2015-16 Faculty Fellowship for Teaching & Learning – Proposal Evaluation Rubric
Criteria for Proposal Evaluation
SIGNIFICANCE. Successful
proposals will improve the quality
of instruction benefiting student
learning. Proposals should
indicate the impact on curriculum,
instructional delivery, and the
students served. Proposals should
directly support the academic
program and the departmental,
college and/or university strategic
planning goals.
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES.
Successful proposals will enhance
the student learning outcomes
and student learning experiences
through improved andragogy and
instructional delivery. Proposals
should demonstrate a clear
connection between andragogy
being implemented and specific
student learning outcomes.
Excellent
Levels of Achievement
Good
5-6 points
Students. The proposal will affect
a significant number of students.
3-4 points
Students. The proposal will affect
a sufficient number of students.
Department/Major. Is central to
the development of instruction
benefiting student learning inside
and outside the major.
Outcomes/Goals. Clearly
articulates its ability to support
departmental, college, and/or
university outcomes and strategic
planning goals.
Alignment. Clear congruence
between andragogy and intended
student learning outcomes.
Department/Major. Is connected
to the development of instruction
benefiting student learning
primarily affecting students inside
the major.
Outcomes/Goals. Notes its
potential to support
departmental, college and/or
university outcomes and strategic
planning goals.
Alignment. Use of andragogy is
appropriate to intended student
learning outcomes.
Rationale. Clear rationale
provided that supports use of the
proposed andragogy.
Rationale. Rationale provided
supports use of the proposed
andragogy.
Rationale. Rationale for the
proposed andragogy is vague or
missing.
Student Learning. Maximizes
student learning potential.
Student Learning. Shows
potential for enhanced student
learning.
Student Learning. Improved
student learning is questionable.
Not Fully Developed
1-2 points
Students. The proposal will affect
a small/questionable number of
students.
Department/Major. Is a curricular
add-on with questionable effect
on student learning.
Score
Outcomes/Goals. Little/no link to
departmental, college and/or
university outcomes and strategic
planning goals.
Alignment. Mismatch between
andragogy and intended student
learning outcomes.
1
2015-16 Faculty Fellowship for Teaching & Learning – Proposal Evaluation Rubric
Excellent
Criteria for Proposal Evaluation
TEACHING & LEARNING.
Successful proposals will enhance
the understanding of teaching and
learning in the discipline.
Proposals should include a plan to
assess whether the project has
achieved its desired outcomes.
Proposals should include a plan to
disseminate what is learned by
the project to others.
PROJECT PLAN. Successful
proposals have a clearly written
project plan with a clear design, a
strong link between design and
intended outcomes. Proposals
should have a high likelihood of
the proposer being able to
complete the project within the
timeline provided.
5-6 points
Contribution. The proposal will
make a worthwhile contribution
to the enhancement of teaching
and student learning in the
discipline.
Assessment. Includes an in-depth
assessment plan.
Dissemination. Includes a
concrete plan to disseminate what
is learned by the project to others
locally, regionally and/or
nationally.
Clarity. The project plan is clearly
stated.
Design. High congruence between
project design and intended
outcomes. Resources identified
are appropriate and available.
Completion. High likelihood that
the project will be completed
within the timeline provided.
Proposer and department are
highly motivated and committed
to the project’s success.
Levels of Achievement
Good
3-4 points
Contribution. The proposal will
make a contribution to the
enhancement of teaching and
students learning in the discipline.
Assessment. Includes an
assessment plan.
Dissemination. Includes a plan to
share what is learned by the
project with others.
Clarity. The project plan is stated.
Design. Appropriate match
between project design and
intended outcomes. Resources
identified are appropriate and
available.
Completion. Good likelihood that
the project will be completed
within the timeline provided.
Proposer and department
demonstrate commitment to the
project’s success.
Not Fully Developed
1-2 points
Contribution. The proposal shows
little promise to make a
contribution to the enhancement
of teaching and student learning
in the discipline.
Assessment. The assessment plan
is vague or missing.
Dissemination. There is no clear
intention to share what is learned
by the project others locally,
regionally and/or nationally.
Score
Clarity. The project plan is not
clearly stated.
Design. Mismatch between
project design and intended
outcomes. Resources are
unavailable or are inappropriate.
Completion. Low likelihood that
the project will be completed
within the timeline provided, or
timeline is missing. Proposer and
department motivation and
commitment to the project’s
success are unclear.
Total
Score
2