Teaching

  1. Teaching involves activities that promote the development of effective strategies to better communicate information to students. Teaching involves planning and examination of pedagogical techniques, dissemination of such information in peer-reviewed contexts (e.g. publications in refereed journals, juried papers or conference presentations, juried proceedings and/or abstracts), as well as the act of teaching itself.
  2. Candidates for reappointment will be expected to demonstrate strong commitment to and growth in their teaching skill through the duration of their probationary years. Candidates for tenure and promotion will be expected to demonstrate a mature level of competence and effectiveness in teaching. 
  3. Evidence of the commitment to competence and effectiveness in teaching could include such things as development of a broad teaching repertoire, course revisions, new courses developed, innovative use of instructional technology, attending conferences and workshops on teaching, seeking peer mentoring, mentoring students, etc. Peer reviews must be a part of the submitted record of candidates for reappointment, tenure, and promotion. Other information such as written comments from students, colleagues within and beyond the candidate’s Academic Program Area or College, or from University administrators, shall be considered when available. Copies of representative syllabi, examinations, and other relevant material should be available for review.
  4. Standards for the Evaluation of Teaching  
    1. The performance levels for the assessment of teaching for tenure and promotion are shown in Table 3-3A. All tenured/tenure track faculty of the College are expected to achieve a minimum of a “Very Good” rating in the teaching category. The indicators used to assess the quality of teaching activity are provided in Table 3-3B.
    2. Table 3-3B provides a list of the teaching activities recognized by the CAE that should be used as criteria for evaluating a candidate's performance in teaching for tenure or promotion.
  1. Table 3-3A Performance Levels for Assessment of Teaching for Promotion and Tenure

    Level

    Teaching

     

    Outstanding

    Definition:  Outstanding teacher; provides leadership in instructional development.

    Accomplishments:  During the candidate’s review period, meets the following criteria.

     

    1) Completes at least 50 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 25 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

     

    Excellent

    Definition:  Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional development.

    Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

    1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 40 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 20 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

     

    1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 20 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 10 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

    Very Good

    Definition:  Innovative teacher.

    Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

    1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 30 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 15 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

     

    1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 15 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least eight instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

     

    Good

    Definition:  Meets teaching obligations well.

    Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

    1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 20 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 10 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

     

    1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least five instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

    Weak

    Definition:  Substandard teacher.

     

    Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

    1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least five instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

     

    1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least five instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least three instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

    Poor

    Definition:  Substandard, ineffective teacher.

    Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

    1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes less than 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), and/or less than five instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

     

    1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes less than five instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), and/or less than three instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

  2. Table 3-3B Criteria for Evaluation of Performance in Teaching

    CAE Guidelines

    Criteria for Evaluation of Performance

    Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty

     

    Teaching

     

    Reviewers will base their evaluation upon the documented degree of excellence achieved in Teaching for those activities that are related to the applicant’s discipline. The candidate is expected to provide a clear explanation of the nature and importance of accomplishments, initiatives taken, leadership roles, etc. Reviewers will be looking for specifics.

     

    It is the responsibility of the candidate to demonstrate the impact of their teaching efforts and activities. Documentation of those efforts should identify the nature and importance of an activity, their role in the activity, and their level of participation and contribution to the activity.

     

    The activities listed below are not all-inclusive and the committee may consider items submitted by the faculty member that are not listed, but are relevant.

     

    Viewed as Exemplary:

    • Recipient of University or external teaching award
    • Nominee for University or external teaching award
    • Consistently exceptional peer reviews of instruction based on actual classroom observation
    • Achieving significant improvements in teaching based upon peer review of instruction comments and feedback
    • Innovation in pedagogy and/or use of technology for teaching
    • Authorship of a new course or a major revision to an existing course
    • Leadership in creation of a new degree, major, or concentration area
    • Initiation and pursuit of a successful grant application resulting in funding of lab development, equipment, software, or other instructional/research items
    • Teaching an exceptional breadth and/or variety of courses
    • Course preparations and/or new course development requiring a significant learning curve
    • Course preparations and/or new course development requiring substantial creation of new course materials
    • Development of online learning tutorials
    • Developing research projects for students
    • Instructional creativity
    • Leadership in curricular revisions
    • Extensive lab development
    • Authorship in pedagogical research in peer-reviewed publications
    • Adaptation of innovative technologies, instructional tools, or teaching methods in the classroom
    • Extensive upgrade or acquisition of academic or professional credentials (Including advanced degrees, certifications, licensures, etc.)
    • Introduction of emerging subjects/materials into courses and curricula
    • Direction of an undergraduate student research project that leads to student presentation or publication
    • Establishment of regional, national, or international alliances in the field or discipline
    • Training program development
    • Directing a thesis, Honors project, or dissertation
    • Supervision of graduate students assigned as research assistants
    • Supervision of culminating experience or capstone course work

     

    Viewed as Favorable:

    • Thoughtful statement of teaching philosophy and self-assessment
    • Favorable peer reviews of instruction based on actual classroom observation.
    • Evidence of responding to an unfavorable peer review of instruction resulting in course and/or teaching improvement
    • Nomination for, or recipient of, campus teaching award; Nomination for University or external teaching award
    • Effective innovation in pedagogy and/or use of technology
    • Active participant in the redesign or restructuring of a degree, major, or concentration
    • Development of a new certificate program
    • Lab development or management
    • Serving on a thesis, Honors project, or dissertation committee
    • Maintenance of professional credentials (certifications, licensures, etc.) as evidence of maintaining currency
    • Professional development (attending courses, conferences, workshops, webinars, internships; obtaining new certifications or licensures, etc.)
    • Courses taught via distance learning
    • Courses taught for the first time, or that require significant revision, modification, and/or preparation
    • Actively participating in curricular revisions
    • Establishment of state or local alliances in the field or discipline
    • Training program, webinar, workshop, or seminar instruction

     

    Viewed unfavorably and/or not considered:

    • No statement of teaching philosophy or self-assessment
    • Unimpressive peer reviews of instruction
    • No evidence of responding to an unfavorable peer review of instruction: no evidence of improvement in class management, course content/design, or teaching method.
    • Lack of representative syllabi and other supporting documentation
    • Poorly explained and/or appropriately documented citations in any teaching activities; No evidence (or poorly documented evidence) of curricular activity or leadership
    • Poorly documented activities and/or accomplishments

     

    Notes on Teaching Activities:

    Application of new/emerging technologies refers to mastering emerging technologies and utilizing them in the classroom for pedagogical purposes or for lecture material