Evidence

Teaching Statement

Members of the professoriate write a teaching statement (which can be part of their standard self-evaluation) in which they give examples of their teaching in each dimension. They may also choose to provide additional context (e.g., reflect overall on their teaching, discuss their teaching philosophy, provide a brief, self-evaluative narrative). The HET framework provides guidance and structure to assist members of the professoriate with creating a more substantive teaching statement.

HET Folder 

Two forms of evidence are typically used in evaluation cases at UCLA: the Teaching Record (a form that summarizes courses developed and taught) and Student Evaluations of Teaching (SETs). An additional source of evidence is required (APM 210), and several options are listed below under Categories of Evidence. In addition, concrete examples are provided further below, keyed to the dimensions of excellent teaching.

These should be thought of as suggestions to spark inspiration, not requirements. The intention is not that most (or even many) of these should be in every participating professoriate member’s HET Folder. What makes a strong HET Folder is the inclusion of evidence that illustrates what the member of the professoriate wants the evaluators to consider.

Categories of Evidence

  • Anonymized examples of student work* (annotated, so evaluators understand the relevance);
  • Feedback gathered from students about the course* (e.g., results of a mid-quarter survey about how the course is working for students; summary of a class activity in which students gave feedback about the course); or
  • Data demonstrating student achievement (e.g., exam or assignment grades; summaries of performance on different dimensions of a grading rubric) or engagement (e.g., record of participation).
  • Student performance on assessments (e.g., pre- and post-quarter tests, discipline-specific licensure or accreditation exams, etc.).
  • Student grades in subsequent courses.
  • Large-scale data demonstrating decreased disparities in outcomes (e.g., between genders, racial / ethnic backgrounds, first-gen / non-first-gen students, etc.).

*If examples of student work or comments from surveys are shared, care should be taken to ensure that students cannot be identified. It is also a good practice to inform students in advance how their work may be used.

  • A classroom observation
  • A review of course materials
  • Curricular collaboration (e.g., co-planning a course, revising a sequence of courses)
  • Teaching-related awards (or nominations)
  • Syllabi
  • Lesson plans or materials
  • Lecture slides
  • Handouts
  • Assignments or assessments
  • Grading rubrics
  • Study guides
  • Descriptions of classroom activities or routines
  • Instructions for projects
  • Discussion guidelines
  • Protocols for student peer review / feedback
  • Screenshots of Bruin Learn site or other e-learning space (e.g., Slack, Campuswire, Piazza)
  • Examples of instructor feedback on anonymized student work
  • Course map showing how activities or assessments align with intended student learning
  • Participation in professional development
  • Participation in formative peer observation
  • Collaboration with departmental colleagues to plan sequential or related courses
  • Mentoring colleagues on teaching
  • Service on a curriculum or assessment committee 
  • Teaching-related publications, presentations, or grant applications

Concrete Examples Keyed to the Dimensions of Excellent Teaching

  • Syllabi or screenshots of Bruin Learn site or other e-learning space (e.g., Slack, Campuswire, Piazza), showing clear course expectations and logistics
  • Screenshots of Bruin Learn site or other e-learning space (e.g., Slack, Campuswire, Piazza), showing instructor’s regular “presence” in an asynchronous course
  • Descriptions of classroom activities or routines to welcome or engage students
  • Lesson plans or lecture slides that describe students’ opportunities for active learning, collaboration, practice, etc.
  • Materials that give students ways to organize their learning other than traditional, student-initiated note-taking from textual slides or during lecture (e.g., reading guides, note-taking templates, timelines, diagrams, concept maps, main-idea-detail charts, etc.)
  • Assignments or activities that engage students in metacognition (e.g., exam wrappers, assignment reflections, etc.)
  • Anonymized examples of student work where students have engaged in metacognition
  • Assignments that are scaffolded, suggest related learning resources, etc.
  • Colleague’s description of a classroom observation or review of materials that includes how instructor engages students as active participants
  • Data demonstrating student engagement (e.g., record of participation)
  • Feedback from students (e.g., on a mid-quarter survey) about how the course engages them
  • Syllabi that include statements addressing diversity, accessibility, classroom climate, basic-needs resources, etc.
  • Screenshots of Bruin Learn site or other e-learning space (e.g., Slack, Campuswire, Piazza), showing good accessibility practices
  • Protocols that foster respectful, helpful student peer review / feedback
  • Discussion guidelines that create an environment where all students can learn
  • Lesson plans or lecture slides that show the inclusion of multiple perspectives on complex or controversial issues
  • Teaching materials created by people from different backgrounds
  • Teaching materials that show how issues of equity and social justice are included in course content
  • Descriptions of activities, handouts, or materials that help students build missing background knowledge
  • Grading rubrics, exemplars that are provided to students for assessments or assignments
  • Description of classroom routines that foster equitable “air time” for all students
  • Lesson plans that include multiple interaction structures and modalities (e.g., whole-group and small-group discussion; students share ideas verbally, in writing, or by completing in-class polls)
  • Assignments that incorporate student choice
  • Lesson plans or assignments that draw on students’ backgrounds, experiences
  • Analysis of grades disaggregated by demographic groups and description of teaching strategies to address equity gaps
  • Descriptions of specific incidents when sensitive areas of the content were addressed or charged learning situations were navigated to maintain an inclusive environment
  • Colleague’s description of a classroom observation or review of materials that includes how the member of the professoriate creates or maintains an inclusive environment
  • Feedback from students (e.g., on a mid-quarter survey) about class climate
  • Syllabi that include course-level intended learning
  • Lecture slides, screenshots of Bruin Learn site or other e-learning space (e.g., Slack, Campuswire, Piazza), that show how lesson-level intended learning is shared with students
  • Materials that explicitly indicate for students how the intended learning will be assessed or how an assignment supports intended learning
  • Lesson plans, lecture slides, or descriptions of activities where the instructor conducts low-stakes, formative assessment (e.g., in-class polls, exit tickets, quick-writes) to get just-in-time information about how students are learning
  • Lesson plans, lecture slides, or descriptions of activities with points where the member of the professoriate can “pivot,” depending on how student learning is unfolding (e.g., depending on student responses during activity X, the member of the professoriate can proceed with activity Y or activity Z)
  • Multi-stage projects where students receive feedback after each stage
  • Feedback from students (e.g., on a mid-quarter survey), along with evidence (e.g., paired, before-and-after syllabi, assignments, etc.) of how the instructor responded (e.g., revisions to expectations, routines, class policies, assignments, lessons, etc.)
  • Course map that keeps track of how lesson-, activity-, and assignment-level intended learning is assessed and builds to course-level intended learning
  • Anonymized examples of student work with comments that show how the professoriate member’s feedback refers to intended student learning
  • Data demonstrating student achievement (e.g., exam or assignment grades; summaries of performance on different dimensions of a grading rubric), along with evidence (e.g., paired, before-and-after syllabi, assignments, etc.) of how the member of the professoriate responded (e.g., revisions to reading list, assignments, lessons, etc.)
  • Colleague’s description of a classroom observation or review of materials that includes how activities align to intended learning, engages in formative assessment, or responds to student learning as it unfolds
  • Any form of evidence listed above that shows how the member of the professoriate implemented changes to their teaching because of suggestions from colleagues, consistent patterns in SETs, reflection, or engagement in professional development
  • A description of:
    • Participation in professional development
    • Participation in formative peer observation
    • Collaboration with departmental colleagues to plan sequential or related courses;
    • Mentoring faculty colleagues on teaching
    • Service on a curriculum or assessment committee
    • Teaching-related awards (or nominations), publications, presentations, or grant applications