Ball State University
Ball State University utilizes diverse assessment tools to enhance teaching effectiveness and support professional development, exemplifying how universities can offer valuable resources for improving educational quality.
I NDICATORS AND A SSESSMENT OF T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
At Ball State University, the effectiveness of teaching is evaluated through multiple methods Although there is a university-wide policy outlining general guidelines for teaching assessments, each department tailors its own specific procedures for evaluating teaching effectiveness.
The University mandates that annual department-designed evaluations incorporate student evaluations alongside one of the following: a peer review of teaching, a chairperson review of teaching, or a combined peer and chairperson review of a teaching portfolio.
Student evaluations play an especially important role in the teacher assessment process at
Ball State University They are to be used both for the improvement of teaching and for evaluation and personnel decisions, such as promotion and tenure
To enhance teaching effectiveness, instructors can gather anonymous student feedback through various methods, including formal surveys, open-ended questionnaires, and informal surveys While educators have the flexibility to create their own feedback tools, Ball State University’s Office of Educational Excellence (OEE) offers several pre-designed feedback options that can be utilized at the start or mid-semester.
Instructors can utilize facilitated feedback, where a staff member from the Office of Educational Excellence leads a structured discussion to collect student insights on teaching effectiveness Following this discussion, the facilitator compiles a concise written report that summarizes the key findings, student recommendations, and any additional issues that emerged during the class.
These facilitated feedback efforts are solely designed to improve teaching Results are confidential and not used for teacher evaluations and personnel decisions 3
1 “Faculty and Professional Personnel Handbook, 2012-2013.” Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs Ball State University 2012, p 174 http://cms.bsu.edu/sitecore/shell//- /media/WWW/DepartmentalContent/FacProfHandbook/1213HandbookR1.pdf
3 “Midterm Feedback.” Services Office of Educational Excellence Ball State University http://cms.bsu.edu/about/administrativeoffices/educationalexcellence/services/midtermfeedback
The Office of Educational Excellence equips instructors with resources to create online student feedback surveys using inQsit or Blackboard Although these surveys may not offer the depth of feedback found in in-class discussions, they enable instructors to gather student insights without sacrificing valuable class time Importantly, the results remain confidential and are not utilized for teacher evaluations or personnel decisions.
At the end of each semester, before final exams, departments conduct student evaluations for all courses with four or more enrollees These evaluations utilize various assessment methods, including formal surveys, open-ended questionnaires, and informal surveys Currently, courses are assessed electronically using the University’s core questions, with departments and faculty permitted to add their own questions and evaluation forms.
Ball State University uses the course evaluation service and information management system Digital Measures for processing and storage of evaluation data 8
In order to ensure that sound methods and statistical procedures are followed, Ball State
University employs a variety of tactics, including: 9
Avoiding statistical summaries from classes with enrollment of ten students or less
Other evaluation methods are instead recommended
When disseminating information to peers, department chairpersons, and others, it is essential to include a copy of the evaluation form utilized, along with any instructions given to those completing the forms.
Individual faculty member evaluation forms which “include different items and configurations of items shall never be averaged or co-mingled.”
Student evaluations are regarded as the personal property of the faculty member, and while the originating department has access to these evaluations, the results must be returned to the faculty member once the tabulation is finalized.
Figure 1.1, on the following page, provides the University Core Questions required for all student evaluations
5 “Faculty and Professional Personnel Handbook, 2012-2013.” Op cit., p 218
6 “Course Evaluation.” Services Office of Educational Excellence Ball State University http://cms.bsu.edu/about/administrativeoffices/educationalexcellence/services/courseeval
7 “Online Faculty and Course Evaluation FAQs.” Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Ball
State University http://cms.bsu.edu/about/administrativeoffices/provost/facresources/crseresponsefaqs
8 For information about Digital Measures, see Digital Measures http://www.digitalmeasures.com/
9 “Faculty and Professional Personnel Handbook, 2012-2013.” Op cit., p 218
Figure 1.1: Example of a Ball State University Core Course Evaluation Form
D ISAGREE 2: D ISAGREE 3: N EUTRAL 4: A GREE 5: S TRONGLY
My instructor explains the course objectives clearly
My instructor explains course content clearly
My instructor uses effective examples and illustrations
My instructor is respectful when I have a question or comment
My instructor provides feedback that helps me improve my performance in the class
My instructor is available for consultation (e.g., after class, email, office hours, or by appointment)
Please provide any additional written comments on the faculty's strengths and weaknesses [Comment Box]
D ISAGREE 2: D ISAGREE 3: N EUTRAL 4: A GREE 5: S TRONGLY
A GREE This course has clear objectives
This course is effective in meeting its objectives
This course has assignments related to the objectives of the course
This course has a clear grading system
This course broadens my perspective and/or knowledge
Please provide any additional written comments on the strengths and weaknesses of the course You may comment on such things as the use of assignments, text(s), exercises, exams, etc
Ball State University mandates that annual teaching evaluations incorporate assessments through at least one of the following methods: peer review of teaching, chairperson review of teaching, or a combined review of a teaching portfolio by both peers and the chairperson.
Peer Review of Teaching: This can include classroom visitations by a peer instructor, as well as evaluations of syllabi, examinations, and other classroom materials
11 “University Core form.” Ball State University http://cms.bsu.edu/-
/media/WWW/DepartmentalContent/Educational%20Excellence/PDF/CoreQuestions.pdf
12 “Faculty and Professional Personnel Handbook, 2012-2013.” Op cit., p 174
Chairperson Review of Teaching: This can include classroom visitations by the department chairperson, as well as evaluations of syllabi, examinations, and other classroom materials
The Peer and Chairperson Review of Teaching Portfolio entails a comprehensive evaluation conducted by both a peer and the department chairperson This review focuses on a teaching portfolio that typically includes a balanced mix of three distinct types of materials.
Effective instructional materials from faculty members include a teaching philosophy statement, clearly defined course goals, detailed course descriptions, syllabi, assignments, handouts, tests, and audio or video recordings of teaching sessions, along with self-evaluation documents.
Evaluation from others, such as: classroom visitations, internal or external peer evaluations of syllabi, examinations and/or other instructional materials, student evaluations
The outcomes of educational instruction are demonstrated through various forms of student work, including written papers, test responses, journals, video recordings, creative projects, and published materials Additionally, achievements such as honors and awards, along with a comparison of pre- and post-course test scores, serve to highlight the effectiveness of teaching methods and student learning progress.
Ball State University currently lacks specific assessment tools for Adjunct Instructors Instead, their courses are evaluated based on established criteria and undergo an annual review as per departmental policy For instance, in the English department, the performance of adjunct and contract faculty is assessed using the same standards applied to tenure-track faculty, facilitated by the "Contract Faculty Salary Committee."
D EVELOPMENT S UPPORT AND I NCENTIVES FOR T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
Ball State University offers a range of tools and procedures designed to promote and reward teaching excellence among faculty These resources are accessible on an individual basis and include department-driven assessment efforts Additionally, the Office of the Associate Provost and the Office of Educational Excellence provide various professional development and support services to enhance faculty effectiveness.
University provides a number of awards and grants based on teaching effectiveness
13 Taken verbatim from “Evaluation of Faculty.” English Department Ball State University http://cms.bsu.edu/academics/collegesanddepartments/english/forfacultyandstaff/resources/depthandbook/eva luation/evaloffaculty
14 “Faculty and Professional Personnel Handbook, 2012-2013.” Op cit., p 57
15 “English Department Policies, Criteria, and Procedures Regarding Promotion and Tenure, 2011-2012.” English
Department Ball State University, p 18 http://cms.bsu.edu/-/media/WWW/DepartmentalContent/English/pdfs/English%20PT%20document%202011-12%20CURRENT%20passed%20on%20April%2028%202011.pdf
D EVELOPMENT S UPPORT FOR T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
Boise State University
Boise State University, with its Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL), provides another strong example of how a university can develop methods to encourage effective teaching
Its assessment and development methods, as well as its processes for adjunct instructor assessment, provide examples of how to recognize and analyze teaching
I NDICATORS AND A SSESSMENT OF T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
At Boise State University, teaching effectiveness is assessed in a number of different ways
Boise State University's Center for Teaching and Learning offers optional assessment methods focused on student feedback, while annual departmental assessments are mandatory for tenured, tenure-track, and part-time faculty Each department creates its own evaluation criteria, which must encompass student evaluations, indicators of student learning, and evidence of teaching improvement efforts, such as field projects, new teaching methods, or innovative media use Additionally, tenure-track faculty evaluations must include peer assessments.
Student evaluations play a major role in assessment of teaching effectiveness at Boise State
University They are used for both the improvement of teaching as well as for promotion, tenure, and other personnel decisions
The Center for Teaching and Learning offers tools for mid-semester assessments (MAP) that enable instructors to gather valuable feedback from students about the learning environment while courses are ongoing Conducted between weeks 5 and 9 of the semester, these assessments are confidential, voluntary, and designed solely to enhance teaching effectiveness MAPs can be completed either face-to-face or online, and they are not utilized for departmental evaluations or personnel decisions.
For an in-person MAP, a CTL consultant reaches out to the instructor beforehand to review essential course details and address any questions The consultant then attends the class, dedicating 25-30 minutes to the session.
MAP with the class in the absence of the instructor.” 35
32 “Center for Teaching & Learning.” Boise State University http://ctl.boisestate.edu/default.asp
33 “Annual Faculty Performance Evaluation.” Boise State University http://policy.boisestate.edu/wp- content/uploads/2011/05/4290_AnnualFacultyPerformanceEvaluation_03182011.pdf
34 “Mid-semester Assessment Process (MAP).” Center for Teaching & Learning Boise State University http://ctl.boisestate.edu/images/MAPflyer2012.pdf
35 “Mid-Semester Assessment Process (MAP) for Classroom Courses.” Center for Teaching & Learning Boise State
University http://ctl.boisestate.edu/services/indivconsult/map.asp
The consultant leads a discussion with students focusing on these three questions: 36
What about the course or its instruction helps your learning?
What about the course or its instruction presents a barrier to your learning?
What changes could be made to improve your learning in this course?
Following completion of this in-class discussion, instructor and CTL consultant meet to review student responses The consultant further provides the instructor with a report
“documenting the conversations that took place and summarizing the consultant’s analysis.” The instructor is further encouraged to analyze this document and briefly discuss with the class the findings 37
Instructors can create online MAP surveys to gather feedback, which, although less detailed than in-class discussions, can still significantly enhance teaching effectiveness when designed properly.
In the final two weeks of a course, students must evaluate their courses, which are essential for enhancing instructor performance and informing broader faculty evaluations and personnel decisions These evaluations can be conveniently completed online via the Bronco CourseEval system for most departments Although university policy does not mandate a specific evaluation design, the online system seems to feature a standardized template for consistency.
Departments can customize course evaluations by adding their own questions as needed These evaluations are crucial for departments and administrators, as they are used alongside other criteria in promotion, tenure, and personnel decisions.
Online evaluations are processed and analyzed with the help of the Office of Institutional
Research at Boise State 43 The University employs the information management system,
Digital Measures, for storage of student evaluations as well as general faculty information 44
37 “Analyzing and Discussing Mid-term Assessments with Students.” Center for Teaching and Learning Boise State
University http://ctl.boisestate.edu/documents/AnalyzeMAP.pdf
38 “Mid-semester Assessment Process (MAP).” Center for Teaching & Learning Op cit
39 For Spring 2013 course evaluation dates, see “Online Course Evaluations.” Boise State University http://iassess.boisestate.edu/onlineevals/
40 Tuck, K “Online Course Evaluations Due by Friday, Dec 9.” Campus News Boise State University http://news.boisestate.edu/update/2011/12/05/online-course-evaluations-due-by-friday-dec-9/
41 “Student Evaluation of Faculty.” Boise State University http://policy.boisestate.edu/wp- content/uploads/2011/05/4300_StudentEvaluationofFaculty.pdf
42 “Adding Your Own Questions to Bronco CourseEval Course Evaluation System.” Boise State University http://iassess.boisestate.edu/onlineevals/files/2012/02/Adding-Faculty-Questions-to-Bronco-CourseEval-1.pdf
43 Office of Institutional Research Boise State University http://iassess.boisestate.edu/
44 “Digital Measures.” Boise State University http://iassess.boisestate.edu/digitalmeasures/
Boise State University acknowledges the lack of specific data linking student evaluations to teaching effectiveness; however, its Center for Teaching and Learning offers extensive resources on the general effectiveness and accuracy of these evaluations Additionally, the Center provides valuable suggestions and tips for structuring questions on student evaluation forms when incorporating them into the Bronco CourseEval online system.
Figure 2.1 provides an example of a student evaluation at Boise State University
Figure 2.1: Student Evaluation of Instructor Effectiveness Example, Boise State University
S UMMATIVE D ATA (U SED FOR P ROMOTION AND T ENURE P URPOSES )
1 Motivates me to do my best work SD D N A SA
2 Effectively explains difficult material SD D N A SA
3 Uses effective teaching strategies and methods SD D N A SA
4 Uses evaluation methods that effectively measure my mastery of course objectives SD D N A SA
5 Is available for help during office hours and outside of class SD D N A SA
6 Has a genuine interest in the success of the individual students SD D N A SA
7 Encourages student questions SD D N A SA
8 Demonstrates enthusiasm for course content SD D N A SA
9 Demonstrates enthusiasm for teaching SD D N A SA
10 Demonstrates competence in the discipline SD D N A SA
11 Demonstrates respect for students SD D N A SA
12 The grade I expect to receive in this class is: A B C D F
13 This course is: a required for my major b required for my minor c an elective
14 I am currently classified as a: a Freshman b Sophomore c Junior d Senior e Graduate
F ORMATIVE C OMMENTS (F ACULTY PLEASE NOTE THAT THE RESULTS OF THE FOLLOWING FORMATIVE COMMENTS WILL NOT BE
SUBMITTED FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE WITH THE SUMMATIVE DATA )
PLEASE PRINT any comments that would be helpful to evaluate this faculty member’s classroom teaching performance
Instructor’s areas of strength [Comment Box]
Suggestions for improving the instructor’s classroom teaching performance [Comment Box]
Suggestions for improving the course [Comment Box]
* SD=Strongly Disagree, D=Disagree, N=Neutral, A=Agree, SA=Strongly Agree
45 “Student Evaluation.” Center for Teaching & Learning Boise State University http://ctl.boisestate.edu/services/indivconsult/evaluation.asp
46 “Adding Your Own Questions to Bronco CourseEval Course Evaluation System.” Op cit
47 This figure is based on information from “Appendix A: College of Health Sciences – Student Evaluation of Classroom
Instruction.” College of Health Sciences Boise State University http://hs.boisestate.edu/ceh/files/2011/06/appendixa-studenteval.pdf
Boise State University mandates various forms of instructor assessment for annual faculty performance evaluations within departments Required documentation for the department chair or evaluation board includes student evaluations and additional evidence of student learning.
The University’s Center for Teaching and Learning provides essential resources aimed at enhancing teaching effectiveness, including assessments of course design and video analyses of teaching styles Additionally, non-tenured faculty can benefit from peer evaluations to further improve their instructional methods.
In addition to student evaluation data, instructors are required to present documentation of student learning for their annual assessments This documentation can encompass a variety of materials, such as student essays, publications, fieldwork or lab reports, and presentations from conferences related to the course content.
Evidence of teaching improvement is a crucial aspect of faculty evaluation Instructors are required to demonstrate their commitment to enhancing their teaching practices Examples of such efforts include integrating field projects into courses, adopting new teaching methods, and innovatively utilizing media in instruction.
CTL also provides more detailed suggestions of opportunities for teaching improvement, especially surrounding classroom and instructional redesign as well as the use of technology 52
Annual performance evaluations for tenure-track faculty must incorporate peer evaluations, which are essential for promotion and tenure reviews This process includes assessing teaching effectiveness, although there is no specific university-wide policy governing it The Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) recommends that peer reviews may involve evaluating course syllabi, reviewing course materials, analyzing student evaluations, and conducting in-class observations.
Optional Assessment Opportunities: The Center for Teaching and Learning at Boise State
University provides a variety of optional teaching assessment opportunities These include teaching observation opportunities, syllabus and course design consultations and training,
48 “Annual Faculty Performance Evaluation.” Boise State University Op cit
49 See “Center for Teaching & Learning.” Boise State University Op cit
50 “Annual Faculty Performance Evaluation.” Boise State University Op cit
52 See “Resources.” Center for Teaching & Learning Boise State University http://ctl.boisestate.edu/resources/default.asp
53 “Faculty Peer Review.” Boise State University http://policy.boisestate.edu/wp- content/uploads/2011/05/4320_FacultyPeerReview_03182011.pdf
The "Peer Review System" from the Center for Teaching & Learning at Boise State University offers valuable resources for instructors, including video analysis of classroom teaching effectiveness These tools serve as significant supplementary opportunities for educators to enhance their teaching skills and positively influence student learning outcomes before the semester concludes.
Boise State University does not mandate departments to evaluate adjunct instructors with the same rigor as full-time, tenured faculty, and lacks specific policies for assessing adjunct teaching effectiveness in essential first-year courses While departments are encouraged to establish evaluation procedures for part-time faculty, adjuncts are at least assessed through student evaluations each semester, similar to their full-time counterparts Some departments have implemented policies that include additional assessment methods for adjunct instructors.
Formal, written evaluation (by the department chair or designee) of each class taught, based on student evaluations, course materials, and/or classroom observations
Classroom visits by department colleagues or affiliates of the Center for Teaching and Learning
A brief, face-to-face meeting with the department chair or designee at the end of each semester
A written Performance Improvement Plan developed in consultation with the department chair or designee, and perhaps involving the Center for Teaching and Learning
D EVELOPMENT S UPPORT AND I NCENTIVES FOR T EACHING E XCELLENCE
Boise State University offers numerous development support opportunities and incentives for teaching excellence through the Center for Teaching and Learning Instructors can access assessment tools and student feedback, along with a range of resources including workshops and programs aimed at enhancing teaching skills Additionally, the CTL and various university departments provide awards, grants, and other incentives to promote effective teaching practices.
55 “Individual Consultation.” Center for Teaching & Learning Boise State University http://ctl.boisestate.edu/services/indivconsult/default.asp
56 “Annual Faculty Performance Evaluation.” Boise State University Op cit
57 “A Guide for Part-Time Faculty.” Boise State University http://academics.boisestate.edu/facultyhandbook/files/2009/10/adjunct-faculty-faqs.pdf
58 Taken verbatim from “Best Practices for Adjunct Faculty Hiring and Evaluation: A Guide for Departments at Boise
State.” Boise State University 2011, p 3 http://academics.boisestate.edu/deptchairs/files/2012/01/Adjunct-Hiring.pdf
D EVELOPMENT S UPPORT FOR T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne
Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW) provides numerous opportunities for enhancing and evaluating teaching practices, primarily through its Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching (CELT) Additionally, IPFW serves as a valuable peer institution comparison for the University of Alaska Anchorage.
I NDICATORS AND A SSESSMENT OF T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne employs diverse tools to assess teaching effectiveness, offering recommendations for faculty and department chairs to create departmental standards for documenting and evaluating teaching The institution highlights the importance of using various evaluation methods, including student evaluations, classroom assessment techniques, and peer evaluations.
Guidelines for University-wide evaluation and personnel decisions also suggest using multiple methods of evaluation for teaching, indicating that information should be gathered from students, peers, and instructors themselves 77
At IPFW, student evaluations are essential to the assessment teaching performance They are used for the improvement of teaching as well as for personnel decisions
To enhance teaching effectiveness, the CELT offers valuable recommendations for utilizing both formative and summative assessment tools It presents a variety of resources focused on classroom assessment techniques, enabling students to reflect on the teaching material more effectively.
The Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching offers in-depth resources on interpreting and utilizing summative student evaluation forms to enhance teaching effectiveness Their services include consultations that analyze student evaluation data and provide small group instructional diagnostic consultations, aimed at improving educational practices.
75 Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne http://new.ipfw.edu/offices/celt/index.html
76 “Examples For Documenting and Evaluating Teaching.” Office of Academic Affairs Indiana University-Purdue
University Fort Wayne 2007 http://new.ipfw.edu/dotAsset/165094.pdf
77 “Promotion and Tenure Guidelines.” Senate Document SD 94-3 Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne
2010 http://new.ipfw.edu/dotAsset/46469df3-8bf3-4685-9539-ebf6c79a97c8.pdf
78 “Classroom Assessment Techniques.” Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching Indiana University-Purdue
University Fort Wayne http://new.ipfw.edu/offices/celt/for-new-faculty/classroom-assessment-techniques.html
79 “Using and Interpreting Student Evaluations of Teaching.” Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching
Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne offers resources for enhancing teaching effectiveness, including the opportunity for instructors to meet with a CELT consultant These consultations focus on addressing specific issues and concerns related to teaching, ensuring a supportive environment for educators For more information, visit their official site.
IPFW mandates student evaluations for all courses each semester, but there has been a lack of consensus on their structure and format until recently In 2011, a faculty senate task force established recommendations and best practice guidelines for student evaluations, while CELT offers additional insights on creating effective evaluation instruments.
The Senate task force has proposed that each department create its own course evaluations, while also recommending the inclusion of a few standardized items across the University for consistency Specifically, the recommendations highlight the need for two particular student evaluation items to be universally included in all evaluations.
Overall, I would rate this course as: Excellent - Good - Fair - Poor - Very Poor
Overall, I would rate this instructor as: Excellent - Good - Fair - Poor - Very Poor
The Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching also suggests ways to structure course evaluations Specifically, these recommend that instructors, among other things: 84
Use a pool of items appropriate to the course and to your teaching style
Be sure that each item addresses only one aspect of your teaching or of the course
Allow space for narrative comments
Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne advocates for incorporating diverse assessment methods in teaching evaluations, emphasizing the importance of individual consultation services offered by the Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching.
80 “Request for Services.” Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching Indiana University-Purdue University
Fort Wayne http://new.ipfw.edu/offices/celt/request-for-services/
81 “IPFW Faculty Senate Student Evaluation Task Force, 2011: Recommendations and Best Practice Guidelines.”
Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne 2011 http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east- 1.amazonaws.com/docs/1149/357554/StudentEvaluationTaskForceReport.pdf
82 “Constructing a Useful Student Evaluation Instrument.” Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching Indiana
University-Purdue University Fort Wayne http://new.ipfw.edu/offices/celt/for-new-faculty/constructing-a-useful- student-evaluation-instrument.html
83 Taken verbatim from “IPFW Faculty Senate Student Evaluation Task Force, 2011: Recommendations and Best
Peer reviews and reflective practice serve as valuable formative tools that enhance teaching effectiveness and inform evaluations and personnel decisions.
CELT teaching fellows offer a range of individual consultation services, including syllabi reviews, course material assessments, and classroom observations, all aimed at enhancing student learning These consultations are based on a collegial, formative peer review model and are tailored to meet the specific needs, goals, and interests of the individuals seeking assistance.
Peer reviews serve as a valuable tool for offering constructive feedback to instructors and informing personnel decisions The CELT’s peer review handbook details various types and methods of peer review, emphasizing the importance of evaluating a broad spectrum of materials When assessing an instructor, peer reviewers should consider input from the instructor themselves, course materials, colleagues, administrators, students, and alumni Additionally, the handbook recommends several methods for collecting data to facilitate the peer review process.
Review of course web pages
Review of course materials (syllabi, handouts, assessment materials, etc.)
Review of samples of student work
Consultation with student focus groups
Consultation, usually at mid-semester, with all the students in a class (SGID = Small Group Instructional Diagnosis)
Survey of students and alumni
Reflective practices are essential for teaching assessment, as recommended by IPFW, which emphasizes self-reflection and evaluation Although the CELT offers a general overview of these methods, they primarily focus on personal statements, self-assessment forms, and the analysis of video and audio recordings.
85 “Improve Your Teaching.” Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching Indiana University-Purdue University
Fort Wayne http://new.ipfw.edu/offices/celt/teaching-resources/improve-your-teaching.html
86 “Request for Services.” Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching Op cit
87 Peer Review of Teaching at IPFW Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne 2009, p 5 http://new.ipfw.edu/dotAsset/dbc25a76-214a-4531-827f-5a17076ceb16.pdf
88 “Reflective Practice.” Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching Indiana University-Purdue University Fort
Wayne http://new.ipfw.edu/offices/celt/teaching-resources/improve-your-teaching.html#reflectivepractice
89 “Promotion and Tenure Guidelines.” Senate Document SD 94-3 Op cit
IPFW lacks specific guidelines for assessing adjunct instructors, but they do receive basic feedback each semester as courses are evaluated.
D EVELOPMENT S UPPORT AND I NCENTIVES FOR T EACHING E XCELLENCE
IPFW’s Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching offers diverse workshops, conferences, fellowships, and awards designed to enhance teaching effectiveness and recognize outstanding teaching efforts.
The CELT offers diverse professional development resources aimed at enhancing teaching effectiveness at IPFW, including workshops, conferences, and various support programs Additionally, CELT provides a range of online resources designed to assist faculty in improving their teaching skills.
Portland State University
Portland State University utilizes diverse teaching development and assessment strategies, offering extensive support to instructors through the Center for Academic Excellence Notably, it stands out as one of the few universities featured in this report that has implemented evaluation methods specifically for adjunct instructors.
I NDICATORS AND A SSESSMENT OF T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
Portland State University employs various assessment measures to evaluate teaching effectiveness, including classroom observations, student-learning outcomes, successful mentoring and advising, student evaluations, and course material assessments These measures are recommended for use in promotion and tenure reviews, with instructors typically undergoing annual evaluations.
The Center for Academic Excellence further outlines assessment measures, though it does note that “PSU tends to be decentralized, and our assessment practices reflect that.”
Assessment is primarily the responsibility of individual schools, colleges, and departments, emphasizing the importance of assessment work that remains closely connected to the classroom Consequently, this decentralized approach makes it challenging to comprehensively outline assessment practices compared to other institutions.
Student evaluation practices, in particular, are more difficult to outline at Portland State
University evaluations play a crucial role in personnel decisions and enhancing teaching quality In 2012, a student newspaper writer encouraged fellow students to actively engage in these evaluations at the end of each quarter, highlighting their importance in the academic environment.
Student evaluations are collected during the final weeks of each course at the institution, but there is limited information available regarding their use or presentation.
103 Center for Academic Excellence Portland State University http://www.pdx.edu/cae/
The "Final Report of the New Academic Ranks Task Force" from Portland State University, published in June 2012, outlines significant recommendations for academic rank reforms This document emphasizes the need for updated academic structures to enhance faculty roles and responsibilities, ensuring alignment with contemporary educational standards For more details, refer to the full report available at the provided link.
105 “Department Chair/Program Director Handbook.” College of Liberal Arts and Science Portland State University
106 “Assessing Teaching & Learning.” Center for Academic Excellence Portland State University http://www.pdx.edu/cae/assessing-teaching-learning
107 Gravlin, E “Students grade teachers?” Vanguard Portland State University April 2, 2012 http://psuvanguard.com/opinion/students-grade-teachers/
108 This is based on an instructors own presentation of student evaluations, see “Robert Lawrence Bertini, Ph.D., P.E.:
Course Evaluations.” Portland State University 2012 http://www.web.pdx.edu/~bertini/pdf/courseevals.pdf
At Portland State University, various assessment tools and methods are utilized, including consultation services, peer reviews, course material evaluations, and assessments of student outcomes and teaching awards This data, along with student evaluations, can be compiled into an instructor portfolio The Center for Academic Excellence recommends these methods as effective ways to showcase evidence of professional competence to the departmental promotion and tenure committee.
Despite the relative dearth of information on general assessment methods at Portland State
University, it does provide more detailed information on the methods used to assess adjunct instructors teaching and more general performance Adjunct instructors are
“entitled to a written performance evaluation by his/her department chair or chair- equivalent” after six terms of teaching, or at other times when determined appropriate by the department chair
Performance evaluations for adjunct instructors are grounded in the written expectations outlined during their hiring process, alongside an assessment of a portfolio that showcases their effective performance.
A Summary of student evaluations, and
To ensure a comprehensive evaluation, the review process may include an analysis of syllabi and supporting materials, an examination of classroom techniques, and a summary of key activities from the past year or since the last review Additionally, peer reviews, letters from knowledgeable individuals regarding your work, and relevant publications or creative projects should be considered.
109 “Policies and Procedures for the Evaluation of Faculty for Tenure, Promotion, and Merit Increases.” Faculty Senate
Portland State University 2009, p 10 http://www.pdx.edu/sites/www.pdx.edu.oaa/files/P&T%20guide%206- 09%20b.pdf
110 “Promotion/Tenure Portfolio Support.” Center for Academic Excellence Portland State University http://www.pdx.edu/cae/promotion-tenure-portfolio-support
111 “Adjunct Teaching Faculty Performance Evaluation: Statement of Purpose.” PSUFA Joint Statement of the
Labor/Management Task Force on Professional Evaluation Portland State University 2009, p 1
D EVELOPMENT S UPPORT AND I NCENTIVES FOR T EACHING E XCELLENCE
Portland State University has limited data on assessment measures for teaching effectiveness, but it offers more information on the development and incentives aimed at enhancing this effectiveness through the Center for Academic Excellence.
Excellence, Portland State University offers a variety of professional development opportunities to improve teaching effectiveness It further provides a variety of awards and other incentives to help encourage teaching excellence
The Center for Academic Excellence offers diverse professional development opportunities for instructors, including programs, discussions, and workshops designed to foster dialogue on effective teaching practices and innovations Additionally, it provides a wealth of online resources to support various teaching methods and approaches.
Portland State University offers three key programs and workshops aimed at enhancing teaching effectiveness, providing valuable opportunities for educators to present and discuss effective teaching practices These initiatives foster an environment for collaboration and professional development, ultimately contributing to improved educational outcomes.
Conversations,” “Focus on Faculty” workshops, and “Teaching, Learning and Assessment
Carnegie Conversations: These ‘conversations’ are held once per semester at Portland State University They are designed to encourage discussion about
Enhancing teaching practices is essential for fostering the scholarship of teaching and learning, as well as promoting excellence and effectiveness in education The latest Carnegie Conversation, which took place in February 2013, focused on the impact of massive open online courses (MOOCs) in the realm of higher education.
Faculty workshops lasting 90 minutes offer educators the opportunity to engage in three to four concurrent discussions on teaching and learning These workshops feature a variety of speakers and cover relevant topics, such as utilizing undergraduate research as an educational tool and enhancing information presentation in STEM courses.
Teaching, Learning and Assessment Reading Groups: These informal groups “discuss reading material as it relates to their classroom experience and/or to their
112 “Teaching & Learning Resources.” Center for Academic Excellence Portland State University http://www.pdx.edu/cae/teaching-learning-resources-0
114 “Carnegie Conversation: Massive Open Online Courses.” Portland State University 2013 http://www.pdx.edu/cae/sites/www.pdx.edu.cae/files/WEBSITE%20POSTER%20Carnegie%20-%20Feb%202- 13%20MOOCs.pdf
115 “Teaching & Learning Resources.” Center for Academic Excellence Op cit
The Center for Academic Excellence at Portland State University emphasizes the importance of faculty development through its "Focus on Faculty" initiative This program facilitates discussions every other Friday during the semester, lasting one hour, and typically centers around a specific book each quarter Recent readings have included "Teaching for Critical Thinking" by Stephen.
Brookfield and Now You See It: How the Brain Science of Attention Will Transform the Way We Live, Work, and Learn by Cathy N Davidson 118
General Online Resources and Other Development Efforts: The Center for Academic
University of Kansas
At the University of Kansas, teaching effectiveness has taken a major role in assessment
Furthermore, through its Center for Teaching Excellence (CTE), the University provides resources for development of effective teaching strategies and a variety of incentives for teaching excellence
I NDICATORS AND A SSESSMENT OF T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
The University of Kansas utilizes diverse methods to evaluate teaching effectiveness, which aid in feedback, improvement, and personnel decisions According to university policy, faculty members are assessed annually by their unit administrator using criteria suitable for their specific unit Assessment methods include student evaluations, samples of student work, peer evaluations, and evidence of teaching awards or nominations Additionally, instructors are required to participate in evaluations based on their status.
“progress toward tenure review,” and subsequently various “promotion and tenure reviews.” 129
The university has established comprehensive guidelines regarding the annual review process, requiring instructors to submit an annual portfolio to the department chair This portfolio should include evidence of the outcomes from various assessment methods and is structured to address four key questions.
1 How does the instructor conduct courses?
2 How does the instructor prepare for courses?
3 What teaching work has the instructor done in addition to teaching courses?
4 Has the instructor made progress over time in development of teaching and/or shared teaching work with colleagues?
Student evaluations play a crucial role in assessing teaching effectiveness at the University of Kansas, serving not only as vital tools for professional development but also influencing annual evaluations and personnel decisions.
127 “Faculty Evaluation.” University of Kansas https://documents.ku.edu/policies/provost/FacultyEvaluation.htm
128 “Documenting My Teaching.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Kansas http://www.cte.ku.edu/documenting/evaluating/index.shtml
129 “Representing Teaching.” An Essential Guide to Teaching at KU Center for Teaching Excellence University of
Kansas, p 45 http://www.cte.ku.edu/resources/essentialGuide/representingTeaching.pdf
130 “Guidelines for Department Implementation.” Task Force on Assessment of Teaching and Learning University of
Kansas 2007 http://www.governance.ku.edu/TFATLdeptguidelines.shtml
The University of Kansas houses the Center for Teaching Excellence, which focuses on enhancing teaching effectiveness However, it lacks the general consultation and student evaluation services commonly found at other institutions Instead, the center offers a comprehensive range of resources on its website, assisting instructors in developing student evaluation procedures aimed at improving their teaching methods.
Suggestions for teaching feedback include: the one-minute paper and midterm feedback
The Center for Teaching Excellence (CTE) offers basic feedback forms for instructors but lacks comprehensive consultation services for student evaluations Additionally, a university task force focused on assessing teaching and learning advises instructors to gather open-ended student comments to enhance their teaching practices.
While these may be used for evaluation in certain cases, in general they should be solely employed by individual instructors 133
Formal student evaluations, conducted at the end of the semester, are stored in an instructor's file and play a crucial role in annual personnel evaluations, promotions, and tenure decisions These evaluations are primarily administered on paper during class sessions, in accordance with the University of Kansas policy.
Teaching evaluations will take place in the final two full weeks of each semester, excluding the final examination period Instructors must announce the specific class session for distributing evaluations at least one class period beforehand.
The University offers a university-developed “Curriculum and Instruction” Survey that instructors may administer for evaluations while also allowing individual departments to design their own student evaluation forms 135
The CTE offers guidance to instructors on interpreting student evaluations; however, the University lacks documentation on the statistical methods and strategies used to validate the correlation between student evaluation tools and teaching effectiveness.
Figure 5.1, on the following page, provides an example of a student evaluation at the
131 “Preparing to Teach: Student Feedback.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Kansas http://www.cte.ku.edu/preparing/feedback/index.shtml
133 “Task Force Recommendations.” Task Force on the Assessment of Teaching and Learning University of Kansas
2007 http://www.governance.ku.edu/TFATLFY08FR.shtml
134 “Procedures for Administration of Student Evaluations of Teachers.” University of Kansas https://documents.ku.edu/policies/provost/StudentEvaluationsProceduresforAdministration.htm
Figure 5.1: Example University of Kansas Student Evaluation Form
The "Appendix B: Teaching-Related Worksheets for Promotion & Tenure" is a crucial resource in the "Essential Guide to Teaching at KU" published by the Center for Teaching Excellence at the University of Kansas This guide, found on page 87, provides valuable insights and tools for educators seeking to enhance their teaching effectiveness and navigate the promotion and tenure process For more information, visit the provided link to access these essential resources.
The University of Kansas offers diverse assessment tools to evaluate teaching effectiveness beyond student evaluations, including self-reflection, peer review, student work samples, and teaching awards Instructor portfolios can effectively combine these methods with student evaluations and other materials to provide a comprehensive overview These assessments aim to address four key questions regarding teaching effectiveness.
Kansas does not appear to provide the more in-depth information about these assessment tools available at other institutions
The University of Kansas encourages adjunct instructors to utilize diverse assessment practices throughout the semester to enhance their teaching effectiveness, although specific guidelines on these practices are not provided.
They also are evaluated by students in their courses each semester like other instructors
D EVELOPMENT S UPPORT AND I NCENTIVES FOR T EACHING E XCELLENCE
The University of Kansas offers a range of development support tools and incentives to promote teaching excellence, including workshops, programs, one-on-one consultations, and teaching awards at both departmental and institutional levels While these initiatives may not be as extensive as those at other institutions, they demonstrate the university's commitment to providing robust support for its instructors.
Development support for teaching is mainly provided through the Center for Teaching
The Center for Teaching Excellence (CTE) provides personalized teaching consultation services alongside a diverse range of programs, workshops, and seminars Additionally, it offers extensive resources related to the scholarship of teaching and learning, as well as comprehensive information on university-wide faculty policies available on its website While 138 Hanover does not encompass every available offering, it emphasizes a select few key development support opportunities to effectively showcase their significance.
University of Kansas supports teaching effectiveness
CTE staff members offer one-on-one consultations for faculty and instructional staff seeking to discuss various aspects of teaching and student learning.
137 “Documenting My Teaching.” Center for Teaching Excellence Op cit
138 Center for Teaching Excellence University of Kansas http://cte.ku.edu/
139 “About CTE.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Kansas http://www.cte.ku.edu/about/index.shtml
Discussion Forums: The CTE provides a variety of forums for more relaxed discussion between faculty members on various aspect of teaching 140 These include lunches as well as
"Teaching teas" are organized three to four times a month, focusing on enhancing teaching methods and strategies Recent discussions have included topics such as "teaching critical thinking through controversy" and "introduction to classroom assessment: creating valid and reliable tests."
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) is committed to enhancing teaching effectiveness through its Center for Teaching Excellence (CTE), which has been dedicated to supporting, promoting, and improving teaching and learning since its inception.
1964 151 Furthermore, teaching plays an important role in promotion, tenure, and other personnel decisions at the institution
I NDICATORS AND A SSESSMENT OF T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
The University of Illinois utilizes diverse assessment methods to evaluate teaching effectiveness, ensuring that all promotion and tenure recommendations include a comprehensive review of the candidate's teaching performance This process mandates the evaluation of student feedback and instructor self-reviews, supplemented by optional assessment techniques such as peer observations and insights from former students and alumni.
Student evaluations form the background of promotion and tenure reviews of teaching and further are used by University of Illinois instructors for the improvement of their teaching
The University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign’s Center for Teaching Excellence offers instructors the chance to enhance their teaching through Informal Early Feedback (IEF) opportunities early in the semester This initiative enables educators to adjust their teaching methods in real-time, addressing any course-related issues promptly The CTE not only guides instructors on administering IEF but also provides consultation services to help them interpret the feedback effectively.
The CTE offers a range of sample course feedback forms for IEF, along with an extensive collection of potential questions An example of these sample forms, specifically designed for gathering general student feedback, is illustrated in Figure 6.1 on the next page.
151 “About Us.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://cte.illinois.edu/about.html
152 “Promotion and Tenure: Office of the Provost Communication No 9.” University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, pp 11-12 http://provost.illinois.edu/communication/09/2013/Communication_9.pdf
153 “Informal Early Feedback (IEF).” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://cte.illinois.edu/teacheval/ief.html
154 “Instructions for administering IEF.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://cte.illinois.edu/teacheval/ief/administer.html
Figure 6.1: General IEF Student Evaluation Form
P LEASE CIRCLE THE NUMBER ON THE SCALE WHICH BEST REPRESENTS YOUR PERCEPTIONS :
1 The instructor is well-prepared for each class session Yes, always 5 4 3 2 1 No, never
2 How would you characterize the instructor’s ability to explain and to answer questions? Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor
3 Is the instructor’s use of blackboard and other materials (handouts, etc.) helpful? Yes, very 5 4 3 2 1 Not at all
4 Assignments are returned with explanations of errors and suggestions for improvement Yes, very 5 4 3 2 1 Not at all
5 The instructor is easily approachable when students have class-related questions Very much 5 4 3 2 1 Not at all
6 The instructor defines the objectives of the class session Yes, always 5 4 3 2 1 No, never
7 Rate the instructor’s overall teaching effectiveness Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor
A What is helping you learn in this section? What is the instructor doing best to help you learn? [Comment Box]
B What are some things in this section that are barriers to your learning? If the instructor is doing anything to hinder your learning, please describe it
C What changes would you suggest to enhance this section? [Comment Box]
Source: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 155
The University of Illinois mandates student evaluations of teaching at the end of each semester, utilizing the “Instructor & Course Evaluation System” (ICES) for this purpose This internally-developed tool serves as the official evaluation method for faculty and teaching assistants across campus, aiding in course improvement as well as playing a crucial role in promotion and tenure reviews, teaching award decisions, and student registration assistance While both paper and online versions of ICES are available, the paper format is being gradually phased out.
UIUC’s ICES provides a strong statistical tool in assessing teaching effectiveness This is due to its longevity at the institution as well as its generally strong design ad customizability The
CTE also provides a variety of research into the broader efficacy of student evaluations in assessing teaching effectiveness to confirm the validity of the ICES tool 157
ICES has developed a large question bank for instructors to use in their individual evaluations Furthermore, many departments have a core of questions required to be asked
155 “Sample 1: Informal Early Feedback.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://cte.illinois.edu/teacheval/ief/Sample%201.pdf
156 “Instructor and Course Evaluation System.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign http://cte.illinois.edu/teacheval/ices/main.html
The ICES system at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign aims to evaluate teaching effectiveness through student ratings, a method studied since the 1920s Despite its sound structure, ICES is not a flawless system and should be used alongside other evaluation methods such as classroom observations and learning outcomes assessments Common misperceptions about ICES exist, and further information can be accessed through the ICES FAQ page For additional concerns regarding the ICES process, instructors are encouraged to reach out via email or phone.
Finally, the CTE has created four complete, pre-designed evaluation forms for easy usage by instructors 159
A paper version of one side of a basic pre-designed ICES evaluation form is presented in
Figure 6.2: Side 1 of a Basic ICES Paper Student Evaluation
Source: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 160
158 “Departments with Core Items.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://cte.illinois.edu/teacheval/ices/pdf/department_with_cores.pdf
159 “ICES Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs).” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign http://cte.illinois.edu/teacheval/ices/faq_answers.html#quest7
The other side of the form presented in Figure 6.2 above offers a variety of more qualitative questions to students similar to those in the IEF student evaluation form
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) enhances its ICES evaluations by utilizing student focus groups to collect additional feedback on teaching effectiveness This valuable input is accessible to individual faculty members to aid in improving their teaching practices, although it may also be incorporated into the formal evaluation process.
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign utilizes diverse evaluation methods to assess teaching effectiveness, primarily informed by the analysis of promotion and tenure review guidelines These reviews incorporate multiple teaching evaluation methods, which are systematically analyzed to ensure comprehensive assessments.
The ICES data, along with a self-review by the candidate, includes documentation of courses taught, instructional materials, and various assessments such as peer observations and surveys from former students, providing comprehensive evidence of student learning outcomes.
In promotion and tenure evaluations, candidates are required to submit a personal statement that outlines their teaching philosophy, methods, strengths, challenges, and goals This statement serves as a crucial context for colleagues to effectively interpret other evaluative materials.
To effectively support student evaluation information, it is essential to document course materials, including syllabi, bibliographies, textbooks, test questions, and grading policies Additionally, data regarding student withdrawals from the course can provide valuable insights for evaluation purposes.
UIUC advocates for peer observations as an effective method for evaluating instructors, suggesting that at least two faculty members observe a course multiple times The campus is promoting the broader implementation of this practice, encouraging collaboration with peers from other institutions not just during promotion evaluations, but throughout a faculty member's entire career at Illinois.
Surveys and questionnaires from former students offer a unique perspective that contrasts with the views of current students, making them a valuable component of the evaluation process Recommendations from UIUC emphasize the importance of incorporating feedback from alumni to enhance the overall assessment of instructional effectiveness.
160 “Paper Version of ICES.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://cte.illinois.edu/teacheval/ices/images/questfront.jpg
161 “Course Evaluation Focus Groups.” Center for Teaching Excellence University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://cte.illinois.edu/teacheval/ices/focus.html
162 “Promotion and Tenure: Office of the Provost Communication No 9.” Op cit., pp 11-12
165 Ibid., p 11 are to be used, there should be relatively large scale outreach to these individuals, as a small number are not typically useful in evaluations 166
At UIUC, various measures of student learning play a crucial role in promotion and tenure reviews Key indicators include the 167 measures from the unit's outcomes assessment program that directly relate to the candidate's work, exceptional awards or recognition received by the candidate's students, evidence of student success in subsequent coursework, and evaluations of student work products such as exams, papers, artwork, and performances.
Adjunct instructors at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign have access to the same assessment opportunities as their full-time counterparts When eligible for promotion, they undergo a comparable evaluation process using similar tools However, the university has not established targeted initiatives specifically for adjunct faculty members.
D EVELOPMENT S UPPORT AND I NCENTIVES FOR T EACHING E XCELLENCE
University of Michigan
The University of Michigan has long supported initiatives to improve teaching effectiveness
Founded in 1962, the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT) is the oldest teaching center in the United States, exemplifying effective assessment and development of teaching practices at the University.
I NDICATORS AND A SSESSMENT OF T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
The University of Michigan utilizes various methods to evaluate teaching effectiveness, including student evaluations and peer reviews These assessments aim to enhance faculty performance and inform decisions regarding re-appointment, promotion, tenure, salary, and awards Each department has tailored its own evaluation systems and tools to effectively measure teaching quality.
Student evaluations are important tools in teacher assessment at the University of
Michigan They are used for both the improvement of teaching as well as in personnel decisions
The Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT) provides mid-semester feedback opportunities to help instructors enhance their teaching effectiveness This feedback is available through two methods: the small group method and the survey method.
The small group method is the primary strategy employed by CRLT for collecting midterm feedback, facilitating a dialogue between a CRLT consultant and students after a brief class session conducted by the instructor.
At the start of the class period, the consultant arrives and observes until about 25 minutes remain At this point, the instructor hands over the session to the consultant, who outlines the procedure and its purpose before dividing the students into groups of four or five.
Each group is provided with a sheet containing two key questions: "What are the major strengths of this course?" and "What changes could enhance your learning experience?" This feedback aims to identify the course's strengths while also suggesting improvements to better support student learning.
188 “About CRLT.” Center for Research on Learning and Teaching University of Michigan http://www.crlt.umich.edu/aboutcrlt/aboutcrlt
189 “8.B.4 Evaluations of Teaching.” University of Michigan Faculty Handbook University of Michigan http://www.provost.umich.edu/faculty/handbook/8/8.B.html#8.B.4
190 “Guidelines for Evaluating Teaching.” Center for Research on Learning and Teaching University of Michigan http://www.crlt.umich.edu/tstrategies/guidelines
The University of Michigan's Center for Research on Learning and Teaching offers a "Midterm Student Feedback" program, where student responses are collected and shared with the entire class A consultant documents this feedback, which is later discussed with the instructor to enhance the learning experience.
The second method for midterm feedback involves more general survey questions to distribute to the class: 193
CRLT consultants collaborate with instructors to create a concise survey featuring both closed- and open-ended questions These surveys can be quickly distributed to students during lectures, conducted electronically using clickers or laptops, or sent out via email for responses outside of class After gathering the results, the consultant analyzes the data and discusses its implications with the instructor.
For Evaluation and Personnel Decisions: The University of Michigan offers online teaching questionnaires to students These are organized and offered through the Office of the
Registrar These are to be completed near the end of a semester, prior to final exams 194
Teacher evaluations play a crucial role in promotion and tenure reviews, as well as in enhancing teaching quality The Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT) offers consultation services to assist instructors in analyzing these evaluations effectively.
The University of Michigan utilizes internally-developed teaching questionnaires that can be customized for different departments Many departments already have established core questions, and instructors can add their own as needed Currently, there are more than 1,000 unique questions available, with a maximum of 30 rating questions and five open-ended questions permitted for course evaluations.
The Center for Research on Learning and Teaching offers valuable insights into effectively utilizing and interpreting student evaluation ratings It presents extensive research on the reliability of these evaluations in measuring teaching effectiveness, highlighting their significance in educational assessment.
University does not appear to provide specific details on research into the effectiveness of the specific student evaluation instrument it employs 197
Figure 7.1, on the following page, provides an example of one of these teaching evaluations
194 “Teaching Evaluations.” Office of the Registrar University of Michigan http://www.ro.umich.edu/evals/
195 “Student Evaluations.” Center for Research on Learning and Teaching University of Michigan http://www.crlt.umich.edu/consultations-teaching/student-evaluations
196 “Teaching Evaluations.” Office of the Registrar Op cit
197 “Evaluation of Teaching.” Center for Research on Learning and Teaching University of Michigan http://www.crlt.umich.edu/resources/evaluation-teaching
Figure 7.1: Example Online Student Evaluation for the University of Michigan
The University of Michigan utilizes various assessment tools to evaluate teaching effectiveness, as highlighted in the CRLT's “Guidelines for Evaluating Teaching.” These guidelines advocate for a multi-faceted approach to teacher evaluation, suggesting that student evaluations should be complemented by peer reviews and self-reflection, typically organized within a teaching portfolio.
Promotion and tenure documents at the University lack specific details on the required teaching assessments, yet they mandate the evaluation of teaching in all reviews.
198 “Preview Evaluation.” University of Michigan http://ro.umich.edu/evals/What%20do%20students%20see%20in%20CTools.pdf
199 “Guidelines for Evaluating Teaching.” Center for Research on Learning and Teaching Op cit
200 “8.B.4 Evaluations of Teaching.” University of Michigan Faculty Handbook Op cit
Peer review methods offer valuable insights by allowing knowledgeable peers to assess teaching practices and course materials According to the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT), various peer evaluation techniques can be employed, such as evaluating classroom instruction, analyzing course content, and reviewing instructional contributions These methods facilitate constructive feedback that enhances the overall educational experience.
Instructor self-reflection and teaching portfolios are essential tools for showcasing teaching effectiveness By developing a teaching dossier, instructors can gather and present various information sources that highlight their academic history and teaching practices These portfolios may include course materials, examples of student learning, and feedback, serving as valuable resources for personnel decisions and professional development.
University of Nebraska
The University of Nebraska offers diverse resources for evaluating teaching and enhancing instructional skills, distinguishing itself from other institutions by lacking a centralized administrative unit for teaching and learning Instead, these services are distributed across various departments and units on campus, exemplifying a decentralized approach to supporting effective teaching practices.
I NDICATORS AND A SSESSMENT OF T EACHING E FFECTIVENESS
The University of Nebraska utilizes a multifaceted approach to assess teaching effectiveness, aiming to enhance instructional quality and inform personnel decisions As stipulated by the Bylaws of the Board of Regents, annual evaluations of faculty performance are mandatory across all departments These evaluations, which consider materials compiled by individual faculty members, play a crucial role in determining merit salary adjustments, promotions, and continuous appointments, with a focus on research, scholarship, service, and teaching effectiveness.
Departments have the flexibility to create their own teaching evaluation procedures; however, they are required to incorporate student evaluations alongside other assessment methods This is crucial because student evaluations alone do not fully capture teaching effectiveness Further details on this topic will be elaborated upon in the following sections, particularly within the College of Arts.
Sciences, a variety of assessment methods are recommended, including, but not limited to: self-evaluation, course portfolio, review of teaching materials, and peer evaluation 215
The University of Nebraska enables instructors to carry out student evaluations during the semester to enhance teaching effectiveness Additionally, end-of-semester evaluations gather crucial information for making informed personnel decisions at the University.
The University of Nebraska promotes diverse informal classroom assessment methods aimed at enhancing teaching, particularly for graduate students These alternative assessment strategies are encouraged to foster a more engaging learning environment.
According to the College of Arts and Sciences Handbook from the University of Nebraska, important information can be found on pages 15-16 of the January 2009 edition For detailed guidelines and resources, refer to the official document available at http://cas.unl.edu/adminresources/BylawsJan2009_7-21-2009.pdf.
The University offers graduate teaching instructors comprehensive guidance on effective assessment methods, including informal classroom assessments, questionnaires, surveys, and student interviews, along with advice on their implementation timing.
The Office of Graduate Studies offers graduate students valuable consultation services to enhance teaching effectiveness Experienced consultants analyze student evaluations and surveys, facilitating small group instructional diagnoses that promote interactive feedback discussions Following these sessions, instructors receive a comprehensive report, enabling them to identify areas for improvement and implement necessary changes.
The University offers limited online support and consultation services for faculty members compared to its resources for students However, it does facilitate the use of formal student evaluation tools, such as the "Teaching Analysis by Students" (TABS) surveys, to enhance teaching effectiveness Both mid-semester and end-of-semester evaluations can be collected through these surveys, providing valuable feedback for faculty improvement.
Research and Planning processes and scores TABS surveys for instructors 218
For Evaluation and Personnel Decisions: TABS surveys as well as other student evaluations may be used in promotion, tenure and other personnel decisions at the University of
In Nebraska, instructors within the College of Arts and Sciences have the flexibility to create their own evaluation forms, which can be distributed either in paper format during class or online These evaluation forms must address six key issues to ensure comprehensive assessment.
1 The instructor's handling of the class
2 The instructor's skill in communication
3 The student's perception of the extent of the learning experience
4 The degree to which the student feels interest and/or thinking has been stimulated
5 Whether the faculty member has treated students with fairness and respect
6 Whether students treated the instructor fairly and respectfully
The specific questions available for instructors to use in determining these are established by individual departments 220
The University lacks transparency regarding the statistical validity of student evaluation measures used by its departments Additionally, unlike other institutions, it does not offer insights into the broader literature that explores the relationship between student evaluations and teaching effectiveness.
216 “Assessing Your Teaching.” Graduate TA Handbook University of Nebraska http://www.unl.edu/gtahandbook/assessing-your-teaching
217 “Gathering Feedback on Your Teaching.” Office of Graduate Studies University of Nebraska http://www.unl.edu/gradstudies/current/teaching/feedback
218 “Teacher Evaluations.” Office of Institutional Research & Planning University of Nebraska http://irp.unl.edu/examination-services/teacher-evaluations
219 College Handbook: The College of Arts and Sciences University of Nebraska Op cit., p 16
Figure 8.1, below, outlines an example student evaluation form In this case, this evaluation form is used by the math department at the University of Nebraska
Figure 8.1: Student Evaluation of Math Course at the University of Nebraska
1 Do the classroom procedures and the discussions seem well- planned?
4) Always 3) Often 2) Sometimes 1) Seldom 0) Never
2 Are the instructor's presentations and explanations helpful in understanding the material?
4) Always 3) Often 2) Sometimes 1) Seldom 0) Never
3 Grading policies were: 4) Clearly stated
4 Could a student get individual help from this instructor?
4) Yes, definitely 3) Usually 2) Sometimes 1) Seldom 0) Definitely not
5 During lectures, does the instructor make suitable adjustments when the class becomes lost or confused?
4) Always 3) Often 2) Sometimes 1) Seldom 0) Never
6 Does the instructor seem interested in this subject and in teaching it?
3) Yes, usually 2) Hard to tell 1) Not much 0) Not at all
7 Has work done in this class helped you to solve course problems on your own?
3) Yes, usually 2) Hard to tell 1) Not much 0) Not at all
8 What is your overall impression of the quality of instruction in this course?
4) Excellent 3) Very good 2) Good 1) Fair 0) Poor
9 Does the instructor's way of speaking and personal mannerisms interfere with effective teaching?
4) Never 3) Rarely 2) Occasionally 1) Frequently 0) Nearly always
10 How would you describe the pace of this course?
4) Very slow 3) Slow 2) About right 1) Rather fast 0) Very fast Source: University of Nebraska 221
At the University of Nebraska, there is recognition that student evaluations are one of a number of tools that must be used when attempting to gauge teaching effectiveness The
221 This is drawn from a graduate student’s report on her student evaluations, see “Courtney Gibbons; Data and
Comments from Student Evaluations.” University of Nebraska, p 2 http://www.math.unl.edu/~s- cgibbon5/teaching/teachingdata.pdf
The University promotes diverse assessment techniques to accurately evaluate a teacher's effectiveness The College of Arts and Sciences recommends that instructors compile materials from various assessment methods when creating their teaching portfolio A comprehensive array of suggested assessment methods is provided to enhance this process.
Self-evaluation by the individual faculty member
Information about the quality of student work in later courses in sequentially organized disciplines
Growth and development of students in regard to course objectives as measured by pre- and post-testing
Course portfolio documenting evidence of student performance in a particular course
Review of teaching materials in terms of the currency, academic soundness, relationship with course objectives, and level
Peer assessment of course design, instructional materials and examinations
Implementing a peer evaluation program through classroom visitation requires specific safeguards to ensure fairness and transparency The selection of visitors should be made by the departmental chair or school director in consultation with the faculty member, ensuring that only appropriate faculty responsible for performance reviews are involved Faculty members have the right to invite additional observers from the relevant faculty for their evaluations A written checklist outlining the dimensions to be assessed by observers must be created by the department Furthermore, faculty members are entitled to review the observers' reports prior to submission to the chairperson or relevant faculty committee, allowing them to provide a written response that will be included with the report.
Analysis of impact on teaching of the discipline
Number of graduate student research projects and/or theses and dissertations supervised
222 Taken verbatim from College Handbook: The College of Arts and Sciences University of Nebraska Op cit., pp 16-
The University of Nebraska lacks dedicated assessment tools for adjunct instructors; however, like other faculty, they undergo annual reviews Additionally, student evaluations are collected for every course taught by these instructors.
D EVELOPMENT S UPPORT AND I NCENTIVES FOR T EACHING E XCELLENCE
The University of Nebraska offers various support and incentives for teaching excellence, although these resources are less publicized compared to other institutions Despite this, faculty initiatives, development opportunities, awards, and grants are available, equipping educators with essential tools and incentives to enhance their teaching practices effectively.