本研究旨在瞭解(一)師院生集中實習總結性評量所需的教學能力;(二)師院生集中實習教學能力總結性評量標準之重要性與鑑別度;(三)師院生集中實習教學能力總結性評量之相對重要性。 本研究以自編之「師院生集中實習教學能力總結性評量調查問卷」，對師院教授、國小校長、主任、教師及師院學生進行施，藉此調查問卷瞭解受試者對師院生集中實習教學能力總結性評量標準之重要性的看法。總結性評量調查問卷共發出1395份，回收問卷計1006收率為72.1%。本研究採用的統計方法有:信度考驗、描述統計、鑑別度分析、肯氏和諧度係數。 研究結果發現: 1. 師院生集中實習總結性評量在教學態度、教學計畫、教學方法、教學技術及教學評量上，所需的教學能力，計有20項教學行為，25項行為指標。 2. 師院生集中實習教學能力總結性評量，各項目之重要性均很好，鑑別度大致良好，為一良好的評量工類。 3. 師院生集中實習教學能力總結性評量最重要的教學能力依序為:(1)教學態度，(2)教學技術，(3)教學方法，(4)教學計畫，(5)教學評量。 The main purpose of this study was to investigate summative teaching evaluation criteria for student teachers. The research objectives were as follows. 1. To understand what the summative teaching evaluation criteria are for student teachers. 2. To understand the importance and the index of discrimination of the summative teaching evaluation criteria for student teachers. 3. To understand the relative importance of the summative teaching evaluation criteria for student teachers. This study employed the self-devised “Summative Teaching Evaluation Criteria for Student Teacher Evaluation Questionnaire” and was administered to educational professors of teachers’ colleges, principals, grade principals, elementary teachers and teachers’ college students. A total of 1,006 of 1,395 questionnaires were returned, for a rate of 72.1%. Descriptive statistics, reliability, item discrimination, and Kendall’s W were employed to analyze the data collected. The findings showed that: 1. There were five areas of teaching performance of summative teaching evaluation criteria for student teachers. The five areas of teaching performance were teaching attitudes, teaching plans, teaching methods, teaching techniques and teaching evaluations. 2. The five areas of teaching performance included twenty teaching behaviors which included twenty-five teaching behavior indicators. 3. The most important area of teaching performance was teaching attitudes. The second was teaching techniques. The third was teaching methods. The fourth was teaching plans. The last was teaching evaluations. 4. The items of summative teaching evaluation criteria for student teachers were rated as important on a Likert scale. The index of discrimination of those items was generally good.