Go to site navigation | Go to extended navigation | Go to content

SECTION TWO: Teaching

General Information

Originals of students' written comments for the last three years should be included in a separate file, labeled as such, and not included in the dossier.

Budget Council Report

The budget council or executive committee must write a separate report assessing teaching performance, with an explanation of the evaluation procedures and measures used. The statement should include the signatures and typed names of those members of the budget council or executive committee responsible for preparing the teaching assessment and should:

  • describe the faculty member’s principal areas of teaching
  • discuss both student and peer observations/evaluations
  • discuss his or her willingness to teach courses for which there is strong student demand
  • as appropriate, describe the balance between undergraduate and graduate teaching
  • discuss relevant evidence of merit or recognition for teaching excellence
  • reflect familiarity with the teaching portfolio
  • describe participation on graduate committees
  • describe supervision of postdoctoral students, where applicable

Any special circumstances concerning the faculty member’s teaching performance should be considered and any innovative contributions described, e.g.,

  • innovative teaching methods,
  • use of instructional technology, interdisciplinary teaching,
  • innovative curriculum development activities,
  • supervision of undergraduate special project courses

Peer Evaluation Report

A faculty member should review the candidate’s effectiveness as a teacher and cover, for example, such elements as presentation, course content, and student outcomes. This observation should be conducted during a semester previous to the fall, so that the budget council can review the report. The report:

  • should be dated
  • identify the faculty member(s) conducting the classroom observation, the number and title of course observed and the date of the observation
  • identify the method of observation and inquiry used

Reports of all in-class observations while in rank are to be included in the dossier. Peer observations of classes should be conducted periodically for all faculty members but not later than the spring semester preceding the fall in which a candidate for promotion expects to be reviewed. The budget council is to consider the peer observations in their assessment of the candidate's teaching service record. Each peer evaluation/observation report is to:

    1. be dated

    2. identify the faculty member(s) conducting the classroom observation of teaching, the number and title of the course observed, the date(s) of the observation(s); and

    3. explain the methods of observation and inquiry used. Observers are to sign their observation reports.

Information on how to conduct a peer classroom observation is available on the Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment's Web page at:

http://www.utexas.edu/academic/cte/PeerObserve.html

Summary Chart

Include a chart summarizing the candidate’s instructional activities of all courses taught during at least each of the last three years of service.

Assistant Professor candidates for tenure and Instructor candidates for appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor should include a list of all courses taught during the probationary period. The chart should list courses by academic year, course number, title, enrollment, and overall instructor rating. Any team-taught courses and courses with a substantial writing component should be identified.

Course Instructor Survey

Based on the April 21 list of promotion candidates to be submitted by each dean, the Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment will prepare a Summary of Recent Course-Instructor Survey results (i.e., through the 2008 summer term) for each faculty member being considered for promotion. The Summary will be based on the Basic and Expanded CIS forms beginning in fall 2002 and will include the three (3) most recent academic years for Associate Professor candidates (i.e., 2005-06 through 2007-08) and the five (5) most recent academic years (where applicable) for Assistant Professor candidates (i.e., 2003-04 through 2007-08). Summaries for Instructor and non-tenured Associate Professor and full Professor candidates will be based on all years in rank. Candidates who have taught at other institutions during the last three years may submit any evaluations from those courses.

The Summary will include (1) a list of each course taught by academic year and semester, (2) course number and title, (3) 12th Class Day enrollment (4th Class Day for summer courses), and (4) the numbers of students who responded. The report will provide (5) the average (arithmetic mean) for the overall course and instructor ratings for each class surveyed, as well as (6) comparative averages for all classes taught in the college/school during the same period. The provost's office will distribute this information to the deans and department chairs in early June, and department chairs/deans should use the Summary to comply with this requirement, where possible.

If the dean chooses not to use the DIIA Summary, or candidates did not use the Basic or Expanded Form, then the dean is responsible for developing a format for college-wide use.

List of Students Supervised

The Graduate School will prepare a report of students supervised or co-supervised for theses/dissertations and of supervising committee service. The report will include the name of the student supervised or on whose committee the faculty member served, last semester enrolled, degree, field, and year degree was awarded.

Based on the April 21 list of promotion candidates that each dean is to submit to the provost, the Graduate School will prepare a Committee Report Masters and Doctoral for theses/dissertations supervised and supervising committee service. The provost's office will distribute the report to the deans and departments chairs in early September, and departments/deans and shall use it to comply with this requirement.

A list of the names of postdoctoral fellows supervised and the name of the institution that awarded their Ph.D. If no postdoctoral fellows were supervised, provide a statement to this effect (e.g., Postdoctoral fellows supervised: None.)

Originals of all Students' Written Comments for the last three years (i.e., 2005-06 through 2007-08 must be provided separately in a clearly labeled folder (Sample: J.J. Smith, CIS Student Comments).

In addition, provide a list of supervising committees in progress, supervising of postdoctoral fellows, and supervising of undergraduate honors theses.

Each candidate is to develop an extensive teaching portfolio for department or college/school review. The portfolio need not accompany the dossier beyond the dean's office. The following items are examples of materials appropriate for a portfolio: syllabi, handouts, problem sets, and other written materials developed for courses; computer-assisted instructional aids; examinations.

For an informative handout on compiling a teaching portfolio, candidates for promotion may wish to consult the Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment's Web site at http://www.utexas.edu/academic/cte/teachfolio.html

Bookmark and Share