The Faculty Council on Teaching and Learning is sponsoring Class A legislation to update existing, outdated language in the Faculty Code. The update proposes five core elements of effective teaching that are informed by research and have been refined through a tri-campus faculty feedback process conducted throughout AY 2022-23 and AY 2023-24 as part of the “Future of Teaching and Learning” initiative.
The proposed updates are to Faculty Code: Section 24-32 Scholarly and Professional Qualifications of Faculty Members, a section of the code that was last updated over fifty years ago.
Background and rationale
The Faculty Council on Teaching and Learning reviewed and revised recommendations from the Future of Teaching and Learning Initiative Working Group on Instructional Quality to update the Faculty Code’s decades-old language around teaching. The current legislation operationalizes these efforts.
The Future of Teaching and Learning Initiative, from which this legislation emerged, was a two-year-long, University-wide, tri-campus effort to update UW’s shared understanding of effective teaching. The effort resulted in broad consensus around a set of core elements of effective teaching – elements developed after careful review of:
- Existing University language, peer institutions’ efforts, and evidence from the scholarship of teaching and learning
- A robust tri-campus vetting process that yielded feedback from over 630 instructors of all ranks, academic leaders, and instructional support staff
- Additional input from faculty who teach in clinical settings to ensure relevance
- Input from a tri-campus faculty advisory council
The following broad themes emerged during this process. They serve as both rationale and context for the proposed updates:
- All UW learners possess the potential for academic success; the core function of instruction is to cultivate that potential through effective teaching.
- Teaching has changed and continues to change because the students and the contexts in which we teach change, and the evidence base on effective teaching evolves.
- Contrary to the notion that the ability to teach is innate, effective teaching practices are reflective and refined over time. This understanding is consistent with FCTL’s recently passed Class C Resolution “Concerning the Use of Student Course Evaluations” that promoted a formative, growth-oriented approach to teaching.
- Many faculty already embrace a reflective approach to teaching and use teaching practices that align with the core elements proposed in this legislation.
- The Faculty Code provides guidance to units committed to promoting effective teaching within their disciplines.
- Advancing the teaching mission of the University is an institutional effort that requires alignment around a shared understanding of teaching effectiveness on the part of academic leaders, faculty of all ranks, instructional support professionals, and administrative staff.
Proposed updates to the Faculty Code
The Faculty Council on Teaching and Learning supports the adoption of the following understanding of effective teaching into the Faculty Code.
Effective teaching is…
- Aligned: Effective teaching is intentionally designed and organized to help learners meet learning objectives.
- Inclusive and equitable: Effective teaching considers learners’ experiences and creates opportunities for each learner to thrive.
- Active and engaged: Effective teaching creates opportunities for learners to engage with ideas and each other.
- Growth-oriented: Effective teaching creates opportunities for learners to learn through practice and provides feedback that helps them grow their knowledge and abilities.
- Relevant: Effective teaching helps learners understand why what they are learning matters and prepares them for future learning and life after UW.
Applicable in any instructional context and across academic disciplines, these proposed core elements embody values central to the University of Washington and reflect how the practice of teaching has evolved over the last 50 years.
FAQs
These FAQs were gathered during feedback opportunities in 2023 & 2024 in which Faculty Senators and 636 faculty from all ranks and academic leaders on the UW’s three campuses were asked what comments or questions they had for the working group and/or relevant faculty governance groups.
Does the faculty code currently contain language about what constitutes effective teaching?
The faculty code Section 24-32 Scholarly and Professional Qualifications of Faculty Members, section C, describes the current articulation of UW “elements in assessing effective teaching.” The working group and FCTL included this existing faculty code language as one of the key inputs in the development of the Class A legislation you are being asked to consider.
Why are the common definitions so broad? Teaching in my area isn’t like teaching in other units.
As concepts foundational to effective teaching, the core elements in this legislation are intentionally broad and are applicable across disciplines and teaching contexts. But that doesn’t mean that these are the ONLY characteristics of effective teaching. The draft criteria are intended as foundational. Departments or academic units may well wish to articulate additional criteria to better reflect their disciplines and teaching contexts.
I already incorporate these elements into my teaching. Does this impact me?
Yes. Many UW instructors already incorporate these elements into their teaching, some of whom are not recognized or rewarded for their efforts. Colleagues may even argue with them that what they are doing is not worth their time or is not, in fact, effective teaching. A common understanding of what makes up effective teaching at UW can shift the conversation and thus better support the work of those already engaged in reflective teaching.
Teaching is an iterative process – no one finishes learning how to teach. Because who, where, and when we teach constantly shifts, there is always room for improvement when it comes to our teaching practice. A shared understanding of the core elements of effective teaching can help offer faculty a place to start as they begin reflecting on and improving teaching.
Will this change how instructors are evaluated for promotion, tenure, and merit? If so, how?
The focus of this work is to create a shared understanding around instructional quality to facilitate conversations around existing processes, such as course and peer evaluations and instructional support. While the immediate focus of a shared understanding of effective teaching is to encourage instructors to adopt a formative mindset when it comes to teaching (i.e., that improving teaching is a career-long process), we anticipate that faculty governance groups and academic leadership may want to integrate it into evaluation mechanisms. If they choose to do so, it would likely take several years and involve additional feedback opportunities from the faculty senate and faculty at large.
Does this effort add burden by changing expectations for instructors around teaching?
Teaching is core to the mission of the university and UW instructors are expected to teach and teach well. This effort aims to clarify and amplify values and expectations already present. The draft criteria represent mindsets and practices that are foundational to effective teaching.
Teaching well is a career-long commitment – no one finishes learning how to teach. Thus, the criteria serve as both a validation of the effective work instructors are already doing in UW classrooms and as goals for improvement.
Reaching these goals may require instructors to spend time and effort refining and adjusting their teaching practices. But such effort is already expected of instructors at the UW, often without clear expectations. This work to define effective teaching at UW will help clarify those expectations across the UW.
How are instructors going to be supported to be able to do this?
One of the chief benefits of having a shared understanding of the core elements of effective teaching is that it can inform the development of more relevant, timely instructional support resources (e.g., informational webpages, workshops, instructional videos, etc.). In addition, implementation of the criteria may require additional resources so that instructors and academic units have the support they need to succeed. FCTL has recommended to the provost that professional development opportunities and instructional support resources be added to facilitate this work.
Contact Us
Casey Self, Chair, Faculty Council on Teaching & Learning
Teaching Professor, Biology
University of Washington – Seattle
cjself@uw.edu