2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

The Teaching Portfolio and Peer Review of Teaching

Inherent in a commitment to teaching excellence is the need for efficient and effective evaluation of teaching in order to appropriately factor teaching into the tenure process and to encourage and inform efforts of continuous improvement. Student ratings, partly because of their quantified nature, are broadly used as the principle means of evaluating teaching effectiveness. Yet, despite their value, student ratings have been demonstrated to be insufficient for thoroughly evaluating teaching effectiveness.

Many colleges and universities are working to find better ways to evaluation teaching. Peer evaluation of teaching is used by many institutions; however, these evaluations commonly lack substance. Teaching portfolios are also commonly used as a tool for teacher reflection leading to efforts of improvement. Yet concerns persist about the nature and effectiveness of teaching evaluation.

Over the past five years, BYU has developed a process built on the concept that peer review can be an effective tool for the evaluation of teaching just like it is for the evaluation of scholarship. In this process, the faculty member is responsible to provide substantive evidence of the effectiveness of their teaching efforts in a teaching portfolio. Peer reviewers then evaluate the evidence in the portfolio and triangulate with student ratings and their own observations of the faculty member’s teaching.

Both the portfolio and peer review are guided by three pillars of effective teaching: Student Learning, the Learning Environment, and Processes of Improvement. In the teaching portfolio, the faculty member documents 1) evidence of student achievement of learning outcomes, 2) how the learning environment is used to motivate learning, and 3) the faculty member’s efforts to continuously improve as a teacher. The portfolio, essentially a teaching journal, is regularly updated and constitutes a real-time, growing record of the teaching stewardship.

Then at each step of the tenure process, a snapshot of the portfolio is taken and provided to peer reviewers. As with scholarly manuscripts, the peer reviewer does not have the “burden of proof” but rather considers the evidence provided to evaluate the faculty member’s teaching. They also use student ratings and their own observations to substantiate claims made in the portfolio. These peer reviews provide the tenure process with a thorough and detailed evaluation of teaching.

Through this process, all stakeholders have a substantive voice: the faculty member through the teaching portfolio; students through student ratings; and the institution through peer review of teaching. The process provides both more substance and balance to inform tenure decisions and, perhaps more importantly, is proving to be an effective means of motivating deliberate and informed efforts to improve teaching and learning across the university.