This page offers clarification and updates to A&S personnel policies.
A&S fulfills CU’s statutory mission to “recognize the exceptional opportunities associated with its role as a research university, and value the unique strength and character research achievements bring to undergraduate education” through “educate[ing] the next generation of citizens and leaders.”
CU Board of Regents Policy 5.D.3 locates with units the authority for establishing, updating, and disseminating clear expectations for teaching evaluation.
Effective in spring 2022, A&S has committed to evaluating teaching quality by three dimensions: scholarly, inclusive, and goal-oriented. To make the evaluation of these dimensions explicit, routine, and equitable, departments should identify a scholarly framework suitable to disciplinary context, communicate expectations, and use evidence from multiple voices, including but not limited to students, peers, and the self. In so doing, the college demonstrates commitment to supporting faculty as teachers and as professionals who continually seek to improve their craft.
Evaluating Teaching Quality
Departmental policies and procedures for evaluating teaching:
- identify discipline-specific frameworks & measures aligned with unit culture & practices;
- define & publish evaluation processes/timelines for any teaching faculty;
- specify standards, expectations, & levels of accomplishment to evaluate teaching for merit, reappointment, tenure, & promotion.
To these ends, each disciplinary academic unit should
> Identify, Approve, and Disseminate Standards for Teaching Evaluation
At CU, academic units are responsible for establishing and disseminating clear expectations for teaching. Each A&S unit should develop disciplinarily aligned, agreed upon processes and procedures for teaching assessment. The Quality Teaching Initiative landing page offers resources support departments to do the work.
Evaluation plans should clearly
- specify standards, timelines, processes, and expectations for merit evaluations, reappointment, tenure, and promotion for all those teaching, starting at hire;
- distinguish between levels of accomplishment (e.g. meritorious versus excellent teaching);
- demonstrate use of frameworks and measures consistent with discipline-specific culture, content, and practices;
- identify a cycle and process for continuous improvement of teaching evaluation (for both individuals and for academic units, e.g. through the ARPAC process).
> Use a Scholarly Framework
Structured, clearly defined, agreed-upon tools and processes for evaluating teaching within the discipline support consistency, equity, and continuous professional growth. As A&S updates teaching evaluation processes, units will select their preferred scholarly framework to evaluate instruction.
Rubrics are one example of a scholarly framework. A&S has identified three dimensions– Inclusive, Scholarly, Goal-Oriented–of evaluating teaching quality. Units are free to identify other dimensions appropriate to evaluate teaching in the discipline. Each targeted dimension should be included in the department’s scholarly framework. This example rubric demonstrates how departments can operationalize QTI’s three dimensions of teaching quality.
How units use evidence within their chosen scholarly framework will inform performance evaluation of discipline faculty across various roles and career stages. These resources support departments to do the work.
> Employ Multiple Measures in Evaluations
A&S units should draw evidence of teaching effectiveness from at least three “voices”: students, peers, and self. Other measures are also possible as departments see fit.
For student voice, FCQs or other approved tools can capture students’ perspectives and offer actionable feedback on teaching. Student interviews and/or letters offer rich and useful evidence about teaching so long as students receive mindful guidance.
Peer review that uses structured tools and approaches can offer robust evidence to evaluate teaching.
Self-reflection—such as in a teaching portfolio—allows instructors to engage mindfully about their teaching, contextualize peer and student observations, and share information about student outcomes and experiences with professional development or pedagogical innovations.
These resources support departments to do the work.