SAADIA N. LAWTON, Ph.D.

EVIDENCE OF TEACHING ABILITIES

CONTENTS:

1. TEACHING PHILOSOPHY

2. 2011-2012 SELF-EVALUATION

3. 2010-2011 SELF-EVALUATION

4. OVERLOADS 2011-2012

5. 2010-2012 COURSE EVALUATION RESULT AVERAGES

6. SPRING 2012 L.U. COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS

7. FALL 2011 L.U. COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS

8. SPRING 2011 L.U. COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS

9. FALL 2010 L.U. COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS

Law

ton

’s T

each

ing

Ph

ilo

sop

hy

In J

anu

ary 2

01

2 t

he

arti

cle

“Tra

nsf

orm

ing

Ped

ago

gie

s, P

ract

ices

, an

d

Pro

du

cts:

In

no

vat

ion

s fo

r Q

ual

ity E

du

cati

on

pu

bli

shed

in

Net

wo

rk:

A

Jou

rna

l o

f F

acu

lty

Dev

elop

men

t, f

eatu

red

ex

cerp

ts o

f a

met

ho

d I

cre

ated

to

effe

ctiv

ely a

chie

ve

and

mea

sure

del

iver

able

s b

ased

on

stu

den

t le

arn

ing

ob

ject

ives

fro

m a

un

iver

sal

rub

ric

des

ign

ed e

xcl

usi

vel

y f

or

scaf

fold

pro

ject

s.

On

e ai

m o

f th

is u

niv

ersa

l ru

bri

c w

as t

o r

eali

ze h

ow

a 2

00

2 e

xp

erie

nce

shap

ed m

y t

each

ing

ph

ilo

sop

hy:

Stu

den

ts l

earn

wh

en t

ran

spa

ren

t eq

uit

ab

le s

yste

ms

tha

t m

easu

re d

iver

se l

earn

ing

sty

les

wh

ere

pro

ject

s

bu

ild

up

on

va

ria

ble

ski

lls

acq

uir

ed a

nd

rei

nfo

rced

du

rin

g t

hei

r te

nu

re o

f st

ud

y b

ala

nce

bes

t te

ach

ing

pra

ctic

es.

Edu

cato

rs a

re e

ntr

ust

ed w

ith

the

resp

on

sib

ilit

y t

o s

ho

w s

tud

ents

ho

w t

o

con

nec

t th

e d

ots

bet

wee

n w

hat

th

ey l

earn

an

d h

ow

th

ey c

an e

ffec

tiv

ely a

pp

ly

info

rmat

ion

. C

oin

cid

enta

lly,

my p

hil

oso

ph

y a

lso

ack

no

wle

dg

es t

he

nec

essi

ty

to c

ult

ivat

e en

vir

on

men

ts w

her

e al

l fa

cult

y s

har

es,

twea

k,

and

co

llab

ora

te

wit

h t

he

inte

nt

to i

den

tify

pra

ctic

es t

hat

bes

t su

it t

he

nee

ds

of

stu

den

t le

arn

ers

bu

t do

no

t co

mp

rom

ise

stan

dar

ds

of

acad

emic

ex

cell

ence

an

d i

nte

gri

ty.

Ou

r ch

arg

e is

to

pro

vid

e st

ud

ents

wit

h t

he

mea

ns

to d

evel

op

new

sk

ills

,

shar

pen

old

on

es,

and

enco

ura

ge

crea

tiv

e ex

plo

rati

on

s o

f o

pti

on

s in

div

erse

lear

nin

g e

nv

iro

nm

ents

th

at c

hal

len

ge

thei

r ab

ilit

y t

o n

ot

on

ly t

hin

k c

riti

call

y

bu

t al

so p

erfo

rm g

lob

ally

. I

bel

iev

e th

at o

ur

abil

ity

to

su

cces

sfu

lly a

chie

ve

thes

e o

bje

ctiv

es r

est

in o

ur

wil

lin

gn

ess

to m

od

ify l

esso

n p

lan

s, c

oll

abo

rate

as

coll

eag

ues

, ad

apt

bes

t te

achin

g p

ract

ices

, an

d m

od

el t

he

resu

lts

we

exp

ect

wit

hin

ou

r o

wn

pro

fess

ion

al p

erfo

rman

ce.

Whil

e m

y u

niv

ersa

l ru

bri

cfo

r sc

affo

ld p

roje

cts

rem

ain

s a

wo

rkin

g d

ocu

men

t

to g

aug

e th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

of

my o

wn

tea

chin

g p

ract

ices

th

rou

gh

th

e le

ns

of

stu

den

t p

erfo

rman

ce,

it h

as o

ffer

ed o

pp

ort

un

itie

s to

id

enti

fy b

est

pra

ctic

es

and

ass

ess

tho

se p

arts

of

the

mo

del

th

at r

equ

ire

rev

isio

ns.

In

th

e en

d, m

y

con

vic

tio

n (

and

ob

ject

ive)

rem

ain

s th

at a

go

od

tea

cher

:

1.

adv

oca

tes

for

var

iable

pro

gre

ssiv

e st

ud

ent

lear

nin

g s

tyle

s.

2.

emb

race

s th

e in

terc

han

gea

ble

co

rrel

atio

n b

etw

een

tea

cher

an

d l

earn

er.

3.

dra

ws

fro

m t

hei

r o

wn

exp

erie

nce

s to

hel

p s

tud

ents

.

4.

pra

ctic

es i

nte

gri

ty i

n t

each

ing

an

d a

dv

isin

g.

5.

enco

ura

ges

stu

den

ts t

o p

erse

ver

e.

6.

mak

es t

he

abst

ract

co

nce

pts

in

con

cret

e m

anag

eab

le t

erm

s.

I u

se t

hes

e ar

e th

e st

and

ards

to a

sses

s m

y o

wn

pro

du

ctiv

ity a

s a

teac

her

an

d

edu

cato

r.

COURSES TAUGHT

LINCOLN UNIVERSITY1. ART200 INTRODUCTION TO ART (CORE CURRICULUM COURSE)2. ARH211 ART HISTORY I: SURVEY OF ART (ANTIQUITY TO 1400)3. ARH212 ART HISTORY II: SURVEY OF ART (1400 TO PRESENT)4. ARH216 ART THEORY, CRITICISM, AND METHODOLOGY5. ARH375 AFRICAN ART HISTORY/ SELECT THEMES

(formerly ARH275)6. ARH376 AFRICAN AMERICAN ART ISTORY, 1619 TO PRESENT

(formerly ARH276)7. ARH490 SENIOR CAPSTONE8. MSM200 INTRODUCTION TO MUSEUM STUDIES

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON1. ARH101 ART HISTORY PAST AND PRESENT (TEACHING ASSISTANT)

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-WHITEWATER1. FREEDOM MOVEMENTS IN THE AFRICAN DIASPORA (NEW COURSE APPROVED FOR RACE & ETHNIC STUDIES IN HISTORY DEPT)

CORNELL UNIVERSITY1. AFRICAN AMERICAN SOCIAL & POLITICAL THOUGHT (TEACHING ASSISTANT)2. RACISM IN AMERICAN SOCIETY (TEACHING ASSISTANT)

LAWTON'S COURSE EVALUATION RESULTS

QUESTION NO.(Please consult Evaluation

Form for wording of each question)

FALL 2010 SPRING 2011 FALL 2011 SPRING 2012 TOTALAVERAGE PER

QUESTION

NO. 1 3.52 3.69 3.4 3.47 14.08 3.52

NO. 2 3.4 3.51 3.14 3.53 13.58 3.395

NO. 3 3.24 3.46 3.1 3.32 13.12 3.28

NO. 4 3.44 3.54 3.07 3.58 13.63 3.4075

NO. 5 3.4 3.46 3 3.61 13.47 3.3675

NO. 6 3.21 3.51 2.98 3.26 12.96 3.24

NO. 7 3.12 3.34 2.64 3.16 12.26 3.065

NO. 8 3.56 3.43 3.17 3.53 13.69 3.4225

NO. 9 3.64 3.49 3.17 3.42 13.72 3.43

NO. 10 3.64 3.49 3.12 3.42 13.67 3.4175

NO. 11 3.44 3.57 3.19 3.21 13.41 3.3525

NO. 12 3.08 2.94 2.55 3 11.57 2.8925

NO. 13 3.33 3.15 2.9 3.32 12.7 3.175

TOTAL SCORE 44.02 44.58 39.43 43.83 171.86 42.965

AVERAGE BY SEMESTER 3.38615385 3.429230769 3.03307692 3.371538462 13.22 3.305