The Top Services in Centers for Teaching Excellence

As I've mentioned in previous posts, I am currently serving as a visiting scholar at Utah State University (USU). I have been working with the Office of the Provost to identify ways that teaching can be support more effectively at USU. As part of my research, I have been reviewing the websites of several Centers for Teaching Excellence at other large universities across the United States with the goal of identifying the common kinds or services and supports given at the university. In this blog post, I will describe some of my findings.

How I Chose the Centers to Include in My Review
I used a fairly unscientific approach for selecting these centers. I performed a Google search for the term "Center for Teaching Excellence." I then began reviewing each site in the order of their ranking by Google. I reviewed a total of 7 sites using this process. I also reviewed the sites of Utah Valley University and the University of Utah, though U of U's site appeared to be in transition from one structure to another and I therefore did not include it in the review.

To document and tabulate my findings, I created a giant table with the university in the first column and the potential services throughout the subsequent columns. I placed a check mark to indicate whether the center provided the service and also made notes in the limited space. I ended up adding an additional piece of paper to the table to add more columns. I also took notes on  a separate Word document on what I found interesting as I went through the sites.

Common Services/Programs at Centers of Teaching Excellence
The following table lays out the most common services offered at these centers. The services are organized from most common to least common.

Service/Program	# offering service (of 8 reviewed)
Online teaching resources for faculty (e.g. blogs, web pages, videos, podcasts related to teaching excellence)	8
Teaching workshops and/or institutes	8
New Faculty Teaching Preparation	7
Teaching Consultations	7
Teaching Observations	6
Small Grants for Teaching Innovation/Improvement	6
Graduate student teacher support program	4
Teaching awards	4
Center-led mentoring program	4
Faculty fellowships to promote teaching excellence	3
Teaching Certification Program	3
Faculty portfolio development support	2
Department-level faculty ambassadors/liaisons	2
Instructional technology programs and research groups	2
International graduate student teacher support program	1
Customized workshops	1
System for faculty observation of high impact teachers	1
Center-run “Journal of Teaching Effectiveness”	1
Faculty Writing Academy	1

Related Post: The Ideal in Evaluating and Improving Teaching 

Typical Staffing of Centers for Teaching Effectiveness
I made it a point to document the basic staffing structure of each of these centers. Based on my review, the following staffing structure seems fairly typical and standard in higher education. It should be noted that many universities had several more employees and programs than these; however, these appeared to be the most common.

• Director – The director should have expertise in faculty development and capacity to lead the center while working closely with administrators of the various faculty support initiatives.
• Faculty Fellow –Some kind of temporary visit from a faculty member to the center, perhaps for 1-2 semesters.
• Support Staff – Administrative assistance and support, maintenance and support of website, communication, etc..
• Graduate Student – Students providing research and support to director and to the faculty fellows.

The average number of employees at the centers reviewed is about 6. This usually included 2-3 individuals with doctorate degrees who were usually directors or associate directors. Most centers include 2-3 support staff, though some had many more, including instructional design and technology support. I assume that some of the universities that didn't have these kinds of roles in the center likely had them in separate areas.

Structure of the Center Website 
I found that the structure of most of these sites was unique. Many of them were fairly disorganized, and as I looked at them from a faculty member's perspective, I had a hard time figuring out what they might be able to do for me. I would probably keep the faculty member in mind when creating the site. Here is what I currently think should be the basic structure of the site of a center for teaching excellence (though some further analysis and testing is warranted). Basic sub-pages should include (1) the About page, (2) the Services page, (3) the Workshops page, and (4) the Resources page.

Recommended structure for center for teaching effectiveness website. 

A Few Final Notes
It should be noted that this was a review of a relatively small number of centers (only 8), but I believe they are typical for what is out there. Also, these were larger universities, and it would be difficult for a smaller university to implement some of these programs. However, the general categories of support appear to be very sound and useful, and it makes sense to me to use these categories in many settings.

This is my current thinking on the topic, but I am still doing plenty of investigating. I have purchased some books on teaching support at the university level and will continue to deepen my knowledge as I focus on this kind of work going forward.

The Ideal in Evaluating and Improving Teaching Effectiveness

Quality teaching yields quality learning, and important step in improving teaching is evaluating teaching success and changing teaching strategies based on that evaluation. But what is the best way to evaluate a teacher's effectiveness? And what data sources can illuminate the path forward? the I recently had a conversation with my good friend John Louviere at USU, and through our mutual brainstorming, we generated the following data sources for effective teaching evaluation. The idea here is to utilize the principle of triangulation - the more data points you can use in your analysis, the more realistic picture you are able to paint of the situation. This in turn gives one a better process and method for moving forward.

The ideal data sources for effective teaching evaluation, particularly in higher education.

Teaching Evaluation Data Points
To make a truly holistic evaluation of a faculty member's teaching effectiveness, the following data points should be analyzed:

• Teacher Observations
• Student Teaching Evaluations 
• Formative Evaluation Tools
• Course Design Principles Rubric
• Course Design Quality Rubric
• LMS Data Analytics

Creating and Implementing Teaching Evaluation Tools

To create and implement effective data analytics tools, the following general phases should be followed. These phases should be used for each of the six data points described above. 

1. Identify and Synthesize Standards of Excellence - Determine based on the literature what the ideal is for each tool. For example, what should an observer find in the ideal teacher? This phase should include a thorough review of literature to find the research-based best-practices and should also include a clear synthesis of those practices into a coherent whole.
2. Develop Reports, Tools, and Rubrics Based on Standard - Create methods for gathering data on how well the standards are being used by the teacher. These can be rubrics, checklists, data analytics reports, and other tools. The goal is to have a way to efficiently and effectively gather data for each data point. For example, a teaching observation form would be developed to guide the observation of a teacher.
3. Gather Formative Feedback and Perform Validity Testing - Get sufficient expert feedback on the drafted tool or report and refine it based on the feedback. For example, have an expert or a scholar of teaching review the teaching observation form and give you feedback on how to refine it.
4. Pilot Testing - Conduct a pilot test of the tool and gather formative feedback on how well it functions and on the quality of the data being generated. For example, have someone use the teaching observation rubric to observe teaching and gather data on how well it worked and on whether the data is useful.
5. Implementation - After the tool has been refined and improved, implement it. This should inherently include the gathering of data on how it is being used and on the outcomes of its use.
6. Summative Evaluation - After the tool has been implemented, gather data on its effectiveness and draw conclusions from its use. Publish the results of the findings and create plans to move forward based on the results of the tool.  

Steps for establishing, implementing and evaluation tools, rubrics, and reports for improving teaching effectiveness.

Interactions of Data 

There will likely be a strong correlation between the many of the measures in each of these tools. For example, the use of effective design principles could correlate strongly to positive reports in other measures. The key is to create the tools, gather data on their use and results, and look for ways to further analyze and improve teaching effectiveness. As data is gathered, we will likely be able to determine what measure(s) are the strongest predictors of successful student learning, and this in turn gives us increased power to develop and improve future teaching evaluation and effectiveness. And in the increasingly competitive higher education environment, the universities who use data to help students succeed will both survive and thrive.

So, what do you think? Am I missing something? What else could be included in this? I believe that the effective establishment and use of these strategies will lay the foundation for increased and continued excellence in teaching at any university.