Self-Analysis

Guidance about improving and documenting one's teaching

through thoughtful reflection

Self-analysis can provide information that is accessible only to

you. It also provides an occasion for you to synthesize and
contextualize the other information you present. Indeed, it may
well provide the opportunity to turn potential failures into
triumphs, through appropriate interpretation or effort at
revision.

One element of self-analysis is to document the regular process

or habit by which you review evidence of your teaching and
use it to revise your behavior. This leads naturally to mapping
your future goals.

Your commentary will demonstrate your scholarly analytical

skills. How well do you piece together information from
disparate Sources? How well do you perceive problems or
successes? How well do you interpret evidence? A well written
analysis can be compelling.

Some guides can help you with a structured analysis of

elements of teaching. These mostly bring to one's awareness
elements that may go unnoticed:

 Sally Brown and Phil Race. 1995. Assess Your Own

Teaching Quality. London and Philadelphia: Kogan Page.
55 personal "checklists" organized into chapters on: (1)
learning in large-group settings; (2) designing and using
resources, such as handouts, overheads, e-mail, etc.; (3)
structuring student learning and feedback, from
independent work to group work; (4) helping learners
individually; and (5) professional qualities
  Stephen D. Brookfield. 1995. Becoming a Critically
Reflective Teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
---See chapters 1-2 on the nature of critical reflection and
chapters 3-4 on our "autobiographies," both as learners
ourselves and as teachers.
 Peter Airasian and Arlen Gullickson. 1997. "Teacher Self-
Evaluation." In Evaluating Teaching: A Guide to Current
Thinking and Best Practice (J. H. Stange, ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
 Maryellen Weimer,Joan L. Parrett and Mary-Margaret
Kerns. 1988. How Am I Teaching?: Forms and Activities
for Acquiring Instructional Input. Madison, WI: Magna
Publications.

Why a Portfolio?

For those who value good teaching, portfolios offer a means to

promote better teaching and to document teaching
achievement.

Teaching portfolios have gained a higher profile in recent years

as a creative form of summarizing and developing stronger
teaching. For those who may be dissatisfied with the
limitations of standardized forms for evaluating teaching
through student evaluations, for example, the portfolio offers
an important alternative. For some, they are merely part of a
broader academic or career portfolio, showing how teaching,
research and service are all integrated. (This website focuses
exclusively on teaching portfolios.)

Teaching portfolios--and the process of creating or revising

one--can have many benefits or roles:

 provide an occasion for reflection:

o on teaching goals
 o on teacher-student relationships
o on effectiveness of teaching strategies
o on alternative methods for teaching and assessing
teaching
 enhance awareness of teaching methods
 showcase a teacher's skills, growth and range
 document teaching and its effectiveness
 profile a specific course or teaching methods for other
teachers
 promote professional dialogue about teaching and growth
towards an active teaching community
 record recognition of scholarship, presentations and
awards on teaching

One may well view teaching portfolios as parallel to the more

familiar process of presenting one's research achievements.
After all, it is appropriate to view Teaching as a Scholarly
Activity. So, too, is documenting it and sharing it. These
reflective and communal activities are a form of personal
growth. Ideally, then, one might see the teaching portfolio as an
extension of one's curriculum vitae (CV). (The perspective at
this website is thus much closer in spirit to discussions at
AAHE than to the popular books by Seldin, 1993; 1997.)

In addition, we will emphasize the process of developing a

portfolio as a tool for guiding self-improvement as much as for
evaluating performance.

Summative and Formative

Portfolios can be multi-purposed. Along one dimension, they

can address an administrative need to summarize one's
teaching contribution in a teaching institution: a form of
summative evaluation. Along another axis, one can use the
assembly or development of a portfolio as an occasion for self-
reflection and growth: a formative evaluation. In teaching, as in
research, we may profit from blurring the distinction, or seeing
the two as complementary, not antithetical. In our site, we
highlight both summative and formative aspects, though our
emphasis is on articulating the less familiar formative
dimension and its potentially vital role in summative
evaluation.

A Portfolio Profile

Fundamentally, a teaching portfolio is similar to an artist's

portfolio: a sampling of the breadth, depth and quality of one's
work, in order to convey one's abilities, strengths or style, and
achievements. But unlike an artist's portfolio, it must display
work indirectly, through descriptions, documents and various
forms of evidence.

You may also peruse a cross-section of other views and

definitions:

 List 1

Content

Depending on one's aim, the contents of a teaching portfolio

might include any of the following:

 *statement of teaching philosophy or goals

 summary of the roles and responsibilites one has adopted
as an expression of those goals
 summary of teaching methods, strategies and teaching
environments employed towards meeting those goals
 * feedback/evidence from students
 * feedback/evidence from peers
 feedback/evidence from others (administrators, alumni,
etc.)
  * reflection on feedback, including self-reflection
 documentation of improvement towards one's stated
goals
 samples of work or products of teaching (from syllabi or
videotapes to papers published by students), interpreted
and analyzed to show student learning or aspects of the
learning environment
 habits of self-assessment and improvement
 personal goals or objectives for the next several years
 evidence and discussion of professional development,
including professional education-related activities,
teaching-related service, research, innovation,
publications and grants
 recognition of teaching achievements, including awards,
published papers and invited presentations
 an index to further evidence or archive of materials

Elements denoted by a star (*) are considered here as the core

of an effective portfolio, especially for the first version.

Documentation and Interpretation

One aim of a portfolio, then, is to document one's teaching. This

means collecting and assembling various forms of relevant
information or evidence. One can be imaginative about sources
-- even creating new tools (as in any research) to collect
information that may be helpful.

As any academic knows, however, evidence does not speak for

itself. Hence, any volume of material -- no matter how vast or
impressive -- needs interpretation. One needs to reduce the
raw data, note patterns, synthesize divergent sources of
information, highlight significant features, etc.
Format

The format of a portfolio may vary considerably. For a portfolio

to be effective, though, it must be informative and well
organized. The American Association for Higher Education
(AAHE) suggests that a teaching portfolio should be:

 structured
 representative
 selective

These are addressed further in the sections below.

Structure

Consider how a portfolio can communicate important traits

through its organization, creativity, thoroughness and
neatness. Again, assembling a portfolio is a creative act and
expresses the author's abilities and style.

In an adminstrative context, a portfolio document becomes

more valuable (or perhaps more efficient) if there are clear
expectations or frameworks that can serve as a structure or
scaffolding for building a portfolio. At UTEP, we are just
beginning to discuss and characterize these categories in the
context of our institution. We encourage you to contribute to
the discussion. At present, this site is organized under three
broad categories:

1. Professional Reflection -- includes teaching philosophy,

methods and scope of responsiblities adopted -- crudely,
why and how you teach.
2. Evidence (or Feedback) -- includes the familiar student
course evaluations, but also other forms of student
feedback, information from peers and others, along with
an analysis of products of teaching -- largely a
 retrospective analysis of your effectiveness, given your
own goals.
3. Professional Development -- includes evidence of
professional growth, expansion of teaching resources and
future plans -- largely a prospective view of your plans
and continued potential for growth.

Scope: Selective or Exhaustive?

Particularly where one aims to document one's achievement in

teaching, the initial tendency is often to be exhaustive -- to
document everything, lest some important element be omitted.
On the other hand, if a portfolio is to be read -- either by a peer
or an administrator -- it must be readable. While being
comprehensive, it must also be concise. A portfolio is not an
archive, though it may be built from one and refer to it. As
artists, photographers and architects know, a portfolio is
selective.

Consider, for example, a familiar academic document: the grant

proposal. In this case, a vast amount of information must be
concentrated and presently cogently and persuasively in a
limited amount of pages that can be reviewed effectively.
Where appropriate, of course, well organized appendices may
provide supplemental information or evidence. When the
portfolio serves as a vehicle for decision regarding tenure or
promotion, it becomes an argumentative device, much like
many scholarly papers. All information should be meaningfully
interpeted and relevant. Authors may reflect on how their
argument and evidence are consolidated or well focused--and
how their skills in assembling a portfolio themselves reflect on
their skills in assembling and presenting evidence.

In research publications, it is customary not to cite failures.

Hence, by analogy, one may well refrain from profiling in a
portfolio the areas where teaching skills are underdeveloped
or need improvement. Whether a portfolio should be selective
by showing only one's best work (see also
"Representativeness" below), however, is still a subject of
debate. Occasional failures may reflect a spirit of innovation
and can be viewed poisitively if they lead to subsequent
improvement or reflection on goals for professional
development.

Concrete recommendations on length vary considerably across

different institutions. Texas A&M University and Seldin (1997),
for example, suggest limiting a portfolio to ten pages based on
experience (well, would you want to read more than that?).
Here, we will assume that different individuals, even at the
same institution (colleague, departmental teaching committee,
department chair, dean, provost), will likely be inclined to read
the same portfolio at varying levels of depth. Hence, the
portfolio might be designed in layers to accommodate different
readers -- as a document whose length expands or contracts,
depending on the reader. Alternatively, a base portfolio might
be organized flexibly or in modules that can be adapted and re-
assembled to suit given circumstances.

Scope: Representativeness

While a portfolio as a portfolio must be selective, it must

usually be comprehensive, as well. Its scope must reflect
achievement or work as wide as one's responsibilities. Hence,
one should address an effective cross-section of one's teaching,
not merely a "selective" glimpse of a specialized subsection of
one's work.

A portfolio may be an occasion to celebrate past achievements.

On such occasions, a focus on one's most outstanding
accomplishments may be appropriate. At other times, the focus
may be on demonstrating potential for the future, or on
sharing one's achievements for others to apply. In these
circumstances, the emphasis may be on general skills,
strategies or habits. That is, one might strive towards
addressing patterns of skills or behavior, not the exceptional
episodes. Again, this may require the creative synthesis of
material.

On-Going Process

One aim of a portfolio is to promote reflective practice in

teaching. Thus, the product of that thinking will itself be
constantly changing. One should expect to add to and revise
one's portfolio on a regular basis. Having a file for collecting
material to review periodically is one way to ensure that the
portfolio becomes a process, not just an idle snapshot. A recent
AAHE document proposes, in fact, that "reflective practice and
improvement should be a part of what we mean by (and
evaluate and reward in) good teaching."

Guidance: Standards and Samples

Consider once again the artist's portfolio. It may follow certain

patterns of content and format, but there are no rules set in
stone. Therefore, while this document characterizes what a
portfolio might be, it is only a guide. What common standards
or frameworks will apply at UTEP will ultimately result only
from faculty discussion on evaluating teaching.

One source of guidance is through exemplars. One develops

understanding through viewing other people's work and
participating in the process. We have assembled links to some
samples online.

A separate section on this site considers how we might begin

Reviewing and Evaluating Portfolios.
Finally, note that our collective vision of portfolios (at UTEP
and in the Academy, more broadly), like the individual
portfolios themselves, will likely evolve.

Teaching Philosophy: Values and Methods

by Douglas Allchin

Notebooks do not an education make.

- S.S. Pratt

Through my seventeen years of teaching, with students at

various levels, several themes emerge. I aim to help students
experience the world more richly, beyond the world of
textbooks and inert facts, guiding and supporting them
towards becoming:

 Reflective practitioners
o who think independently and learn how to learn for
themselves
o who creatively consider how things might be
otherwise (through habits of posing questions,
examining assumptions, exploring alternative
perspectives)
o who assess evidence critically
 Collaborative thinkers
o who exhibit good listening and
analytical/sympathetic reading skills
o who share their ideas and support others in
developing their own ideas
 Effective communicators
o who can write and speak effectively and convey
information visually
o who can organize their thoughts and reasoning and
contextualize their messages
  Persons who appreciate diverse subject matter
o who appreciate (in the sense of understand)
significant concepts
o who appreciate (in the sense of value) their new
knowledge and its context(s)
o who appreciate (in both senses) high standards of
quality

According to non-majors (mostly in large classes), my primary

strengths as a teacher are: interesting classes or lectures,
enthusiasm, level of knowledge, and organization. Other
notable features include: use of visuals and discussions and an
open, productive student-teacher relationship. A healthy
percentage comment on the intellectual challenge and my
emphasis on concepts or higher levels of understanding ("he
forced me to think"). Students in smaller classes also value my
careful written feedback and guidance on
writing/reading/thinking skills.

From my own perspective as a veteran teacher, I would

underscore further distinctive strengths: careful curriculum
design to guide development of thinking skills; active, project-
based learning (where possible); team-structured work;
formative evaluation on written work; questions to motivate
intellectual work; and respect for students as whole persons
(one student in a class of 70 exclaimed, "he remembered our
names!").

The "formula" for my practice might thus be summarized:

1. I regard all students as discoverers of new facts, rather

than as receptacles for memorizing previously developed
knowledge. The text is not the authority; rather, it is the
reasoning from evidence and new investigations. Thus, I
 model reasoning in lectures, small-group activities and
whole-class discussions.
2. I focus on building on what students already know and on
revising what they misconceive (including diagnosing
their preconceptions and prior knowledge.)
3. I focus on relevant concrete examples that perturb or
disrupt prior student conceptions and that motivate the
process of learning or discovery. I devote considerable
time to posing questions or framing problems. I construct
an affectively supportive environment that promotes
student involvement in learning.
4. As noted above, I borrow from or adapt intellectual
history as a guide.
5. I organize classes to capitalize on differences in individual
student strengths and backgrounds (e.g., teams,
moderated discussions). At the same time I frame
evaluation individually to promote students in developing
their own knowledge.
6. Where possible, I offer forums for students to
demonstrate what they have learned, rather than
measure them against a narrow, teacher-determined
standard. I aim towards "authentic assessment," asking
students to convey their knowledge in applied or "real-
life" conte

An old Chinese proverb says, "a teacher for a day is like a

parent for a lifetime."

Report on Classroom Observation and Discussion with

Students
[professor], [course], [date], [observers]

You asked us to observe a sample segment of your upper level

biology class, in which you are applying a combination of
collaborative (team-based) learning, problem-solving
approaches, discussions on "what-if" scenarios and student-
teaching.

Our assessment task was open-ended. Below you will find a

general overview of the class, a crude analysis of reasons for
various successes and problems (that may apply to using this
approach elsewhere), and finally a more detailed analysis of
things to address in this particular class.

Overview

The class atmosphere was congenial and the students were

actively engaged in discussion. You have clearly developed a
format where students participate in "authentic" discussion
and understand their accountability to that discussion and to
their peers. The learning environment is impressive for an
upper level course of this size (~30).

Students themselves give the class overwhelmingly high

marks. Nearly all the students are working harder in this
course than in any other. Nearly all find the approach interests
them more in the material, and roughly two-thirds feel they are
learning more material, learning it more deeply, and learning
better communication skills in the process.

What's Working, What's Not--and Why

Students very much appreciate the chance to be engaged in

"real" problems and analysis of complex situations and "what-
if" scenarios that challenge them to think. Some of this seems
to be enthusiasm for an upper level course, but much of it also
seems to draw on your free-wheeling style (versus pre-
planned lecture) that explores each situation opportunistically.
Roughly half the students feel the course can succeed mostly
because of what they have learned earlier in other classes: in
this class they develop a deeper appreciation of the context
and connections of concepts they've already learned, while
also acquiring a deeper conceptual understanding. Some
students wanted to encounter this approach from the outset of
college, but others felt the need to have something to build on
first. Your specific style in this class may thus be tailored only
to upper level classes. I suspect (from the cross-section of
comments) that stronger students respond more favorably,
while those less experienced in organizing information
want/need a bit more structure.

Students enjoy being able to ask questions (and feel the

freedom to do so). While students take substantial notes from
the reading and in preparing material in small groups, during
class discussion they learn more from the dialogue itself and
from recurring examples. There is an important "learn-by-
doing" component--suggesting that what is learned (if learned)
will be more permanent.

Students report that they invest considerable time in the

course--probably the major reason they are learning more
material. So motivation is key. It appears that the most
significant factor is intra-group accountability. They respond to
"peer pressure" and to the system of rewards that promote
contributions to other members of the group and coming to
class prepared. They readily admit to responding to the point-
system. Almost all acknowledge the increased level of pressure
on them, yet they seem to find the pressure good, not stifling or
oppressive. Our estimate was that about one- quarter of the
students have learned to engage in the material
"professionally," while performance for the other three-
quarters depends mostly on this motivation/reward system.
Hence, there are some potential tensions still to be resolved
between short- term class goals and long-term learning goals.
Your written survey/questionaire focused mostly on the
content. Note, however, that ~60% of students would add that
they are learning communication and presentation skills, while
developing confidence in such group situations through
practice. This is another valuable dimension of learning that
ought not to be overlooked--and perhaps incorporated into the
class reward/grading structure.

By not following a strict ("lecture"-driven) trajectory, you seem

to be able to identify what students do not understand well.
They appreciate being able to revisit material and having
multiple opportunities to learn. This is especially important
where students rely on other students who may not be fully
prepared or skilled at presenting material. Students also
recognize your keen ability for posing questions that expose
their uncertainties and the unfinished edges of their learning.

Note that you often become involved with specific individuals,

virtually excluding the rest of the class. At one level, you are
modeling an interaction for all to observe (and many do
watch)--but you do not draw explicit attention to this, or
always expand the focus to include the whole class. You simply
might want to try being more aware of individual versus
whole-group focus and how this affects classroom dynamics.

Recommendations

Few students feel that they know how they're doing in the
course. Almost ALL want more feedback in terms of grades,
points from group evaluations, or how they "measure up"
against course expectations. At the same time, nearly all feel
that they can articulate clearly exactly what they've learned.

Intra-group accountability is working well. Keep it (but note

peer pressure above.)
By contrast, inter-group accountability seems to falter
significantly. Students do not like (=resent?) having to teach
what has been taught to them when initially taught by a group
weaker than themselves--with no opportunity to accommodate
the other group's weaknesses. Relative level of satisfaction is
significantly lower here. Students would like to know who will
teach them in advance, so that they can prepare against it if
needed(!), OR be given a one-class turn-around time between
being taught and teaching the same material. Consider even
eliminating second-order group teaching (keeping "plain"
group presentations). If I gauge the situation correctly, the
peer accountability feedback loops are working well in small
groups, but not at the intra-group level. My unvalidated
impression is that most students just go back and learn it on
their own afterwards--defeating the purpose of the group
interaction. If you continue this type of interaction, you may
need to increase the amount of commentary/ feedback (or
degree of point-accountability) for each group. Self-selected
groups, however, may stratify the class and make uniform
performance (even through accountability) difficult.

Many persons found the inter-group teaching to slow things

down. Still, most acknowledged that when they went over the
material a second or third time, you introduced more examples
that deepened the discussion. Note that only half agreed fully
that your approach allows them to learn the material more
quickly (any increased rate may well be due to other basic
motivational factors, not group processing). Survey responses
and comments offer the perpetually cryptic contradiction that
the pace is both too fast and too slow at the same time. Clearer
review or periodic retrospective synopses may help clarify
where the pace really is.

Students are keenly aware that your approach keeps them on

top of material and prepared for each class (good), but that this
also puts a premium on preparation. They would like more
advance scheduling so that they can accommodate the work to
their schedules -- especially when groups have to coordinate
outside class.

You have a very competitive group(!). Is it clear how each

person has an opportunity to receive a good mark based on
some known grading standard or set of explicit expectations?
(It seemed that intra-group processing led to ranking, rather
than absolute achievement -- some student anxiety here.)

Not all students are enamored of this approach. Hence, you

may need to consider, more than usual, how to accommodate
the minority.

Consider the approriateness of stating more explicit or more

organized instructional goals at the outset. (Do not rely
exclusively on lists of problems and working through them.
Identify the structure or conceptual scaffolding?) I'm guessing
occasional recaps that identify what was learned in the past
(day? week? 2 weeks?) might also help. (Post review "maps" on
web?)

Studies nationally indicate that students don't mind extra work

if it is worthwhile. Still, you might want to monitor workload to
ensure that students do not feel undue sacrifice relative to
other classes--and that the workload is indeed commensurate
with the credit hours received. You might remind students of
your own work for/time commitment to the course--often less
visible in this format. (Remind students how you are not
merely avoiding your job by shifting the burden of "teaching"
to them.)

Be attentive to noise and voice levels. A loud fan in the room

does not help, of course. I found I could not hear many
students--and noticed that many other students "tuned out" on
occasions where they could not hear: they did not ask their
peers to speak more loudly. You might consider how you set an
example, by asking each person to speak loudly and clearly (in
a sense, honoring their contribution for all), and inviting others
to feel free to request the same on their own.

Some students apparently want more visuals -- animation or

handouts. Some of this may be insecurity, but it is also easily
remedied. Some of it may be related to the advanced level you
expect, which could be clarified by additional visual
information.

Articulate more clearly the relationship between lab and

"lecture," and perhaps give stronger or clearer justification for
lab grade being 50%.

Your openness to questions in "lecture" seems not to be

paralleled by an equal openness in lab?

Mapping Future Goals

Concrete plans for the future, based on retrospective analysis,

as a component of the professional activity of teaching

In a professional context, one major reason for reflection and

self-analysis is to identify strengths that can be ampilified and
built on, while noting possible weaknesses to mend and
opportunities for further growth. These might be made explicit
in a statement of future goals.

Goals may be short-term (revising a course the next time it is

taught, or introducing a new teaching technique in the
upcoming year) or long-term (overhauling a curriculum to
adapt to new teaching strategies, learning about and refining
innovative teaching methods, or developing a major
instructional resource). They may focus on specifics regarding
courses or teacher-student relations, for example, or on
general teaching skills or development of "teaching capital," or
even on plans for funding large educational projects.

Indeed, at some point in the future, we might want to use a

teacher's own goals (including the level of their ambitiousness)
as a benchmark for assessing that teacher's later
achievements: did he or she demonstrate deliberate and
effective--and personally meaningful--professional
development?