TILT's Recommended Process
for Annual Review of Teaching
TILT recommends instructors set one SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound) goal in one domain of teaching each year using the Teaching Effectiveness Framework (TEF). This process emphasizes growth, the use of evidence-based teaching practices, and continuous reflection. Given the interdependence of the seven domains of teaching, we recommend a deeper dive into one domain at a time as growth in one domain will positively impact other domains of teaching. The recommended 4-step process below includes supporting resources from the Teaching Effectiveness Framework Toolkit.
Step 1
Faculty:
Choose a Domain
Begin the goal setting process by choosing one of the seven domains of the TEF at a glance. To choose a domain, consider feedback from students, colleagues, or supervisor, and/or identify the TEF domain that most intrigues you. Your department might consider a domain to focus on for a year. The Evaluating Teaching Flowchart outlines a path for faculty during this process and a correlating path for chairs, heads, and committees.
Department Head/Chair:
Review the Recommended Goal Setting Process
Use the Goal Setting and Evidence Options for Departments to decide on a goal-setting process that will work best for your department. The Evaluating Teaching Flowchart outlines a path for faculty during this process and a correlating path for chairs, heads, and committees.
Step 2
Faculty:
Set One Goal
Once you choose a domain from the Teaching Effectiveness Framework (TEF), go to the Teaching Effectiveness website page and click on the domain in which you would like to grow. Select the rubric on the right-hand side of the page to assess your current level of proficiency in your chosen domain. Refer to the Evidence-Based Practices page to choose 1-2 focus areas on the in your chosen domain and use them to write your annual goal on this Goal Setting Form. Refer to the Examples of Goals and Evidence for Annual Review of Teaching to help you get started.
Department Head/Chair
Support Faculty Goal Setting
Support faculty in the goal setting process by sharing Examples of Goals and Evidence for Annual Review of Teaching based on the domains of the TEF at a glance. Provide faculty organized time to set a teaching goal, form groups according to similar goals, and give and receive feedback from colleagues on their goal.
Step 3
Faculty:
Learn and Practice
Attend professional development offered by TILT and other campus partners that aligns with the domain of the Teaching Effectiveness Framework and your teaching goal. Integrate Evidence-Based Teaching Practices into your classroom. Keep track of how students respond to these integrated practices; if you are participating in the Teaching Effectiveness Initiative (TEI), you can use this information when writing a Post-Implementation Reflection.
Department Head/Chair:
Support Faculty PD Efforts
Check in with faculty on their progress. Share TILT Professional Development opportunities. Encourage faculty to take part in the Teaching Effectiveness Initiative (TEI). Provide time for faculty to discuss their teaching and goal progress with one another.
Step 4
Faculty:
Reflect
Collect evidence of teaching successes aligned with your teaching goal. Reflect on what went well, how you know, and what you will revise as you continue to refine your teaching practice. This will help you complete the Goal Setting Form. The Teaching Effectiveness Initiative (TEI). provides an in-depth reflection form that can be used to earn certificates of achievement in each TEF domain; you can also use the documentation from the TEI as evidence for annual review and/or Promotion and Tenure.
Department Head/Chair:
Evaluate Teaching
Use the information provided in each TEF domain and self-reflection rubric to ask faculty about their teaching goal, evidence of success, and changes they will make to their teaching based on their experience throughout the year. Know that evidence of teaching effectiveness has Strengths and Limitations but that three forms of evidence should create a complete picture of the quality of teaching occurring.
Resources:
Teaching Effectiveness Framework (TEF) Toolkit
Contact
Jennifer Todd
Senior Faculty Developer & Teaching Effectiveness Framework Program Manager
TEF and Annual Review
Watch this presentation video to learn more about the history of the Teaching Effectiveness Framework (TEF) at CSU, why it was developed, how it works, and how TILT recommends it be used for developing and evaluating teaching effectiveness to support faculty in annual review of teaching.
Research Citations
Active Learning: A Practical Guide for College Faculty, Magna Publications 2017
Adams, M., Bell, L.A., & Griffin, P. (Eds) 2007. Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice (2nd ed). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, NY
Ambrose, S.A., Brides, M.W., Lovett, M.C., DiPietro, M., & Norman, M.K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Angelo, T., & Cross, K. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: a handbook for college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Bain, Ken. (2004). What the Best College Teachers Do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Barr, J. J. (2016). Developing a positive classroom climate. The IDEA Center, IDEA Paper #61(October 2016). https://www.ideaedu.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/IDEA%20Papers/IDEA%20Papers/PaperIDEA_61.pdf
Barry J. Fraser , David F. Treagust & Norman C. Dennis (1986) Development of an instrument for assessing classroom psychosocial environment at universities and colleges, Studies in Higher Education, 11:1, 43-54, DOI: 10.1080/03075078612331378451
Belcher, A., Hall, B. M., Kelley, K., & Pressey, K. L. (2015) An analysis of faculty promotion of critical thinking and peer interaction within threaded discussions. Online Learning, (19)4. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.544
Berk, Ronald, A. (2005) Survey of 12 Strategies to Measure Teaching Effectiveness. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 17(1), 48-62.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad R. (2016), The online teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brown McNair, T., Albertine, S., Cooper, M. A., McDonald, N., Major Jr., T. (2016). Becoming a student-ready college: A new culture of leadership for student success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Canning, E. A., Muenks, K., Green, D. J., & Murphy, M. C. (2019). STEM faculty who believe ability is fixed have larger racial achievement gaps and inspire less student motivation in their classes. ScienceAdvances, 5(2). DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aau4734
Carpenter, S. K., Witherby, A. E., & Tauber, S. K. (2020). On Students’ (Mis)judgments of Learning and Teaching Effectiveness. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2019.12.009
Chaiklin, S. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V. S. & Miller, S. M. (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (39-64). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chávez, A. F., Longerbeam, S. D. (2016). Teaching across cultural strengths. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Claro, S., Paunesku, D. & Dweck, C.S. (2016). Growth mindset tempers the effects of poverty on academic achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, (116)31, 8664-8668. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1608207113
Cohen, Z. (2018, July 17). Small changes, large rewards: How individualized emails increase classroom performance The evoLLLution. Retrieved from: https://evolllution.com/attracting-students/retention/small-changes-large-rewards-how-individualized-emails-increase-classroom-performance/
College and University Classroom Environment Inventory (CUCEI) Fraser: 7 psychosocial dimensions of actual or preferred classroom environment: personalization, involvement, student cohesiveness, satisfaction, task orientation, innovation, and individualization. Fraser, B.J. & Treagust, D.F. High Educ (1986) 15: 37. https://doi-org.ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/10.1007/BF00138091
Cornell Centre for Teaching and Learning (1997) Teaching Evaluation Handbook (3rd ed.) Ithaca, NY: Office of Instructional Support, Cornell University.
Darby, F. (2019). Small Teaching Online. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Devlin, Marcia & Samarawickrema, Gayani. (2010) The Criteria of Effective Teaching in a Changing Higher Education Context. Higher Education Research and Development 29(2), 111-124.
Dweck, C. (June 26, 2018). Growth mindset interventions yield impressive results. The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/growth-mindset-interventions-yield-impressive-results-97423
Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 74–146). San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
Eddy, S. L. & Brownell, S. E. (2016). Beneath the numbers: A review of gender disparities in undergraduate education across science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2). DOI https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020106
Fraser B.J. (2012) Classroom Learning Environments: Retrospect, Context and Prospect (pp. 1191-1239). In: Fraser B., Tobin K., McRobbie C. (Eds.). Second International Handbook of Science Education. Springer International Handbooks of Education, vol 24. Springer, Dordrecht
Felder, Richard M., Rugarcia, Armando, Stice, James E. (2000). The Future of Engineering Education v. Assessing Teaching Effectiveness and Educational Scholarship. Chem. Engr. Education 34(3), 198-207.
Fink, L. D. (2013) Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Fountain S. B., Doyle K. E. (2012) Learning by chunking. In Seel N.M. (eds) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H.,& Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Friere, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the oppressed. (30th anniversary ed). New York, NY: Continuum International Publishing Group Inc.
Giovannelli, Marietta. (2010) Relationship Between Reflective Disposition Toward Teaching and Effective Teaching. The Journal of Educational Research, 96:5, 293-309.
Good, C., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women’s representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 700-717. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026659
Gunawardena, C. N., Ortegano–Layne, L., Carabajal, K., Frechette, C., Lindemann, K., & Jennings, B. (2006). New Model, New Strategies: Instructional design for building online wisdom communities, Distance Education, 27(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910600789613
Guo, P. J. (2013, November 13) Optimal video length for student engagement. Retrieved from https://blog.edx.org/optimal-video-length-student-engagement
Haak, D. C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., & Freeman, S. (2011). Increased Structure and Active Learning Reduce the Achievement Gap in Introductory Biology. Science, 332(6034), 1213–1216. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204820
Herring, M. C., Koehler, M. J. & Mishra, P. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for Educators (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hulleman, C. S., Barron, K. E., Kosovich, J. J. & Lazowski, R. A. (2016). Student motivation: Current theories, constructs, and interventions within an expectancy-value framework. In Lipnevich, A. A., Preckel, F. & Roberts, R. D. (Eds.), Psychosocial skills and school systems in the 21st century. (pp. 241-278). Switzerland: Springer.
Johnson, D. I. (2009). Connected Classroom Climate: A Validity Study, Communication Research Reports, 26(2), pp. 146-157, DOI: 10.1080/08824090902861622
Kwantan University Office of Institutional Analysis and Planning (2007) Establishing a Framework for Evaluating Teaching Excellence: An Overview of the Literature.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Towards a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), pp. 465-491.
Lang, J. (2016). Small teaching: Everyday lessons from the science of learning. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Ladyshewsky, R. K. (2013). Instructor presence in online courses and student satisfaction. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.240429/ijsotl.2013.070113
Lee, A., Poch, R. O’Brien, M. K., Solheim, C. (2017). Teaching interculturally: A framework for integrating disciplinary knowledge and intercultural development. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Lehman, R. M., & Conceicao, S. C. (2010). Creating a Sense of Presence in Online Teaching: How to “Be There” for Distance Learners. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lieberman, M. (2018, April 11). What online teachers have learned from teaching online. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2018/04/11/veteran-online-instructors-share-tips-improving-their-practices
Magnusson, S. J., Borko, H., & Krajcik, J. S.(1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge (pp. 95-132). Boston, MA: Kluwer Press.
[email protected]. “Making Excellence Inclusive.” Association of American Colleges & Universities, 7 June 2018, 2:20pm, www.aacu.org/making-excellence-inclusive.
McDaniel, M. A., Anderson, J. L., Derbish, M. H., & Morrisette, N. (2007). Testing the testing effect in the classroom. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(4-5), 494-513.
Meer, N. M., Chapman, A. (2014). Assessment for confidence: Exploring the impact that low stakes assessment design has on student retention. The International Journal of Management Education, 12, 186-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2014.01.003
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H. & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. Wakefield, MA: CAST, Inc.
Milheim, K. (2017). A fundamental look at cultural diversity and the online classroom. eLearn Magazine. Retrieved from https://elearnmag.acm.org/archive.cfm?aid=3041614.
Miller, M. D. (2014). Minds online: Teaching effectively with technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Myers, C.B. & Myers, S.M. (2007). Innovation in High Education 31: 227. https://doi-org.ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/10.1007/s10755-006-9020-x
National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Expanded edition. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9853.
Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133-144.
Nilson, L. (2014). Creating Self-Regulated Learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Oleson, A. & Hora, M. T. (October 23, 2013). Teaching the way they were taught? Revisiting the sources of teaching knowledge and the role of prior experience in shaping faculty teaching practices. Higher Education. DOI 10.1007/s10734-013-9678-9
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in achievement settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, pp. 543-578.
Pennebaker JW, Gosling SD, Ferrell JD (2013). Daily Online Testing in Large Classes: Boosting College Performance while Reducing Achievement Gaps. PLoS ONE 8(11): e79774. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079774
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of educational Psychology, 95(4), 667.
Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231.https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Quaye, S. J. & Harper, S. R. (2007). Faculty accountability for culturally inclusive pedagogy and curricula. Liberal Education, 93(3), AAC&U.
Quaye, S., & Harper, S. (2015). Student Engagement in Higher Education (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Rendón, L. I. (2014). Sentipensante pedagogy: Educating for wholeness, social justice and liberation. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Rhodes, M.G., Cleary, A.M.,& Delosh, E.L. (2019). A guide to effective studying and learning: Practical strategies from the science of learning. Oxford, 2019.
Rhodes, M., Cleary, A., & DeLosh, E. (2020). A guide to effective studying and learning: practical strategies from the science of learning. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Robertson, R. J., & Riggs, S. (2018). Collaborative assignments and projects. In K. E. Linder & C. M. Hayes (Eds.), High-impact practices in online education (pp. 71-84). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Roediger, H. L. (2013). Applying cognitive psychology to education: Translational educational science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14, 1-3.
Rowe, M (1986), Wait Time: Slowing Down May Be a Way of Speeding Up!, Journal of Teacher Education.
Strayhorn, T. L. (2019). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students. New York, NY: Routledge.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, vol 15(2), pp. 4-14.
Sisk, V. F., Burgoyne, A. P., Jingze, S., Butler, J. L. & Macnamara, B. N. (2018). To what extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement? Two Meta-analyses. Psychological Science, 29 (4), 549-571. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617739704
Stevens, D. D. & Levi, A. J. (2012) Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback and promote student learning (2nd ed.). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Tanner, K. D. (2013). Structure Matters: Twenty-One Teaching Strategies to Promote Student Engagement and Cultivate Classroom Equity. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(3), 322–331. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-06-0115 )
Tobin, T. J., & Behling, K. (2018). Reach everyone, teach everyone: Universal design for learning in higher education. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press.
Villalpando, O. 2002. The impact of diversity and multiculturalism on all students: Findings from a national study. NASPA Journal, 40(1) pp. 124–44.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development (M. LopezMorillas, Trans.). In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (pp. 79– 91). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walvoord, B. E., & Anderson, V. J. (2010). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment in college (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Weiner, B. (1972). Theories of motivation: From mechanism to cognition. Oxford, England: Markham.
Wieman, Carl. (2015). A Better Way to Evaluate Undergraduate Teaching, Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 47:1, 6-15, DOI: 10.1080/00091383.2015.996077.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005), Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA; Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Woosley, S. A. (2003). How important are the first few weeks of college? The long term effects of initial college experiences. College Student Journal, 37(2), 201-207.
Yosso, T.J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education,8 (1) n.p. https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006
Zhou, H. (2015). A systematic review of empirical studies on participants’ interactions in internet-mediated discussion boards as a course component in formal higher education settings. Online Learning (19)3. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i3.495