Teaching will meet expectations when it is professional, inclusive, engaged, and research-informed. Teaching quality will be evaluated by unit heads and personnel committees according to these four standards. Quantitative summary data cannot be used as the sole standard for assessing teaching quality. Instead, evaluators will consider supervisor reviews, peer reviews, and faculty self-reflections, in addition to student comments and other materials provided in the candidate statement or teaching portfolio.
Personnel committees and unit heads may use this optional template for the Evaluation of Teaching section of their promotion letters.
Promotion review considers all aspects of an individual’s teaching: classroom instruction, including large and small classes; small group courses or activities and individual tutorials; graduate seminars; curriculum and program development; graduate student, or professional student supervision; academic advising; etc. Materials on teaching should be placed in either the primary file or in the supplementary file as indicated on the checklists and described below.
These materials must be prepared by the unit staff, not the candidate.
1. Teaching Overview Report (Cognos, required)
This report includes:
- a list of all courses taught during the review period
- summary data from numerical student Course Evaluations (2008-2019)
- summary data from Student Experience Surveys (Fall 2019-present)
Note that due to COVID-19, no Student Experience Survey data is available from Spring or Summer 2020.
The teaching overview report can be accessed by academic unit managers through cognos.uoregon.edu, Team Content > Departmental Folders > Provost’s Office > Teaching Evaluation Reports. If you need access to the Cognos reports, send an email firstname.lastname@example.org and include your #95.
2. Pre-2019 Student Comment Report (Eval25, signed student comments from courses prior to Fall 2019, required IF APPLICABLE)
These reports are available from Eval25, accessed via duckweb.uoregon.edu. The report is titled "Pre-2019 Student Comment Report". From Eval25, select Reports > Report Browser > (Select Instruction and all courses in the review window) > Create Batch File > Click Batch Reports > Select "Pre-2019 Student Comment Report" as the Report. The linked instructions provide screenshots to assist you. This report includes all signed student comments drawn from Course Evaluations, which were in use from 2008-2019. If the faculty under review did NOT teach at UO prior to Fall 2019, please include a note in the Primary File Template indicating this as the reason no report is included. If you need access to the reports in Eval25, send an email email@example.com and include your #95.
3. Teaching Detail Report E-SES (Cognos, required) The teaching detail report can be accessed by academic unit staff through cognos.uoregon.edu, Team Content > Departmental Folders > Provost’s Office > Teaching Evaluation Reports
4. Instructor Reflection Report (Cognos, optional) The instructor reflection report can be accessed by academic unit staff through cognos.uoregon.edu, Team Content > Departmental Folders > Provost’s Office > Teaching Evaluation Reports
5. Teaching Awards
The candidate, or the candidate’s CV, may be consulted to ensure all appropriate awards are listed here. If no awards have been received, include a page with the simple notation, “None.”
6. Student Mentorship
List students mentored or supervised for a dissertation, thesis, or undergraduate honor paper. List each type of project separately, and for each project, identify the student, the year, and the candidate’s role (e.g., committee chair, committee member, etc.). A separate listing for exam committees should be provided, if appropriate. If no students have been mentored, include a page with the simple notation, “None.”
7. Peer Review of Teaching
Three Peer Review of Teaching reports are required for a tenure or promotion file.
OtP advises that the frequency of peer review should be as follows:
- Career Instructional Faculty: one peer review of teaching per review period
- Assistant Professor: at least one peer review before the first mid-term review, and at least two peer reviews during each of the three years preceding the faculty member’s tenure review. Three peer reviews are necessary for the promotion and tenure dossier.
- Associate Professor: at least one every other year. Three peer reviews are necessary for the promotion to full dossier.
- Professor: one every three years. NB: Two peer reviews are necessary for 6th-year post-tenure review.
The Office of the Provost recommends units use TEP’s template for Peer Review of Teaching to ensure alignment with the UO Teaching Evaluation Criteria as well as effective and efficient review teaching in remote, online or in-person environments.
At minimum each report must include:
- the faculty member’s name,
- the course number and name,
- the date(s) of the review,
- signature of reviewer,
- signature of the faculty member being reviewed or other indication that they have read the final version (e.g., e-mail communication).
1. Teaching Portfolio (required)
The teaching portfolio, which is provided by the candidate, should be representative, not comprehensive. Candidates often include sample course materials such as syllabi, exams, and homework assignments in order to illustrate their innovative approaches to teaching. Other materials, such as course websites, may also be included.