The nomination dossier can be submitted in the format preferred by the nominee. This includes a PDF document, or website with multimedia components. Listed below are guiding parameters for the nomination package: 

• LENGTH – The content of the dossier must not exceed 40 pages (if in PDF format). Those seeking to submit a dossier in a different format should use this 40-page parameter as a reference for their own work. An adjudication committee member should be able to review your nomination package within a one-hour timeframe. Any included videos should not exceed 10 minutes in length. 
• ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE – All nomination packages should have a navigable organizational structure. This includes the use of a table of contents, headings and sub-headings, page numbers, and the use of a standard 12-point font with one-inch margins where appropriate.  NOTE: Cover pages, divider pages, the nomination brief, and the appendix are not included in this count.  
• ACCESSIBILITY – All nomination submissions must be in an accessible format when submitted. Inaccessible submissions will not be shared with the adjudication committee. Nomination packages in PDF format should be searchable and tagged documents. If included, images require alternative text, videos require closed captioning options for viewers, hyperlinks should be descriptive, and audio files must include a transcript. Nominees should strive to ensure that any included hyperlinks are sustainable, so that the information referenced will be able to be referred back over time.  

Though you may include hyperlinks to supplementary evidence within your nomination package there is no guarantee that adjudication committee members will visit all the included links within the time they have been given to adjudicate. Nominees should take care to ensure that the evidence is comprehensively referenced in the main dossier so that the hyperlinks remain as supplemental not foundational support.  

Providing a cover page and table of contents is suggested for those compiling a Distinguished Teaching nomination package. This will assist members of the adjudication committee in navigating your application package.

Nominator’s Letter

The nominator letter should act to summarize the nominee’s dossier. The letter should highlight for the adjudication committee key components of the dossier that fulfil the award criteria. The nomination letter will be written by someone working closely with the nominee and who is familiar with the dossier.  

The nomination letter is the adjudication committee member’s introduction to the nominee. As such, the nomination letter is one of the most important documents in a successful dossier. The most compelling letter will evoke a vivid, three-dimensional sense of the nominee. 

The reflective Teaching Philosophy Statement is a crucial part of the nomination package. An effective philosophy statement is personal and genuine. It distinguishes the nominee’s approaches to learning and teaching. It provides a conceptual framework that explains the beliefs, values, principles, and goals that underpin the nominee’s teaching decisions and actions. It helps readers connect with the evidence provided elsewhere in the dossier.  

Teaching Philosophy Statement is recommended to be two to three pages. Claims made in the philosophy statement should be substantiated in other parts of the dossier.  

The Educational Development team at the Centre for Pedagogical Innovation is available for consultation. Please reach out to cpi@brocku.ca and arrange an opportunity to discuss your statement of philosophy with an educational developer. 

This section sets the context for your teaching. Here nominees should briefly explain their normal teaching responsibilities including: 

• a summary of courses taught including the course code, title, number of students, and other relevant information to provide context (e.g. delivery mode, inclusion of secondary components for which the nominee was responsible for TA/lab demonstrator supervision, etc.), 
• statement of the normal number of courses taught by faculty in the candidate’s department,  
• relevant details about the student profile in their classes (required or elective courses), and 
• anything that is unique to their teaching context.  

Individuals with graduate student supervisory roles should include those responsibilities in this section. 

Note: If you have an administrative position, clarify the course release (if any) that goes with that responsibility.  

Since every effort is made to ensure the adjudication committee consists of representation from all Faculties sharing context that will help committee members understand how much, what, and when you teach is important.  

5.1 TEACHING AWARDS RECEIVED

Nominees should discuss any teaching awards they have received. Other useful information includes the number of faculty members eligible for the award and the number of such awards granted in any given year.  

NOTE: Receiving a previous teaching award is not a requirement for receiving this award.   

5.2 EFFECTIVE TEACHING STRATEGIES

Here the nominee should discuss some examples of effective teaching strategies that they have implemented in their classroom. Presented as a narrative, this discussion should provide clear insight into the nominee’s teaching.  

Strategies discussed should demonstrate an alignment to the beliefs and values shared in the nominees Statement of Teaching Philosophy (section 3.0). Nominees may choose to highlight signature pedagogies of their disciplines (e.g. lectures, labs, etc.) and should highlight the ways these approaches represent the enactment of their teaching philosophy. 

As an example, nominees may describe an original assignment, a series of lab experiments, exceptional fieldwork, innovative lecturing, the development of accessible assignments, creation and/or adoption of Open Education Resources, utilization of Universal Design for Learning principles, connections to community, and so on in their narrative. This section should help the Committee understand how the nominee’s teaching philosophy is enacted.  

5.3 EVIDENCE FOR TEACHING EXCELLENCE

Evidence for teaching excellence should come from several sources such as, student evaluations of teaching, peer review of teaching, course development efforts, or course materials.  This section should highlight the effectiveness of your pedagogical approaches and demonstrate alignment to the beliefs and values outlined in your statement of teaching philosophy (section 3.0). Nominees should work to highlight their ability to share their disciplinary knowledge with their diverse student groups in meaningful ways (across the responsibilities summarized in section 4.0). 

It is up to the nominee to decide what evidence to put forward in this section though some suggestions are provided below.  

Evidence of inclusive teaching and learning 

Evidence of action to support equity, diversity, and inclusion, accessibility, and decolonization in the classroom should be integrated across the nomination dossier. Nominees can additionally address inclusive teaching separately if desired. Nominees In both approaches nominees should demonstrate how efforts to support inclusion and equity in different areas of your pedagogy, from philosophy, to resources, to assessments, or knowledge mobilization efforts are enacted in their practice. 

Instructional and Assessment (Re)Design 

As relevant, nominees should provide evidence for excellence in the design of newly-developed or redesigned courses. Describe the rationale for and process used to develop and refine the course. If the course is successful because of design innovation, explain what is unique and effective, giving evidence: Are students learning something different because of the design? How do we know? 

Examples of Course Materials  

Please do not simply copy course outlines and major assignments into the dossier without interpretation. If certain course materials can provide evidence for claims of teaching excellence, excerpt noteworthy elements and explain why they are significant. Nominees who have created or adapted Open Educational Resources (OER) might include excerpts of those OER in this section.  

The Committee should be able to readily identify connections between included materials with other messages in the dossier, including what is shared in the statement of teaching philosophy (section 3.0).  

Questions to guide reflection may include: 

• Do the materials illuminate some part of the nominee’s attitudes and orientation to teaching?  
• Do the materials demonstrate alignment to some aspect of the teaching philosophy?  
• Is there a novel or important teaching method appearing earlier in the dossier that is supported through the inclusion of the course materials?  

Please be explicit in your explanations. 

Knowledge mobilization 

Nominees might discuss community involvement of a pedagogical nature in their dossier. Discussions of knowledge mobilization might include examples of awareness building and teaching in disciplinary areas and interdisciplinary engagement to mobilize knowledge in the community. As well, supporting access to knowledge in the broader community through open educational resources (OERs).   

Student evaluation of teaching (formal and informal) 

Formal student evaluations 

Formal student evaluations of teaching, called Student Course Experience Surveys (SCES) at Brock, are one piece of evidence that can be used to highlight teaching effectiveness. If the nominee chooses to include SCES data, it should be from the last five years. If a nominee chooses to include SCES data contextual information should be provided including an explanation of how the surveys were carried out. 

In presenting SCES data nominees may provide a table detailing course titles and levels, dates, class sizes, number of completed evaluations, and mean ratings for the global question for each organized by year. If commentary from SCES results is included in the nomination package a typed list of all student comments from two or three classes (prepared at arm’s length from the nominee) is to be included in the appendix.  

Informal student feedback 

Nominees might also choose to include informal student evaluations of teaching including formative feedback collected through: 

• mid-course surveys, 
• exit cards,  
• in-class activities,  
• unsolicited student communications speaking to your teaching (e.g. thank-you cards), and 
• student reflection opportunities from course work. 

Nominees should address the ways that formative feedback from students is sought, their approaches to processing feedback received, and how they address the feedback with their students.  

Peer review of teaching  

The Adjudication Committee appreciates peer reviews of the nominee’s teaching. The value of such evidence increases with details and specifics—anecdotes, examples, descriptions, stories, and observations. If peer review of teaching is used as part of the evidence for teaching excellence, it is important the reviewer take a scholarly approach to the peer review. For instance, they will have used multiple sources of data to perform the review such as feedback from students, review of course materials, websites etc. and an in-depth discussion with the instructor on how their syllabi, including assessment methods, help them meet student learning outcomes. This would be in addition to visiting several of the instructor’s classes. 

Graduate Student Mentorship (if applicable) 

Provide evidence of excellence in teaching in the area of graduate student supervision and mentorship. Evidence can include feedback from former students and reflections on your supervisory practice. Do not include letters from current students.  

The best letters are specific and authentic. These are signed and dated letters from colleagues or former students.  

To avoid redundancy, each letter should address a separate facet or two of the nominee’s teaching. The focus in the letters should be on the impact the nominee has had on the individual, group, institution or discipline. Elements might include commentary on student engagement, support for student learning, professional value of the courses, effective teaching strategies, curriculum design, campus-wide impact, teaching reinforced by research, peer mentoring, and so on. Examples are stronger than adjectives.  

NOTE: Do not include letters from current students. Current students are vulnerable, even if they express a strong, unprompted desire to play an active role in supporting the nomination. Nominations with letters from current students will not be considered by the adjudication committee. 

NOTE: Typically, up to 3 letters from former students are included in the nomination package. Letters of support are included in the page count for the nomination package. 

Nominees should include a discussion about their engagement with professional learning opportunities. These opportunities might include teaching and learning workshops, communities of practice, Scholarship of Teaching and Learning reading groups, and related conferences.  

Nominees should include a positionality statement (up to 250-words) that describes themselves in a meaningful way, including intersectional awareness where appropriate.  

The statement should summarize the information found in the dossier in a way that would be accessible to general audiences outside of the nominee’s discipline and outside of the Brock community. The statement can include short quotations from the dossier if it helps describe the nominee’s commitment to teaching and learning.  

This section is optional and not included in the page count.  

The Appendix is an optional section of the dossier and may include reference lists, certificates, and copies of your SCES instrument as appropriate.