Including 'reappointment letters' and/or teaching observations in job market materials?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

Is it appropriate to include reappointment letters (which specifically comment on my scholarship, teaching, and service from the Chair and Dean) and teaching observations in a job application? If so, where? Teaching obs could go in a teaching portfolio I suppose...Any norms here?

Teaching observations seem just fine to include in a teaching portfolio. But I don't think I've ever seen 'reappointment letters' in a dossier, and I think this would probably seem strange. 

What does everyone think?

Comments

[East Coaster]

I would not have thought it okay to use teaching observations in a teaching dossier without asking first—but that could totally be my institutional conservatism. I don't have a principled reason for my stance; it isn't like students are asked for consent to have their survey #s included in the portfolio. But my inchoate sense is that the rules of the game for those observations is that they are prepared for the internal process.

I could be a wild outlier here! Hopefully, I am!

[I am getting it!?]

You should not include someone's letter that was written for other purpose UNLESS you get their permission to do so. That is, if the letter was wriiten by a colleague for a retention file, then you should not send it out in applications without first asking the letter writing. If you did, the prospective employer may contact the letter writer ... and rightly so.

[Bill V.]

The tendency to try to include piles of evidence is understandable--there's so much at stake, and the odds are so low that candidates want to do everything they possibly can. But busy search committees, handling hundreds of applications, are (almost universally, I claim) not going to do more than skim a lengthy teaching dossier. I wouldn't include those items. When you ask your current chair to write a letter of reference (which you should do anyway), send the chair those items. The chair can shape the info contained therein to better serve the purpose.

[Marcus Arvan]

Just to clarify, my experience is that many teaching observations are carried out under the explicit understanding that they will be used in job market materials—but I agree: one should only use them if that understanding exists.

Re: Bill’s comment, I’ve heard people say they think observations are the best evidence of what someone actually does in the classroom. I’m not sure I agree with that take, but the point is I’ve heard people say they can be helpful—though as Bill notes maybe the best place for that is a recommendation letter by someone (particularly a senior colleague) who has observed you teach.

[dontworry]

Just in case people start panicking: I can't remember the last time I saw someone submit a letter from their current chair as part of a job application I was reviewing. (I think people do it, or have colleagues write, but in my experience it is far less common than not.) I teach at an R1; maybe things are different elsewhere. Lots of people apply to jobs from the tenure track and don't disclose that fact to their department at all, so they can't ask for such a letter. But also, at least at my R1, it is more valuable to have research-focused letters from people in your subfield. And quite a few of my former students have moved between somewhat more teaching-focused jobs without notifying their departments they were applying, and thus without a letter from anyone in their department.

[jaded]

I would like to follow up on Bill V's comment. Teaching dossiers have really grown over the years. And Bill is right to say that they are largely just lightly skimmed over. Indeed, MOST of the content in them is very low grade evidence (is it even evidence?). Standard teaching evaluations are problematic in many ways, that are widely discussed. Teaching observations are anecdotal, and are written by a canidadate's advocate (has a candidate ever included an impartial and critical teaching observation in their file?). And teaching philosophies are bogus. There is little evidence that they inform the practice of the candidate who wrote them. What is unfortunate is that administrators now demand "evidence of teaching quality" in applications - so departments are forced to ask for them, candidates are forced to write them, and faculty are forced to "review" (or skim) them. By the way, I personnaly care about teaching ... I even enjoy it.

[Bill V.]

I think dontworry is right for people moving between tenure track jobs, and/or for jobs at places where teaching is less of a focus. I was thinking of and should have specified that folks who are in adjunct or other temporary positions who are looking for a TT job at a teaching-focused place should have their current chair write a letter--such a letter is evidence of collegial fit, etc.

And Marcus, maybe we need a follow-up thread on jaded's topic. What *should* be in a teaching dossier, how long should it be, what constitutes good evidence of teaching effectiveness, etc. Perhaps Cocoon can come up with a new standard that is easier on both candidates and committees.

[TeachingCentric]

At my R1 Flagship State Campus, teaching evaluations by peers are often considered the best evidence of teaching effectiveness. If you have good ones, you should include them.