GRD 716 Teaching Portfolio Evaluation Rubric
Component
Teaching Responsibilities
List of courses taught with descriptions of
role (lecturer, coordinator, lab supervisor,
instructor, etc.) and the level of assistance
provided (extent of TA involvement in
marking, labs, lecturing, etc.)
Course outlines/syllabi
List of students supervised (if applicable)
Teaching Philosophy
Statement of personal beliefs about
teaching and how these inform the choice of
teaching methods, i.e., why you do what you
do.
Teaching Innovations
List any novel teaching methods or
curriculum materials developed, including
textbooks, lab manuals, assignments,
computer software, and materials for
courses in mediated learning modes
Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness
Classroom Teaching
Graphical or tabular summary of formal
student ratings.
Exemplary
Comprehensive and clearly organized
list of courses/ lectures with year and
number of students. Roles and level of
assistance are clearly defined.
Course outlines are included and are
an appropriate format and length
Supervised students listed, including
year
(10 pts)
Perspective on teaching is clearly
outlined. Includes beliefs and values
with respect to his/her approach to
facilitating learning.
Choice of teaching methods is
appropriately linked to beliefs and
values.
Indication of teaching goals: roles and
responsibilities of teacher and student
in the learning process are included.
Statement is succinct and clearly
reasoned.
(10 pts)
Description of course innovations is
included, i.e. web materials, resources,
changes to methods.
May include proposed ideas or
strategies for improving his/her
teaching.
(10 pts)
Summary of the mean scores for
student evaluations are included and
displayed in a table. Graphics are clear
Adequate
List of courses and lectures taught within year.
Year taught and number of students
incomplete. Roles and level of assistance not
clearly defined.
Course syllabi are not included or are not
referenced in the body of the portfolio
(5 pts)
Perspective on teaching is outlined, as is
his/her approach to facilitating learning, but
these are not clearly linked to ones beliefs and
values on teaching and learning.
Choice of teaching methods seems random
due to lack of succinct teaching philosophy.
Indication of teaching goals: roles of only the
teacher or the student are outlined, not both.
Statement is present but lacks strength
because separate elements are not clearly
connected to one another.
(5 pts)
Lists but does not describe teaching
innovations;
Does not include any proposed ideas or
strategies to improve teaching.
OR
Lists ideas or strategies to improve teaching
but does not include changes to teaching
methods or innovations. (Reflections)
(5 pts)
Some information from student evaluations
included, but not presented graphically.
(OR Graphic is unclear)
Needs Improvement
Unorganized list of courses and
modules taught. Number of
students missing. Roles and level
of assistance not outlined.
No Course syllabi included
List of supervised students is
absent.
(0 pts)
Perspective on teaching is only
partially outlined, and it is not
directly linked to beliefs and values
with respect to an approach to
facilitate learning. (focus on
teaching rather than learning)
teaching methods is not described
or not connected to the philosophy
on teaching and/or the approach to
facilitate learning.
Statement is incomplete and lacks
focus due to missing or vague
elements.
(0-3 pts)
Does not make any reference to
teaching methods or innovations
used, or that could be used to
improve teaching.
(0 pts)
Summary of student evaluations is
absent.
 GRD 716 Teaching Portfolio Evaluation Rubric
Letters from students, parents, former
students, or employers of former students.
Colleague evaluations based on direct
observation of teaching
Course Content & Course Management
Colleague evaluations based on analysis of
course documents and materials (course
outlines, assignments)
Professional Development
Brief description of steps taken to improve
your teaching (e.g. workshops, seminars,
courses)
Overall Organization
Adapted from Teaching Portfolio Evaluation Rubric, University of Western Ontario Teaching Support Centre
and easy to interpret.
Letters are organized, and summary
comments included
Evaluations/ Observations made by an
experienced professor and/or above
average instructor. Comments cover
both content and teaching methods.
(10 pts)
Courses, seminars, workshops and
other activities are clearly listed with
brief descriptions and categorized with
dates.
(5 pts)
Information is well organized and easy
to follow with clear sections,
categories, headings.
Concise and not overwhelming.
Teaching goals are clearly indicated.
Supportive documentation effectively
demonstrates abilities and
accomplishments.
Effective use of tables, charts,
graphs and/or graphic design (for web-
based portfolios)
Format is visually appealing and aids
reader in efficiently scanning for info
Error-free.
(10 pts)
The evaluation is from a graduate student and
not from an experienced professor and/or
above average instructor. Comments do not
cover both course content and management.
(5 pts)
Some information is missing or difficult to
follow (categories and headings are missing or
less helpful)
Information is clear but could be more
succinct
Teaching goals are listed but not elaborated
upon
Supportive documentation is provided but
may not be pertinent. It is however, related to
abilities and accomplishments.
Appropriate use of tables, charts, graphs
and/or graphic design
Document formatting is standard.
Document contains very few spelling,
grammatical and typographical errors
(5 pts)
Does not include any letters.
Does not include any peer
evaluations
Does not include any evaluations
by professors
(0 pts)
No teaching improvement activities
listed.
(0 pts)
Information is incomplete
Included components are not
clearly linked to one another to
provide an overall sense of his/her
teaching perspective
Teaching goals are not stated as
such, and are therefore not clearly
identified
Supportive documentation may be
absent, impertinent or does not
effectively demonstrate abilities
and accomplishments
Inappropriate use of tables and
statistics
Document is disorganized; not
visually appealing
Document contains several
spelling, grammatical and
typographical errors
(0-3 pts)
 GRD 716 Teaching Portfolio Evaluation Rubric

This rubric is from a course I took fall 2017 while working towards a PhD in nutrition sciences and CIRTL certifications. I thoroughly enjoy this
syllabus, and the others from this course, because it clearly outlines what each grading interval entails. It also ensures the students know what
all is to be included in their projects or assignments with the use of headings and subheadings. The grading intervals list different grading criteria
such as format, grammar, graphics, organization, and more, so the students are graded on their project overall rather than just how pretty the
assignment looks or how well written it is.