Teaching Portfolio
Due Date: Monday, February 16, 2004
The English department has been working on program assessment in part to prepare for SACS accreditation review. In the past, you've done portfolios mainly for professional development and ranking for teaching positions and awards. This year, however, we're also using teaching portfolios to assess our program. Thus, the requirements have changed. Below, please find an outline of what to include, followed by a description of each item. Please know that portfolios are works in progress, and we realize this is the first semester we've asked for so much material. Don't panic if you're just beginning to teach; portfolios vary, and yours will evolve over time as you gain teaching experience. We very much appreciate your efforts and professional commitment. Please let us know if you have comments or concerns.
Outline:
1. Teaching Philosophy
2. Course Reflections
For each semester you taught during 2003 (Spring 2003, Summer 2003, and Fall 2003) include:
3. Syllabus for each different course, including course outline.
4. Learning Outcome Grid, completed with all supporting materials
5. Course Evaluations
6. Observation Form
1. Teaching Philosophy. Include a philosophy of teaching. Most of these are not more than 2 pages long. Discuss your goals and philosophy (theory) of teaching. Your philosophy should show your awareness of major concepts and trends in your field (i.e. rhetorical, process, feminist, collaborative pedagogy; authorship, reader-response, cultural studies, etc.) but avoid academic jargon and overly inflated prose. What unique contribution do you bring to the classroom?
2. Course Reflection. Write a reflective essay about the courses you've taught this year. Discuss what you think worked with particular classes and what you will try next time you teach the courses. Here you may also explain details you've included in the Learning Outcomes Grid.
For each semester you taught, include the following items. Please place all materials from each semester together. If you didn't teach a semester or are missing some items, just leave them out.
3. Syllabus. Include the ones used for courses taught this year, including course outlines.
4. Learning Outcome Grid. Use the attached form for 1101 and/or 1102; choose 2-3 learning outcomes for each different course you taught this year and explain the activities or assignments that you used to teach them. Attach sample student work that demonstrates the outcome. Explain briefly how you measured the outcome (you may include a grading rubric or use the sample rubric attached here, which refers to our published course grading standards). Finally, estimate the percentage of students who met the outcome. For example, you can explain that 5/23 earned an A, 8/23 a B, 3/23 were not proficient, etc.
5. Course Evaluation. Include the GoSolar summary of course evaluations for each different course you taught this year.
6. Observation Form. Include a copy of the written comments of your observer. You may include any explanatory material that you wish.
Please arrange materials in the order described. Use a manila folder to hold materials. Turn these in to Heather Russel on or before Monday, Feb. 16, 2004. For more information, contact Lynée Gaillet, Mary Lamb, or Marti Singer.
The files below require the Adobe Acrobat Reader. You can download the free reader here.
1101 Learning Outcome Grid (pdf)
1102 Learning Outcome Grid (pdf)
Rubric for Papers in English Composition (pdf)
GSU Writing Standards (pdf)
Georgia State University Writing Standards
A. The A paper exhibits originality of thought in stating and developing a central idea. The ideas expressed are clear, logical, and thought provoking. The paper contains the positive qualities of good writing listed below: 1. The paper concentrates on a central idea and reveals a clear and sound over-all organizational plan. 2. Major points in the paper are developed logically and are supported with concrete, specific evidence or details that will arouse the reader's interest. 3. The paper reveals the writer's ability to select effective, appropriate words and phrases to make careful use of transitional devices; to maintain a confident, appropriate tone; and to be free from mechanical errors.
B. The B paper has a clearly stated central idea, logically and adequately developed. The ideas are clear because the paper contains some of the positive qualities of good writing. The paper is comparatively free of errors in the use of English. Although indicating marked competence, the B paper lacks the originality and depth of thought and the mastery of style which characterizes the A paper.
C. The grade of C demonstrates college-level proficiency in writing. The paper has a central idea expressed clearly enough to convey the paper's thesis to the reader. The paper avoids serious errors in the use of English, but lacks the vigor of expression and thoroughness of development found in B or A papers. Organization, coherence and unity of thought must be sustained in the paper as a whole.
D. The grade of D indicates achievement that falls below that of college-level proficiency. Most D papers fail to clearly develop and sustain a central idea, or they may reveal serious and numerous errors in rhetoric and mechanics.
F. The grade of F usually indicates a failure to state and to develop a central idea, to have an organization in the paper that is indicative of an overall plan, to deal with the assigned topic, or to avoid serious (and numerous, perhaps) errors in rhetoric and mechanics.