Professor Chen (from above) took all student comments from 5 semesters and ran them through a simple qualitative coding process. They presented a table:

A portfolio is only as strong as its evidence. Every claim made in the narrative must be "strategically linked" to physical artifacts in the appendices. Instructional Effectiveness:

"My research is the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). I study how primary-source archives improve student retention."

Associate Professor of English, R1 University.

Patel led the portfolio with "Societal Impact" rather than "Journal Impact." They created a "Policy Brief Appendix" showing that their research on housing insecurity was cited in a state senate bill.

This is controversial but critical. The best candidates don't just list 10 potential reviewers. They send a to their Dean with 15 names, ranked by priority, along with a "context sheet" for each potential reviewer explaining why that person can speak to the candidate's specific contribution. (e.g., "Dr. Smith is the only other scholar using the Zhao method; she can verify that my modification is novel.")