shell as teaching assistants to give them access to all areas of the course. Should a division lack a sufficient number of faculty experienced in teaching virtual classes, the Chair can ask members of another division to serve, as is often done for division tenure and promotion committees. While the faculty member can request evaluation of a virtual class as part of an annual review, it is a mandatory part of the pre-tenure review process. Faculty who teach virtual classes will also be encouraged to have their classes reviewed as evidence of teaching effectiveness as part of the post-tenure review process. In the case of a class being offered as a virtual class for the first time, this review should be used to help guide the faculty member toward more effective delivery of course materials rather than as part of the formal evaluation process. Each item should be rated as “does not meet expectations,” “meets expectations,” or “exceeds expectations,” as is the case with annual review. (See Appendix D).
Explanation and Justification for Requested Change: The recommendations proposed above are driven by a need to define what the University means by virtual and hybrid courses. The Committee determined that the best way to create a consistency of quality in online instruction is to ensure courses are developed and reviewed by a defined process. The proposed Director of Online Programs would work as a “quality assurance” individual who would review courses and make suggestions for revisions according to best practices.
In identifying these best practices, the Director would be aided by the Distance Education Committee. In general, the Director would be facilitating online courses; the actual content of the courses would be evaluated within the department or division when a course is being offered virtually or as a hybrid course for the first time. The Director would oversee the training of faculty for teaching online as well as provide ongoing professional development opportunities for online faculty.
[20]