As mentioned earlier, we do not want to provide a checklist of topics that a case should address, nor do we want to prescribe what should be included as evidence in a case. We believe that a good case will be as unique as the person it presents to the Selection Committee. Evidence can take many forms, and it isn't restricted to these items, but we offer the following ideas:

• Letters from colleagues that provide "evidence" of good teaching, and that make specific reference to pedagogy
• Letters from former students that describe the influence of the teaching on learning, describe learning outcomes and comment on lasting influence on the students. Ideally, letters will not merely "acclaim" that someone is good at helping others learn- they will provide a first-hand, eye-witness account of it
• Documents that illustrate course organization and effective practice. Documents can be annotated to make links to effective practice
• Descriptions of effective teaching methods and strategies developed or used by the nominee
• Evidence of community engagement, outstanding presentations and workshops, service learning or the expression of teaching in communities external to the University of Saskatchewan
• Examples of leadership in teaching organizations, participation in conferences, or faculty development units
• Examples of innovative teaching materials, including media and multimedia. These are best used to illustrate specific teaching skills or values, and in most cases should include only brief extracts. For example, if a course Website is included, it should probably just be a printed page or two from the website that is annotated to describe how it illustrates particular aspects of the case. Merely submitting a URL to the site will not illuminate the case or compel the Selection Committee to review it in its entirety
• Peer reviews of teaching, particularly those that focus on specific elements of teaching
• Samples of course syllabi
• Examples of evaluations done of student work
• Evidence of successful teaching at both undergraduate and graduate levels. For example, one aspect of superior teaching at the graduate level might be evidence of where students have gone and what they have accomplished. Similarly, descriptions of undergraduate students who have chosen to do graduate work under the direction of the nominee or have gone on to graduate studies elsewhere because of their learning experience with the nominee could be used as evidence of superior undergraduate teaching
• Summarized and annotated student evaluations of courses. If statistically based, normative data are helpful, and it is important that the nominator provide a clear description of the context and interpretation of the data. If non-statistical data are presented, it is important to situate the results by describing the context of the course, a representative sample or complete set of student comments, and a commentary on how the summarized information compares with that of peers.

In the final analysis, the development of a case is an artistic act. You are attempting to make a person come alive in the minds of the Selection Committee. The Selection Committee does not use a standardized approach to evaluating cases, but we are influenced by clarity, economy, vigor and grace in the preparation of the case. We want to find and reward the very best teachers we have on campus, and we want to enlist your help in accomplishing that difficult goal. As one of our groups eloquently put it, "We want to find the person who can teach the phone book, and make it engaging and meaningful."