Standards for Evaluating Teaching | Kent State University

Standards for Evaluating Teaching

Criteria for the evaluation of the teaching are listed in Table 3.  Course revision is defined as a substantial modification to a course such as developing several new laboratories, addition of distance learning options, formally proposing to change course content/format, etc.

Other information such as written comments from students, colleagues within and beyond the Department, College or University administrators shall be considered when available.  Peer reviews and summaries of Student Surveys of Instruction (including all student comments) must be submitted as part of a candidate’s file for reappointment, tenure and promotion.  Copies of representative syllabi, examinations, and other relevant teaching material should also be available for review.  Documentation related to graduate student, undergraduate student, and post-doctoral student training should be included in materials provided by a candidate for reappointment, tenure and promotion.  Faculty members are expected to mentor graduate students and/or postdoctoral students.  Evaluation of teaching will account for differences in missions and expectations across campuses. 

Table 3. Evaluation Components for Assessment of Teaching for promotion and tenure

Teaching

Definition

Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

Excellent

Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional

Development

Develop/revise courses where appropriate, develop research projects for students (undergraduate and/or graduate), work with graduate and/or undergraduate students in research, excellent student and peer perceptions, instructional creativity, actively taking the lead in curricular revisions where appropriate.

Very Good

Innovative teacher

Develop/revise courses where appropriate, good student and peer perceptions, work with graduate and/or undergraduate students in research

Good

Meets obligations well

Good student and peer perceptions; participation in curricular revisions where appropriate.

Fair

Substandard teacher

Below average student and peer perceptions

Poor

Substandard, ineffective teacher

Below average student and peer perceptions, consistent pattern of complaints