All faculty should thoroughly and regularly review Policy 635 § 4.5 to understand
their rights and responsibilities in teaching, as well as Policy 601: 课堂教学与管理，概述了弗吉尼亚大学的教学标准和程序。 These policies
constitute the baseline expectations for teaching, which will be evaluated each year
in faculty annual performance reviews.
Beyond these baseline expectations, faculty should strive for teaching excellence by working to make their classes more inclusive and engaging and focused on student achievement (see 卓越教学模式 below). Faculty should also be aware of how their teaching will be evaluated per their approved department RTP criteria.
卓越教学模式与同侪评估
Faculty members should regularly review the UVU 教学卓越 model created by the 教师参议院 Advancement of Teaching Standing Committee and use annual reviews and the tenure and rank advancement processes to document the development of their teaching in the domains of inclusion, engagement, and student achievement.
教师还必须对他们的教学进行严格的同行评估。 The Advancement of Teaching Committee has created a peer-assessment process and form to assist faculty in meeting this obligation.
卓越教学模式和同行评估 过程和形式可以在 UVU教学卓越.
专业发展
Faculty are required to demonstrate that they have participated in professional development to improve their teaching when they apply for tenure (Policy 637 § 5.6.1.4). Opportunities to evaluate and improve teaching are available through the 教与学办公室 and through the Office of Academic Affairs (contact [email protected]).
学生教学评分
学生教学评分 (SRIs) are an important piece in evaluating and improving teaching.
However, at UVU we are well aware that the information presented by SRIs varies widely in validity and reliability. Some of these issues operate at an institutional level, as the university does not require students to complete SRIs; thus, some courses may be evaluated by only a few students, calling into question any numbers reported. Moreover, SRI scores and comments have been shown in multiple studies to be biased by race, gender, sexual orientation, age, nationality, and other demographic factors. And SRI scores can be lower for classes where difficult topics are discussed and those with innovative pedagogies (e.g., student-centered approaches, service learning, online or hybrid modalities).
For these and other reasons, UVU embraces a developmental approach to SRIs in which faculty responses to and contextualization of student comments in annual reviews and reflections within RTP portfolios are more important than the scores themselves. Faculty should demonstrate commitment to continuous development of their teaching through changes to course materials and procedures, professional development, etc., in response to comments in the SRIs.
There is not a University-wide "cutoff score" for SRIs, and UVU administration and the 教师参议院 do not support the use of SRI scores as the sole or most significant determining factor in recommendations and decisions with regard to retention, tenure, or promotion, or in annual reviews, though these scores may serve to draw attention to aspects of a faculty member’s teaching that may need a closer look. Department chairs should work with faculty members each year to identify areas of concern in SRI comments and set goals for improvement in order to ensure teaching excellence and increase student success.
Faculty members should be aware of any requirements regarding SRIs in their approved department RTP criteria.
