Teaching | Kent State University

Teaching

Criteria for the evaluation of the teaching are listed in Tables 3A for Kent Campus Faculty and 3B for Regional Campus Faculty.  Course revision is defined as making a substantial modification to a course such as developing several new laboratory experiments, addition of distance learning options, formally proposing and implementing major changes in course content/format, etc.

Other information, such as written comments from colleagues within and beyond the Department, College or University administrators, shall be considered when available.  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 promotion.  Copies of representative syllabi, examinations, and other relevant teaching material shall also be made 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.  It is anticipated that Kent Campus Faculty members will effectively mentor graduate students (particularly at the doctoral level) and/or postdoctoral students.  Evaluation of teaching will account for differences in missions and expectations across campuses.     

Table 3A.  Evaluation Components for Assessment of Teaching for promotion and tenure of Kent Campus Faculty.1

Assessment of Teaching2

Definition

Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

 

 

 

 

Outstanding

 

 

 

 

Outstanding teacher; provides leadership in instructional

development

Developed or significantly revised courses, outstanding student and peer evaluations across a breadth of courses and levels, award of a substantial pedagogical or training grant, instructional creativity, leadership in curricular revisions, development of research projects for students (undergraduate honors or individual investigation or graduate students). Other recognition may include teaching awards from outside the Department.

Excellent

Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional

development

Developed or significantly revised courses, excellent student and peer evaluations, instructional creativity, actively participates in curricular revisions. Other recognition may include teaching awards from outside the Department and development of research projects for students (undergraduate honors or individual investigation or graduate students).

Very Good

Innovative teacher

Strong student and peer evaluations.  Other recognition may include the development of research projects for students (undergraduate honors or individual investigation or graduate students) and the Development or significant revision of courses.

Good

Meets obligations well

Marginal student and peer  evaluations.

Fair

Substandard teacher

Weak student and peer  evaluations.

Poor

Substandard, ineffective teacher

Weak student and peer evaluations, pattern of complaints.

 

 

 

1These accomplishments are intended to be neither all-inclusive nor exclusionary.  2The assessment of teaching involves an overall evaluation of teaching and is not solely derived from any single evaluative measure. 

Table 3B.  Evaluation Components for Assessment of Teaching for promotion and tenure of Regional Campus Faculty.1

Assessment of Teaching2

Definition

Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

 

 

 

 

 

Outstanding

 

 

 

 

 

Outstanding teacher; provides leadership in instructional

development

Outstanding student and peer evaluations, award of a substantial pedagogical or training grant, demonstrated instructional creativity, active participation in curricular revisions, development of research projects for students (undergraduate honors or individual investigation students). Other recognition may include teaching awards from outside the Department.

Excellent

 

Innovative teacher

 

Excellent student and peer evaluations, instructional creativity. Other recognition may include teaching awards from outside the Department and development of research projects for students (undergraduate honors or individual investigation students).

Very Good

Innovative teacher

Strong student and peer evaluations.  Other recognition may include the development of research projects for students (undergraduate honors or individual investigation students).

Good

Meets obligations well

Marginal student and peer evaluations. 

Fair

Substandard teacher

Weak student and peer evaluations.

Poor

Substandard, ineffective teacher

Weak student and peer evaluations, pattern of complaints.

 

 

1These accomplishments are intended to be neither all-inclusive nor exclusionary.  2The assessment of teaching involves an overall evaluation of teaching and is not solely derived from any single evaluative measure.