INDIANA UNIVERSITY
FACULTY COLLOQUIUM ON
EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING
Understanding the
FACET Statewide
Selection Process
Robin K. Morgan
10/11/2013
Statewide Procedures
• All dossiers are read and rated by each
statewide committee member using the rubric
• One person assigned to present case
• Rankings recorded
• Case reviewed
• Vote taken:
• Full admission to FACET
• Please revise and resubmit
• Rejection
• Letters written by Chair
Evaluation Rubric
Overall Rating:
• Ideal match for FACET
• Possible FACET match
• Not appropriate for FACET but
need to discuss given the current
information
Evaluation Rubric
Teaching Philosophy:
1a. Consistent with knowledge of student
learning
1b. Consistent with identified teaching goals
and approaches in the feedback loop
Overall Rating: Very strong____
Strong____ Weak____ Very Weak____
Evaluation Rubric
Evidence from LEARN
2a. Evidence of reflection about teaching
2b. Demonstrated ability to learn from taking
risks
2c. Creativity in pedagogy
2d. Development of appropriate learning goals
2e. Evidence of student learning
Overall Rating: Very strong____ Strong____
Weak____ Very Weak____
Evaluation Rubric
Teaching Summary
3a. Evidence of teaching scholarship
3b. Evidence of peer mentoring related to teaching
3c. Evidence of participation in professional
development activities related to teaching
3d. Demonstrated leadership related to teaching
Overall Rating: Very strong____ Strong____
Weak____ Very Weak____
Evaluation Rubric
Evidence of potential future contributions to
FACET and its mission
Appendix B: Contributions to FACET: Interest
Profile
Overall Rating: Very strong____ Strong____
Weak____ Very Weak____
Biggest Issues?
Lack of evidence of student learning
SET data ≠ student learning
• 95% of my students report that I am
knowledgeable
• Student should be able to apply concepts to
novel scenarios:
• Assessed on each exam
• On exam 1: 25% of students succeeded
• On exam 2: 57% of students succeeded
• On exam 3: 86% of students succeeded
Biggest Issues?
Reflection/evidence-based teaching
In keeping with the objective of having an
interactive classroom, I encourage student
creativity. Students have engaged in such
diverse activities as playing games, making up
new words and defining them, going on
scavenger hunts, and analyzing the symbolism
in an episode of M*A*S*H.
Biggest Issues?
Reflection/evidence-based teaching:
Originally, the sophomore introduction class had
very poor evaluations…The class had been
formatted to …. Over the last 4 years I have
changed both course content and presentation to
engage students… The evaluations of students
agreeing that the quality of the class is
outstanding have gone from 40% to over 60%
last year.
Example
For example, in one peer review, a suggestion was made to, “Work a
participation grade into the grading structure. Perhaps add some more
formal classroom assessment techniques.” I have since added
participation points to the total points possible in my courses, and
attendance has improved. This is important because the correlation in
my courses between attendance and final grade has been as high as 0.65.
Often, participation is tied to “minute papers” in which students reflect
in each class on one concept that they believe they understand well and
one concept that they believe requires further study. I call these “got it /
didn’t get it” papers, and I have been pleasantly surprised with how
seriously students take these activities. They actually state things like, “I
probably need to go back and review X,” or “When I read the chapter, I
didn’t really get concept Y, but your class examples helped, thanks!”
These assignments not only allow me to see what I need to review more
thoroughly in class, but also give students a chance for self-reflection on
their studies.