The Toolkit provides guidelines, supporting documents, and implementation/application suggestions for all parties involved in the evaluation of teaching.
- Teaching Narrative
- Documentation of Teaching
- List of Courses
- Course Material: Syllabi and Assignments
See the 2017 Syllabus Checklist that serves as a guideline for syllabi at LMU.
- Teaching Effectiveness
- Course Evaluations, aka Student Ratings of Teaching
- Peer Observations
- Assessment of Student Learning (see Teaching Narrative and Assessment Principles)
- Professional Development
- Honors and Awards
- Other Activities such as SoTL Research
[pdf Version - all files combined]
Last Updated 4/23/2013
The Toolkit has been assembled by the Committee on the Comprehensive Evaluation of Teaching (CCET) and submitted to the Committee on Excellence in Teaching (CET) and the Faculty Senate at the end of the spring semester 2013.
Feedback on all documents is welcome - please send to email@example.com.
The Statement on Effective Teaching at LMU has provided a basis for the work of the CCET, inspired also by the 1/26/10 Conversation on Effective Teaching.
The Faculty Senate Committee on the Comprehensive Evaluation of Teaching (CCET) was charged in the spring of 2010 "to investigate, document, and assist with the development of tools for evaluating teaching beyond student evaluations. The committee will analyze different options, develop appropriate guidelines, and make recommendations to the Faculty Senate regarding more comprehensive methods of evaluating teaching at LMU."
The committee's work, as charged by the Senate, is based on the principles that
- A comprehensive evaluation of teaching will require multiple measures, because effective teaching involves multiple dimensions and any particular instrument has definite limitations. Attempting to evaluate teaching ability with a single measure does a disservice both to the university and the faculty member.
- The evaluation of teaching should take place for two purposes: (a) to provide information used to make decisions on retention and merit (i.e., for FSRs) and for applications for advancement to tenure or in rank (summative evaluation) and (b) to provide information that could be used to improve teaching at every stage of a faculty member's career (formative evaluation).