Agenda
- Academ
- Teaching Excellence Program
- CMU Website
Overview
- Software to track faculty achievements
- Generates standardized CV (Arabic/English)
- Generates AACSB reports
- Future potential
Academ Data Entry
Joint Task:
- IAAU
- Class and committee participation
- Faculty member
- Publications and other information
Academ Faculty Checklist
One Time
Periodic
What’s Missing?
- Data
- Complete journal ranking/impact
- Dashboard widgets (We are still figuring the system out)
How Can You help?
- Publish impactful research!
- Keep your information up-to-date
- Email IAAU if you have to
- Encourage your colleagues to do the same
Peer-Review Teaching Excellence Program
Overview
- Goal: Instructional continuous improvement
- Peer-review based in-class feedback
- Voluntary and confidential
- Student feedback not effective
- Suggested by visiting PRT
The Process
- Faculty are paired asymetrically
- Evaluator makes 2 in-class visits
- Around 4th week
- Around 10-12th week
- Benefit goes both ways!
The In-Class Visit
- Writes confidential feedback (strength, weaknesses and recommendations) based on:
- Observations
- Student feedback (Evaluatee should leave class)
- Feedback discussed with evaluatee
- CMU should be notified of visits to track statistics
- PRT likely to discuss the experience with participants
How to Participate
- Option 1: CMU to coordinate
- Option 2: Coordinate at the department level (My Preference)
What to Report to CMU
- Name of evaluator and evaluatee
- Dates of in-class visits (should be 2)
- Feedback on the process
- Was teaching improved as a result of the process?
- What worked? what did not?
- Lessons learned?
Remember
- We don’t need the details, just to know whether the results are favorable or not
- Details must remain confidential between the peer-review pair
- Likely to share your experience with PRT