Criteria for the evaluation of the teaching are listed in Table 2. Course revision is defined as making 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 Campus, Department, School, 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 the 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 the candidate for reappointment, tenure and promotion. Evaluation of teaching will account for differences in missions and expectations across campuses. 

  1. Table 2. Evaluation Components for Assessment of Teaching for Promotion and Tenure




    Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score


    Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional


    Develop/revise courses, develop research projects for students (undergraduate and/or graduate), excellent student and peer perceptions, instructional creativity, actively participate in curricular revisions

    Very Good

    Innovative teacher

    Develop/revise courses, good student and peer perceptions


    Meets obligations well

    good student and peer perceptions


    substandard teacher

    Below average student and peer perceptions



    ineffective teacher

    Below average student and peer perceptions, pattern of complaints