ND Common Metrics-Skills of Teaching Tool (STOT)
- Teacher Candidate:
- Semester:
- Weeks:
- Subject / Grade Taught:
- School & Town:
- Cooperating Teacher:
- University Supervisor:
This assessment is based on the 10 national standards of effective practice for new teachers (InTASC). Standards 1-3 address The Learner and Learning. Standards 4-5 address Content Knowledge. Standards 6-8 address Instructional Practice. Standards 9-10 address Professional Responsibility. Under the Family Education & Privacy Act of 1974, the teacher candidate has the right to inspect and review of this document.
Directions
For each of the items below, place a rating of 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, or 4 by the number which describes the teacher candidate as a pre-professional. *An overall average rating will be calculated by the university for each standard. Thank you for your time and commitment to the profession.
Standard #1: Learner Development
The teacher understands how children learn and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.
| InTASC Standard 1 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Supports student learning through developmentally appropriate instruction |
The teacher candidate implements challenging learning experiences that recognize patterns of learning and development across cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional and physical areas |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate implements developmentally appropriate instruction that accounts for learners’ strengths, interests and needs |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate implements grade-level appropriate instruction, but does not account for individual learners’ differences |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate implements instruction that exceeds or does not match a developmentally appropriate level for the students |
|
|
Accounts for differences in students’ prior knowledge |
The teacher candidate assesses student readiness for learning and expands on individual students’ prior knowledge |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate accounts for individual differences in students’ prior knowledge and readiness for learning |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate addresses students’ prior knowledge as a class, but individual differences are not considered |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate does not account for differences in students’ prior knowledge |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Standard #2: Learning Differences
The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that allow each learner to meet high standards.
| InTASC Standard 2 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Uses knowledge of students’ socioeconomic, cultural and ethnic differences to meet learning needs |
The teacher candidate anticipates individual learning needs by proactively differentiating instruction using knowledge of learners’ socioeconomic, cultural and ethnic backgrounds |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate demonstrates thorough knowledge that learners are individuals with differences in their backgrounds as well as their approaches to learning and performance |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate demonstrates a basic knowledge about learners’ backgrounds and how to meet their learning needs |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate demonstrates minimal knowledge about learners’ backgrounds and how to meet their learning needs |
|
|
Exhibits fairness and belief that all students can learn |
The teacher candidate exhibits high expectations while designing and implementing instructional strategies to meet the diverse needs of all learners in a fair and respectful manner; consistently provides equitable opportunities to meet the needs of learners |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate exhibits respect and high expectations for each learner; communicates with diverse learners in a fair and respectful manner; consistently provides equitable opportunities to meet the diverse needs of learners |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate communicates with diverse learners in a fair and respectful manner; provides occasionally equitable opportunities to meet the diverse needs of learners |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate communicates with diverse learners in an unfair and disrespectful manner; provides inequitable opportunities to meet the diverse needs of learner |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Standard #3: Learning Environments
The teacher works with learners to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.
| InTASC Standard 3 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Creates a safe and respectful environment for learners |
The teacher candidate collaborates with learners to facilitate self-reflection and ownership for ongoing improvement of the classroom community |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate consistently models safety and respect to encourage a positive classroom learning community that is respectful of all learners’ differences, including race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate models safety and respect to encourage a positive classroom learning community |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate ignores unsafe or disrespectful behaviors contributing to a negative classroom learning community |
|
|
Structures a classroom environment that promotes student engagement |
The teacher candidate develops a highly engaging learning environment, taking into account student differences and learning needs |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate develops a learning environment that is consistently engaging for most students |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate attempts to develop a learning environment that is engaging for most students |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate needs assistance in developing a learning environment that is engaging for most students |
|
|
Clearly communicates expectations for appropriate student behavior |
The teacher candidate communicates standards of conduct that are clear and effective |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate communicates clear standards of conduct |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate communicates standards of conduct that may not be clear |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate has minimal standards of conduct in place |
|
|
Responds appropriately to student behavior |
The teacher candidate teacher candidate monitors student behavior and responds appropriately on a consistent basis |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate the teacher candidate monitors and responds to student behavior effectively |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate the teacher candidate inconsistently monitors and responds to student behavior |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate needs assistance with monitoring student behavior or in responding consistently |
|
|
Guides learners in using technologies in appropriate, safe, and effective ways |
The teacher candidate plans for and uses interactive technologies as a resource to support student learning; anticipates how information may be misused and develops guidelines for learners to use technology appropriately, safely and effectively |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate uses interactive technologies as a resource to support student learning; guides learners in using technology appropriately, safely and effectively |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate attempts to use interactive technologies as a resource to support student learning; guides learners in using technology appropriately, safely and effectively |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate needs assistance to use interactive technologies as a resource to support student learning; rarely guides learners in using technology appropriately, safely, and effectively |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Standard #4: Content Knowledge
The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make these aspects of the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content.
| InTASC Standard 4 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Effectively teaches subject matter |
The teacher candidate displays mastery of content knowledge and learning progressions that allow flexible adjustments to address learners at their current level of understanding to either remediate or deepen the learners’ understanding |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate instructional practices indicate understanding of content knowledge and learning progressions; practices are complete and appropriate for the content |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate displays basic content knowledge; instructional practices indicate some awareness of learning progressions; practices are incomplete or inaccurate for the content |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate displays minimal content knowledge; instructional practices indicate little awareness of learning progressions, and practices are too often incomplete or inaccurate for the content |
|
|
Guides mastery of content through meaningful learning experiences |
The teacher candidate creates an interactive environment where learners take the initiative to master content and engage in meaningful learning experiences to master the content |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate applies appropriate strategies designed to engage learners in meaningful experiences and guide them toward mastery of content |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate attempts to apply appropriate strategies in instructional practice to engage learners in mastery of content |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate applies inappropriate strategies in instructional practice to engage learners in mastery of content |
|
|
Integrates culturally relevant content to build on learners’ background knowledge |
The teacher candidate flexibly designs learning experiences that integrate culturally relevant content to build on learners’ cultural backgrounds and experiences |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate designs learning experiences that integrate culturally relevant content to build on learners’ cultural backgrounds and experiences |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate demonstrates basic knowledge and/or ability to design learning experiences that integrate culturally relevant content to build on |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate demonstrates minimal knowledge of learners’ cultural backgrounds and experiences, and there is no plan to design learning |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Standard #5: Applications of Content
The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical/creative thinking and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues.
| InTASC Standard 5 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Connects core content to relevant, real-life experiences and learning tasks |
The teacher candidate designs and facilitates challenging learning experiences related to the students’ real-life experiences and relevant core content |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate designs instruction related to the students’ real-life experiences and relevant core content |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate designs instruction related to the core content but learning tasks have only superficial relationships to the students’ interests or life experiences |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate designs instruction related to the core content but learning tasks have no relevance to the students’ interests or life experiences |
|
|
Designs activities where students engage with subject matter from a variety of perspectives |
The teacher candidate embeds interdisciplinary connections and multiple perspectives into activities, allowing learners to independently relate these connections to key concepts and themes |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate designs activities for learners to engage with subject matter from a variety of perspectives and to develop interdisciplinary connections |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate designs activities for learners to engage with subject matter, from a variety of perspectives but no interdisciplinary connections are developed |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate designs activities related to subject matter but does so from a singular perspective and discipline |
|
|
Accesses content resources to build global awareness |
The teacher candidate seeks out new and innovative ways to access content resources, including digital and interactive technologies, to build student awareness of local and global issues |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate uses content resources, including digital and interactive technologies, to build student awareness of local and global issues |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate accesses some content resources, including technologies, to build student awareness of local and global issues |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate needs regular guidance to determine where and how to access content resources to build student awareness of local and global issues |
|
|
Uses relevant content to engage learners in innovative thinking & collaborative problem solving |
The teacher candidate creates an environment that encourages higher level thinking, innovative ideas and approaches connected to relevant content |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate engages students in higher level thinking skills such as critical/creative thinking and collaborative problem solving connected to relevant content |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate engages students in higher level thinking skills such as critical/creative thinking and collaborative problem solving but skills are not connected to relevant content |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate instructional strategies do not promote higher level thinking or collaborative problem solving connected to relevant content |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Standard #6: Assessment
The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teachers’ and learner’s decision making.
| InTASC Standard 6 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Uses multiple methods of assessment |
The teacher candidate designs and modifies multiple formative and summative assessments that align with learning targets and assessments are differentiated to meet student needs |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate uses multiple assessments that align with the learning targets |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate uses multiple assessments, but not all are aligned with the learning targets |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate uses limited assessment methods and items that are not aligned with learning targets |
|
|
Provides students with meaningful feedback to guide next steps in learning |
The teacher candidate provides descriptive success and next-step feedback to individual learners and involves them in self-assessment to improve their own work |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate provides effective feedback to learners that aids in the improvement of the quality of their work |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate feedback provided to learners is actionable but does not necessarily improve the quality of the work |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate feedback provided to students is not actionable |
|
|
Uses appropriate data sources to identify student learning needs |
The teacher candidate documents, analyzes, and interprets student assessment data gathered from multiple methods to identify student learning needs, achievement trends, and patterns among groups of learners to inform instruction |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate documents, analyzes, and interprets student assessment data gathered using multiple methods to identify student learning needs |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate uses assessment data to guide planning and identify student learning needs |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate uses assessments solely to determine a grade |
|
|
Engages students in self-assessment strategies |
The teacher candidate engages learners in understanding and identifying quality work. Infuses opportunities for student reflection, self-assessment, and monitoring of learning goals |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate engages learners in understanding and identifying quality work (models, examples, etc.). Provides opportunities for reflection and self-assessment |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate engages learners in understanding and identifying quality work |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate learners are not engaged in understanding and identifying quality work |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Standard #7: Planning for Instruction
The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context.
| InTASC Standard 7 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Connects lesson goals with school curriculum and state standards |
The teacher candidate plans demonstrate an understanding of prerequisite relationships between goals and standards and structure and sequence; proactively anticipates misconceptions and prepares to address them |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate plans a variety of learning experiences that are aligned with learning goals and standards in a structure and sequence designed to meet student needs |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate plans for learning experiences that are aligned with learning goals |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate lesson plans are not aligned with learning goals |
|
|
Uses assessment data to inform planning for instruction |
The teacher candidate assessments are strategically designed to inform planning and to provide multiple forms of evidence for monitoring students’ progress relative to learning targets |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate uses pre-assessment and formative assessment strategies that align with learning targets and data are used to inform planning |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate pre-assessment and formative assessment strategies are not aligned adequately with learning targets, so data does not effectively inform planning |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate pre-assessment and/or formative assessment data are not utilized to inform planning |
|
|
Adjusts instructional plans to meet students’ needs |
The teacher candidate uses information gained from assessment findings and becomes more capable of predicting, and planning ahead to customize instructional plans to meet students’ needs |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate uses information gained from assessment findings to customize instructional plans to meet students’ needs |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate uses assessment findings to modify instructional plans to meet students’ needs |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate plans are not adjusted to meet student learning differences or needs |
|
|
Collaboratively designs instruction |
The teacher candidate proactively addresses student learning needs through ongoing collaboration with the cooperating teacher, other teachers, and/or specialists |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate plans with the cooperating teacher and/or specialists to design instruction that addresses and supports individual student learning |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate plans with the cooperating teacher, other teachers, or specialists but is confined to exchanging information |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate plans instruction individually |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Standard #8: Instructional Strategies
The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways.
| InTASC Standard 8 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Varies instructional strategies to engage learner |
The teacher candidate integrates a variety of instructional approaches for all members of the classroom; considers learners’ needs, interests, and goals in determining instructional strategies to engage students as both learners and teachers |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate varies role between instructor, facilitator, guide, and audience; considers learners’ needs, interests, and goals in determining instructional strategies to engage learners |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate uses a variety of instructional approaches but approaches are not matched to learner needs, interests, and goals |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate utilizes only one instructional approach |
|
|
Uses technology appropriately to enhance instruction |
The teacher candidate engages learners in evaluation and selection of media and technology resources; uses technology appropriately to engage learners and enhance instruction |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate uses technology effectively to enhance instruction |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate uses limited instructional strategies that involve technology |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate identifies instructional strategies without involving technology |
|
|
Differentiates instruction for a variety of learning needs |
The teacher candidate differentiates instruction in the areas of content, process, product, or learning environment in the best interests of the students |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate varies instruction for individuals or small groups to create learning experiences that are well matched to student needs |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate varies teaching of individual or small group learning experiences, but variations are not well-matched to student needs |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate teaches individual or small group learning experiences without differentiating instruction |
|
|
Instructional practices reflect effective communication skill |
The teacher candidate articulates thoughts and ideas effectively using oral, written and nonverbal communication skills in a variety of forms and contexts to inform, instruct, and motivate during instruction; uses multiple media and technologies; listens respectfully to decipher meaning |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate listens and respectfully articulates thoughts and ideas using technology as well as oral, written and nonverbal communication to connect with students during instruction |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate articulates thoughts and ideas using oral, written and nonverbal communication skills but over-relies on the same forms of communication during instruction; uses technology for communication in some instances; listens to others |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate makes frequent errors during instruction when articulating thoughts and ideas using oral, written, and nonverbal communication skills; does not use technology for communication; seldom listens |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Standard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice
The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, and other professionals, and the learning community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each learner.
| InTASC Standard 9 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Uses feedback to improve teaching effectiveness |
The teacher candidate seeks multiple sources of feedback and takes responsibility for ongoing professional learning to address identified needs and areas of professional interest |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate accepts and reflects upon feedback from colleagues to evaluate and improve teaching effectiveness |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate accepts feedback to improve teaching effectiveness |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate resists feedback to improve teaching effectiveness |
|
|
Uses self-reflection to improve teaching effectiveness |
The teacher candidate reflects on thoughtful and specific indicators of effectiveness in the lesson. The lessons learned tend to improve future planning, adaptations, and instructional practice |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate reflects on the lesson and accurately assesses the effectiveness of instructional activities used and identifies specific ways in which a lesson might be improved |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate reflects on the lesson and has a general sense of whether or not instructional practices were effective and identifies general modifications for future instruction |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate reflects on the lesson, but draws incorrect conclusions about its effectiveness and/or identifies no areas for improvement |
|
|
Upholds legal responsibilities as a professional educator |
The teacher candidate demonstrates an understanding of the larger context of public education policy by staying apprised of changing laws and ethical standards, through literature, professional development or activities |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate acts in accordance with ethical codes of conduct and professional standards; complies with laws and policies related to learners’ rights and teachers’ responsibilities |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate acts in accordance with ethical codes of conduct and professional standards but demonstrates limited understanding of federal, state, and district regulations and policies |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate does not act in accordance with ethical codes of conduct and professional standards and demonstrates inadequate knowledge of federal, state, and district regulations and policies |
|
|
Demonstrates commitment to the profession |
The teacher candidate takes a role in promoting activities related to professional inquiry, contributes to events that positively impact school life; contributes to the district and community |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate participates in activities related to professional inquiry, and volunteers to participate in school events and school district and community projects |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate participates in activities related to professional inquiry, and when asked, participates in school activities, as well as district and community projects |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate purposefully avoids contributing to activities promoting professional inquiry, and/or avoids involvement in school activities and district and community projects |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Standard #10: Leadership and Collaboration
The teacher seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities to take responsibility for student learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues, other professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth, and to advance the profession.
| InTASC Standard 10 | Distinguished (4) | (3.5) | Proficient (3) | (2.5) | Emerging (2) | (1.5) | Underdeveloped (1) | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Collaborates with colleagues to improve student performance |
The teacher candidate initiates supportive and collaborative relationships with teachers, administration, support staff, and specialists that benefit the teacher and student performance |
In addition to rating“3” performance, partial success at rating of “4” |
The teacher candidate develops supportive and collaborative relationships with colleagues that improve student performance |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate develops cordial relationships with colleagues; attempts to improve student performance |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate develops relationships with colleagues that are characterized by negativity or combativeness |
|
|
Collaborates with parent/guardian/advocate to improve student performance |
The teacher candidate guides the students in development of materials to collaborate with their families about instructional programs, and all of the teacher’s communications are highly sensitive to families’ cultural norms |
The teacher candidate collaborates to make information about instructional programs available, and communications are appropriate to families’ cultural norms |
In addition to rating “2” performance, partial success at rating of “3” |
The teacher candidate maintains a school-required grade book but does little else to inform or collaborate with families about student progress, and/or some of the teacher’s communications are inappropriate to families’ cultural norms |
With assistance, partial success at rating of “2” |
The teacher candidate makes little or no information regarding the instructional program available to parents, limited collaboration, and/or there is culturally inappropriate communication |
The overall rating will be calculated as an average of the ratings for this standard.
Constructs, InTASC Standards, and Tagged Alignment of Items
| Construct/ Areas of Knowledge | InTASC Standard | Item # |
|---|---|---|
| The Learner and Learning | #1: Learner Development | 1-2 |
| The Learner and Learning | #2: Learning Differences | 3-4 |
| The Learner and Learning | #3: Learning Environments | 5-9 |
| Content Knowledge | #4: Content Knowledge | 10-12 |
| Content Knowledge | #5: Application of Content Knowledge | 13-16 |
| Instructional Practice | #6: Assessment | 17-20 |
| Instructional Practice | #7: Planning for Instruction | 21-24 |
| Instructional Practice | #8: Instructional Strategies | 25-28 |
| Professional Responsibility | #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice | 29-32 |
| Professional Responsibility | #10: Leadership and Collaboration | 33-34 |