A Common Language For Evaluating Real-World Learning
For a common language for evaluating real-world learning, we need a common practice for evaluating and designing experiences. We have created a prototype that is built upon the anchors in this report. It is specifically designed for internships; however, it can be extrapolated to other experiences such as client-connected projects, service learning experiences, entrepreneurial experiences, and more.
Purpose of this Tool
This supervisor evaluation tool provides a structured, shared language for assessing the context of a student’s internship experience (both how they worked and what they did). It is designed to:
- Help supervisors evaluate the level of Autonomy, Complexity, and Contribution demonstrated
- Confirm whether the intern achieved the experience as designed (Level 1, 2, or 3).
- Support a reflective conversation that prepares the student for future storytelling, interviews, and documentation.
Supervisors can use this tool as both an evaluation rubric and a conversation guide. This tool should be used all throughout the internship, as well as when undergoing the final evaluation.
Anchor Evaluation Framework
Each anchor includes:
- Three structured rating questions (aligned to the 3-Level Progression)
- Evaluator prompts to surface evidence
- Student storytelling prompts for reflection and articulation
Anchor 1: Autonomy – From Following to Leading
Definition: The extent to which the intern exercises agency over decisions and actions, and the level of supervision required to complete their work.
Supervisor Rating: Which statement best describes the level of autonomy this intern demonstrated?
- Level 1 (Follow): The intern followed instructions closely and needed frequent guidance to complete tasks.
- Level 2 (Assist): The intern worked independently on routine tasks and checked in as needed.
- Level 3 (Apply): The intern managed their own work under general direction and made decisions about how to approach tasks.
Evaluator Prompts
- What decisions did the intern make without needing approval?
- How often did the intern require step-by-step instruction?
- Did the intern anticipate issues or wait for direction?
- If the intern had more autonomy than planned, why?
- If they had less, what barriers appeared?
Student Storytelling Prompts
- “What decisions were you trusted to make on your own?
- “Describe a moment when you figured something out without asking for help.”
- “How would you explain the level of independence you demonstrated to a future employer?”
Anchor 2: Complexity – From Routine to Unfamiliar
Definition: The degree of novelty, ambiguity, variety, spontaneity, or challenge in the intern’s tasks. Complexity assesses whether the intern applied known rules or had to define new ones.
Supervisor Rating: Which statement best describes the level of complexity of the intern’s work?
- Level 1 (Follow): The intern completed routine, well-defined tasks with clear instructions
- Level 2 (Assist): The intern adapted known methods to situations with some novelty or variety.
- Level 3 (Apply): The intern navigated non-routine or ambiguous tasks requiring independent problem-solving.
Evaluator Prompts
- What kinds of problems did the intern face – routine or ambiguous?
- Did the intern encounter unfamiliar situations? How did they respond?
- Did the intern create or modify tools, processes, or guidelines?
- Did their tasks increase in complexity over time?
Student Storytelling Prompts
- “What was the hardest or most unfamiliar part of your work?”
- “Describe a moment when the task didn’t have a clear answer. What did you do?”
- “What made your work challenging, and how did you handle that challenge?”
Anchor 3: Contribution- From Supporting to Steering
Definition: The extent to which the intern contributed to outcomes and supported others. Over time, contribution becomes influence: the ability to mobilize others and affect results.
Supervisor Rating: Which statement best describes the intern’s level of contribution?
- Level 1 (Follow): The intern reliably completed assigned tasks that supported the team’s work.
- Level 2 (Assist): The intern contributed to ideas, improved processes, or shaped parts of the project.
- Level 3 (Apply): The intern drove key aspects of the work, collaborated to solve problems, or guided peers.
Evaluator Prompts
- How did the intern’s presence improve the work?
- Did they support only their own tasks, or others’ as well?
- Did they take the initiative to move the project forward?
- Did they offer ideas that the team adopted?
- Did others rely on them?
Student Storytelling Prompts
- “How did your work make a difference to the team?”
- “Describe a time when someone relied on you.”
- “What part of the project changed because of your ideas or effort?”
Overall Assessment: Did the student achieve the experience as designed?
This rating reflects the overall level of the internship experience – how much independence, challenge and contribution the design intended and whether the intern reached that level.
Intended Experience Level
Completed by the educator and supervisor together before the internship.
- Level 1 Experience – Follow
- Level 2 Experience -Assist
- Level 3 Experience – Apply
Achieved Experience Level (Supervisor Evaluation)
Considering the intern’s autonomy, complexity of work, and contribution, which statement best reflects the intership experience they actually demonstrated?
- Level 1 (Follow): Focused on following directions and completing routine tasks.
- Level 2 (Assist): Involved initiative, problem solving, and responsibility for a range of tasks.
- Level 3 (Apply): Required ownership, coordination, or solving complex problems.
Attachments: Evidence of Experience
Provide specific observations or artifacts that validate the experience. Examples may include:
- Work samples or deliverables
- Meeting notes showing decisions made
- Emails, messages, or documentation verifying contributions
- Observed behaviors in unfamiliar or challenging situations
Student Reflection and Storytelling
Supervisors should complete this section with the student as a conversation.
- What story does this internship tell about the student’s growth? (Write together)
- Draft a “story sentence” for interviews and digital records. (Template: “During my internship, I operated at Level _ in Autonomy, Level _ in Complexity, and Level _ in Contribution. One example of this is when I …. (add specific story + evidence).”)
- What should the student highlight (skills, moments, learnings) when describing this experience to employers or colleges?
Tips for Evaluators:
- Use evidence, not impressions. Focus on observed actions, decisions and outcomes.
- Use the anchor as your lens. Ask:
- How much independence did they have?
- How challenging was the work?
- How did they influence others or outcomes?
- Discuss the evaluation with the student. This is a developmental conversation, not a score.
- Help the students build their narrative. Your examples become the talking points for interviews, college essays, and digital records.
Final Note:
This tool is not simply an evaluation instrument. It is a key part of building a Common Language of Experience, enabling learners, educators, and employers to describe and validate real-world learning in a way that builds confidence, trust, and, ultimately, economic mobility.
