Open Response from Colleagues in the Faculty of Arts to the University of Regina Strategic Plan for Teaching and

Learning [SPTL] as drafted by University Committee on Teaching and Learning [UCTL].

Dear University Committee on Teaching and Learning, Fellow Colleagues, and the Broader University Community: We, the undersigned colleagues from the Faculty of Arts, believe the SPTL should reverse its thrust toward centralization and standardization (including measuring and defining good teaching) in order to promote diversity, trust and creativity. To that end, we endorse the following suggestions and comments to assist in the redrafting of the SPTL: 1) Department-Level Assessments of Teaching Effectiveness Departments should retain the right to implement their own assessments of effective teaching for the purposes of mentoring their own faculty and fostering strong teaching cultures. Because the content, execution and outcomes of teaching vary based on (sub)disciplinary conventions and practices all teaching and learning assessments, definitions and instruments of measurement should remain at the departmental level. Recommendation: Departments should be encouraged to disseminate information about their assessment practices. For example, the Department of Sociology and Social Studies has implemented a teaching evaluation process that allows faculty members to draw upon many different types of evidence (listed in the Faculty of Arts Criteria document) in order to build a case for teaching effectiveness, without making any type of measure (e.g. standardized student evaluations) compulsory. This model is being implemented on a trial basis, and the departments experiences will inform practices in Sociology and Social Studies and might be relevant to other Departments. Whereas standardizing evaluations could serve to forestall innovations and opportunities, discussions about different strategies between Departments might offer opportunities to reflect and improve teaching in different units. In the interest of better teaching, Departments should be encouraged to develop effective assessment practices at the local level and to share those practices when appropriate. 2) Supporting Teaching Practices The SPTL should focus on effective ways to support and reward teaching. The SPTL is currently very precise and clear about its mechanisms for surveilling teaching and imposing summative evaluation, but very vague about the ways in which teaching will be supported and evaluation processes will be formative in nature.

* See also Faculty of Educations Open Letter on the SPTL

Recommendation: Good teaching is innovative teaching and innovation is necessarily risky. The SPTL should focus on assessment as a formative learning process in which faculty members are encouraged to take risks and learn from doing. Support should be focused on enabling innovative teaching practices such as team-teaching, field and service learning, anti-oppressive teaching, etc. Allowing Departments to work on local assessment processes should be complemented with effective teaching supports. Currently the Center for Teaching and Learning is the only venue focused on discussing effective teaching practices. The University should increase and expand the mandate of the Center for Teaching and Learning while concurrently consulting with Departments about the types of supports needed for faculty in the classroom. 3) Acknowledging Effective Teaching There is a need to identify and acknowledge effective teaching. Standardized measurement across faculties treat students as customers and therefore assess student satisfaction. Research has shown that standardized evaluations reflect students biases. Additionally, students are often less satisfied when being taught uncomfortable and unpopular subject material. Standardized measurements are therefore incapable of properly identifying effective teaching. Rather, individualized student evaluations provide opportunity for students to reflect on their own learning and on course instruction. Recommendation: It should remain up to individual members to present a compelling case for rewarding good teaching when applying for merit, tenure and/or promotion. A variety of qualitative assessments including peer-review and self-reflection can be used as evidence of good teaching for review purposes. The Deans Office should be encouraged to collect effective examples of how to represent teaching in performance review files and make these samples available to faculty in different Departments and to the Performance Review Committee. We thank the committee for its work and its commitment to recognizing and better supporting teaching at the University of Regina. Sincerely, Darlene Juschka Patricia Elliott William Arnal Womens and Gender Studies Program School of Journalism Department of Religious Studies

* See also Faculty of Educations Open Letter on the SPTL

Emily Eaton Michelle Stewart John Conway Andr Magnan Tobias Sperlich JoAnn Jaffe Claire Carter Marion Jones Marcia Calkowski Deborah Simpson Joyce Green Annette Desmarais Hirsch Greenberg Bruce Plouffe Viktoriya Galushko Carlos Londono

Department of Geography Department of Justice Studies Department of Sociology and Social Studies Department of Sociology and Social Studies Department of Anthropology Department of Sociology and Social Studies Womens and Gender Studies Program Department of Economics Department of Anthropology International Studies Program Department of Political Science International Studies Program Department of Justice Studies Department of International Languages Department of Economics Department of Anthropology

* See also Faculty of Educations Open Letter on the SPTL