Abstract
In 2011, Hutchings, Huber, and Ciccone asked, �What would academic life look like in ten years if the principles and practices of the scholarship of teaching and learning were to take hold at the deep level? What would it take to get there?� One powerful way to get there would be to integrate SoTL into the institution's faculty evaluation process for tenure and promotion as suggested by McKinney (2007). This presentation will report how one large research university is doing just that�transitioning away from traditional peer review of teaching to a SoTL approach in which faculty candidates collect and evaluate evidence of student learning as the measure of effective teaching. Results indicate that faculty members and administrators see this approach as considerably more credible, useful, and meaningful than previous approaches to peer review. In addition, it better supports faculty development, program review of learning outcomes, and institutional accreditation.
Location
Room 115
Recommended Citation
Swan, Richard and Johnson, Trav, "A SoTL Approach to Learning-Centered Peer Review of Teaching for Tenure and Promotion" (2013). SoTL Commons Conference. 22.
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sotlcommons/SoTL/2013/22
A SoTL Approach to Learning-Centered Peer Review of Teaching for Tenure and Promotion
Room 115
In 2011, Hutchings, Huber, and Ciccone asked, �What would academic life look like in ten years if the principles and practices of the scholarship of teaching and learning were to take hold at the deep level? What would it take to get there?� One powerful way to get there would be to integrate SoTL into the institution's faculty evaluation process for tenure and promotion as suggested by McKinney (2007). This presentation will report how one large research university is doing just that�transitioning away from traditional peer review of teaching to a SoTL approach in which faculty candidates collect and evaluate evidence of student learning as the measure of effective teaching. Results indicate that faculty members and administrators see this approach as considerably more credible, useful, and meaningful than previous approaches to peer review. In addition, it better supports faculty development, program review of learning outcomes, and institutional accreditation.
