Search

Excellence in Online Teaching Award

NOTE | Revised version of the teaching award- See second bullet point under "Eligibility."

This award honors one faculty member per year who shows evidence of outstanding online teaching for a fully online or hybrid/blended course. Awardees will receive a one-time stipend of $1,000 and a Certificate of Recognition, and will be featured in the Center for Online Education (COE) website. Individuals who have received the Excellence in Online Teaching Award in previous years are not eligible to reapply.

For this award, a fully online course is defined as a course taught 100% online. This includes courses that are taught as part of the IU Online Class Connect (IUOCC) and/or joint degree programs, or as a fully online course for IU South Bend students.

A hybrid/blended course has 26% to 99% of the course taught online.


Eligibility

All tenured and tenure-track faculty, full-time lecturers, clinical faculty (whose primary duty is teaching), and associate faculty who:

  • Have taught at IU South Bend for a minimum of three years (six semesters for associate faculty)
  • Have taught at least four sections (fully online or hybrid/blended) before the fall semester of the call for applications and for the last three years (not necessarily academic years)
  • Have not previously received this award

Candidates do not need to be nominated for this award; self-nominations are acceptable. It is the candidate's responsibility to compile the completed application and email it as a single PDF file to the Director of the Center for Online Education (DEiusb@iusb.edu) by 11:59 p.m. on October 1. Late submissions will not be accepted.

Please note, this is the same deadline as the Excellence in Teaching with Technology Award. Applicants may apply for either or both awards.


Application Components

Required:

  • Name, rank, unit, years of teaching at IU South Bend
  • Table of online courses taught at IU South Bend by semester, tagged as fully online or hybrid, and course enrollment
  • Descriptive and reflective statement about candidate’s approach to teaching online, highlighting particular strengths
  • Evidence of online teaching’s impact on student learning and engagement
  • Peer review of online teaching by a full-time faculty member, whether the reviewer taught online, hybrid or face-to-face courses
  • Student evaluations and comments table for fully online or hybrid courses/sections taught the last three years as an appendix
  • Engagement in activities for faculty development in online teaching (e.g., completion of online course development seminar, Quality Matters training, mentoring colleagues in online teaching, etc.)

Other evidence may be used to document excellence, such as lists, tables, or brief descriptions of

  • Course development
  • QM reviews of courses
  • Teaching innovations
  • Leadership in online education
  • Teaching awards

Number of Pages and Format

  • Maximum of 10 pages (not including appendices and tables)
  • 10-12 point font
  • 1-inch margins

Appendix (not counted in the 10 pages):

  • Mini-course portfolio from a recent fully online or hybrid course:
    • Syllabus
    • One lesson or module and its assesment (exam items or assignment) as screenshots
    • Completed Course Alignment Worksheet for entire course (blank worksheet provided to applicant with these application guidelines)
    • Student evaluations adn comments table for fully-online or hybrid courses/sections taught in the last three years

Selection Process

Members of the Center for Online Education (COE) Advisory Board will serve as the selection committee. This committee will be composed of three faculty members who have experience in online (hybrid or fully online) teaching, a professional staff who has worked with faculty to develop online courses, and the COE director.


Criteria

  • Evidence of strong course design
  • Evidence of student learning and enagagement
  • Descriptive and reflective statement about candidate's approach to online teaching, highlighting particular strengths
  • Peer review of online teaching by a full-time faculty member
  • Student evaluations and comments table for fully online or hybrid courses/sections taught the last three years
  • Engagement in activities for faculty development on fully online or hybrid/blended courses

Rubric

Rubric used to encourage discussion in choosing the Excellence in Online Teaching Award winners in order to recognize sustained and consistent excellence in teaching fully online or hybrid/blended (26%-99% of course delivered online) courses.

Note: This rubric is to encourage discussion by Review Committee. It is not a scoring tool.

DESCRIPTION

Excellent Good Acceptable Unacceptable
Teaching Statement | Descriptive and reflective statement about candidate's approach to teaching online, highlighting particular strengths Rich descriptions and reflection indicate thoughtful and deliberate course planning and execution as well as broad effectiveness and a novel way of employing technology. Description and reflection suggest effective teaching. Provides both description and reflection but they do not suggest effective teaching. Missing description or reflection.
Faculty Development | Engagement in activities for faculty development in online teaching Active and on-going efforts to improve online teaching through seminars, readings, mentoring others, etc. Completed several courses, seminars, or multiple discrete activities. Completed a course, seminar, or discrete faculty development activity. No evidence of faculty development.
Mini-course Portfolio | Syllabus, learning objectives, and lesson/module with assessment, course alignment, student evaluations Course is thoughtfully designed and shows complete alignment of objectives, assessments, and activities. Strong student evaluations. Portfolio is strong overall, but one of the three components is weak. All three components are average, or only one is strong. Little evidence of careful planning; little or no alignment of components. Weak student evaluations.


EVIDENCE OF QUALITY

High Distinction Good Acceptable Unacceptable
Peer Review | Letter from peer reviewer evaluating teaching performance by direct observation in the learning management system (and classroom, if hybrid) and review of course materials. Peer may be someone who has taught a fully-online, hybrid/blended, or face-to-face course Peer review demonstrates clear excellence in online teaching with multiple indicators and examples Peer review discusses applicant in positive terms; but gives only a single piece of evidence from a conclusive indicator or example Peer review discusses applicant in average terms, or positively but without giving clear evidence from conclusive indicators or examples Peer review is missing, or is featuring applicant in poor terms


OVERALL IMPRESSION

High Distinction Good Acceptable Unacceptable
Overall Impression | Preponderance of all materials demonstrates excellence in online teaching Strong evidence from multiple sources suggests outstanding online teaching Evidence suggests strong online teaching Evidence suggests good online teaching Evidence suggests average or weak online teaching