Multifaceted Evaluation of Teaching
"When teaching is viewed as professional knowledge there must be an accepted way to define characteristics of teaching excellence and to make judgments based on a stated set of criteria and standards that reflect the complexity of teaching" (Chism, 2007, p. 13).
Peer review is one way to address multifaceted evaluation of teaching. It can include not only peer observations, but also assessment of a teaching portfolio which could consist of curricula vitae, student evaluations, syllabi and other course artefacts, and reflections on teaching. There are two very different forms of peer review: formative and summative.
Formative evaluation is oriented solely towards the improvement of teaching and is part of instructional mentorship and development. CTL supports formative evaluation through our Peer Consultation Program.
Summative evaluation is typically tied to decisions related to reappointment, promotion, or tenure. If initiating a peer review process, it is important to be clear about the purpose and to have different peers involved in each form of assessment.
CTL Documents
Read (CTL blog posts)
We Need to Talk About TeachingJanuary 17, 2018 |
||
USRIs - What are they good for?March 27, 2019 |
Listen (podcasts)
Teaching ObservationsOctober 15, 2019 Multifaceted Evaluation of TeachingMarch 13, 2019 In this episode, we discuss a multifaceted approach to evaluating teaching with the help of Keith King and Vice Provost of Learning Initiatives, Sarah Forgie. |
View (presentations)
Recognizing and rewarding excellent teaching: yes it's hard and yes it can be doneAugust 19, 2019 This presentation will provide an overview of the work that is taking place in Australia on defining criteria and standards for excellence in teaching, research and service, and with the goal of making an impact on students' learning and engagement. |
||
Achievements and Challenges of UBC's Peer Review of Teaching Initiative: A View from the Faculty of ArtsMay 7, 2015 The University of British Columbia embarked upon a Peer Review of Teaching (PRT) Initiative in 2010. This talk describes the origins, process of implementation, and outcomes to date of the initiative, focusing on the challenges and opportunities in the large and diverse Faculty of Arts. |
Tools
- Follmer Greenhoot A., Ward, D., & Bernstein, D. (2017). Benchmarks for Teaching Effectiveness. https://cte.ku.edu/sites/cte.ku.edu/files/docs/Branding/Benchmarks/BenchmarkswRubricwCCUpdated.pdf
- Palmer, M. S., Bach, D. J., & Streifer, A. C. (2014). Measuring the promise: A learning‐focused syllabus rubric. To Improve the Academy, 33(1), 14-36. https://doi.org/10.1002/tia2.20004
- Smith, M.K., Jones, F.H.M., Gilbert, S.L., and Wieman, C.E. (2013). The classroom observation protocol for undergraduate STEM (COPUS): A new instrument to characterize university STEM classroom practices. Cell Biology Education-Life Sciences Education, 12 (Winter), 618-627. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-08-0154 *also applicable in other contexts
Other Resources
- Chism, N.V. (2007). Peer review of teaching: A sourcebook (2nd edition). Bolton MA: Anker Publications.
- Boysen, G. A. (2016). Using student evaluations to improve teaching: Evidence-Based Recommendations. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 2(4), 273-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/stl0000069
- Linse, A. R. (2017). Interpreting and using student ratings data: Guidance for faculty serving as administrators and on evaluation committees. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 54, 94-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.12.004
- Haave, N. (2017). Assessing Teaching to Empower Learning. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 10, iii-x. http://dx.doi.org/10.22329/celt.v10i0.4910