COE
Criteria and Procedures for Excellence in
Teaching Award
The Excellence in Teaching Award
Selection Committee of the College of
Education is charged with:
1. Confirming nominees’ eligibility for
Award
2. Reviewing and scoring nominees’ supporting materials
3. Selecting a nominee for
the Award
4. Forwarding the name of the selected
faculty to the Dean
of the COE
5. Conducting one seminar
during the year
related to excellence in teaching
The Committee
consists of the three most recent recipients (or in an emergency
case could be past nominees) of the COE Excellence in Teaching Award. The Associate Dean is responsible for convening the committee on an annual basis. The role of the committee is to select the yearly awardee
for
the Excellence in
Teaching Award.
1.
Nominations
may be submitted at any time to the Office of the Dean of the College of
Education (see sample nomination solicitation announcement below). Nominations
for
each’s year process are considered from those submitted January 1 – December
31 of the previous
year.
2.
By February 1, the nominees
are
notified of their nomination
with notification that their
materials should be submitted
by March 1. Letters of
notification are emailed to all
eligible nominees.
3. The Excellence in Teaching Award
Committee reviews the nominations
and selects one nominee
on the basis of the criteria
for selection identified by the committee in
accordance with university criteria by April
1, which is then forwarded to the Dean.
4.
The Dean
prepares a
letter of nomination to
be submitted along with the nomination
package to
the Quality
of Instruction Council
no later than May
1
(see page
9
of this
document or http://offices.depaul.edu/oaa/faculty-resources/teaching/qic/Pages/Excellence-in-Teaching-Awards.aspx for university guidelines on the Excellence in
Teaching Award).
Nomination
Materials
Material submitted
(in electronic format) by the nominee to the Excellence in Teaching
Award Selection Committee
(by March 1) include:
1.
A copy of the notification
of nomination letter
2.
A copy of the actual nomination letter(s)
3. A copy of the nominee’s
current CV
4.
A personal
statement wherein the nominee
elaborates on his/her teaching philosophy and
performance (a summary of student evaluations
should be addressed in the statement)
5. At least
two
faculty peer reviews
from faculty of the COE or
other schools/colleges within DePaul
6. Samples of student work (limited to 2
samples)
7. Student course evaluations
from the most recent academic year
8. Sample syllabi
9.
Additional
supporting evidence that
speaks to superior teaching (i.e. unsolicited student comments, guest speaking lectures,
teaching seminars, etc.)
Materials submitted by the Excellence in Teaching
Award Selection Committee to the Dean
(by April 1) include:
1.
A letter
from the Excellence in
Teaching Award Committee
highlighting the nominee’s strengths as a teacher and explaining the year’s selection
process, including the members of
the selection committee
2. A sample
of the evaluation rubric used by the Committee
3. A
copy of all of the materials submitted by the nominee
The Dean
prepares a letter of nomination to be submitted along with the nomination
package as outlined
above to the Quality
of Instruction Council no later than May 1.
Further Actions:
1.
The awardee
is recognized through multiple forums
within the COE (i.e. via email
to all faculty/staff, on the COE
website, at a staff/faculty meeting, etc.).
2. This criteria and procedures document should be
posted on a public drive and
will be accessible to all
faculty.
Excellence in Teaching Award Rubric
|
Objectives
|
Exceptional
|
Highly Effective
|
Acceptable
|
Incomplete
|
Earned Points
|
|
Teaching Philosophy Reflection of Teaching
|
4 points
Exemplifies COE criteria for excellence in
teaching & fosters
student learning. Exceptional in meeting
COE teaching and learning goals. Focuses on learner centered education and integration of theory
& practice.
|
3 points
Highly effective in demonstrating
COE criteria for excellence in teaching & fostering
student learning. Meets COE teaching
and learning goals. Focuses
on learner centered education
and integration of theory
& practice.
|
2 points
Proficient in demonstrating COE criteria for
excellence in teaching & fostering student learning. Partially meets teaching
& learning goals.
Partially focuses on learner centered
education & integration of theory
& practice.
|
1 point
Does not demonstrate COE criteria for excellence
in teaching & does not
focus on fostering student learning. Does not focus on COE teaching & learning goals.
|
|
|
COE Mission and Vincentian Personalism
|
4 points
Exceptional
representation of
all the principles of the COE mission and of Vincentian personalism.
|
3 points
Highly effective inclusion of the principles of the COE mission and
of Vincentian personalism.
|
2 points
Acceptable
representation of the principles of the COE mission and of Vincentian personalism. Reflects some inclusion of each
principle but
not in depth.
|
1 point
The
principles of
the mission are not evident. Syllabi
& teaching materials do not reflect
integration of the mission or any relation to Vincentian personalism.
|
|
|
Evidence
of Collaborative Work
|
4 points
Documentation of consistent exceptional
collaborative work with
and between students exemplifies professional development
& collaborative engagement
with students.
|
3 points Documentation of collaborative work demonstrates highly effective
participation in
professional development & research collaboration between self & students.
|
2 points Documentation of collaborative work with students is limited but
demonstrates participation in collaborative efforts.
|
1 point
No documentation of collaborative work between faculty and student
noted.
|
|
|
Bonus
points for course load (taking into account number of preps, supervision,
class sizes):
|
|
|
NAME OF NOMINEE Total points page 1:
|
|
Revised March 2017
|
Objectives
|
Exceptional
|
Highly Effective
|
Acceptable
|
Incomplete
|
Earned Points
|
|
Evaluations and Peer Reviews
|
4 points
Evaluations consistently show highest rated teaching excellence. Peer
reviews exemplifies the teacher's exceptional
capabilities of fostering
student learning as well
as meeting COE teaching & learning goals.
|
3 points
Evaluations consistently reflect accomplished teaching effectiveness. Peer
reviews point to
effectiveness in fostering student learning as well
as meeting COE teaching & learning
goals.
|
2 points
Evaluations reflect acceptable teaching
effectiveness. Peer
reviews show proficiency in fostering student learning as well
as meeting COE teaching
& learning
goals.
|
1 point
Evaluations and peer
reviews do not
reflect acceptable teaching effectiveness or
teacher’s ability
to meet COE teaching & learning goals.
|
|
|
Course & Curriculum Development
|
4 points
Exceptional
representation of
COE excellence in teaching criteria and
fostering student learning. Curricular & course
revisions or
development demonstrates exceptional integration of theory
& practice & learner centered education.
|
3 points
Highly effective in
representing COE excellence in teaching criteria & fostering student learning. Curricular & course revisions or development demonstrate highly effective
integration of theory & practice & student centered
learning.
|
2 points
Acceptable
representation of
COE excellence in teaching criteria & fostering
student learning. Curricular & course
revisions or
development demonstrates an acceptable level
of integration of theory &
practice as well
as student centered learning.
|
1 point
COE criteria for excellence in teaching & fostering student learning are not met. Curricular & course revisions or development don’t reflect integration of theory
& practice or student centered learning.
|
|
|
Improvements in Instructional Practice
|
4 points
Exceptional & innovative instructional practices that fosters student
learning & reflects COE teaching
goals
&/or learner centered education.
|
3 points
Highly effective & innovative instructional practices that fosters student
learning & reflects COE teaching
goals
&/or learner centered education.
|
2 points
Acceptable
instructional practices or instructional practices that
are currently under
development that fosters student
learning & reflects COE teaching
goals
&/or
learner centered ed.
|
1 point
Instructional
practices have not been altered to improve student learning or reflect COE teaching goals &/or
learner centered education.
|
|
|
Other
|
4 points
For example: Past nominee for
Teaching Award, recipient of other recognitions of excellence in teaching, etc
|
3 points
For example: Mentorship of other faculty in teaching (conducting peer reviews, seminars on best teaching practices, guest
lectures, etc
|
2 points
For example: Attendance at forums on teaching
practices
|
1 point
No additions to evidence of excellence in teaching
|
|
|
Total points page 1:
|
|
|
Total points page 2:
|
|
|
TOTAL PORTFOLIO SCORE:
|
|
CRITERIA FOR EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING
1. Integration of theory
& practice: application of complex concepts
to practice, designed to help
prepare students for
professional success. Examples included, but are
not
limited to, projects involving
integrative problem
solving skills
development; peer mentoring; research
projects; theory based creative
expressions; hands-on activities relevant to
the
world-of-work, and theory development.
2.
Student reflection: application of theoretical and pedagogical frameworks; active
demonstration of learning from students.
Gives students the opportunity to demonstrate what they have learned and
how
they can apply what they have learned to promote
better future outcomes for themselves and others.
3.
Collaborative learning experiences: learning that requires
cooperation, team work, and,
often leadership development. Could take
place in classroom exercises, course projects,
or through internships and independent studies
that place students in collaborative
relationships within
professional or organizational settings. May involve
interdisciplinary work.
4.
Infusion of multicultural and/or global experiences: may include the
infusion of multicultural/global/international content in
curriculum, the inclusion of experiential learning activities
designed to promote greater awareness of multicultural/global issues
and increased multicultural understandings,
and
class trips, immersions, or study abroad.
5.
Innovative curriculum & instruction: demonstrated interest in improving
teaching and
learning curriculum redesign,
new
approaches to course delivery, innovative
learning opportunities for
students, advanced technology
applications. This
may
also be evident through the scholarship
of
teaching and research
projects designed to answer important
questions about teaching effectiveness.
CRITERIA FOR INCLUSION - EVIDENCE
1. Evidence of teaching effectiveness: should include
substantive information about student learning. Such evidence may include
summaries of student comments
on student evaluations
as well as
peer reviews of teaching
effectiveness. Use only student evaluation
data for courses taught during the
calendar year. Acceptable evidence includes summary sheets
from
student evaluations.
2.
Participation in the scholarship
of teaching: description
of ways
in which
the candidate keeps abreast
of changes in teaching
practices, for example, presentations at teaching-related conferences, facilitating workshops, publishing teaching-related articles
in refereed print or online
journals. Description of
participation in organizations with a
teaching mission, and efforts
to keep
abreast of changes in
teaching practices.
3. Serving as a catalyst
for enhancement of
teaching: include activities
such as:
-mentoring of other faculty
-peer-review projects
-participation in preparing or
presenting workshops or symposia designed to help faculty enhance teaching skills
-participation in preparing guidelines, teaching
aids, assessment tools
and other
materials related
to discipline,
campus, or university-wide efforts to improve
teaching
-contribution to course and curriculum development in the department,
school, or university.
More weight will be given
to these
activities when they are accompanied, where appropriate, by evidence of
effectiveness.
4.
Interaction with and
availability to students: provide
evidence of
effective academic advising of
students as well as
mentoring of students in
other capacities. This
may
include, but is not limited to, activities such as participation in
a mentoring program; working with
students on research projects, to get papers accepted at conference or exhibitions and
performances; and supervising students in internship and
service learning programs.
5. Teaching awards, honors and
grants: report only teaching-related awards,
honors and grants received during the
calendar year covered
by this report.
6. Other: provide any evidence of teaching
excellence that does
not fit into the categories
above.
Excellence in Teaching
Award Recipients *
2017 Horace
Hall
2016 Karen
Monkman
2015 Jeffrey
Kuzmic
2014 Erin
Mason
2013 Jason
Goulah
2012 Beverly
Trezek
2011 Darrick
Tovar-Murray
2010 Horace
Hall
2009 [no nominations]
2008 [no nominations]
2007 Andrea Kaufman
2006 Joy Whitman
2005 Sonia Soltero
2004 Sr. Frances Ryan
2003 Enora Brown
2002 [no nominations]
2001 Kathy Wiggins
2000 Amira Proweller
1999 [no nominations]
1998 Nell Cobb
1997 Stephen Haymes
SAMPLE
NOTIFICATION LETTER
Dear
Prof. [ ],
We
are pleased to inform you that you have been nominated for the College of
Education Excellence in Teaching Award. This award recognizes one faculty
member each year who exemplifies the standards of excellence to which the
College of Education is committed. You received two letters of nomination from
students in the College of Education attesting to your commitment to students
and collegiality in sharing ideas for teaching. The nomination is a clear
statement of support for the quality of your teaching.
The
Excellence in Teaching Award Committee relies on further documentation in
making its nomination for the Excellence in Teaching Award. If you wish to be
considered for the award, we ask that you please submit the following items to
us for review:
·
Introductory/overview
statement of how materials are organized (or table of contents)
·
Personal
statement elaborating on your teaching philosophy and performance (a summary of
student evaluations should be addressed in the statement)
·
Current CV
·
At least two
COE faculty peer reviews of your teaching (non-COE peer reviews are also
welcome)
·
Sample
syllabi
·
Samples of
student work (papers, projects, etc.)
·
Other
supporting materials that speak to superior teaching (unsolicited student
comments, etc.)
Please submit your materials to the
Dean’s Office no later than March 1, [YEAR]. You may consult with any past recipient for guidance in preparing your
materials for review. Electronic is
preferable to paper, but we will accept your documents in whatever format you
provide them.
On
behalf of the Excellence in Teaching Award Committee, congratulations!
Sincerely,
SAMPLE NOMINATION SOLICITATION
NOMINATIONS FOR EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AWARDS
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Purpose
Teaching is at the core of what faculty
members do at DePaul University. In support of the University’s affirmation of
the teaching mission, the Quality of Instruction Council presents annual
University Excellence in Teaching Awards. These awards recognize outstanding
and significant achievement in teaching and commitment to the teaching mission.
Eligibility
All College of Education tenure-track
faculty members who teach at least three degree-credit courses at DePaul during
an academic year and have completed at least three full years of teaching at
DePaul at the time of the award (autumn following the nomination) are eligible
for consideration.
Who May Nominate
Students, faculty, and staff members in
the College of Education.
When You May Nominate
NOMINATIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED AT ANY TIME
DURING THE YEAR. YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO NOMINATE FACULTY MEMBERS FROM THE
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION NOW FOR THE ANNUAL AWARD.
Procedure
Ø
Nominations
should be typed in letter form and signed, detailing reasons why the faculty
member should be considered for the Excellence in Teaching Award.
Ø
Nominations
should be submitted to Sarah Magnuson, Executive Assistant, at smagnuso@depaul.edu.
Ø
Each
letter should contain only one faculty nomination per letter. However, you are
allowed to submit more than one nomination letter.
Quality of Instruction Council
EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AWARDS
Purpose
In support of the University's policy of
placing the highest priority on programs of instruction and learning, the Quality of Instruction Council
(QIC) makes
annual DePaul University Excellence in Teaching
awards. The awards are announced at Convocation each autumn, and
individual plaques are awarded. The awards carry a taxable stipend of
$2,000 each.
Eligibility
At
the time of the award (the autumn following the nomination), faculty members
must have completed four full years of teaching at DePaul. Faculty members
who teach at least four degree-credit courses at DePaul during an academic
year are eligible for consideration. Each college or school determines what
constitute a "course" for purposes of this program.
The maximum number of awards made each
year is as follows: up to two in the College of Liberal Arts and Social
Sciences; up to two in the Driehaus College of Business; and up to one each in
the College of Computing and Digital Media, College of Communication, College
of Education, College of Law, College of Science and Health, School of Music,
School for New Learning, and the Theatre School. Academic units that do not
wish to nominate faculty are not required to participate in this program.
Academic units that wish to suggest alternative approaches to recognizing
excellence in teaching at the university level for their faculty are most
welcome to do so by writing to the council at QIC@depaul.edu.
A
faculty member who receives an Excellence in Teaching award from the council
may not be selected again in the five years immediately following. Faculty
members may receive teaching awards from their colleges simultaneously with the
QIC award.
Criteria for Selection
Each
college or school determines its own nomination and selection process.
Members of the college selection committee shall be tenured or tenure-track
faculty. Inclusion of former teaching award winners is encouraged.
The QIC reviews the criteria and procedures for comparability, fairness, rigor,
and consistency with University mission, policy and practice. The council
reviews individual nominations for consistency with the stated criteria of the
college or school.
The
selection criteria and procedures followed by the dean's office must:
·
be submitted to the council for review by October 15;
·
be distributed to all eligible faculty members;
·
be based solely on teaching performance in degree-credit
programs at DePaul (including curriculum design and any extra-classroom
activities related to degree-credit instruction);
·
refer to the academic year of the award and optionally cover the
two preceding years - although consistency is given weight, this is not a
lifetime achievement award;
·
take into account written student evaluations, particularly
evaluations over the most recent academic year;
·
incorporate review by at least two faculty members or include a
statement of teaching philosophy; and
·
include endorsements by the dean or chair.
Calendar
·
October 15th: Each dean should submit their unit's award
criteria and procedures to QIC@depaul.edu .
QIC reviews these materials for comparability (not uniformity), fairness,
rigor, and consistency with university mission, policy and practice.
·
May 1st: The nomination documents should be emailed to QIC@depaul.edu . QIC reviews materials for
consistency with stated criteria and procedures.
·
September: Awardees are honored at Convocation.
Nomination Materials
Materials
submitted by each dean to the council should include:
·
a letter from the committee chair highlighting the nominee's
strengths as a teacher;
·
a copy of each nominee's current curriculum vitae;
·
an edited selection of evidence illustrating the nominee's
teaching strengths including faculty peer reviews (at least two from the
nominee's department); if peer reviews are not available, a statement of
teaching philosophy may be substituted;
·
some form of summary of student evaluations (not the individual
evaluations) and a sample evaluation form;
·
a review of the year's selection process, including the members
of the selection committees; and
·
an explicit endorsement by the appropriate dean in the form of a
brief citation suitable for public presentation.
These
materials are used by the council both to study the qualities and skills that
distinguish the awardees as superior teachers and to communicate their
accomplishments to the university community.
