Teaching and Its Evaluation
Teaching in the School is of utmost importance and may be defined as interactions with students including teaching in undergraduate and/or graduate classes, seminars, workshops and institutes; supervision of students in student teaching, practica, field components of methods and other courses, and internships; and advising of students with respect to coursework, programs, theses and dissertations, careers, and so forth.
Peer reviews and summaries of Student Surveys of Instruction (SSI), including all student comments, must be submitted as part of a candidate’s file for reappointment, tenure and/or promotion. Probationary Faculty should work with the School Director to invite at least one (1) faculty member each year to visit their class and evaluate their teaching performance. A written report of the evaluation is submitted to the Director for placement in the Faculty member’s file. Copies of representative syllabi, examinations, and other relevant teaching material should also be presented. Peer reviews are required for those Faculty submitting materials for promotion. The committee will use all available data to assess the quality of instruction, and will be looking for the following criteria:
- High quality teaching as evidenced by positive peer reviews.
- Positive student evaluations of instruction, including summaries of student comments, particularly through evidence of success (averages of 4.0 and above) by using Question 19 (or its equivalent) of the SSI
- Evidence of reflective teaching and intentional revision of areas requiring improvement included within contextual statement.
- Teaching materials such as syllabi and examinations that include disciplinary knowledge representing contemporary theoretical perspectives and relevant research.
- Any other available data to assess the quality of instruction.
Documentation related to graduate student, undergraduate student, and post-doctoral student mentoring should be included in materials provided by a candidate for reappointment, tenure and promotion. Faculty members are expected to mentor graduate students (particularly at the doctoral level) and/or postdoctoral students. Evaluation of teaching will account for differences in workload expectations across campuses.
Development of a course portfolio which includes not only the items previously mentioned but also includes submission of observations and other feedback given to students during field supervision, as well as evidence of the successful completion of doctoral dissertations and master’s theses may be helpful to reviewers.
As stated before, for Regional faculty, for whom teaching is a primary responsibility, excellence in teaching weighs more heavily than scholarship. While the expectations of the quality of scholarship is the same as that expected of Faculty on the Kent campus, the same quantity is not as expected for Faculty on the Kent campus.