The paper analyses the concept of ‘teaching excellence’ and attempts to give it precision. In the process, it is found that the lack of precision is due essentially to the multidimensionality of the concept, which has led to serious confusion in any attempt to reduce its dimensions to a single one. The dimensions are of two kinds; first, classificatory, distinguishing the three levels of institution, department and individual, and second, substantive, describing the different ways in which each of the three levels can exhibit excellence. Ways of recognizing and rewarding individual excellence in its different dimensions are then discussed and recommendations are made for action. It is argued that under present circumstances, excellence at institutional and departmental levels are almost unattainable, but that this is not so at individual level. Finally, it is noteworthy that recognizing and rewarding teaching excellence at all three levels is found to be significantly different from corresponding practices normally used for research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lewis Elton (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: