2026 CTLM Instructor Survey: What We Heard

This spring, UW–Madison’s Center for Teaching, Learning & Mentoring (CTLM) ran a campus-wide Instructor Survey. 1,336 instructors responded, including 38 from SoHE (16 faculty, 14 instructional staff, and 8 TAs). Thank you to everyone who took the time to share your experiences. Below is a short summary of what we learned.

Campus-wide results

Who responded. The survey went to 9,703 instructors, and 1,336 responded (a 13.8% response rate). That included 539 faculty, 545 instructional academic staff, and 252 current or former teaching assistants.

Overall experience. About 85% of respondents described teaching at UW–Madison as somewhat or very positive. Only about 7% described it as negative.

Feeling valued by students. Instructors in every role felt valued by their students. They felt somewhat less valued by departmental colleagues, though still generally positive.

Percentage of Instructors Feeling Valued by Students
Role	Very or extremely valued by students
Faculty	73%
Instructional academic staff	81%
Teaching assistants	71%

Top challenges (number of coded written responses):

Student engagement (232)
Campus culture, policy, and dynamics (193)
Generative AI (150)
Interpersonal and interdepartmental dynamics (137)
Teaching workload (125)

When instructors described engagement challenges, they talked about students coming to class less prepared, reading less, being more distracted by phones, and sometimes taking a more passive role in their own learning. Several connected these changes to the pandemic years.

Generative AI. The most common AI practice was including an AI statement in the syllabus. Relatively few instructors required students to use AI. Instructors said they want support with AI course policies, assignment design, ethical use, responding to inappropriate use, and clearer campus guidance.

Seeking teaching support. Nearly two-thirds of respondents had sought teaching support in the past three years, and most said their needs were met. CTLM and Learn@UW were the most used campus resources, followed by the Libraries.

Percentage of Instructors Seeking Teaching Support (Last 3 Years)
Role	Sought teaching support (past 3 years)
Assistant professors	82%
Instructional staff	72%
Teaching assistants	65%
Associate professors	61%
Full professors	44%

Teaching assistants. TAs were more likely than faculty and staff to want support with core teaching practices, such as leading class conversations, grading, giving feedback, and managing group dynamics. They also reported feeling less prepared to teach than professors.

Top rewards (number of coded written responses):

Student learning and progress (291)
Interacting with students (273)
Student engagement (247)
Others’ appreciation of their work (149)
Student interest in the course or discipline (97)

Student engagement is both one of the hardest parts of teaching right now and one of the most rewarding. Students remain at the heart of why teaching feels meaningful.

SoHE results

Who responded. 38 SoHE instructors responded: 16 faculty, 14 instructional staff, and 8 TAs. The SoHE report compares our responses with those from the rest of campus.

SoHE at a glance

Highlights from SoHE Respondents
Measure	Faculty	Staff	TAs
Somewhat or very positive about teaching	81%	93%	80%*
Very or extremely valued by students	88%	86%	—
Very or extremely valued by departmental colleagues	88%	—	—
Sought teaching support (past 3 years)	63%	86%	100%*
Worked with the SoHE Teaching & Learning Team	88%	93%	80%*
Want support with generative AI in their classes	—	86%	86%*

*Very small group. A dash means the result wasn’t highlighted in the SoHE report.

What stands out

SoHE faculty feel especially valued by their colleagues. 88% of faculty felt very or extremely valued by departmental colleagues. Across campus, faculty generally felt less valued by colleagues than by students.
Our teaching is active and applied. Compared with the rest of campus, SoHE instructors reported more use of cooperative activities, group work, small-group discussion, semester-long projects, case- and inquiry-based learning, and setting group norms.
Local support is visible and used. Most SoHE respondents in every role have worked with the SoHE Teaching & Learning Team, and SoHE staff and TAs sought teaching support at especially high rates.
AI needs look different by role. Faculty were most interested in creating AI course policies and assignments that use AI. Staff were most interested in using AI for course design and administrative tasks. TAs were most interested in policies and assignments that limit or exclude AI.

Top SoHE challenges

Student engagement
Changing student needs
Teaching workload
Larger class sizes
UW–Madison culture, policy, and dynamics

Top SoHE rewards

Student learning and progress
Getting to know students
Student engagement
Course and discipline content
Interacting with students
Support from the school, college, and department

A note on the numbers: SoHE’s group of respondents is small, so these results are best read as patterns rather than firm conclusions. In many areas, SoHE responses were not statistically different from the rest of campus. Across campus, responses differed more by job title than by school or college.

Full reports