4 Raising the bar: An administrator’s perspective on documenting teaching excellence to support instructor and student development

Introduction

Administrators at the department, college, or institutional level are well positioned to support instructor development. Department heads, who typically have responsibility for routine performance reviews, play a role in tenure and promotion decision making processes, and have a line of sight on data related to instructional performance, can and should play a particularly impactful role. Serving as a department head, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, and on a university level tenure and promotion committee gave me diverse perspectives on what effective teaching documentation looks like. Moreover, it shaped how I mentored, offered counsel, or approached conversations about teaching effectiveness, whether with instructors, or new or aspiring administrators. While not all administrators have the same breadth of experiences, they can still effectively assess instructional performance in ways that help instructors build their identities and brands as educators committed to student growth.

Teaching excellence is not static but a function of evolving contextual factors. For example, in some environments there has been a shift from instructor-centric teaching, the so-called ‘sage on the stage’, to student-centric learning that engages students in the learning process. The higher education environment is, however, becoming increasingly complex and challenging, making learning alone insufficient. Artificial intelligence is changing what human cognitive capacities add value beyond what technology can offer. A global marketplace, remote work, and increasing demand for higher education in the developing world are disrupting the geography of where work takes place. Changes in student motivation and demographics, and evolving attitudes towards the role and form of higher education are also shaping what classroom and out of class experiences must deliver. Instructors have a responsibility to help students not only learn effectively but position themselves for long-term success. As such, it’s important that discussions about teaching excellence revolve around both student growth and instructor development in support of this, not improving teaching or instructional performance alone.

Administrator Context

Before delving into how effective documentation can help administrators mentor, counsel, and motivate instructors, it’s helpful to consider why, from their vantage point, a culture of documenting teaching excellence might not take root despite positive intentions. Administrators may lack training in the science of teaching or learning, or talent development. They can be selected for reasons unrelated to teaching or student development and have different motivations for seeking or being appointed to their roles. There are many demands on their time, and institutional context influences how they approach their role as it relates to teaching. Even student focused administrators can feel conflicted in how they develop a culture of teaching excellence given everyday realities. That said, how an administrator sets and communicates expectations can be both constructive and developmental.

There are several ways in which an administrator can use teaching documentation to support instructors. Documentation is a key input in enabling administrators to provide critical, objective, and actionable guidance that an instructor can use to drive improvement. It can also shape conversations that help an instructor craft a compelling narrative about their identity as a teacher. These are perhaps the most common uses of documentation by an administrator and the primary focus of the chapter. However, two additional ways in which administrators can use documentation merit brief discussion.

Documentation plays an important signaling role. While the absence of evidence doesn’t imply evidence of absence, effective, constructive documentation explicitly demonstrates an instructor’s commitment to teaching excellence. This can be important if questions or concerns arise about the teaching record, requests are made for resources in support of teaching, particularly when resources are limited, or other circumstances arise regarding commitment or performance in the teaching domain. Not only can effective documentation help an administrator make informed decisions it can offer cues about an instructor’s professional priorities. This can guide conversations with an instructor about workload and career planning that can help position both the instructor and academic unit for success.

Instructors typically see only their own or perhaps a small number of other examples of teaching documentation. In contrast, administrators see more, giving them broader perspective and alternate lenses through which to help instructors view and interpret their documentation. This enables an administrator to corroborate an instructor’s interpretation of their teaching record, validate what they are doing, surface blind spots, or highlight practices to be shared with others. They can use this to highlight areas for improvement, identify ways in which instructional development can be of value, or suggest roles in which the instructor can take on leadership or mentorship responsibility. It can also be used to guide an instructor to identify ways to improve their documentation process, outcomes, or narrative.

Administrators have a responsibility to guide, mentor, and support instructors’ development. They rely, however, on the information available to them. It behooves instructors to play their part in support of the process by developing effective documentation. The following sections examine how to document teaching excellence as an identity, use measures of instructional performance, and demonstrate engagement in extra-curricular activities to promote instructor and student development. The chapter concludes by examining obstacles to the development of this documentation.

Teaching and Personal Growth

Before getting into the tactics of effective documentation it is appropriate to discuss the bigger, strategic picture. In the what, when, and where of developing and delivering implementing courses, it’s easy to lose sight of the who and why. The most important thing an instructor can do to position themselves for long term success and that an administrator can help cultivate, is to view instruction from a personal brand or identity perspective. Who am I as a teacher and educator? Why do I do what I do? It is important to take a strategic, growth-oriented approach rather than a transactional one that speaks only to tasks and numbers without demonstrating purpose or impact. In this context, three areas are addressed: teaching philosophy, feedback as a driver of growth and improvement, and professional development.

Defining Identity as an Instructor

A starting point for documenting teaching excellence is a teaching philosophy that demonstrates intentionality and drives action. Teaching philosophies benefit instructors, enhance academic development, and facilitate institutional capacity building (Ruge et al., 2023). For example, they can deepen an instructor’s identity as a teacher, increase their confidence, resilience, and career satisfaction, and foster reflective practice. Teaching philosophies can also enhance collaboration among colleagues, drive improvement in teaching quality, and align teaching practice with strategic priorities. The philosophy should be authentic, unique, and more than sound bites. ‘I care about students’, I love teaching’, or ‘I can have meaningful impact’, while admirable, don’t communicate depth of purpose. Articulating what motivates desired learning and student growth objectives demonstrates to the instructor and administrator that instruction is more than an exchange of facts, knowledge, or perspectives. Using this to intentionally drive course design, pedagogy, assessment, and improvement signals commitment to instruction as a skillset to develop not a task to complete, a continuous process rather than a discrete event. Even if not administratively valued, it provides an anchor the instructor can return to for critical self-reflection.

Reflecting on outcomes without connection to learning goals can reinforce positive outcomes without yielding desired ones. This can occur absent clear articulation of goals or their motivation. Documenting both what and why facilitates alignment and demonstrates commitment to driving meaningful improvement. It can also be used to leverage ‘failure’. Learning from failure drives growth and improvement. This is particularly relevant when teachers lack formal training in teaching or if a culture of innovation is to be fostered (Jungic et al., 2020). It is easy to convince ourselves that all our efforts pay off or that by avoiding innovation we won’t fail. Taking chances, however, represents opportunity. Demonstrating what was tried, the underlying motivation related to desired outcomes, what the outcome was, what was learned, and what the response was shows a willingness to take a chance and to grow. This can also mitigate concerns about the effects of taking chances on student evaluations of teaching, to be addressed later, and other risks that might arise from failure (Ross et al., 2023).

Improving Through Intentional Reflection

Effectively leveraging formal or informal peer feedback can drive improvement. Even small teaching focused social networks can drive innovation and improvement (Benbow et al., 2021). The key is demonstrating how what is heard is translated into action. Evidence that constructive response was made to feedback, even if a desired outcome was not achieved, demonstrates positive intent and a commitment to growth. While student feedback is addressed in detail later, at the core is identifying and documenting responses to underlying themes. Where they tell a positive story, articulating the motivation behind corresponding actions can communicate positive causation. More critical themes provide opportunities to demonstrate constructive response. The focus should be on demonstrating what was learned, what may have motivated this, how this informs action, and what the outcome was. Critical self-evaluation, whether at the end of a course or even following each class session, can also serve as a source of feedback. Whether it is peer or student feedback, or critical self-reflection, the opportunity exists to create and document a virtuous cycle that drives improvement and learning (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Feedback Response Cycle

Conversely, pats on the back from peers, positive student testimonials, or high course evaluation scores, while affirming, are of little value if they don’t drive action or improvement. For this reason, they are of limited use in evaluative processes and may be discounted. Experienced administrators are aware of the reality of cherry-picking to tell a particular story or the gaming of evaluative processes for personal gain. The goal in using feedback should be to get better not simply look good. This also provides a point of differentiation from instructors that either don’t have a compelling narrative or are simply gaming the system.

Growing Through Professional Development

Taking advantage of relevant professional development opportunities says much about a commitment to teaching excellence. These opportunities can come in a variety of forms, for example teaching focused workshops or sessions at professional conferences, developmental activities at one’s home institution if these are available, online resources, observing peers, or working with peer support groups to name a few possibilities. While engaging with these opportunities alone can be of value, it doesn’t communicate positive intent as effectively as demonstrating follow up. Documenting the motivation for engagement, takeaways, and how this was acted upon to drive improvement again shows intentionality. It also provides the opportunity to demonstrate innovation.

Embracing the Student Voice

Instructional performance drives judgments about teaching excellence that are used in evaluative processes (Cherry et al., 2017). When it comes to assessing this performance, perhaps few topics elicit more opinions than course evaluations, and in particular, Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET). SET are the most used rating-based tool for the evaluation of instructor teaching quality (Vargas-Madriz et al., 2019). Extensive literature exists on the use of SET (e.g., Clayson, 2021), and while opinions on their use differ, SET can be used effectively to demonstrate positive intent and drive improvement.

It’s helpful to start with how not to use SET as part of the documentation process. While these are things instructors do, they are unproductive and don’t contribute to a positive, constructive narrative. For example, unduly focusing on numbers or basking in the glory of what looks like success can mask underlying realities. Getting defensive, ignoring what doesn’t look rosy, or rationalizing bad news by saying it’s only student feedback similarly hides potential truths that need to be unearthed for growth to occur. SET should be used as part of the documentation process with a developmental mindset rather than with an overemphasis on data alone. Ideally this should occur once the initial emotional reaction to receiving feedback has passed.

There are a variety of ways in which responses to SET feedback can be documented to demonstrate growth and improvement. For example,

• Identify themes that emerge from student comments, both positive and critical, and critically reflect on what is learned through the lens of teaching philosophy, pedagogy, learning outcomes, or assessment as appropriate.
• For positive themes, document how they provide evidence of cause and effect and intentionality in pedagogical or assessment process. For example, if an outcome can be reasonably attributed to a desired learning outcome or intentional use of a pedagogical device, make the case. An outcome can arise for a variety of reasons, both intended and otherwise. Own a positive outcome when you can, show that you have learned something when you can’t. Documentation should also address why actions that led to positive outcomes should be retained and what actions might be taken to further strengthen outcomes.
• For critical themes, document what was learned even if you don’t agree. Use the opportunity to 1. articulate motivations, even those that didn’t lead to desired outcomes, 2. offer reflection on why these outcomes may have been realized, and 3, develop countermeasures and a plan to respond to the critique.

Defensiveness and apportioning ‘blame’ to students is unproductive. Administrators have received their own SET assessments and appreciate their underlying realities and frustrations. They also don’t have the full story of what happened in the classrooms of each of their instructors. Contextualizing comments and demonstrating a spirit of responsiveness and improvement with student learning in mind lets the instructor tell the complete story, else others will create their own absent full information. For example, students might not know that an activity that yielded negative feedback was an innovation being used for the first time to enhance learning or in response to earlier feedback. Unless this is articulated, a well-intentioned and designed innovation may not be interpreted through this lens, and the instructor may have little recourse.

Tables, such as the example below, can be effective in presenting information concisely and capturing attention (Table 1). Carefully selected headings should focus attention in a way that demonstrates thoughtful reflection and intentional follow up. Short, targeted statements should, using the same approach described in Figure 1, connect analysis and reflection of what the data is saying, improvement opportunity, and resulting action. Brevity, coupled with routine additions and updates to the table, can also reduce the effects of memory loss and facilitate an archival process without the process becoming burdensome. This can be particularly useful when more comprehensive documentation is developed, for example annual performance review or promotion and tenure materials.

Table 1

Framing Student Feedback

The quantitative dimension of SET can generate considerable heartburn but also be a source of opportunity if used effectively. SET scores are a measure of real or perceived outcomes. While well designed instruments can measure learning outcomes or provide perspective that informs course design, this depends on their being used effectively by students, which is not a given, for data to be of value. Even with good data, the instructor’s focus should be on process rather than outcome. It is thus incumbent on them to ensure documentation provides adequate context. Administrators can read numbers and draw their own conclusions. Absent context, the door is open for letting the numbers tell the story, rather than the story behind the story being told. An effective way to present numeric scores is using graphs over time, whether a single graph with all courses or course specific graphs. This then allows the story underlying the graph to be told. It’s common for instructors to largely say the same thing using a combination of pictures, tables, or words. An effective narrative however complements the graph, not by simply restating what is visually evident, but by contextualizing:

• Patterns or trends. If for example scores are increasing or decreasing, this should be connected to intentional actions. SET scores directly measure outcomes and only indirectly process. It’s incumbent on the instructor to demonstrate causality and offer analysis of how the trend can be sustained or reversed as appropriate.
• Anomalies. If scores noticeably but temporarily increased or decreased, what might have caused this and what the implications are should be addressed. Demonstrating reflection and insight related to process shows recognition that outcomes don’t occur in a vacuum.
• Deviations from course norms. If scores are low in absolute terms but consistent or better than course norms or other relevant benchmarks, this should be articulated. It’s particularly useful to demonstrate how superior outcomes are being achieved.

SET represents data collected at one point in time, and acting on it is largely looking in the rearview mirror. Course length permitting, conducting informal mid-course evaluations provides an opportunity to document real time response to feedback and a second set of data points. Constructively responding represents further evidence of commitment to the student learning experience.

Leveraging Extra-Curricular Engagement

As indicated previously, a paradigm shift is needed from teaching and learning to student development. This offers several, under-leveraged, ways to demonstrate and document excellence. The key is again connecting motivation, action, and outcomes. While extracurriculars are not addressed exhaustively, the underlying message will be apparent using targeted examples.

Mentoring

Helping students see the possibilities and realize their potential is what brings many instructors the greatest professional satisfaction yet can be just a footnote in their story. Merely listing names or numbers of students mentored doesn’t do justice to the commitment made to their growth. Mentoring occurs in both formal or required settings, or informally. It can be an expectation for students in honors or similar programs or involve guiding students in internships or research projects. Mentoring can occur by virtue of advising student organization leaders or developing a connection with a student. It can also occur when instructors spend time with students on developmental experiences such as academic competitions or overseas study programs.

A good starting point is to document a mentoring philosophy. This should address desired outcomes in terms of, for example, skill development, growth in cognitive capacity, and helping students position for post-college life. The why is arguably more important than the what or how, as it informs process. Documenting process, specifically how you mentor, should provide context for what the engagement looks like. Similar to the discussion on classroom teaching, connections between philosophy and process, and between goals, actions, and desired outcomes, should demonstrate intentionality rather than ad hoc actions.

Articulating impactful outcomes and how specific mentoring actions played a contributory role is key so that efforts go beyond numbers. Boysen et al., (2020) describe a rubric which, while focused on research experiences, can be applied to other mentoring contexts. It may be helpful to have students provide their critical and specific reflection of how the mentoring relationship contributed to their development and growth. As discussed earlier, a glowing testimonial that is merely a pat on the back is of little value and may be discounted by administrators.

The impact of mentoring is greater when it occurs over an extended period, and documentation is more persuasive and impactful when a productive relationship has evolved over time. A curated collection of compelling stories that demonstrates a sustained pattern of high impact mentoring is more effective than a laundry list that highlights quantity over quality.

Teaching Materials and Innovations

One of the positive outcomes from teaching during the COVID pandemic was an increased motivation to share classroom practices and innovations around technology use. While there are various motivations for innovation, dissemination and adoption in university teaching are relatively ineffective (Gribble & Beckmann, 2023). As the authors note, reluctance to change is a limiting factor in innovation. However, efforts to advance the practice of teaching represent an opportunity for documentation. Whether it is new classroom activities, assessments, course design concepts, or other innovations or changes that reflect continuous improvement, documenting them contributes to the narrative about growth and teaching excellence. They provide an opportunity to demonstrate discomfort with maintaining the status quo and a commitment to trying new things with the student experience in mind. While change and innovation need not be large in scope, more substantive innovations may also have the potential for sharing with a broader audience.

For small efforts, documenting motivation, specifics of the change or innovation, and impact should be considered at a minimum. Whether the motivation is addressing a deficiency, for example students not grasping a concept or engaging in the learning process, deepening learning, or developing new pedagogy, it is important to communicate this so intent is understood. Even changes to address deficiencies should not be viewed in a negative light but framed as proactively recognizing and addressing areas of concern. Demonstrating impact should include objective measures of positive learning outcomes that connect with the motivation for the effort and desired learning outcomes. The goal should again be to demonstrate learning not merely look good.

For larger innovations, scope may exist to share to a wider audience, for example institutional colleagues, conference attendees, or journal readers. The use of innovations by others offers external validation of a commitment to advancing pedagogy. Receiving and constructively acting on external feedback to extend the improvement and innovation process provides further evidence of a commitment to growth. Exploring whether to share an innovation, through conversations with colleagues or conducting a literature review, can help in appropriately positioning the innovation and can identify other pedagogical opportunities to incorporate. The opportunity to document what was done, why, and impact should not be lost.

Instructor Context

The chapter began with a discussion of the realities administrators face in assessing teaching excellence. Having also explored how and what to document, it’s appropriate to address the realities instructors face. What has been proposed isn’t difficult, so why might an instructor not help the administrator appreciate the depth of their story? ‘Why’ has been a recurring theme throughout the chapter and is equally applicable here, though perhaps it’s more a case of ‘why not’?

Documenting teaching excellence can be viewed as little more than an administrative requirement. Academic culture, specifically the importance and value associated with teaching influences perspectives. Questions about an administrator’s motivation or ability to evaluate documentation effectively can also play a role. If efforts to document excellence don’t motivate actions that drive it, for example strategic resource allocation or individual reward and recognition, they become just another task to fulfil administrative expectations.

From my experience, instructors perceive there to be increasing demands on their time. They are having to rapidly familiarize themselves with new technologies such as artificial intelligence tools. Technology has also played a role in the formative years of the current generation of college students like no other (e.g., Haidt, 2024, Twenge, 2017), influencing their motivation to, and how they learn, something to which instructors must adapt. Other factors such as increasing performance expectations, questions about the value of the college experience, and declining budgets may also be contributing to instructors feeling overwhelmed. For those seeking extrinsic benefits to justify investing the time to effectively document teaching excellence, it may not be a priority absent corresponding rewards. For instructors intrinsically motivated to excel in their student-focused roles, this isn’t an issue. To them, documenting excellence, whether valued or appreciated by administrators, is not a chore but a necessary process.

A final consideration is not taking a broad view of the teaching role or appreciating the breadth of ways in which excellence can be documented. Even viewed through the traditional lens of classroom instruction, there are multiple ways to demonstrate efforts to improve the craft of teaching. However, as highlighted throughout the chapter, when viewed through the lens of student and instructor development, the opportunities multiply. It was mentioned earlier that unless an instructor is intentional in seeking other examples of effective documentation, they may have only one, their own. As a result, they may not have accurate perspective about whether their documentation is effective or not. It’s ultimately up to the individual to determine whether teaching is a task or part of their professional identity, and the level of commitment they are prepared to tell their story.

Realities of Evaluative Processes

Evaluative processes, whether end of semester course reviews, annual performance assessments, or tenure and promotion processes are among the most challenging aspects of the administrator role, particularly for department heads who play the role of first line supervisors. The absence of objective metrics, which is often the case with teaching, further complicates an already difficult task of making fair, objective performance assessments. Instructors receiving high SET scores naturally prefer that they play a significant role, and focusing on numbers can certainly simplify the administrator’s task. However, this runs counter to a strategic, developmentally focused evaluative process and should be avoided. Coupled with the reality that administrators typically evaluate not just one or two instructors but often ten or twenty or more, and even the most conscientious administrator can feel overwhelmed.

Much like building a resume, the onus is on the instructor to present their record in a way that motivates an administrator to read on rather than check out. This means telling a compelling story in a concise, logical manner, explaining what may not be readily apparent through the lens of the reader, and engaging them in a way that generates positive sentiment. Whatever one’s perspective of evaluative processes, it’s ultimately a choice of whether or how to use it to good effect.

References

Benbow, R. J., Lee, C., & Hora, M. T. (2021). Exploring college faculty development in 21st–century skill instruction: An analysis of teaching-focused personal networks. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(6), 818–835. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877x.2020.1826032

Boysen, G. A., Sawhney, M., Naufel, K. Z., Wood, S., Flora, K., Hill, J. C., & Scisco, J. L. (2020). Mentorship of undergraduate research experiences: Best practices, learning goals, and an assessment rubric. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 6(3), 212–224. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000219

Cherry, B. D., Grasse, N., Kapla, D., & Hamel, B. (2017). Analysis of academic administrators’ attitudes: Annual evaluations and factors that improve teaching. Journal of Higher Education Policy, 39(3), 296–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080x.2017.1298201

Clayson, D. E. (2021). A comprehensive critique of student evaluation of teaching: Critical perspectives on validity, reliability, and impartiality. Routledge.

Gribble, L., & Beckmann, E. A. (2023). The 4 Cs strategy for disseminating innovations in university teaching: Classroom, corridors, campus, community. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(1), 13–34. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.01.03

Haidt, J. (2024). The anxious generation: How the great rewiring of childhood is causing an epidemic of mental illness. Penguin Press.

Jungic, V., Creelman, D., Bigelow, A., Côté, E., Harris, S., Joordens, S., Ostafichuk, P., Riddell, J., Toulouse, P., & Yoon. (2020). Experiencing failure in the classroom and across the university. International Journal for Academic Development, 25(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2020.1712209

Ross, J. N., Guadagnolo, D., Eastman, A., Petrei, M., Bakaj, A., Crupi, L., Liu, S., Laliberte, N., & Rawle, F. (2023). Instructor perspectives on failure and its role in higher education. Currents in Teaching and Learning, 14(2), 83–120.

Ruge, R., Schӧnwetter, D. J., McCormack, C., & Kennelly, R. (2023). Teaching philosophies revalued: Beyond personal development to academic and institutional capacity building. International Journal for Academic Development, 28(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2021.1963735

Twenge, J. M. (2017). IGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy—and completely unprepared for adulthood (and what this means for the rest of us). Atria Paperback.

Vargas-Madriz, L. F., Nocente, N., Best-Bertwistle, R., & Forgie, S. (2019). “Somebody has to teach the ‘broccoli’ course”: Administrators navigating student evaluations of teaching (SET). Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 49(1), 85–103. https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.v49i1.188275