1. DCB Annual Review of Teaching Performance Proposal for New Metrics for Review of Teaching Performance

2. For the Annual Review Current Performance Process Scholarship points; Service points; Ranking of SETs for the year Prior attempts to revise Peer review of each person – too time consuming Adjust SETs based upon courses taught New format will add to the current ranking of SETs for the year In order to obtain a more sophisticated, holistic measure of teaching performance

3. Teaching Metric Taskforce Efforts - Tommi J., Sharon L., Jenn L. and Paul O. Reviewed the “literature”, other school’s efforts & brainstormed Basic goals for the approach: 1.Add to the reliance on a single metric (i.e., SETs) for merit review 2.Capture APT’s broader evaluation 3.Relatively easy to collect at the end of year 4.Enhance the dialogue between faculty and department chairs 5.Customizable by units (e.g., metrics and implementation) 6.Does not replace more detailed, developmental processes

4. Settled on Adapting the Balanced ScoreCard (BSC) Kaplan & Norton (1992) Performance consists of four “buckets” Financial – “How do we look to our shareholders?” Profits are a “trailing indicator” Customer Satisfaction – “How do we look to our customers?” Internal Business Processes – “What do we need to do well?” Innovation, Learning and Growth – “How can we continue to improve?” Worked to adapt these to teaching metrics

5. Teaching Performance Balance Scorecard Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs" Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments" Innovation, Learning, and Growth "Engage in continuous improvement" Customer Satisfaction "Meet student expectations"

6. 2 Exceeds Expectations 1 Meets Expectations 0 Does not meet Expectations

7. Customer Satisfaction Meet student expectations (SETs) 25% Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs" Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments " Innovation, Learning, and Growth "Engage in continuous improvement" Customer Satisfaction "Meet student expectations"

8. Meet student expectations: Student evaluation of Teaching Current Approach SET scores Convert the % in top 3 boxes to a scale of 0-2 Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs " Customer Satisfaction "Meet student expectations"

9. Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs " Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments " Innovation, Learning, and Growth "Engage in continuous improvement" Customer Satisfaction "Meet student expectations" Stakeholder Assessment Meet student needs 25%

10. Meet student needs: Course quality assurance Examples: Course is appropriately challenging Connects student learning objectives to curriculum Aligns activities & assessments to the student learning objectives Includes active learning strategies where appropriate Supports equity, diversity, and inclusivity Uses current & diverse course material where appropriate Adheres to policies Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs "

11. Meet student needs: Faculty member Engages in Assurance of Learning Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs "

12. Meet student needs: Evaluation This will be the Chair’s/Department’s evaluation Data will come from: Review of syllabi; Grade distribution; Add questions to student evaluations about the degree of challenge in the course Written comments by students Discussions with faculty members Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs "

13. Internal Processes Fulfill Teaching Commitments 25% Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs" Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments" Innovation, Learning, and Growth "Engage in continuous improvement" Customer Satisfaction "Meet student expectations"

14. Fulfill teaching commitments A departments/school expectation for preps, courses, and students taught/course Rubric assessment reflects performance on a number of possible factors (next) Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments"

15. Fulfill teaching commitments This will be the Chair’s/Department’s evaluation Data will come from: Expectations by department for Faculty Member Information supplied by Faculty Member Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments"

16. Fulfill teaching commitments Examples of Factors Number of preps, courses, and students taught/course Teaching breadth: teaching multiple or advanced programs, instead of only UG programs; engaging in evening, early morning, or weekend teaching; hybrid or online teaching; travel classes Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments"

17. Fulfill teaching commitments More examples Participating in the core and/or integrated courses (e.g., Compass; Gateway; EVM) Good teaching citizenship: Overload teaching; covering a class for someone; guest lecturing Student engagement outside of classroom Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments"

18. Innovation, Learning, & Growth Engage in continuous improvement 25% Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs" Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments " Innovation, Learning, and Growth "Engage in continuous improvement" Customer Satisfaction "Meet student expectations"

19. Engage in continuous improvement Course and Curricular Innovation Integration of new instructional methods Course redesign or development Leadership in department, college, or university curriculum development or redesign Innovation, Learning, and Growth "Engage in continuous improvement"

20. Engage in continuous improvement Professional Development Efforts made to improve one’s teaching skills Offering significant mentoring to help someone else improve teaching skills Leading professional workshops on teaching practices Innovation, Learning, and Growth "Engage in continuous improvement"

21. Engage in continuous improvement Evaluation This will be the Chair’s/Department’s evaluation Data will come from self-reported annual review information, peer review processes Innovation, Learning, and Growth "Engage in continuous improvement"

22. Closing Comments Each faculty will be scored on a scale of 0-8 The rank within the teaching system will be combined with Scholarship and Service points (same as before) Pilot this in the fall – no impact on merit but a chance to test the process Questions? Stakeholder Assessment "Meet student needs" Internal Processes "Fulfill teaching commitments" Innovation, Learning, and Growth "Engage in continuous improvement" Customer Satisfaction "Meet student expectations"