborative activities in a limited or inconsistent manner. Engagement in group processes is present but lacks initiative or clear contribution to outcomes. |
Does not meaningfully participate in collaborative activities with stakeholders. Lacks engagement or contribution to group efforts. |
RA1.1.e Supporting appropriate applications of technology for their field of specialization
| Standard | Exceeds Standard | Target / Meets Standard | Progressing Towards Standard | Does Not Meet Standard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Selects and implements technology to achieve desired outcomes |
Integrates appropriate and innovative technology in ways that clearly enhance and achieve desired outcomes. Technology use is purposeful, well-aligned, and adds measurable value to practice. |
Integrates appropriate technology that supports and achieves desired outcomes. Technology use is aligned to purpose and contributes to practice. |
Identifies appropriate technology but implementation is incomplete, inaccurate, or weakly aligned to the desired outcome. |
Uses technology that is inappropriate for the intended outcome or fails to support the goal. Application reflects misunderstanding of the technology’s purpose or use. |
RA1.1.f Application of professional dispositions, laws and policies, codes of ethics and professional standards appropriate to their field of specialization
| Standard | Exceeds Standard | Target / Meets Standard | Progressing Towards Standard | Does Not Meet Standard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Applies Ethical Standards of Professional Practice |
Demonstrates a thorough and integrated application of ethical standards, laws, policies, and professional codes. Decisions and actions consistently reflect sound ethical judgment and professional responsibility. |
Demonstrates appropriate application of ethical standards, laws, policies, and professional codes. Actions reflect understanding of professional expectations. |
Demonstrates partial or inconsistent application of ethical standards and professional expectations. Understanding of laws or policies is incomplete. |
Demonstrates limited or inappropriate application of ethical standards and professional expectations. Actions do not align with established codes, laws, or policies. |
|
Attendance, Timeliness, Engagement, and Professional Conduct |
Demonstrates professional reliability and engagement that supports responsibilities and contributes positively to the professional setting. Conduct reflects respect, initiative, and collaboration. |
Demonstrates appropriate reliability, engagement, and professional conduct aligned with expectations. |
Demonstrates uneven reliability, engagement, or professional conduct. Alignment with expectations is partial or unclear. |
Demonstrates inadequate reliability, engagement, or professional conduct. Does not meet expectations for professional responsibility. |
|
Commitment to Self-Reflection and Professional Learning |
Engages in meaningful self-reflection and actively uses insights to improve practice. Demonstrates initiative in ongoing professional learning and growth. |
Demonstrates reflection on practice and engages in professional learning aligned with expectations. |
Demonstrates limited or surface-level reflection. Engagement in professional learning lacks clear connection to improvement. |
Demonstrates minimal reflection or engagement in professional learning. Does not use feedback to improve practice. |
|
Written and Oral Communication |
Communicates clearly, professionally, and effectively in written and oral formats. Communication is well organized, audience-appropriate, and supports professional goals. |
Communicates appropriately in written and oral formats. Communication meets professional expectations and conveys intended meaning. |
Communication is uneven or lacks clarity. Organization or delivery limits effectiveness in professional contexts. |
Communication is unclear, ineffective, or inappropriate for professional contexts. Does not support understanding or collaboration. |
RA1.2 Application of Specialized Content and Discipline Knowledge in Clinical Practice
| Standard | Exceeds Standard | Target / Meets Standard | Progressing Towards Standard | Does Not Meet Standard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Application of discipline-specific knowledge in authentic settings and demonstrated impact on all learners or services |
Implements advanced, discipline-specific practices across clinical contexts and clearly demonstrates measurable positive impact on learning, development, or services using multiple forms of evidence. Practice reflects intentional alignment with learner needs and includes evaluation and refinement based on outcomes. |
Implements discipline-specific practices appropriately in authentic clinical settings and provides evidence of positive impact on learning, development, or services. Practice aligns with learner needs and intended outcomes. |
Implements some discipline-specific practices, but application shows inaccuracies or weak alignment to context or learner needs. Evidence of impact is limited, unclear, or anecdotal. |
Does not demonstrate appropriate implementation of discipline-specific practices in authentic clinical settings. Provides little or no evidence of impact on learning, development, or services. |
|
Growth over time through reflection, integration of theory, data, and practice |
Demonstrates substantial growth through deep reflection, integration of theory and data, and application across multiple field experiences to improve practice and learner outcomes. |
Demonstrates clear growth by applying theory and field-based learning to inform practice and support student learning using appropriate data and evidence. |
Demonstrates emerging growth with limited analysis. Reflections are primarily descriptive with minimal connections among theory, data, and practice. |
Demonstrates minimal or unclear growth. Reflections lack evidence of knowledge development or meaningful application to professional practice. |
RA3.4 Facilitating learning for Diverse Learners
| Standard | Exceeds Standard | Target / Meets Standard | Progressing Towards Standard | Does Not Meet Standard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Ability to facilitate learning that results in positive academic and developmental outcomes for diverse learners |
Facilitates learning that results in clearly documented, positive academic and developmental outcomes for diverse learners. Uses disaggregated data to guide decisions, adapts strategies to meet varied needs, and engages in critical reflection to support continuous improvement. |
Facilitates learning that supports positive academic and developmental outcomes for diverse learners. Uses relevant data and evidence to guide decisions and applies appropriate adaptations for learner diversity. |
Facilitates learning with limited or uneven impact on diverse learners. Acknowledges learner differences but shows minimal use of data or targeted strategies to support equitable outcomes. |
Demonstrates minimal ability to facilitate learning for diverse learners. Little or no evidence of data use, differentiated supports, or impact on academic or developmental outcomes. |