UCAN

Wednesday, September 30, 2026

The Potential Impact of IE Theory, an ICORT Mindset, and Emotional Intelligence Upon One's Conception of God

Is there a fruitful conceptual connection between Invitational Education Theory (IET), an I-CORT mindset, Emotional Intelligence, and one’s conception of God? Arguably, Invitational Education, an I-CORT mindset, and one’s overall Emotional Intelligence can positively influence one's conception of God by habituating people to relationships characterized by intentionality, care, optimism, respect, and trust, thereby providing an experiential and relational framework through which God may be understood less as a distant or coercive authority and more as a trustworthy, caring presence who respects human dignity and agency while inviting people toward their fuller potential. An I-CORT mindset may contribute to the development of emotional intelligence by encouraging intentional self-awareness, compassionate social awareness, optimistic self-management, respectful interpersonal engagement, and trustworthy relationship management. Increased emotional intelligence may, in turn, contribute to a more differentiated and positive self-concept by enabling individuals to recognize their emotions, regulate their responses, understand others, and develop healthy relationships. Within a theological framework, these relational and emotional capacities may also influence one's conception of God by providing experiential categories: intentionality, care, optimism, respect, and trust, whereby the character and relational posture of God are interpreted.

The reader is invited to note the author’s emphasis above on "may" and "within a theological framework." This treatise is an interpretive extension of IET rather than a claim that Purkey, Novak, and Fretz (2020), were presenting a theology of God. Their work is educational and relational. Likewise, neither Bradberry and Greaves' EI model (2009) nor Anderson's I-CORT research (2021), by themselves, establishes a causal relationship between emotional intelligence and one's conception of God. Ideally, as considered herein, the concepts will provide a compelling lens for theological reflection.

Invitational Education Theory (IET) begins with a fundamentally positive view of persons. Given this, IET assumes that people are able, valuable, and responsible and that human potential is greater than what may initially be visible. The educator's task is therefore not primarily to control people but to invite them toward the realization of their potential. The International Alliance for Invitational Education describes this as intentionally creating environments characterized by trust, respect, optimism, and care. If the way we experience human relationships influences how we understand ourselves and others, then consistently practicing intentionality, care, optimism, respect, and trust can provide a relational framework through which we may come to understand God as similarly inviting, caring, hopeful, respectful, and trustworthy. That premise can affect one's conception of God in an important way.

When a person repeatedly encounters the messages: “You are valuable. You are capable. I believe there is more in you than you currently see. I will accompany rather than control you…” then that person may begin to imagine God through a similar relational paradigm. For instance: “God sees value in me even when I cannot see it in myself; God calls me toward becoming rather than merely judging what I have already become…” IET can thereby shift one's conception of God from an exclusively evaluative God to an invitational God.

This does not eliminate judgment, accountability, moral responsibility, or divine authority. Rather, it emphasizes that authority can be understood relationally. In this regard, God calls, summons, invites, and accompanies rather than merely commands.

Can intentionality shape the perception of God as purposeful? Anderson's I-CORT framework emphasized intentionality as an interdependent rather than a discrete element of a caring, optimism, respect, and trust(worthy) mindset. His 2021 study found that teacher candidates' experiences of an instructor demonstrating these qualities were associated with their emotional-intelligence development and their embrace of Invitational Education.

Intentionality is particularly significant for theological reflection. An intentional person does not merely happen to be caring, respectful, optimistic, or trustworthy. Those qualities become deliberate ways of being. Applied metaphorically to one's conception of God, this could lead to seeing God's relationship with humanity as purposeful rather than arbitrary. Experiences of challenge, growth, correction, forgiveness, or opportunity might be interpreted within a larger narrative of formation. An important qualification is that IET cannot establish that God actually acts this way. Rather, I-CORT provides a conceptual vocabulary through which a believer might interpret God's relationship with humanity.

How can a mindset that exhibits care transform God from a distant authority into a relational presence? For IET advocates, care is not simply feeling concern for another person. It is expressed through one's behavior and environment. The theory asks educators to demonstrate that the well-being and potential of another person genuinely matters. IET consequently encourages treating relationships as formative. Intentionally caring messages communicated by people and environments therefore contribute to how individuals understand themselves.

This has potentially profound theological implications. If human beings experience authentic care from others, they may acquire a relational template for understanding divine care. A human experience of care impacts the perception of one's own worth that influences the possibility of experiencing God as caring, which may result in a greater willingness to trust God. In such a conception, God does not merely know me but rather cares about my becoming.

That distinction matters. A person can imagine an omniscient God who knows everything about them while nevertheless believing that God is disappointed, distant, or punitive. I-CORT introduces a different relational possibility whereby one is fully known and nevertheless treated with dignity and care.

How can optimism cultivate hope in God's intentions? An IE advocate’s optimism is not merely positive thinking. It is grounded in the assumption that human potential exists even when it is not immediately apparent. Invitational Education Theory consequently encourages people to look beyond present circumstances toward possible growth. This provides an interesting bridge to faith. For instance, an I-CORT-informed conception of God might emphasize:

possibility rather than finality,
growth rather than stagnation,
redemption rather than being unredeemable,
hope rather than despair,
becoming rather than merely being judged according to one's present condition.

From a theological perspective, one could thereby say that God becomes understood as the One who sees possibilities in people that they cannot yet see in themselves. That is remarkably compatible with an Invitational Education premise: Human potential may be present even when it is not yet visible.

How can intentionally exhibiting respect encourage a conception of God that honors human agency? One of IET's distinctive characteristics is its emphasis on inviting rather than coercing. Dr. William Purkey's account of IE Theory emerged partly from his rejection of an educational model based on doing things to people in favor of a culture that invites doing things with people. Let’s extend this distinction to theology:

A. God doing to humanity whereby humanity is primarily an object of divine action.

B. God doing with humanity whereby humanity is a participant in a relational and developmental process.

An I-CORT mindset therefore creates space for a conception of God that respects human agency. God's invitation does not necessarily remove the possibility of saying no. Indeed, an invitation has meaning precisely because the recipient possesses some degree of freedom to accept or decline it. This corresponds well with the IET advocate's understanding that teachers invite autonomy rather than simply imposing compliance. Consequently, someone positively influenced by IET might begin feeling empowered to ask, “If I believe that genuinely respectful relationships preserve another person's agency, what might it mean to understand God as respecting human agency?”

Does that question not produce a substantially different conception of the divine-human relationship than one based exclusively on obedience and control?

How can intentional exhibition or perception of trust change the emotional character of one's relationship with God? Trust is perhaps the most direct connection between being human and seeking the divine. IET understands trust as something that develops through repeated experiences of reliability, consistency, authenticity, and honesty. Through positive and beneficial experiences trust is accumulated and thereby more possible.

This suggests an interesting reciprocal process whereby experiencing trustworthy relationships leads to further learning what trust feels like and then developing greater capacity to trust that potentially increases understanding God through a relational model of trustworthiness. By contrast, relationships characterized by manipulation, inconsistency, rejection, or coercion can make it difficult for someone to imagine God as trustworthy.

This is one reason the practice of I-CORT may be as important as its intellectual content. For instance, in the 2021 study, Anderson did not simply ask teacher candidates to learn the vocabulary of I-CORT. Rather, it examined their responses to an instructor who demonstrated intentionality, care, optimism, respect, and trust. Those experiences were associated with changes in the candidates’ emotional-intelligence skills and engagement with Invitational Education. Thus, experiencing I-CORT may be more influential than merely being taught about I-CORT.

How can an educator become a "window" through which God is imagined? Indeed, this endeavors development of the deepest type of connection. A foundational premise of IET is that people partly develop their self-concepts through the messages communicated by significant others. Given that, then the behavior of a teacher, parent, mentor, pastor, or other trusted person can become an experiential model for how relationships work. IET practices explicitly emphasize that people's words and actions communicate messages about another person's worth and ability.

Consequently, an educator who consistently embodies I-CORT may communicate something beyond, "This is how an educator should behave." As a result, the person may also experience, "This is what it feels like to be valued." Therefore, within a religious framework, that experience can become, "Perhaps this is something of what God's relationship with me is like."

In no way does the educator become God. In itself, neither does I-CORT prove anything about God's character. Rather, the educator's relationship can function as an experiential analogy through which abstract theological claims become relationally intelligible.

How may exhibition of I-CORT influence both one's self-concept and one's God-concept? A useful way to conceptualize the relationship is as a three-part developmental process:

1. Willingness to develop and exhibit an I-CORT mindset

2. Increased emotional intelligence

3. Forming of a healthier self-concept and potentially a more positive, relational concept God.

Bradberry and Greaves (2009) conceptualize emotional intelligence (EI) through four competencies: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management. One premise of the concept is that when people understand their emotions and use them intentionally, they think more clearly, collaborate more effectively, and stay grounded through change and uncertainty (Sass, 2025). While feeling respected is often mentioned in the EI literature, the role emotions play in achieving a feeling of respect is not well understood or discussed. As noted in the following chart, EI competencies provide a particularly useful bridge between Anderson's I-CORT framework and conceptions of self and God.

I-CORT dimension	Emotional-intelligence connection	Influence on self-concept	Possible influence on one’s concept of God
Intentionality	Self-awareness & self-management	I become more conscious of my emotions, motives, strengths, limitations, and choices. I begin to see myself as capable of intentional growth rather than merely reacting to circumstances.	God may be understood as intentional and purposeful, while the individual becomes more receptive to God's purposes rather than experiencing life as arbitrary.
Care	Social awareness & relationship management	Experiencing and extending care communicates, "I am worthy of care, and I can care for others." This can strengthen a sense of relational worth and belonging.	God may increasingly be conceived as relational, compassionate, and attentive rather than distant or merely evaluative.
Optimism	Self-management	I develop the capacity to regulate discouragement and maintain hope without denying difficulties. My identity becomes less defined by present failure or circumstance.	God can be understood as a source of hope and possibility—the One who sees potential beyond present circumstances.
Respect	Social awareness & relationship management	Respect from others reinforces dignity, while respecting others strengthens the perception that human worth is intrinsic rather than conditional.	God may be conceptualized as one who honors human dignity and agency and invites rather than simply coerces.
Trust	Relationship management & self-awareness	Healthy trust can produce greater relational security and confidence in one's ability to form meaningful relationships.	God may become more readily understood as trustworthy, faithful, and relationally dependable.

How might exhibition of I-CORT strengthen self-awareness, which changes self-concept? The first connection suggests increased intentionality leads to more self-awareness, which influences self-concept.

Bradberry and Greaves (2009) identify self-awareness as the foundation of emotional intelligence: recognizing one's emotions and understanding how those emotions influence thoughts and behavior. When a person develops this awareness, the self becomes something that can be observed, understood, and intentionally developed, rather than something experienced as fixed.

Exhibited I-CORT complements this process because intentionality requires asking questions such as:

What am I communicating to others?
Why am I responding this way?
What emotions are influencing my behavior?
Am I acting consistently with the person I want to become?
What message am I communicating about another person's worth?

Thus, I-CORT can move one’s self-concept from "This is simply who I am" toward "I can become more aware of who I am and intentionally develop who I am becoming."

That is an important distinction for both education and theology.

How might intentional care connect emotional intelligence with perceived worth? This connection suggests care leads to increased social awareness, which positively impacts relational self-concept. An emotionally intelligent person becomes increasingly capable of recognizing the emotions and needs of other people. Bradberry and Greaves' concept of social awareness involves understanding others and accurately reading interpersonal situations.

Exhibited I-CORT adds an ethical and relational orientation to that awareness: What I perceive in another person matters, and how I respond communicates something about that person's worth. This has a reciprocal effect on self-concept. Therefore, when individuals consistently experience relationships in which they are treated with care, they receive a repeated relational message: I matter.

People can learn to intentionally extend care to others. Exhibiting care empowers a person to simultaneously develop another message: I am capable of contributing to the well-being of others. Consequently, care can contribute to a self-concept characterized by worth, belonging, relational competence, and agency.

How might intentional optimism make self-concept developmental rather than deterministic? Bradberry and Greaves' self-management dimension is particularly relevant to optimism. This connection suggests optimism can extend one’s capacity by encouraging an orientation toward possibility. Given that Emotional Intelligence (EI) involves regulating emotional responses rather than being controlled by them, then an I-CORT advocate's optimism can extend that capacity by encouraging an orientation toward possibility. The resulting development is in naming the emotion, awareness of its potential, connection to regulation strategies, and increased hopefulness, which results in intentional right actions.

Relative to development of a healthier self-concept, this means a person is less likely to define the self exclusively through past mistakes, current limitations, or negative feedback. Self-talk evolves. So, "I failed" does not necessarily become "I am a failure." "I am struggling" does not necessarily become "I am incapable." Crucially, "I have not yet developed this ability" leaves open "I can grow." Those distinctions are particularly consistent with Invitational Education's emphasis on human potential.

How might intentional respect integrate emotional intelligence and human dignity? Intentionally exhibiting respect has a particularly interesting relationship with self-awareness and social awareness. The development of Emotional Intelligence helps an individual recognize that other people's emotions, perspectives, and experiences are real and significant. Through exhibition of I-CORT, respect adds the recognition that those experiences deserve to be treated with dignity. This certainly can alter one's self-concept as well.

By learning to treat others as inherently worthy of respect, I can also begin to understand my own worth as something deeper than achievement, status, approval, or performance. This is how an I-CORT mindset potentially provides an important corrective to performance-based self-concepts. Rather than, "I am valuable because I succeed," the relational message becomes: "I possess worth, and my behavior is an opportunity to express that worth through responsible relationships."

How might trust provide a bridge from Emotional Intelligence to one’s concept of God? Arguably, the strongest connection to one's concept of God may be in the willingness to trust and the ability to be trustworthy. Bradberry and Greaves' relationship-management competency involves using emotional awareness to manage interactions effectively and develop positive relationships. Trust is fundamental to those relationships. However, trust also has a theological dimension.

Let’s agree that a person's capacity to trust can be influenced by repeated relational experiences. When significant relationships communicate consistency, care, respect, honesty, reliability, forgiveness, and psychological safety, the individual thereby acquires an experiential understanding of what trustworthiness feels like and how it should be exhibited. Thus, that positive experience can become a relational framework through which theological language about God is interpreted. So, trustworthy human relationships increase emotional security that builds relational trust and potentially increases understanding of God as trustworthy.

However, the reverse can also occur. If a person's relational experiences have consistently involved betrayal, manipulation, rejection, or conditional acceptance, then the person may emotionally have difficulty apprehending theological claims about a loving or trustworthy God despite being able to intellectually affirm those claims. This suggests that one’s concept of God is not merely cognitive. Rather, it can have an important, profound emotional and relational component.

Does this mean Emotional Intelligence should function as the mediating variable? We are not trying to suggest herein that embracing and exhibiting an I-CORT mindset directly produces a healthier concept of God. Rather, the argument is that I-CORT practitioners can cultivate emotionally intelligent ways of perceiving and managing oneself and one's relationships, which can contribute to the development of a healthier self-concept and provide relational experiences through which one's conception of God may be interpreted. A self-concept and a conception of God may be related but they have distinct outcomes. One does not cause the other.

"How do I experience myself" and "How do I experience God," are interesting theological questions. If emotional intelligence increases one’s capacity to recognize and regulate emotions, understand others, and form healthy relationships, then the person may also increase the ability to distinguish between what is felt about his or herself and what is believed about God. That distinction is important because one's conception of God can sometimes become intertwined with one's self-concept. As an example, if feeling unworthy, then believing God must therefore be disappointed. Similarly, if feeling incapable of change, one may believe God probably sees me as incapable of change.

How can an I-CORT-informed development of emotional intelligence (EI) interrupt the process noted above? Let’s consider the following application of EI in the self-talk process that can positively influence a revised self-concept:

· Self-awareness: "I recognize that I feel inadequate."

· Self-management: "I can regulate that feeling rather than allowing it to define me."

· Social awareness: "I can recognize how other people's responses affect my interpretation of myself."

· Relationship management: "I can develop relationships characterized by trust, respect, and care."

This process creates the possibility of a revised self-concept whereby self-talk may be, "I am a person of worth who is capable of growth and meaningful relationship."

Within a theological framework, that revised self-understanding may make it possible to correspondingly conceptualize God whereby "God is one who sees my worth, invites my growth, and desires relationship with me."

This discussion invited the reader to consider intentionality, care, optimism, respect, and trust to operate both as I-CORT dispositions and as the relational qualities through which the person experiences self, others, and potentially God. This compelling model embracing the interdependence of Invitational Education Theory (IET), an I-CORT mindset, and Emotional Intelligence for influencing one’s conception of God suggests there is an important I-CORT -driven sequence whereby a person:

· feels intentionally seen and cared for

· experiences her or himself as valuable and worthy of respect

· develops greater trust and hope

· becomes more open to relationships characterized by trust, care, respect, and hope

· begins to conceptualize God through those same relational categories

The model is consistent with the broader premise of Invitational Education Theory (IET) that suggests people and environments are never entirely neutral as they communicate messages that can either invite or disinvite human development. As noted in the chart below, this leads to a particularly important theological implication whereby the practice of IET does not merely change what someone thinks about God; rather, it can change the relational posture with which someone approaches God.

I-CORT principle	Relational experience	Possible implication for one's conception of God
Intentionality	"I am deliberately attended to."	God is experienced as purposeful rather than arbitrary.
Care	"My well-being matters."	God is conceived as compassionate and relational.
Optimism	"My present condition is not my final possibility."	God is associated with hope, growth, and redemption.
Respect	"I have dignity and agency."	God is understood as inviting rather than merely coercing.
Trust	"You are reliable and will not abandon me."	God becomes more readily understood as trustworthy.

The resulting conception could be summarized as an invitational God whereby God sees human potential, communicates worth, offers relationship, respects agency, cultivates hope, and invites people toward their fullest human potential. There is also a potential danger in making this connection too quickly as exhibition of I-CORT should not be used to project human preferences onto God. IET is not an inherently Christian theory nor does Anderson's 2021 research demonstrate anything about God. A person's experience of a caring or trustworthy teacher does not establish that God possesses precisely the same characteristics or behaves in precisely the same manner. Instead, the relationship is best described as hermeneutical and formative whereby exhibited I-CORT can provide a relational framework through which people interpret their experiences of God, while one's theological tradition provides the theological claims by which that interpretation is evaluated.

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (September 30 2026). The Potential Impact of IE Theory and an ICORT Mindset Upon One's Conception of God. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

References:

Anderson, C. J. (2021). Developing your students' emotional intelligence and philosophical perspective begins with I-CORT. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 27, 36-50.

Bradberry, T., & Greaves, J. (2009). Emotional intelligence 2.0. TalentSmart.

Bradberry, T. (2022, June 20). Emotional intelligence 2.0 step by step. TalentSmartEQ. https://www.talentsmarteq.com/emotional-intelligence-2-0-step-by-step

CAST. (2024). CAST Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. CAST UDL Guidelines 3.0

Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2015). Fundamentals of invitational education. (2^nd Ed) International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from: Fundamental of Invitational Education | IAIE

Purkey, W.W., Novak, J.M., & Fretz, J.R. (2020). Developing inviting schools: A beneficial framework for teaching. Teachers College Press.

Sass, M. (2025, December 29). The EQ effect: How human skills (still) drive measurable results. TalentSmartEQ. https://www.talentsmarteq.com/the-eq-effect-how-human-skills-still-drive-measurable-results/

TalentSmartEQ. (2021). The science of emotional intelligence. https://www.talentsmarteq.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/TS_EQResearchReport_r7.pdf

Monday, August 31, 2026

An Intentionally Inviting Clinical Mentoring Protocol for the Teacher Candidate Supervisory Triad

Often clinical student teachers are assigned to work with small groups comprised of the least proficient or most behaviorally challenged classroom students. Given this, it is crucial for university supervisors of teacher preparation programs to utilize an intentionally inviting approach (Purkey, Novak, & Fretz, 2000; Anderson, 2021) to encourage cooperating teachers to mentor for best practices that utilize universal design for learning approaches rather than an immersion approach to class management. For teacher preparation programs, it is important to reframe its clinical placement experience from ‘the teacher candidate learns to manage difficult groups’ to ‘the teacher candidate and the cooperating teacher learns to design conditions in which those diverse students can successfully participate.’

That shift in perspective fits particularly well with Invitational Education (IE) because the university supervisor's role becomes one of intentionally inviting the cooperating teacher into a different way of seeing both the students and the clinical teacher candidate. Invitational Education describes an intentionally inviting stance through intentionality, care, optimism, respect, and trust (I-CORT) and applies that mindset not only to people but also to places, policies, programs, and processes (5Ps). Universal Design for Learning UDL principles similarly begin with the premise that learner variability is predictable and intentionally inclusive educators should proactively reduce barriers through multiple means of engagement, representation, and action/expression, rather than waiting for students to fail and then being reactive.

The following protocol is designed for use as a cooperating-teacher mentoring tool during clinical teacher candidate practice. It integrates the I-CORT assumptions of Invitational Education with UDL and proactive classroom management. Utilization of this protocol can ideally help intentionally mentor clinical teacher candidates toward inclusive, proactive, and evidence-based teaching. When clinical teacher candidates work with small groups of students who have experienced academic difficulty or behavioral challenges, the goal is not simply provide an opportunity for the teacher candidates to experience how to manage the most diverse learners. The goal is to help teacher candidates learn to identify barriers, design accessible learning experiences, build relationships, and use data-based evidence to improve instruction.

This suggested protocol and any of the provided forms herein can be usable during an actual pre-conference/post-conference, rather than simply treating a previous protocol as a checklist. The three-column approach can clarify what each member of the clinical partnership is responsible for doing. Explicitly connecting the form to InTASC Standards 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 is important because they collectively capture learner variability, learning environment, assessment, planning, instructional strategies, reflection, and collaboration. The UDL component reflects the current CAST UDL Guidelines 3.0, which emphasizes learner agency, belonging, anticipating barriers, multiple means of engagement, representation, and action/expression.

An Intentionally Inviting Clinical Mentoring Protocol

A Guide for Cooperating Teachers for Developing Day One Ready Teacher Candidates

Purpose:
Use this protocol to intentionally mentor clinical teacher candidates toward inclusive, proactive, and evidence-based teaching. When clinical candidates work with small groups of students who have experienced academic difficulty or behavioral challenges, the goal is not simply for the teacher candidate to manage these students. The goal is to help teacher candidates learn to identify barriers, design accessible learning experiences, build relationships, and use evidence to improve instruction.

Using an INVITE Cycle:

I — Investigate the Learner

Invite with CARE. Before identifying a problem, help the teacher candidate understand the learner. Ask:

What are this student's strengths, interests, prior knowledge, and successful experiences?
What conditions help this student engage and learn?
What relationships or experiences might influence participation?

Mentor’s intention: Model language that describes students by their strengths and learning needs rather than by deficits or labels.

N — Name the Barrier

Invite with RESPECT. Move from “What's wrong with the student?” to “What barrier is interfering with learning?” Ask:

Is the barrier related to the task, directions, materials, environment, pacing, relationships, or expectations?
What evidence do we have?
Is the student unable to do the task—or unable to access the way the task is currently designed?

Mentor’s intention: Help the teacher candidate distinguish between student behavior and student access to learning.

V — Vary the Design

Invite with INTENTIONALITY. Encourage the teacher candidate to proactively apply Universal Design for Learning principles. Consider Multiple Means of:

Engagement: How can we increase relevance, choice, collaboration, or motivation?
Representation: How can information be presented in multiple accessible ways?
Action & Expression: How can students demonstrate understanding in different ways?
Environment: What can we change about routines, space, time, materials, or transitions?

Mentor’s intention: Ask the teacher candidate, “What can we change in the design before we change the expectation?”

I — Invite Participation

Invite with TRUST. Create opportunities for ALL learners to experience competence, agency, belonging, and responsibility. Ask:

What meaningful choice can the student make?
How can each student contribute to the group?
How can we communicate that we believe each student can succeed?
What support can we gradually remove as independence increases?

Mentor’s intention: Model for the teacher candidate high expectations with appropriate supports rather than lowering expectations because a learner has previously struggled.

T — Track Evidence

Invite with OPTIMIS. Help the teacher candidate determine whether the instructional change made a difference. Look for data-based evidence of:

increased engagement;
time on task;
participation;
understanding;
independence;
quality of student work;
improved interactions.

Ask:

“What did the student do differently when we changed the learning design?”

Mentor’s intention: Celebrate evidence of growth with the teacher candidate AND learners. Use unsuccessful attempts as information for the next instructional decision.

E — Evaluate & Refine

Invite with further INTENTIONALITY. After the lesson, engage in a brief reflective conversation. Ask:

What worked?
What did the evidence tell us?
What barrier(s) remain?
What will we intentionally change next?

Use the Action Research cycle:

Observe → Hypothesize → Design → Implement → Collect Evidence → Reflect → Revise

Cooperating Teacher Commitments

As a cooperating teacher, I will:

☐ Model care, respect, trust, optimism, and intentionality in my interactions with students and the clinical teacher.

☐ Avoid defining students primarily by academic or behavioral deficits.

☐ Mentor the clinical teacher to design for learner variability before relying on corrective management strategies.

☐ Make my instructional decision-making visible through a think-aloud and reflective conversations.

☐ Provide the clinical teacher opportunities to plan, implement, assess, and revise UDL-informed instruction.

☐ Treat challenging teaching situations as professional learning opportunities, not simply problems to be controlled.

☐ Use evidence of student learning and engagement to guide feedback.

The Key Mentoring Question: What can we intentionally design through relationships, instruction, environment, and assessment to invite this learner into successful participation?

Clinical Goal: From managing the ‘difficult group’ to designing conditions whereby every learner can participate, belong, and succeed.

TRIAD: Cooperating Teacher > Clinical Teacher > University Supervisor

Preparing Day One Ready Teachers Through Invitational Education and UDL Principles

Purpose: To intentionally develop clinical teacher candidates who respond to learner variability by designing inclusive learning environments, anticipating barriers, using evidence, and building relationships characterized by Intentionality, Care, Optimism, Respect, and Trust (-ICORT).

Clinical Focus or Student Group: ___________________________________________

Date: _______________ Lesson/Content: ________________________________

THE INVITE CYCLE

COOPERATING TEACHER	CLINICAL TEACHER CANDIDATE	UNIVERSITY SUPERVISOR
I — INVESTIGATE THE LEARNER (CARE) Share strengths, interests, prior knowledge, successful experiences, and conditions that support engagement. Avoid deficit labels. InTASC 1, 2, 3	Identify learner strengths and variability before planning. Ask: What does this learner already know, do, value, and need? Day One Ready: Knows learners and builds relationships.	Ask: What evidence demonstrates that the candidate understands the learner beyond academic/behavioral labels? Look for: asset-based language, knowledge of learner variability, relationship building.
N — NAME THE BARRIER (RESPECT) Help distinguish a learner difficulty from a barrier created by the task, environment, materials, pacing, directions, or interaction. InTASC 2, 3	Analyze the learning barrier before assuming noncompliance. Ask: What might be getting in the way of access, engagement, or participation? Day One Ready: Anticipates learner needs.	Coach the candidate to examine the instructional/environmental context before defaulting to behavior correction. Look for: evidence-based problem identification.
V — VARY THE DESIGN (INTENTIONALITY) Model proactive UDL planning rather than relying first on remediation or immersion in behavior management. InTASC 2, 3, 7, 8	Design multiple means of Engagement, Representation, and Action & Expression while maintaining meaningful learning goals. Day One Ready: Plans accessible, differentiated instruction.	Ask: What barrier can we remove through instructional design? Look for: choice, scaffolds, multiple representations, flexible response options, appropriate challenge/support.
I — INVITE PARTICIPATION (TRUST) Create opportunities for students to experience competence, belonging, agency, and responsibility. InTASC 3, 8	Establish clear expectations while providing meaningful opportunities for student voice, choice, collaboration, and successful participation. Day One Ready: Creates a positive learning environment.	Observe whether management preserves student dignity and access to learning. Look for: proactive routines, positive interactions, engagement, student agency—not simply compliance.
T — TRACK EVIDENCE (OPTIMISM) Help identify observable evidence of engagement, learning, independence, and progress. InTASC 6	Collect formative evidence: What did students do, say, produce, or demonstrate? Use evidence to determine whether the design worked. Day One Ready: Uses formative assessment to adjust instruction.	Ask: What evidence supports your conclusion? Distinguish perception from observable evidence. Look for: purposeful formative assessment and responsive decision-making.
E — EVALUATE & REFINE (INTENTIONALITY) Engage the candidate in reflective problem solving rather than simply providing corrective advice. InTASC 6, 7, 9, 10	Reflect: What worked? What barrier remains? What will I change next? Why? Day One Ready: Reflects, responds to evidence, and seeks improvement.	Facilitate a reflective coaching conversation. Identify one evidence-based next step and connect it to professional standards. Look for: reflection, responsiveness, collaboration, professional growth.

UDL Principles and Invitational Education LOOK-FORS:

Before correcting behavior, ask:

☐ Engagement: Is the learner interested, connected, appropriately challenged, and supported?

☐ Representation: Does the learner have an accessible way to understand the information and expectations?

☐ Action & Expression: Does the learner have an appropriate way to participate and demonstrate understanding?

☐ Environment: Are routines, transitions, materials, time, and expectations predictable?

☐ Relationships: Does the learner experience care, trust, respect, and optimism?

☐ Evidence: What observable student behavior or learning tells us whether the instructional change worked?

CAST describes UDL as proactively addressing predictable learner variability through engagement, representation, and action/expression; UDL 3.0 Guidelines also emphasize belonging, agency, anticipating challenges, and challenging exclusionary practices.

‘DAY ONE READY’ CLINICAL INDICATORS

The ‘Day One Ready’ clinical teacher candidate proficiently…

KNOWS by identifying learner strengths, needs, interests, and variability.
DESIGNS by anticipating barriers and plan accessible, appropriately challenging instruction.
INVITES by establishing relationships and environments characterized by care, respect, trust, and optimism.
ENGAGES through proactive strategies that increase meaningful student participation.
ASSESSES by gathering formative evidence of learning and engagement.
RESPONDS by adjusting instruction based on evidence rather than relying primarily on reactive management.
REFLECTS by explaining instructional decisions and identifying specific next steps.
COLLABORATES by seeking, receiving, and applying feedback from cooperating teachers and supervisors.

InTASC Alignment: 1 Learner Development • 2 Learning Differences • 3 Learning Environments • 6 Assessment • 7 Planning for Instruction • 8 Instructional Strategies • 9 Professional Learning & Ethical Practice • 10 Leadership & Collaboration.

CLINICAL PARTNERSHIP REFLECTION ACTIVITY:

Evidence of student growth/engagement:

Barrier identified:

UDL/invitational strategy attempted:

What did the evidence tell us?

Next intentional instructional step:

Clinical Teacher: ________________________
Cooperating Teacher: ____________________
University Supervisor: ____________________

A Guiding Question:
“What can we intentionally design through relationships, instruction, environment, and assessment to invite this learner into successful participation?”

The intent is to encourage an essential shift in one's inclusive mindset and pedagogical approach. Every university supervisor is invited to explicitly mentor cooperating teachers toward this progression:

Traditional/Immersion Approach	Intentionally Inviting + UDL Approach
“These are my lowest students.”	“These learners bring variability that we need to understand.”
“They need more behavior management.”	“What barriers are producing disengagement?”
“Keep them quiet and on task.”	“Design meaningful ways for them to engage and participate.”
“Give them easier work.”	“Maintain the learning goal while varying access and support.”
“The student teacher needs to learn classroom control.”	“The student teacher needs to learn proactive instructional design.”
“Pull them aside when they misbehave.”	“Anticipate barriers before behavior escalates.”
“Manage the group.”	“Design the environment, instruction, and relationships.”

The important distinction is that UDL principles are neither permissiveness nor are they a substitute for effective classroom management. Rather, planning with UDL principles and 3.0 guidelines move some of the management problem upstream by asking:

What can we change in the design of the learning experience so that fewer students encounter unnecessary barriers to engagement?

CAST's current UDL 3.0 framework explicitly includes anticipating challenges, optimizing challenge and support, fostering belonging and collaboration, and providing action-oriented feedback.

Use the university supervisor>cooperating teacher conference as an “invitation”

Rather than starting a supervisory conversation with: “How are you going to get these students to behave?…” the supervisor might instead intentionally invite the cooperating teacher to examine the situation differently:

“What might these students be telling us about the design of the learning environment?”

That is a very different university supervisory stance. Continuing, the supervisor could use five questions corresponding to IE’s I-CORT stance:

Intentionality: “What are we deliberately designing differently tomorrow?” This converts the conversation from philosophy into an instructional experiment.

Care: “What do we know about these students as learners, not simply as behavior problems?” Ask the cooperating teacher and student teacher to identify:

interests and strengths;
prior knowledge;
successful learning experiences;
relationships and peer connections;
conditions under which the student participates successfully.

This prevents the clinical teacher candidate from beginning with a deficit description.

Optimism: “What evidence suggests these students can be successful?” The goal is to prevent the clinical teacher candidate from internalizing the belief that “This is the group nobody can teach.” Instead, the cooperating teacher models the professional belief that instructional success is possible and therefore worth designing, planning, and implementing.

Respect: “Are we interpreting student behavior as communication or simply as noncompliance?” This is particularly important when students are routinely placed in a separate small group because they are perceived as the “least proficient” or “most challenging.” A respectful interpretation asks: What is the student trying to accomplish, avoid, communicate, or access? That question can lead directly to UDL planning.

Trust: “What responsibility can we give the student teacher for designing and trying an instructional response?” Rather than telling the teacher candidate exactly how to control the group, the cooperating teacher becomes a mentor who essentially conveys: “I trust you to study this problem, design an intervention, try it, and learn from the results.” That creates a much more authentic clinical-learning experience.

Make UDL 3.0 Guidelines the mentoring language for classroom management

A particularly powerful move for teacher preparation programs would be to connect UDL principles and 3.0 guidelines directly to the program's expectations for classroom management, rather than treating them as separate competencies.

For example:

Before responding to a behavior problem, the teacher candidate learns to ask about:

Engagement: Was the learner interested, connected, appropriately challenged, and supported?
Representation: Did the learner have an accessible way to understand what was expected?
Action & Expression: Did the learner have an appropriate way to participate or demonstrate understanding?
Environment: Were transitions, materials, space, time, and routines predictable?
Relationship: Did the learner experience the teacher as caring, respectful, and trustworthy?

This is particularly consistent with UDL 3.0 guidelines, which includes optimizing challenge and support, fostering belonging and community, anticipating challenges, and enhancing learners' capacity to monitor progress.

The result reinforces a useful clinical principle: Behavior management should begin with instructional design, not end with behavioral correction.

Invite the cooperating teacher to model ‘design before discipline’

The cooperating teacher could deliberately model a three-step process for the clinical teacher candidate:

Step 1, Identify the barrier: Rather than: “Marcus won't participate.” Model asking:

“What is preventing Marcus from accessing this learning experience?”

Step 2, Change the design: For example:

provide visual directions;
chunk the task;
provide a model;
activate prior knowledge;
offer choice;
allow verbal, written, visual, or technological responses;
use peer collaboration;
adjust the amount of practice without lowering the learning goal;
provide graduated support.

Step 3, Examine the response: Invites the teacher candidate to respond to the question, “What changed when we changed the design?” This makes the student teacher an instructional problem solver, rather than a behavior technician.

Use the small group for inclusive practices rather than as potential remediation

This may be the most important programmatic change. If the clinical teacher candidate is routinely assigned the students with the greatest needs, the supervisor should explicitly establish that the assignment is not an apprenticeship in deficit teaching. Instead, the small group becomes a clinical laboratory for learning how universally designed instruction can increase access, engagement, independence, and academic participation. For example:

Learning objective: Students will identify the main idea and supporting details.

Rather than giving the struggling group a substantially easier assignment, the clinical teacher might maintain the same essential goal while providing:

an audio version of the text;
vocabulary supports;
visual representation of the concept;
highlighted critical information;
teacher modeling;
partner discussion;
graphic organization;
choice of oral, written, or visual response.

That is consistent with UDL's emphasis on maintaining meaningful, challenging learning opportunities while reducing barriers to participation.

Provide cooperating teachers the “intentionally inviting mentoring protocol”

A teacher preparation program could formalize this into a short protocol to be used during the TRIAD conferences.

An INVITE Protocol

I — Investigate the learner: What strengths, interests, knowledge, relationships, and successful experiences does the learner bring?

N — Name the barrier: What specifically is preventing access, engagement, or participation?

V — Vary the design: What can we change in engagement, representation, action/expression, environment, or support?

I — Invite participation: How can the teacher provide meaningful choice, agency, responsibility, and belonging?

T — Track evidence: What observable evidence will tell us whether the instructional change worked?

E — Evaluate and refine: What should the clinical teacher keep, change, or try next?

This protocol provides the cooperating teacher (CT) something concrete to do relative to Invitational Education rather than simply expecting the teacher candidate and the CT to ‘be more inviting.'

Change the expectations for what university supervisors observe

There is an important implication for the clinical observation instrument. The clinical teacher candidate receives a powerful implicit message that Good teaching = Controlling students whenever the university supervisor primarily scores an observation based upon:

student compliance,
transitions,
teacher authority,
noise level,
redirection,
pacing,

Instead, supervisory observation should also capture proactive instructional design, which is especially compatible with UDL 3.0’s explicit emphasis on learner agency, meaningful goals, anticipating challenges, and challenging exclusionary practices. For example:

Supervisory Look-Fors	Evidence
Invitational stance	Teacher communicates care, respect, trust, optimism
Engagement	Students have meaningful purpose, relevance, choice, or collaboration
Representation	Important information is accessible in multiple ways
Action/Expression	Students have meaningful ways to participate and demonstrate learning
Anticipation	Teacher identifies and addresses likely barriers before escalation
Agency	Students increasingly monitor, choose, and regulate aspects of their learning
Responsive management	Teacher responds to behavior while preserving dignity and instructional access
Reflection	Teacher uses student evidence to modify instruction

In summary, a ‘Day One Ready’ teacher candidate does not merely respond effectively to student behavior. Rather, the highly proficient the teacher candidate is capable of anticipating learner variability and intentionally designing instruction based on diverse relationships, routines, and environments that optimize learners' opportunities to engage and succeed. Therefore, that ideal brings together: Invitational Education + UDL + formative assessment + proactive classroom management.

The ideal also prevents the false dichotomy between “management” and “inclusive instruction.” The best classroom managers are often doing considerable management through instructional design. While Invitational Education (Purkey and Novak (2015) provides the relational and ethical stance while UDL provides the instructional design framework, formative assessment provides the evidence, and classroom management provides the responsive structures necessary to maintain a productive learning environment.

That combination would allow a university supervisor to say to the cooperating teacher, ‘We aren't asking you to give the clinical teacher candidate an easier group to manage. We're asking you to mentor the clinical teacher candidate in how to design learning so that students who have historically experienced failure, exclusion, or disengagement have greater access to success.’ That is a considerably more ambitious and defensible purpose for the clinical placement.

To cite:

Anderson, C.J. (August 31 2026). An intentionally inviting clinical mentoring protocol for the teacher candidate supervisory triad. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

References: