P1
Excellence in teaching is judged within the context of the School’s continuing commitment to the highest standard of instruction for its students. Consideration shall be given to the candidate’s commitment to teaching, the quality of the learning environment the candidate creates in the classroom and in individual work with students, and to the rigor of the academic standards encouraged and enforced in all work with students.
Evaluation: By the judgment of students as measured through standard course evaluations; the responses to standard letters sent to a sample of present and former students, requesting their assessment of the candidate’s teaching, including the supervision of graduate student research; and in the case of an ad hoc committee, any information provided by the student members of the committee. Also, by the judgment of qualified colleagues through examination of course syllabi and other related materials.
P2
Submitted by candidate: Provide a statement that describes your philosophy of advising and your approach to effectively mentoring advisees, both undergraduate (if applicable) and graduate (masters or doctoral, as appropriate). You may not independently solicit student letters.
P3 (3-year review)
Submitted by candidate: Provide a statement of the general nature of your teaching activity, describing your primary teaching interests, philosophy, and accomplishments. It is appropriate to provide a thoughtful self-analysis of your performance, particularly in response to course evaluations or feedback from your faculty mentor, and future objectives. This may include goals for instructional design and delivery, course content, evaluation of student learning, and provision of effective feedback to students. If applicable, include a statement describing the nature and extent of your contribution to any courses you co-taught/co-teach.
P4
The candidate should provide a statement describing goals and objectives for his/her teaching. It is appropriate to provide a self-analysis regarding the candidate’s personal view of his/her performance, successes, concerns, and expectations of his/her teaching effort.
P5
A list of courses taught since appointment, with enrollments
A summary of course evaluations16 and student opinion prepared by someone other than the candidate including data on how the candidate’s evaluations compare to those of other
faculty teaching the same or similar courses
Evaluation of the candidate’s teaching by the chair, the director of undergraduate studies, or a faculty committee that visits colleagues’ classes, based on observations of the candidate’s courses and review of course materials (syllabi, reading lists, handouts, non-print materials, problem sets, assignments, graded exams, student research papers, final projects, final grade distribution, examples of written feedback to students)
P6
Departments which compile statistical information on teaching should provide an explanation of the numbers, e.g., departmental mean scores. Departments which use the college’s on-line course evaluation system may include the system’s summary reports for the candidate’s courses, but should still comment on these in the context of departmental norm
P7
A summary of course evaluations16 and student opinion prepared by someone other than the candidate including data on how the candidate’s evaluations compare to those of other
faculty teaching the same or similar courses
Evaluation of the candidate’s teaching by the chair, the director of undergraduate studies, or a faculty committee that visits colleagues’ classes, based on observations of the candidate’s courses and review of course materials (syllabi, reading lists, handouts, non-print materials, problem sets, assignments, graded exams, student research papers, final projects, final grade distribution, examples of written feedback to students)
