Four Facets of Teaching for Peer Reviewers

Under the Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure Recommendations (2005–2006 Academic Year), KU faculty members who are completing peer reviews are encouraged to address the following four areas:

1. Quality of intellectual content
Is the material in this course appropriate for the topic, appropriate for the curriculum and institution?
Is the content related to current issues and developments in the field? 
Is there intellectual coherence to the course content? 
Are the intellectual goals for students well articulated and congruent with the course content and mission?  

2. Quality of teaching practices
Is the contact time with students well organized and planned, and if so, are the plans carried out? 
How much of the time are students actively engaged in the material? 
Are there opportunities (in or out of class) for students to practice the skills embedded in course goals?  
Are there particularly creative or effective uses of contact time that could improve student understanding? 
Are there any course structures or procedures that contribute especially to the likely achievement of understanding by students?

3. Quality of student understanding
Is the performance asked of students appropriate for course goals, level of course, and for the institution?  
Does the performance requested include challenging levels of conceptual understanding and critical evaluation of the material appropriate to the level of the course and of the students? 
Are students being asked to demonstrate competence in the stated course goals? If not, is it possible to identify why? 
Are there obvious changes in the course that could improve performance? 
Are the forms of evaluation and assessment appropriate to the stated goals of the course? 
Are they particularly creative or do they provide students with opportunities to demonstrate their understanding using intellectual skills typical of the field? 
Is the weighting of course assignments in grade calculation coordinated with the relative importance of the course goals?

4. Summarizing the evidence of reflective consideration and development
Has this faculty member made a sincere effort to insure that students achieve the goals for the course? 
Has the faculty member identified any meaningful relationship between what (s)he teaches and how students perform? 
Is there evidence the faculty member has changed teaching practices based on past teaching experiences? 
Is there evidence of insightful analysis of teaching practice that resulted from consideration of student performance?

As reported in November 2005 issue of Teaching Matters, published by the KU Center for Teaching Excellence.