Skip to: search, navigation, or content.

Indiana University Bloomington

Trustee Teaching Awards Selection Process 2002-2004

A. Technology Services processed evaluation data to rank order all instructors in both categories (Tenure-track and Clinical/Lecturer) based on the Kelley School of Business evaluation standard of the average of the following nine evaluation questions: 1, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 17, and 18. For each question, the credit hour weighted average of all classes taught in that year was computed and then a simple average across all nine questions was calculated. However, to be considered, the instructor:

  1. had to be full-time;
  2. had to have taught 6 or more credit hours for the year;
  3. had to have had 60 or more students complete student evaluations for the year;
  4. had to not have left Indiana University at the time of the award, although retirement is fine.

From this rank ordering and constraints, the TEC had a list of 14 finalists for the 7 tenure-track awards and 8 finalists for the 4 full-time lecturers and clinicals awards. (In both cases, the number of finalists was equal to 200% of the number of awards that were given out in each category.)

B. Finalists had to submit two supporting documents to the Teaching Excellence Committee:

  1. A list of courses taught at Indiana University during the previous year-showing the course number, the number of credit hours, the semester taught and the student enrollment in each class; and
  2. A 2-page maximum, single-spaced statement that linked the major goals and objectives of any course taught by the finalist to the finalist's methods, classroom activities, assignments, or other instructional techniques. Course goals and objectives were to be articulated briefly in terms of student learning (when students complete the course, they will have learned_________). Most of the statement were to be devoted to showing the committee how the finalist's various activities as a teacher help students achieve the goals articulated at the beginning of the statement. Finalists were urged to discuss a few activities in detail rather than the sum total of their teaching duties.

C. In making its determinations, the Teaching Excellence Committee considered three primary criteria for each finalist:

  1. The student evaluation summaries augmented by related considerations, such as impressive scores for difficult teaching assignments (i.e., teaching a large number of students) as well as attaining high evaluation scores while simultaneously maintaining rigor in the classroom;
  2. The list of courses taught by the finalist during the past year; and
  3. The 2-page statement prepared by the finalist.

D. The top seven finalists in the tenure-track category and the top four finalists in the clinical/lecturer category received cash awards as well as certificates attesting to their excellence in teaching. Those finalists not receiving cash awards received certificates attesting to their excellence in teaching.