TARGET
The Advisory Resource Group on Evaluating Teaching
| Teaching: | What is good teaching? | Criteria for evaluating good teaching | |
| Evaluation: | Goals (formative, summative) | Types (peer, student, chair) | Tools (portfolios, forms) |
| Resources: | Resource Master List | Best Practices from Elsewhere | |
| Task Force on Roles and Responsibilties | MRFA Collective Agreement | ||
| Materials from PD Days presentation | |||
Criteria for evaluating teaching fall into two main categories: demonstrable skills, and 'big picture' attibutes.
In the demonstrable skills camp, Arreola breaks down teaching into several component parts, each of which has a number of activities associated with it. He proposes that these activities be noted as present or absent, leading to an overall score.
The Making judgments on teaching, learning and assessment in lessons document develops some qualitative rubrics around concrete actions. While it is directed at schools, rather than postsecondary environments, the structure is useful to look at.
On the attributes, or 'dispositions' (to use Theall's term,) side are guidelines like Chickering and Gamson's, and the one proposed in Glassick et al's Scholarship Assessed. These are broader aspects of teaching that can be reflected in practice in a variety of ways.
Chickering and Gamson's Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education:
Good practice in undergraduate education:
Glassick et al's six standards for evaluating all acts of scholarship - teaching, scholarship and service, boil down to the list below. One of the sources they used to derive these standards were SEI-type instruments.
The aim of the TARGET group is to seek out, evaluate, and, make available to the Mount Royal Community materials which may inform the evaluation of teaching for the purposes of professional development, summative assessment, and/or formal evaluation.
Updated November 25, 2009