Standards for Evaluating Teaching and Professional Development | Kent State University

Standards for Evaluating Teaching and Professional Development

Evaluation of teaching is conducted in two categories: Classroom Instruction and Professional Development. In order to meet expectations for tenure and promotion in this category, the faculty member must demonstrate the following:

Classroom Instruction: Evidence of high quality teaching. Examples include, but are not limited to, peer reviews, contributions to curricular development, innovative instructional practices and course offerings, professional development, scholarship of teaching and learning, examples of assessments and feedback to students, student surveys of instruction (SSI), and evidence of self-reflection and responsiveness to constructive criticism.  Curricular development may include the development of new courses as well as revision of existing courses, which includes any substantial modification to a course such as developing new laboratory exercises, addition of distance learning options, and formal changes of course content/format.

Professional Development: A record of participation in purposeful, structured, and/or collaborative activities which result in the acquisition, enhancement, or refinement of skills and knowledge. Examples include, but are not limited to: evidence of impacts of development activities and outcomes in areas such as student learning and engagement, course design and/or materials, research methods and/or process, pedagogical practice/strategy, improvement in student achievement, evidence of new skills applied to practice, or professional collaborations.

Alternatively, examples of insufficient activity in these categories include, but are not limited to, consistent evidence of poor teaching performance and/or lack of professional development activities or lack of evidence of the impacts of such activities.

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 student comments) must be submitted as part of a candidate’s file for reappointment, tenure and promotion.  Copies of representative syllabi, assessments, feedback to students, and other relevant teaching materials should also be included. Documentation related to graduate student, undergraduate student, and post‐doctoral student mentorship 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.

Accomplishments and/or contributions in the area of Student Supervision are neither required nor expected, except as to the extent such accomplishments and/or contributions are appropriate to the FTNTT faculty member’s track and/or workload assignments, but will, when they exist, contribute to the FTNTT faculty member’s overall record of accomplishments.

Research that results in publication is also not a requirement for promotion in the Instructional track, however, research and/or publications can be submitted by FTNTT faculty members as an indication of professional development and/or contributions/service to the University or the discipline/profession.