Tools and Resources

Microaggressions are verbal, behavioral, or environmental actions that communicate hostility toward
the targeted group either intentionally or unintentionally (Sue et al., 2007). Microaggressions can
target many aspects of one’s identity, including race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, mental health, or
socioeconomic backgrounds. This resource provides insights on the adverse effects of
microaggressions on the targeted group and on microaggressions in academic settings.

FERN WILLITS AND MARK BRENNAN (2015) The University as a Community of Learning
Perceptions of Students and Teachers in Three Settings, The Journal of the World Universities Forum
Part of the Quality of Instruction (QOI) series supported by a Schreyer Institute grant

PowerPoint presentation on Blended Learning from Abington Colloquy, January 18, 2012 by Stephen Pyser.

The U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment: Background for the Community. As a land-grant institution, Penn State takes seriously its role in promoting and supporting free speech under the law. Freedom of expression is a bedrock principle of our University and is essential to our core educational mission. Free speech is foundational to a democratic society, even when it tests the limits of our tolerance.

Student ratings are not the only option to provide evidence in the evaluation of teaching. There is a broad range of alternatives to consider beyond student ratings in the delicate decision-making processes to improve teaching and determine the promotion and tenure of faculty. Yet, despite the constant barrage of attacks on the integrity, reliability, and validity of student ratings, their use in higher education is at an all-time high.
So what do student ratings actually contribute to decisions about teaching and faculty? Should they be abandoned? Should you focus on the other options? This article examines student ratings and 14 alternatives to guide your plans to evaluate teaching in your department.