Aspirational Model Teaching Criteria for Psychology

Maintain expert knowledge in a subject area

There is consensus that excellent teachers are experts in their field of instruction (Buskist et al., 2002). The need for subject-specific expertise is officially recognized in several ways. At the most basic level, teaching positions have minimum requirements for degrees and degree specializations. In addition, the APA’s (2011) Principles for Quality undergraduate education states that instructors should not be given responsibility for courses outside of their training or knowledge, and it is considered unethical to teach outside of one’s area of competency (APA, 2010). Thus, model teachers instruct courses for which they have adequate knowledge and training. Basic knowledge of a subject is just a starting point for the best teachers, however (Buskist et al., 2002). Teachers should stay up to date in their field. They should also have salient examples and real-life illustrations of their subject matter. Model teachers remain intellectually engaged in their subject.

Acquire knowledge about basic pedagogical theory and practice

The process of becoming a model teacher is doubly challenging because it requires development of expertise in a specific content area and in the general area of pedagogy. Completing a graduate course on teaching is a standard method for improving pedagogical knowledge and skills (McElroy & Prentice-Dunn, 2005; Prieto & Meyers, 1999; Prieto & Scheel, 2008). Courses on teaching allow individuals to develop basic skills, such as lecturing and leading discussion, but the development of knowledge about how people learn may be an even more important outcome. Basic and applied research indicates that there are fundamental ways that people learn, and teachers should be aware of these basic learning principles (APA, 2011; Worrell et al., 2010). Furthermore, teachers should utilize scientifically justified methods of instruction; they should specifically design lessons to take advantage of the methods known to promote learning (APA, 2011; Bernstein et al., 2010). Teachers who approach pedagogy from a scientific perspective are referred to as scientist-educators (Bernstein et al., 2010). The most advanced type of scientist-educator integrates both knowledge of psychology content and knowledge of effective pedagogy into the design of learning experiences. Thus, model teachers are trained as scientist-educators who put pedagogical knowledge into practice.

Maintain current knowledge of pedagogical theory and practice

Bernstein and colleagues (2010) argued that development of teaching competency is an ongoing process for scientist-educators. Just as the science of psychology is constantly developing, pedagogy changes with the production of new knowledge. To illustrate, recent research placed doubt on the ability of learning styles to influence actual learning outcomes (Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, & Bjork, 2008) and on the ability of technology (e.g., course response systems) to improve learning in teaching methods that are already pedagogically sound (Anthis, 2011). Knowledge of these results could lead to dramatic shifts in teaching. Up-to-date pedagogical knowledge can even be considered an ethical responsibility. The APA (2010) ethics code instructs psychologists to “undertake ongoing efforts to develop and maintain their competence” (p. 5). Considering the evolving nature of pedagogy, model teachers engage in continuous efforts to learn about teaching.

Model teachers also possess pedagogical knowledge that goes beyond specific teaching techniques. Because the student population and psychology itself are increasingly diverse, model teachers seek to increase their multicultural competency in terms of knowledge and ability to engage in effective cross-cultural interactions (Littleford et al., 2010). In addition, rapidly changing technology means that teachers need to stay abreast of possible new ways to improve learning or accessibility through the use of technology (Millis et al., 2010). For example, incorporating the “flipped classroom” using online e-learning websites (e.g., Blackboard) to teach statistics can increase student learning (Wilson, 2013). Continuing education in pedagogy takes many forms. Model teachers read books and journals on education, attend teaching conferences, and participate in professional development opportunities on their own campuses.

Supporting evidence related to training

Evidence to support training competency can be broken down into two categories namely initial training and continuing education. Initial training can be documented with curriculum vitae (CV) and graduate transcripts. Subject knowledge can be seen in teachers’ graduate degree specialization and program of study. In addition, documentation of presentations or publications in a specific research area can demonstrate knowledge in areas that may not be represented by specific course work. Records of scholarship can also demonstrate that teachers have maintained expertise in their specific fields. Transcripts or certificates of completion are particularly important in documenting formal education in teaching methods; they should reflect courses taken in the teaching of psychology, education, and professional development more broadly (e.g., preparing future faculty). The CVs of model teachers also document efforts to continue their education. Evidence for continuing education can include attendance at conferences, completion of workshops, and participation in professional societies; such continuing education should relate to both subject-specific knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. For example, a teacher might show a pattern of rotating between attendance at conferences that are directly related to their area of scholarship and conferences that are dedicated to teaching.

Demonstrate effective use of various teaching methods

Model teachers are characterized by their ability to use varied teaching techniques that actively engage students in the process of learning. A recent review of contemporary approaches to teaching synthesized their shared assumptions and methods (Slavich & Zimbardo, 2012). All of the approaches centered on the assumption that students must actively engage with material—be it through discussion, collaboration, problem solving, or reflection—in order to learn. Research supports the idea that good teachers actively engage students in the learning process. Numerous narrative reviews and meta-analyses support the effectiveness of methods such as active learning, collaborative learning, and problem-based learning (Dochy, Segers, Van den Bossche, & Gijbels, 2003; Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1998; Prince, 2004; Springer, Stanne, & Donovan, 1999; Walker & Leary, 2009). Model teachers actively engage students using these types of methods, but they also have the ability to do so using a diverse set of techniques. The APA’s (2011) Quality Principles for Undergraduate Education includes applying “a variety of learning principles and modes of learning” (p. 8). Furthermore, Dunn, McCarthy, Baker, Halonen, and Hill (2007) described the highest quality psychology faculty as those who engage “students broadly through varied effective and creative pedagogical strategies” (p. 662). Although it is impossible to stipulate the specific methods used by model teachers, their teaching approach is likely to be characterized by the use of a variety of techniques that enhance student engagement.

Demonstrate excellence in basic teaching skills

In addition to their broad pedagogical approach, model teachers also possess mastery of many specific teaching skills. There is some consensus on the skills and classroom stance of the best college teachers (Buskist et al., 2002; Epting, Zinn, Buskist, & Buskist, 2004; Keeley et al., 2006, 2010; Marsh, 1984; Svinivki & McKeachie, 2011). Model teachers are open, enthusiastic, and engaging. They tend to demonstrate excellent public speaking and communication skills. They are also conscientious, organized, and professional. Model teachers set high expectations, motivate students to meet those expectations, and exert control in order to manage classroom distractions. Although most teachers have a dominant pedagogical style—it is easy to think of prototypically masterful lecturers and discussion leaders—model teachers are flexible in their methods. Finally, model teachers are competent in the use of educational technology.

Supporting evidence related to instructional methods

Evidence to support the use of model instructional methods can be broken down into the following two categories: instructional materials and teacher evaluations. At the most basic level, syllabi can be used to demonstrate the use of engaging pedagogical techniques. Syllabi will reflect teachers’ predominant methods of instruction through descriptions of the course, assignments, and course schedules. More detail can be provided by lesson plans, however. A lesson plan represents teachers’ systematic outline of how learning will be facilitated in a specific class (Cerbin, 2012). Lesson plans, at a minimum, contain a list of learning objectives and the materials and methods the teacher will use to facilitate learning. They provide model teachers with the opportunity to highlight their intentional use of specific teaching techniques. Model teachers can also document sound pedagogy through the evaluations of others. Students are perhaps the most important evaluators, and teachers can provide evidence of specific skills by having students fill out the Teacher Behavior Checklist (Keeley et al., 2006) in addition to the forms that universities routinely administer. More generally, teaching awards stemming from student nominations suggest the mastery of teaching skills. Observations by experts in education are another important evaluation. These can include peers, administrators, and staff from campus teaching centers. Classroom observations can be followed by letters or completed observation rubrics documenting the teachers’ mastery of basic teaching skills and the intentional use of specific pedagogical techniques.

Establish learning goals and objectives

Model teachers clearly and objectively define the expected outcomes of their courses. Defining learning goals is considered a basic skill in the scientist-educator approach to teaching (Bernstein et al., 2010). Clear learning objectives allow teachers to align educational experiences and expected outcomes before the learning experiences begin; similarly, having learning objectives allows for an assessment plan to be set before learning occurs (McCarthy et al., 2011). Creating instructional objectives also has the advantage of being one of the characteristics of learning-centered education (Blumberg, 2009; Harden, 2002; Huba & Freed, 2000). A teacher-centered approach to education tends to focus on what the teacher does. A learning-centered approach focuses on what students learn, and the most important reason to utilize objectives is that they increase learning. A series of studies in the 1970s focused on the effects of providing objectives to students, and the clearest result of this research was that more learning occurred when students had objectives than when they simply reviewed material without objectives (Duchastel & Brown, 1974; Duell, 1974; Gagné & Rothkopf, 1975; Kaplan, 1976; Kaplan & Simmons, 1974; Rothkopf & Kaplan, 1972; Royer, 1977). Other interesting effects emerged as well. Specific objectives fostered more learning than general objectives (Kaplan, 1976; Rothkopf & Kaplan, 1972), use of objectives increased learning without significantly increasing studying time (Duchastel & Brown, 1974), and the objectives were effective for information presented in written or lecture format (Royer, 1977). Although this research was limited to the laboratory, it provides some empirical grounding for the claim that course objectives help achieve the ultimate goal of learning.

Assess student-learning outcomes

Although defining learning objectives assists students in learning, objectives are also essential as a guide to evaluating the success of learning experiences. Ideas to improve learning are like experimental hypotheses, and teachers cannot assume that their hypotheses about learning are supported without consulting the results of a dependent measure (i.e., achieved learning objectives). The scientist-educator model requires teachers to connect learning goals to assessment results (Bernstein et al., 2010). Furthermore, the APA’s (2011) Quality Principles for Undergraduate Education states that teachers should assess learning outcomes. Thus, model teachers assess students’ abilities to meet course-learning objectives. Model teachers do not consider assessment extra work. They plan assessments before learning experiences begin and conduct them so that the results are useful for increasing future learning (Angelo & Cross, 1993; Huba & Freed, 2000; McCarthy et al., 2011).

Reflection and use of assessments

Scientist-educators not only collect assessment data but also reflect on assessment outcomes and use the results to improve learning experiences (Bernstein et al., 2010). The APA’s (2011) Quality Principles for Undergraduate Education states that teachers should be consistently adjusting learning experiences to increase achievement of the outcomes. Thus, model teachers make changes to their courses based on assessment results. They do not conduct assessment simply because it is required; rather, they use assessment results in the process of continuous course improvement. In particular, model teachers go beyond using only summative assessments, data usually collected to inform tenure and promotion, to use formative assessments, assessments carried out during the course which can then immediately inform changes in pedagogy (Blumberg, 2014). It is their goal to consistently increase the percentage of students who achieve the learning goals in their courses.

Disseminate information about teaching in the form of scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL)

The documentation of student learning outcomes is inherently tied to scholarship of teaching (Gurung & Landrum, 2012; Smith, 2008). Scholarship of teaching is the sharing of peer-reviewed teaching materials so that they are capable of informing others’ teaching practices (Buskist, Carlson, Christopher, Prieto, & Smith, 2008; Smith, 2008). Sharing of results is a key element of SoTL. Thus, using scientifically verified teaching practices and improving teaching through research without publically sharing these findings would not qualify as the scholarship of teaching. There is consensus that model teachers engage in scholarship of teaching. The APA’s (2011) Quality Principles for Undergraduate Education encourages scholarship of teaching at all institutions, not just at research-intensive or teaching-focused colleges. Furthermore, the scientist-educator model suggests that the highest levels of teaching include creation of new methods that improve the teaching of others (Bernstein et al., 2010).

Scholarship of teaching is also important in evaluating the potential of basic psychological principles—such as testing effects, spaced practice, and deep processing of information—to enhance learning in the classroom. Basic psychological concepts often have robust effects in the laboratory, but it is up to the teachers to determine if the effects generalize to the psychology classroom (Worrell et al., 2010). For example, increasing memory through repeated testing stands out as a basic research finding with exceptional classroom potential (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006), but the positive effects of testing may be attenuated when applied in courses that are already designed using techniques that maximize learning (Saville, Pope, Lovaas, & Williams, 2012). Overall, whether they are validating their own new methods or evaluating applications for basic research, model teachers use scholarship of teaching to impact not only their students but other teachers as well.

Align evaluations of learning with learning objectives

Evaluation is related to, but not synonymous with, assessment. Generally, evaluation occurs when the quality of a specific performance is judged, and for most teachers evaluation results in the assignment of a specific grade. Thus, evaluation does not constitute a process like assessment, but it does stem from the desire to document students’ abilities to achieve learning objectives. For model teachers, evaluation of students is aligned with course-learning objectives (Palomba & Banta, 1999; Race, Brown, & Smith, 2005). Evaluation alignment is useful for both teachers and students. For teachers, alignment is part of course planning and makes it clear what should be evaluated and how it should be evaluated. To illustrate, knowledge goals might be evaluated using tests, and application goals might be evaluated using papers. For students, alignment of evaluations with objectives helps focus efforts to learn on the goals of a course, and a grading system that is coherent and predictable is inherently fairer than the one that is relatively more capricious.

Provide students with prompt, constructive feedback on learning

Evaluations are an opportunity to assign grades to students’ work, but they also represent a chance to give feedback that can lead to improvements in student learning. Good teachers provide useful feedback to students (Chickering & Gamson, 1987; Keeley et al., 2006). One component of useful feedback is how promptly and frequently teachers provide it to students. Feedback that comes too late or too infrequently to influence student learning is not useful (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000). The content of feedback is also important because vague or inaccurate feedback is not useful no matter how promptly or frequently teachers provide it. Model teachers provide students with feedback that fosters improvement in learning or performance; typically, this requires more detail than just a grade. When appropriate to an assignment, model teachers give students feedback using rubrics, which are a particularly learning-focused approach to evaluation (Huba & Freed, 2000). Rubrics outline varying levels of proficiency for different aspects of an assignment (e.g., poor, acceptable, and excellent levels of APA-style formatting). From this, students know the learning or skills they are expected to exhibit, and feedback in the form of a scored rubric allows them to know what specific aspects of their performance need improvement (Andrade, 2005). It is also important to note that rubrics can possess considerable reliability and validity (Stellmack, Konheim-Kalkstein, Manor, Massey, & Schmitz, 2009), which is relevant to teachers’ and students’ concerns about fairness.

Supporting evidence related to the assessment process

Activities included in the MTC as assessment-related are quite varied; they include everything from classroom assignments to scholarship. Similarly, the evidence used to document engagement in the assessment process is diverse, but it can be divided up into the basic assessment process, evaluation of students, and scholarship. The basic assessment process involves setting learning objectives, facilitating learning experiences, assessing student learning outcomes, and reaction to the outcomes. Each step in this process can be documented. Objectives can be documented in syllabi and explicit lists of objectives for courses (Boysen, 2012). Lesson plans also typically outline learning objectives and the methods used for achieving the objectives. Evidence for the assessment of learning outcomes can be documented with summaries of assessment methods and results. Pusateri, Halonen, Hill, and McCarthy’ (2009) assessment guide provides numerous illustrations of the appropriate methods for assessing various objectives that are common to psychology education. Teachers might also create embedded assessment plans; these connect specific objectives and the course assignments used to assess if students have achieved the objective (McCarthy et al., 2011). For example, knowledge-based objectives might be assessed through tests, and writing objectives might be assessed with an APA-style writing rubric (e.g., Stellmack et al., 2009). Assessment ideally leads to improvement in teaching and learning; therefore, evidence of changes based on assessment results is essential. Changes might be demonstrated through examples of evolving syllabi, course content, and lesson plans.

MTC related to evaluation may emerge as part of evidence documenting the broader assessment process, but there are specific ways to document evaluation directness and utility. In terms of directness, teachers might explicitly illustrate how evaluation tools such as tests and grading rubrics relate to their list of course-learning objectives. Anonymous samples of evaluations of actual students who did and did not meet the learning objectives may also serve as evidence. For example, if the learning objective is for students to be able to format articles in APA style, evidence for evaluation directness might consist of completed rubrics along with articles that received high and low scores. Evaluations of learning should also be useful to students, and the aforementioned methods can serve as documentation of directness. However, student evaluations of teaching often have items related to usefulness of grading that might be submitted as evidence.

SoTL is the final assessment-related criterion. The key to any evidence of SoTL is dissemination of knowledge gained about teaching. Traditional forms of peer-reviewed research represent the strongest evidence for scholarship. However, evidence of local dissemination is also meaningful. Teachers may direct workshops, conduct in-services, or give presentations on their own campuses. The key idea is that model teachers can demonstrate that their gained knowledge about effective teaching is not held in isolation and that it has the potential to influence the practice of other educators.

Provide clear and complete syllabi

Although syllabi are as unique as the teachers who create them, there are some standards that model teachers exhibit when constructing a course syllabus (Slattery & Carlson, n.d., 2005). Syllabi serve as permanent references for information that students will need to know about a course, such as instructor contact information, policies, and learning goals. Syllabi also function as an outline for a course and should offer students a plan for what will occur across the entire semester. Students should be able to determine the course expectations, evaluation methods, and schedule using the syllabus. Finally, syllabi serve as an agreement between teacher and student; thus, ethically responsible teachers construct accurate syllabi and teach in a manner consistent with their stated course plan (APA, 2010).

Plan specific activities to achieve learning objectives

Model teachers’ syllabi reflect thoughtful planning about the learning that should occur in a course, the methods used to facilitate learning, and the methods used to assess learning. The syllabus is where the planning of learning objectives meets actual course content. Syllabi should communicate high expectations but also outline methods by which expectations will be met (Slattery & Carlson, n.d., 2005). Both in-class and out-of-class work should clearly relate to learning goals, and each learning goal for a course should be connected to a learning experience. Furthermore, each learning goal should be connected to a potential method of assessment (McCarthy et al., 2011). Although some of the specifics of course planning may not be included in the syllabi distributed to students, the syllabi of model teachers represent the final product of this deliberate and thoughtful alignment of goals, learning activities, and assessment.

Supporting evidence related to syllabi

Evidence for syllabi quality is largely self-evident. The transparency of a course is shown by the detail provided to students in the syllabi regarding objectives, assignments, policies, and schedules. Evidence is also needed for intentional course planning. Teachers might demonstrate mastery of planning through their course schedules. Sample lesson plans and assignment descriptions can show that a teacher selects varied teaching methods to fit the specific learning objective rather than relying on just one method.

Establish learning objectives reflecting the scientific foundation of psychology

Scientific knowledge is at the core of the undergraduate psychology curriculum (Dunn et al., 2010). Both the APA’s undergraduate major guidelines and principles of quality indicate that teachers should emphasize the scientific foundation of psychology (APA, 2007, 2011, 2013). Furthermore, Dunn and colleagues’ (2007) quality benchmarks for undergraduate programs characterized the best departments as training students in the skills of scientists and as requiring a research experience for all students. Taken together, these prescriptions leave no room for teachers to ignore the science behind psychology. Thus, model teachers represent psychology as a science in all of their courses and set learning goals related to the scientific foundation of psychology. Depending on the course, learning goals might reflect the actual methods of psychological science or knowledge of the ways in which psychological concepts and applications are a product of the scientific method.

Establish learning objectives reflecting the breadth of psychology theories and applications

The APA (2007) undergraduate major guidelines outline specific learning goals as they relate to various areas of psychology. These goals include both the basic science of psychology and its areas of application. Calls for a core psychology curriculum echo these central areas of basic and applied knowledge (Dunn et al., 2010). Furthermore, the quality benchmarks state that the best undergraduate curricula offer multiple, complementary perspectives on psychology (Dunn et al., 2007). Model teachers use the core, accepted knowledge base of psychology as their source for learning objectives. However, they also attempt to impart to students the diversity of perspectives and breadth of content in psychology.

Foster student development of basic liberal arts skills

Psychology is an excellent example of a liberal arts undergraduate major. Students in psychology master subject-specific content, but the psychology curriculum should also train students more broadly to communicate effectively, work collaboratively, and think critically. The APA’s (2007) undergraduate major goals explicitly outlines these liberal arts goals. In terms of communication skills, undergraduates should learn how to speak and write clearly. Furthermore, they should be able to collaborate, which requires communication and interpersonal skills (APA, 2007, 2013; Dunn et al., 2007; McGovern et al., 2010). Given these standards for providing psychology majors with a liberal arts education, model teachers incorporate liberal arts skills as learning goals in their courses. They also provide students with opportunities to practice these skills through such activities as written assignments, discussion, public speaking, and collaborative work.

Psychology education should also foster critical thinking. People, including psychology majors, hold many inaccurate beliefs about psychology (Lilienfeld, Lynn, Ruscio, & Beyerstein, 2010). Furthermore, the ease with which information—accurate and inaccurate—can be accessed on the Internet has increased the need for critical analysis of sources and evidence. These facts make critical thinking, perhaps, the most important skill that students can learn in psychology. In recognition of this fact, critical thinking is one of the fundamental learning goals for the psychology major (APA, 2007), and basic psychological literacy requires healthy skepticism in problem solving and evaluation of information (McGovern et al., 2010). In addition, the APA’s (2011) quality principles clearly states that critical thinking should be fostered continuously throughout the undergraduate curriculum. Therefore, model teachers set learning goals related to critical thinking in their courses. They also use established methods when fostering the disposition and cognitive skills that characterize critical thinkers (e.g., Halpern, 1998; King, 1995; Wade, 1995; Yanchar & Slife, 2004).

Infuse ethical and diversity issues throughout teaching

Along with scientific inquiry, diversity and ethics are among the core values of psychology as a discipline. In that pursuit, the APA’s (2007) guidelines for the undergraduate major include the ability to “recognize and respect human diversity” (p. 17). Thus, teachers should foster respect for and recognition of diversity for several reasons beyond the prescriptions of the APA (Chew et al., 2010; Landrum et al., 2010; Littleford et al., 2010). Diversity is about individual differences, which is a core concept in psychological science. In addition, with the increasingly diverse American population, teachers have a responsibility to address the diversity of their students and to prepare them to function in a diverse world. Diversity is a relevant topic for all psychology courses, and this means that explicit learning goals related to diversity should be distributed across the undergraduate curriculum (APA, 2003, 2011; Dunn et al., 2007, 2010). Considering the already established and ever-increasing importance of diversity, model teachers infuse learning goals related to diversity, broadly defined, into their courses. Their goals reflect a commitment to developing students’ multicultural knowledge and awareness (APA, 2003). Diversity goals can be taught across the curriculum and are not a topic reserved for specialized multicultural or applied courses (e.g., Borshuk, 2006; Littleford et al., 2010; Trimble, Stevenson, & Worell, 2003). Thus, model teachers of all teaching specialties address diversity content in their courses.

Behaving ethically is another value that is central to psychology. One of the APA’s learning outcomes for the undergraduate major is to “Recognize the necessity of ethical behavior in all aspects of the science and practice of psychology” (APA, 2007, p. 17). More specifically, students should have a basic grasp of the APA ethics code, and they should follow the APA ethics code when conducting research. Just as with diversity, programs should infuse ethics throughout the curriculum (Dunn et al., 2007, 2010), and this includes ethics as they relate to diversity specifically (APA, 2011). Given the importance of ethical behavior to the profession of psychology, model teachers include ethical issues in their courses. Their courses reflect the relation of ethics to research, practice, and diversity; and they introduce students to the APA code of ethics when it relates to the course topic (e.g., research methods and clinical practice). Furthermore, model teachers not only instruct on the basics of ethics, they also stand as models of ethical behavior (APA, 2011).

Supporting evidence related to content

Evidence for teachers’ coverage of essential content can come from materials at all levels of course structure and implementation. Most broadly, learning objectives and course subjects listed in the syllabi demonstrate the goal to include essential content. Lesson plans and assignments can demonstrate the actual methods used to achieve objectives related to the essential content. Finally, results of assessments and samples of students’ work can demonstrate the achievement of learning objectives related to essential content.

Solicit formative and summative student feedback on teaching

Standardized student evaluations are an accepted measure of teaching effectiveness. Indications of their validity include their ability to predict student learning and evaluations by other stakeholders, such as peers and administrators (Marsh, 1983, 1984; Marsh & Roche, 1997). There is some variance in student evaluations that makes them less than perfect measurements of teaching effectiveness (e.g., their small correlation with grades and class size), but they may provide meaningful data about students’ perceptions of teachers. As such, model teachers administer summative student evaluations of teaching at the conclusion of their courses. In addition, model teachers do not wait until the end of the semester to receive their first student feedback; they also solicit formative evaluations from students during the semester. Formative evaluations may not be standardized assessment tools, and classroom assessment techniques as simple as having students write for 1 min about what they learned in class can provide useful feedback from students (Angelo & Cross, 1993).

Utilize student evaluations of teaching to improve teaching and learning

Research and debate about student evaluations center on their utility in making summative judgments about teacher performance, and this often obscures their use as a tool for the improvement of teaching. Student evaluations of teaching have become so ingrained into the fabric of higher education that the research undergirding their use receives little attention. Research indicates that receiving and reflecting on student evaluations actually improves teaching (Marsh & Roche, 1997). For example, in one study, random samples of teachers either received feedback using midterm student evaluations or did not receive feedback: Teachers who received feedback also spent time reflecting on their evaluations. At the end of the semester, students of the teachers who reflected on midterm feedback, compared to students of the teachers who did not receive feedback, tended to assign better end-of-semester ratings on teaching evaluations, earn better grades, and have more positive attitudes about the course subject (Overall & Marsh, 1979). Several meta-analyses have provided similarly supportive results for the utility of reflecting on student evaluations (Lipsey & Wilson, 1993). Furthermore, the effect sizes found in the meta-analyses compare favorably to many other accepted psychological and educational interventions. Thus, model teachers do more than solicit student feedback, they reflect on that feedback and use it to make appropriate changes to their instructional methods.

Supporting evidence related to student evaluations of teaching

Model teachers should be able to demonstrate regular solicitation of and reflection on student feedback. Evidence can consist of summaries of end-of-the-semester official teaching evaluations, but will, ideally, also include summaries of informal feedback gathered from students throughout the semester. Model teachers not only gather data on student perceptions, they make adjustments based on feedback. As such, model teachers should be able to provide specific examples of feedback-based changes in their syllabi, course materials, lesson plans, or general teaching strategies.