1. Each faculty unit is invited to
nominate candidates for the annual University Alumni Outstanding Teaching
Awards. Each unit is to determine its
own method for selecting nominees based on Faculty Senate Resolution #91-29,
"Seven Characteristics of Effective Teaching" (attached), and should
allow consideration of any eligible faculty member who requests consideration
for nomination. No more than one nominee
for each ten faculty members in the academic unit can be nominated for the
award.
2. Faculty members are eligible to be
nominated for one of the three Outstanding Teaching awards, as well as, for one
of the six Board of Governors Distinguished Professor
for Teaching Awards and the one Board of Governors Award for Excellence in
Teaching. Information on the selection
procedures for the Board of Governors’ awards may be obtained from the Center
for
3. Any full-time faculty member who has
taught at ECU for 3 or more years is eligible to be considered for a teaching
award. Four years must have elapsed
before a faculty member who has won can be considered again. Award recipients will be invited to place
their portfolios and videotapes in the Center for
4. An announcement on the upcoming call
for nominees will be distributed to all faculty and unit code administrators
each year by the end of Spring semester. Deadlines for
the submission of these materials will be specified in the call letter for
nominees each year. An official call for
nominees will be distributed to unit code administrators at the beginning of
the Fall semester. This call will include a brief
statement that each unit is to determine their own method for selecting
nominees. Nomination letters from the
unit code administrators must be received in the Faculty Senate office no later
than September 15 of each year (September 15, 2008). The nomination letter should include a
listing of the names and departments of all nominees to the Ad Hoc Teaching
Awards Committee via the Faculty Senate office.
Nominated faculty who wish to pursue the award should submit the portfolio
of all evaluative materials to the Faculty Senate office no later than November
1 of each year (November 3, 2008). The Ad Hoc committee chair will forward
format guidelines to each candidate.
5. The candidate, once nominated by the
unit, should provide the following portfolio of evaluative materials to the Ad
Hoc Teaching Awards Committee:
A. 2-page
cover letter describing his/her teaching philosophy, including efforts for
effective teaching and learning,
B. current
nomination letter from the unit code administrator,
C. list
of all courses taught over the past 3 years, average credit/contact hours per
semester, and representative samples of course outlines, tests, and teaching
materials. Samples do not have to
include all courses taught,
D. student
evaluations for the past 3 years, and the corresponding grade distributions for
each course;nominees will be
provided a format for the summary SOIS student ratings,
E. peer
evaluations, if available, or other approved evaluation methods as listed in
Faculty Senate Resolution #91-28, "Methods for Assessing Teaching
Effectiveness" (attached), and
F. 3
letters of support from former students (not to exceed 2 double-spaced pages
each). Include names, addresses, phone
numbers of students, and the title and date of course attended.
Please note that
finalists for the award will also be
asked to provide a video tape showing them teaching a portion of a class. The Chair of the Ad Hoc Teaching Awards
Committee will contact the finalists at a later date concerning arrangements
for making videotapes. The total packet of materials submitted to
the Ad-Hoc Teaching Awards Committee is not
to exceed 50 single-sided pages. All materials must be up-to-date, using at
least a size 12-font and be double-spaced.
The course materials, counted in the 50 single-sided page limit, do not
have to be in a size 12-font or be double-spaced. Packets that do not follow all specified
guidelines will be eliminated from consideration.
6. The
Ad Hoc Teaching Awards Committee will consist of 2 members elected from the
7. The final pool of at most twelve
applicants will be contacted by the chair of the Ad Hoc Teaching Awards
Committee. A copy of this correspondence
will also be sent to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Vice
Chancellor for Health Sciences for their information. Finalists must provide a videotape showing
them teaching a portion of a class. The
video segment submitted to the committee must be fifteen to twenty consecutive minutes
in length, must include at least one pan of the students, and must have been
recorded within the past 3 semesters. The date, time, and class must be indicated on
the video tape. The finalists will be
given 3 to 4 weeks to provide the video tape.
8. The Ad Hoc Teaching Awards Committee
will evaluate the materials, including the video tapes, and by scoring
determine the 3 winning candidates. Once
determined, the Committee will randomly choose one recipient to receive one of
the alumni teaching awards.
9. The names of the winning candidates
will be announced during the annual teaching awards ceremony that is
held at the
end of the Spring semester. The
finalists will be publicly recognized at that time.
Selection
Procedures for the Alumni Outstanding University Teaching Awards
(attachments 1 and 2)
SEVEN CHARACTERISTICS OF EFFECTIVE TEACHING
Good Organization of Subject Matter and Course: Reflected in the objectives, course materials,
assignments, examinations, instructor preparation for class, and effective use
of class time.
Effective Communication: Reflected in lecturing ability including use of
motivational techniques such as audiovisual aids, clarity of presentation, verbal fluency,
interpretation of abstract ideas, good speaking ability, good listening skills,
and the ability to communicate the organization and sequence of a course.
Knowledge of and Enthusiasm for the Subject Matter and
Teaching: Reflected in the choice of textbook, readings
and reference lists, lecture content, course syllabus, and personal interest
displayed in the subject and in teaching.
Positive Attitudes Toward Students: Reflected by helping students master subject matter,
encouraging students to ask questions and express opinions, being accessible to
students outside the classroom, and expressing a general concern for student learning.
Fairness in Examinations and Grading: Reflected in clarity
of student assessment procedures including papers, assignments, exams,
classroom discussion, and other activities, including relative weight toward
grade, consistency among objectives, course content, and assessment procedures,
and timely, useful feedback on student progress.
Flexibility in Approaches to Teaching: Reflected in the use
of alternative teaching strategies such as small group discussion, simulations,
use of audiovisual materials, and varying the approach and pace of instruction
to meet different learning styles among students.
Appropriate Student Learning Outcomes: Reflected in student
performance on various assessment measures and positive changes in student
attitudes and values.
METHODS FOR ASSESSING TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS
Academic Unit
Implementation Plans endorse The University's Strategic Plan Goal that Academic
Units employ more than one approach when assessing the teaching effectiveness
of faculty members. Appendix C of the Faculty Manual requires that a
survey of student opinion of instruction be used in evaluating teaching
effectiveness. Appendix C permits the
use of other methods and procedures when initiated by the Unit and recommended
by the Faculty Senate and approved by the Chancellor. The methods outlined below are examples of
additional approaches for assessing teaching effectiveness which units may
adopt. These assessment methods are
adapted from the manual, A Guide to Evaluation
of Teaching for Promotion and Tenure published by
ADDITIONAL
METHODS OF EVALUATING TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS
Annual Goals Assessment: An annual agreement
with the unit administrator where specific goals are set that
contribute to effective classroom teaching. Such goals might include, but are not limited
to, updating syllabus and reading lists, developing study guides, implementing
new instructional procedures, and incorporating components of writing/critical
thinking into course. The unit
administrator will evaluate progress related to the agreed‑upon goals at
the end of the academic year.
Faculty Report: A description of
teaching activities including, but not limited to, the names and numbers of
courses taught, number of students taught and advised, services on
thesis/dissertation committees, involvement with instructional development
activities, descriptions of teaching methods, and other activities that bear on
the effectiveness of the unit's educational program. (Much of this information is currently part
of the annual report.)
Analysis of Instructional and Other Materials: Review by the unit
administrator and/or peers of course materials including syllabi, reading
lists, outlines, examinations, audiovisual materials, student manuals, samples
of student's work on assignments, projects, and papers. Other materials prepared
for or relevant to instruction.
Instructor-Generated Evaluations: Instructor‑generated
evaluation procedures, such as checklists, survey‑type instruments,
videotapes of class sessions, and written entries reflecting on teaching
techniques and philosophy.
Classroom Observations: Direct observation of classroom teaching or
observation of videotaped class sessions by peers or experts. Several techniques help to make observations
objective: use of an observation guide
or structured process determined by the unit for observations; a number of
observations before final report is prepared; observations and reports by at
least two observers; observation by those outside the faculty member's
immediate unit.
Structured Interviews with Former Students: Face‑to‑face,
telephone, group interviews, or surveys asking for comments on current or
former professors. Broad questions, such as the following, are
asked to solicit overall evaluation statements:
Describe why you would recommend (or not recommend) Professor X's class
to a friend? How did Professor X's class
prepare you for advanced work in the subject?
What is your overall assessment for Professor X?
Measures of Student Achievement: In the case of multi‑section
courses with a diagnostic pretest and a final examination that both measure
abilities in a similar way, student improvement may be used as a measure of
teaching effectiveness. In addition,
multi‑section courses that use an identical final examination for all
sections make possible a comparison of relative teaching effectiveness of
individual faculty where observed patterns hold over five or more
semesters.