Peer Feedback on Teaching
About Peer Feedback on Teaching
In our ongoing development as teachers, feedback from a number of sources can assist in that process.
The most common strategy used in most universities is some form of student evaluation either at the
individual unit level or the individual teacher. Of course, self reflection is also a common strategy.
Another strategy which is becoming more common is feedback from our peers. Peers are familiar with
the context of our teaching, that is, philosophy and approach to teaching and learning and priorities
of the school, faculty and institution, current issues and other contextual factors. They can provide
feedback based on a common familiarity with content knowledge, best practice and ethical standards
as well. Peers may also have pedagogical expertise and long experience of teaching which they can
draw upon to provide feedback.
Peer feedback on teaching can be for formative purposes (i.e. improving our teaching) or summative
evaluation (i.e. making judgements) and can involve a range of strategies.
Peer review helps to reinvigorate teaching, whether the purpose is formative or summative.
For formative purposes, peer review provides detailed information for appraising one's own work.
When reviews are reciprocal, colleagues come to be seen as constructive consultants rather than
as potential judges. For summative purposes, peer review enriches the evidence on which decisions
about compensation and advancement are made. (Menges in foreword to Chism, 1999, p. ix).
Engaging with peers to get feedback on your teaching should be part of an ongoing process of continuous
improvement of teaching through collaboration, open dialogue, constructive feedback and self-reflection.
The process is about describing what is happening and understanding why it is happening with the
view to improving teaching, even when it may be used for evaluative purposes.
The peer feedback process aims to
- provide the teacher with a supportive network of colleagues;
- develop an ongoing relationship of trust and open dialogue about best teaching practice;
- ensure a cycle of continuous improvement;
- engender an embedded process of self reflection for ongoing development;
- emphasise the value of teaching in the university; and
- foster the scholarship of teaching and learning.
Teachers are at varying stages of their careers, have varying levels of experience, teach in differing
contexts and disciplinary fields and have varying uses for peer feedback. Therefore, no one process,
standard or set of criteria is appropriate to all situations or staff. However, the adoption of one
approach or at least a consistent set of criteria will provide a longer-term picture of teaching
development and improvement.
This processes and strategies described here are based on peers engaging in the provision of feedback
to each other on a range of aspects of their teaching practice. The process can be an informal agreement
where two or more colleagues agree to work together to improve their teaching or it can be more formalized
as part of a wider process, for example a School or Faculty based process. This approach is not prescriptive
but is intended to serve as a guide to individuals, teams or schools who wish to engage in peer feedback
on teaching. The processes and templates are examples that can be adapted to suit individual needs.
There are many resources available to guide the process. The level of experience of the teacher and
the provider of the feedback and the stage of development of the teacher are factors that will affect
the design of the peer feedback process.
Back to Top
Why use peer feedback?
Peer Feedback can be used in probationary
review and promotion applications, teaching
award applications, teaching
portfolios and job applications. A Unit Portfolio developed as
part of the peer feedback process (as an individual or a teaching team) can be used for curriculum
development and renewal.
Most importantly, peer feedback is used for your ongoing professional development to improve your
teaching. Everyone involved in the process of peer feedback on teaching benefits from their involvement.
These benefits arise through the cycle of continuous improvement of teaching including curriculum
renewal, delivery of content, assessment and approaches to the provision of feedback to students
which ultimately flow through to the student learning experience. For new staff, peer feedback on
teaching is a source of advice, expertise and reassurance about their teaching and may provide a
mentoring relationship. For those providing the feedback there is an opportunity to reflect upon
their own teaching practice which may lead to modification of their own approach to teaching.
Each piece of evidence can lead to improvement in teaching practice but relying on a single source
of feedback may not provide a complete picture of your teaching. Evidence from multiple sources will
provide a more complete understanding of teaching practice and areas of strength and those where
development could be valuable. You can also use one form of feedback to guide another feedback process.
For example, a review of student evaluation of teaching reports may help to explain or confirm what
a peer might report. Student feedback can be used to decide on specific aspects of your teaching
on which you might ask your colleague to provide feedback.
Back to Top
Overcoming reservations about peer feedback on teaching
While student evaluation of teaching is often mandated in one form or another in universities, peer
feedback on teaching is less widely used. This is generally due to a number of factors including
fear on the part of staff as to the intended use of the feedback, not understanding the peer feedback
process, and time constraints on staff. Academic staff are more likely to engage in peer feedback
on teaching if it is one element of a university or faculty wide teaching development plan where
teaching is valued, good teaching is acknowledged and rewarded and the time needed for teaching development
is recognised and accounted for in staff workloads.
Both you and your peer will have reservations about engaging in Peer Feedback on Teaching both as
the teacher and the colleague providing feedback. Take some time and consider these reservations
individually and then discuss them together so that you can develop a process for peer feedback that
addresses these reservations, ensuring that the feedback process is conducted in a positive manner
and the outcomes are not limited by the reservations. Such a discussion is important if you plan
to engage in a reciprocal process of peer feedback.
The concern of many teachers who engage in peer feedback on teaching is that the feedback with be
used for purposes not intended in their initial decision to get feedback. That is, there is a fear
that the feedback will be used for evaluative purposes and decisions related to employment and promotion
and tenure without the express consent of the teacher. It is important that the purpose of the feedback
is established right from the start. You may also find that probation and promotion panels consider
evidence of improvement in teaching provided by peer feedback and student feedback as positively
as they value very good teaching.
Another concern that you may have is finding the time for peer feedback. It is your decision as
to the extent of engagement with the process and the processes you will use to gather evidence. You
therefore control the amount of time you will spend on peer feedback on teaching.
Issues that might arise when engaging with peers in the feedback process include a bias in the information
collected due to personal relationships and peer pressure or the observer's own preferred teaching
strategies and approach or philosophy of teaching. Collegial relationships may suffer if the process
is not entered into with a positive and collegial approach aimed at individual and collective development.
The process of peer feedback on teaching and the provision of feedback require a high degree of professional
ethics and objectivity. Giving thought to your choice of colleague to provide feedback will minimise
these issues.
If peer feedback is considered as a strategy for individual development and conducted in a collegial
and constructive manner, the process should be less intimidating for academic staff. The process
of peer feedback on teaching is something that is negotiated between those engaging in the process.
Back to Top
How do I get started?
When you have made the decision to get a colleague to provide feedback on your teaching you should
answer the following questions.
- What do I want to know?
- Why do I want to know it?
- What sort of information might help me?
- What strategies can I use to get the information?
- How will I present the information?
Use the material and resources on this site to help answer the questions.
As a bare minimum you might ask a colleague to provide feedback from peer
observation of teaching.
A more comprehensive process of peer feedback would include peer observation
of teaching, a review of teaching materials using some principles
of good practice in teaching and learning as criteria and perhaps a unit
portfolio.
Teaching teams might choose to review their teaching by peer observation and/or
developing a unit portfolio.
At the school level, you might develop a framework for peer feedback on teaching that includes any
of these strategies.
Assistance is available from the Teaching
and Learning Centre.
Back to Top
Choosing a peer to provide feedback
While teaching experts can provide feedback on teaching based on research and evidence based best
practice, a benefit of using peers for providing feedback is that peers are familiar with school,
faculty and institutional priorities, values, current issues and contextual factors. They can provide
feedback based on content knowledge as well.
Having familiarity with the context and content of another's teaching does not exclude peers from
crossing disciplines, schools or faculties in engaging in the peer feedback process. A peer who lacks
knowledge of the "traditional" or common teaching practice within a field may question
these practices and bring to light issues that a colleague from within the disciplinary would not
have given thought to. Another consideration where a colleague lacks content knowledge is that they
can place themselves in the position of a student, a novice in the discipline.
Engaging in peer feedback on teaching can be a threatening experience and make the teacher feel
uncomfortable. This is particularly so when the teacher is being observed in the classroom. Being
the peer reviewer or observer can also be an uncomfortable experience. As the aim of the peer review
process is the improvement of teaching, the teacher must look for a colleague who is prepared to
provide constructive feedback while not being judgmental and harsh. Engaging in a collaborative process
where there is reciprocal provision of feedback is the most productive and least threatening.
Gunnar Handal (1999) introduced the idea of critical friends which draws on the unlikely
association of the concepts of friendship and criticism. Handal says
Friends are people who are close to us, who support us, and who provide confirmation.
They often disregard our weak points or excuse them rather than confront us with them. Criticism
is generally conveyed by others who are not as close to us, perhaps our superiors or representatives
of viewpoints different from our own. But in fact a real friend is someone to rely on, someone
who will hold a critical mirror before us if necessary. (p. 63)
He goes on to say that a critical friendship "involves an obligation to analyze and criticize" (p.
64). The friend seeks honest, meaningful and thoughtful feedback and entrusts the colleague with
providing it. Four elements of a critical friendship, that is, qualities you would seek in a colleague
to provide feedback are
- A personal relationship of confidence;
- Belief in the professional competence of the critical friend;
- Expectation of personal integrity; and
- Basic trust in the good intentions of the critical friend. (Handle, 1999, p. 64)
There is debate also about who actually 'qualifies' as a peer. In the end, the important factor
is that the peer should be someone with whom you are comfortable and confident in their willingness
to engage with you in the peer feedback process.
When you have established your peer feedback partnership, you should answer a number of questions
such as these adapted from Bell (2005):
- What do we (individually and collectively) want to achieve through this process?
- What will the feedback be used for?
- Against what criteria will we review our teaching?
- What is my/our philosophical approach to the evaluation of teaching and to peer feedback on teaching?
- What protocols will we follow?
- What level of confidentiality do we want to maintain?
- What role do the students play in this peer feedback process? What role do other peers play?
- What processes and timetable will we follow?
- What records will we keep?
- To whom will we provide the information collected in the feedback process?
- What might go wrong? How might we prevent it?
It is important to remember that the teacher seeking feedback on their teaching should be in control
of the process. That is to say that person providing the feedback does so under the 'instructions'
of the teacher. Where the teacher has control over the peer feedback process, rather than being 'subjected'
to an evaluative process, teaching development is encouraged (McMahon, Barrett and O'Neill, 2007).
Back to Top
Criteria on which to base feedback on teaching
One of the most difficult steps in the planning process is determining the criteria by which the
teaching will be reviewed to be able to provide constructive and meaningful feedback in a logical
and consistent manner. It could be argued that reviewing the outcomes of teaching, i.e. student learning,
is the best measure for providing feedback on teaching. Atwood et al (2000) suggest that this would
be a more objective measure of good teaching and reduces the bias in providing feedback on teaching
and the variety of styles of teaching. It is important to recognise however, that while the best
measure of effective or successful teaching is student learning, it is difficult to determine how
much of a student's learning can be attributed to the teaching and how much is a product of other
factors including their own motivation, academic abilities, prior education and backgrounds.
There is any number of ways of setting criteria on which to evidence feedback on teaching. While
there continues to be debate about what constitutes good teaching, a good number of authors (e.g.
Cohen & McKeachie, 1980; Chickering & Gamson, 1987; Ramsden, 2003) have developed lists of
good or effective teaching. There is general consistency across these lists. These principles of
good practice in teaching and learning are compiled from the literature and based on research.
Some principles of good practice in teaching
and learning include:
- Encourage student – teacher contact
- Create an optimal learning environment
- Engage students in collaborative and cooperative learning
- Use active learning strategies
- Provide prompt feedback
- Emphasise time on task
- Communicate high expectations and provide appropriate support
- Acknowledge and respect diversity
- Demonstrate clear organisation, smart preparation and clear presentation
- Base teaching on interconnected knowledge and the creation of a meaningful and relevant context
for learning
- Communicate enthusiasm for the subject and for teaching
- Emphasise fairness
The following five general criteria have been added to these principles to provide a wider set of
criteria on which to gather evidence on your teaching.
- Expertise in subject matter
- Leadership and innovation in teaching and learning
- Scholarship of teaching and learning
- Ethical standard of practice
- Engagement in practices and activities to improve teaching and student learning
Use the Checklist – Feedback on Teaching to record evidence
and feedback using these criteria. You may choose not to complete feedback against all criteria and/or
you may wish to add your own criteria.
If you choose not to use this set of criteria or wish to add or substitute other criteria to this
set, there are many other sources from which you can develop them. You may choose to use the criteria
included in the guidelines for the development of a teaching
portfolio at Murdoch University or those for the Vice
Chancellor's Teaching Excellence Awards. Another source is the data bank of items used in the student
surveys of teaching (both unit and teaching surveys). You might choose criteria set by a discipline
group or School that best reflects the context in which the teaching is done or you may choose a
completely separate set of criteria drawing upon various guidelines that focus on a particular aspect(s)
of teaching.
You can also refer to the peer feedback checklist sets that provide
generic guidelines or key attributes you might use to develop your own criteria and open-ended checklists.
Do not forget that after the set of criteria is chosen, you will need to determine where you might
source evidence to provide feedback against each criterion.
Back to Top
Collecting evidence for feedback on teaching
Evidence to support feedback on teaching can come from multiple sources including:
- Peer observation of teaching;
- Teaching portfolio;
- Unit portfolio;
- Other sources:
- Teaching and learning materials including unit outlines, resource lists, online resources including
the use of a learning management system (e.g. CE6), and recorded lectures;
- Student evaluation of teaching including formal processes, informal feedback, focus groups
and student interviews;
- Scholarship of teaching and learning including publications, conference presentations, grants
and projects; and
- Testimonials, awards and citations, invitations and consultancies.
While it is important to remember that multiple sources of evidence provide a more accurate picture
of teaching practice, there may be times when a single strategy is appropriate given the purpose
and desired outcomes of the feedback process, the context of the teaching and the time available.
There is no standard practice as to where and how evidence may be collected and presented.
Each source of evidence can be used in isolation to collect feedback on teaching. This will depend
on teaching context, teaching and learning strategies, the purpose of the feedback process and the
individual teachers.
Peer observation of teaching
"There is only one honest way to evaluate the many varieties of good teaching with
the subtlety required: it is called being there" (Palmer, 1998, p. 143).
Peer observation of teaching involves one or more peers sitting in the classroom and providing feedback
to the teacher on what is happening in the classroom. It may be supplemented by videotaping or recording
the lecture or teaching activity so that the teacher and the observer can more effectively reflect
on the teaching and place the feedback in context. Peer observation is quite often a reciprocal process
with the observer and teacher swapping roles.
Peer observation might be the seen as the first step in engaging in a broader process of peer feedback.
If only one strategy is to be adopted then peer observation would be the most appropriate.
Peer feedback on teaching is often mistaken as being synonymous with peer observation of teaching
but peer observation, while probably being the most common, is only one approach to collecting evidence.
There is more to teaching than what is observable in a classroom and when used in isolation of other
peer feedback strategies it is not likely to provide a compete and accurate picture of the teacher's
practice. A single observation also may not provide an accurate picture. On any given day, a teacher
could have a "bad" day that is not typical, the teacher may give a "performance" that
is not typical, and other factors in the classroom such as student attendance and engagement may
not be representative.
When using peer observation of teaching to get feedback, you may place emphasis on the observer
(Cosh, 1998). The observer reflects on their own teaching in light of the teaching being observed
and improves their own practice. This reduces the focus on 'evaluation' and judgement of the teacher
and may actually encourage the use new and innovative teaching.
Some points to consider when engaging in peer observation of teaching include:
- While peer observation of teaching is effective in providing feedback, it is more effective if
it is part of a continuing dialogue process of review and feedback, not an end-product in itself.
- The students should be aware of the purpose of the observations. You may consider this unnecessary
if it is a very large class.
- The process of peer observation of teaching and the provision of feedback requires a high degree
of professional ethics and objectivity.
- The teacher owns the observation process and its outcomes.
- The peer observation process is a learning experience for both parties.
- A narrative is a better way of presenting feedback to the teacher and provides a sequential record
of the teaching event. The teaching can be better placed in context and provides more concrete
evidence.
- If you use a checklist, also record sufficient information to explain your decision.
- Conduct the observation in a positive atmosphere.
- Look for themes in the information gathered.
The Five Step Approach to Peer Observation of Teaching is flexible
and adaptable to individual needs and context. Select the appropriate forms
and checklists for recording and providing feedback or using these generic ones as templates
or the checklist sets, create your own to suit the particular peer
feedback context and process.
A similar peer observation process is described in much detail in Maureen Bell's HERDSA Guide (2005) Peer
observation partnerships in higher education (http://www.herdsa.org.au).
This excellent Guide provides both a process for individuals as well as a formal process that a
School or team of teachers might adopt.
The teaching portfolio
The teaching portfolio is a document that describes and evidences the individual teacher and his
or her teaching. It can form part of the feedback process providing documentation to the colleague
to assist in the feedback process as well as being a place to document the evidence and outcomes
of the feedback process.
The teaching portfolio is developed in an ongoing manner. Indeed, it is essential that the portfolio
be updated and reviewed regularly in order to maintain the value of the portfolio. Revision of the
teaching portfolio on a regular basis will reflect improvements and additions to the teacher's range
of teaching. The process of evaluation of teaching including peer feedback, peer observation of teaching,
student feedback and curriculum review will contribute to this ongoing review and updating. The portfolio
also serves as a valid tool in providing teaching staff with the reassurance that they are developing
expertise over a period of time. It is useful to look back and reflect on the early days of the peer
feedback process and realise how far one has progressed.
The Teaching and Learning Centre provides guidelines
for developing a teaching portfolio plus a list of additional resources on teaching portfolios.
Another useful resource is Seldin's (2004) text The teaching portfolio: A practical guide to
improved performance and promotion/tenure decisions.
The unit portfolio
The unit portfolio focuses on a particular unit and provides in-depth reflection and information
about the unit. Bernstein, Nelson Burnett, Goodburn and Savory (2006) write that a unit portfolio
is
a reflective investigation of how course [unit] structures, teaching techniques and
assessment strategies enhance or detract from student learning. As such, it provides a window into
what occurred during the course [unit], highlights what worked and what did not, and showcases
the student learning that resulted (p. 8).
The unit portfolio is a suitable format for a teaching team to document their teaching in a unit
for peer feedback as well as form part of the process of curriculum review. It can be revised on
a regular basis to reflect the various modifications that will occur each time the unit is offered.
The unit portfolio most importantly, perhaps, provides the opportunity for peers to focus on the
intentions of the teacher(s) and to be aware of aspects of teaching of a unit or course that requires
focus during the peer feedback process. It also allows ongoing dialogue between all parties involved
in the peer feedback process and ultimately achieves a much deeper level of understanding of what
constitutes optimal student learning in the unit and more generally.
The portfolio can be structured under six sections:
There should be clear alignment throughout the portfolio between the unit design, teaching and learning
activities and the assessment strategies. Reflection is a critical element of the portfolio and should
form part of each section. You should also include a reflective narrative that draws all sections
together and looks at the unit as a whole.
Unit design
The section on the unit design is an opportunity to present an overall picture of the unit. It would
start with a general teaching statement or philosophy of the unit, the context in which it is taught,
where it fits in the course or degree program and how it links to other units. The aims of the
unit and the student learning outcomes would be articulated here too. Teaching materials and resources
could be listed. Much of this information might be included in the Unit Outline, which could be
attached as an appendix to the Unit Portfolio but this section is an opportunity to articulate
the overall philosophy and strategy behind the curriculum design process. The planning process
may be explained through concept maps and charts. This is generally more than what might be included
in a unit outline. There should be some element of reflection on the process included in this section
too.
Teaching and learning activities
Teaching and learning activities are the processes by which the teacher and students engage with
each other and the unit material. This includes lectures, tutorials, laboratories, field work,
team exercises, in-class activities, 'homework' and so forth. In this section, describe the teaching
and learning activities and show how they are linked to the learning outcomes and the assessment.
There should also be reflection on the process of choosing the activities, their success or otherwise,
ongoing development of the unit and suggestions for change.
Assessment of student learning outcomes
Assessing student learning outcomes provides information to the teacher and the students about their
learning and the achievement of the learning outcomes. Providing constructive feedback is an integral
part of assessment. All assessment tasks should be detailed in this section including assignments,
in-class work and participation and mid-semester and final exams. The criteria for assessment should
also be described. Although this information should be included in the unit outline which is attached
as an appendix, information in the portfolio can be more detailed as to the assessment philosophy,
the rationale for choice of assessment strategies, marking criteria and how the assessment aligns
with the learning outcomes and the teaching and learning activities. The strategies for providing
student feedback should also be described.
Evidence of the assessment strategies could include examples of student work and examples of feedback
on submitted work provided by the teacher. The process of marking and how multiple markers cross
mark for consistency should also be included.
Teaching evaluation
Describe the process for obtaining feedback on the teaching and learning in the unit and how the
feedback is used to improve the unit. Multiple sources of feedback on the unit are available and
should include both formative and summative feedback. It should also include student evaluations
of the unit and teaching and peer feedback. Summaries of scores as well as selective narrative
comments can be included. Include examples of the instruments used to collect feedback on teaching.
Unit quality standards
The Murdoch Guide for
Unit Quality, designed to assist staff in the preparation of high quality, flexible units
that implement aligned curriculum, provides a set a unit quality standards that provide a check list
for reviewing the unit.
Reflective narrative
The reflective narrative is an opportunity to draw together the other five sections of the unit portfolio
and show the relationship between them. It is an opportunity to reflect on the success of the unit
and describe planned changes. Innovative approaches might also be discussed here. The narrative
is also a place where you can discuss research (formal or informal) that has been done in the unit
and the outcomes of the research. Contributions to the scholarship of teaching and learning through
research in the unit should feature here.
Back to Top
Giving and receiving feedback
A crucial element of the peer feedback process is the provision of constructive feedback. The feedback
process is more effective where peers have some understanding of interpersonal skills and relationships.
When providing feedback you are describing what you have seen, heard or read and are attempting to
come to a mutual understanding of why it is so or what it is that happened. This understanding needs
to be placed in the context of the teaching and also related to what you both believe to be good
teaching, that is, basing the feedback on some criteria or principles of good teaching practice.
Feedback should be given and received in a peer relationship based on honesty and trust. It should
be non-judgmental and be constructive with a view to further development. As Chism (1999) suggests "Feedback
that is forward-looking allows the colleague to go beyond the peer review activity" (p.
32). Feedback should focus on the material presented or behaviours and the events that happened rather
than on the individual. Taking this focus lessens the emphasis on personal judgment of the individual.
A narrative is a better way of presenting the feedback to the teacher and provides an opportunity
for exploration of elements of the feedback. In written form it provides some structure on which
the teacher can develop plans for improvement. A checklist may be appropriate in some circumstances
and can serve as a guide for the teacher to pursue development of particular aspects of their teaching,
particularly if details are recorded against each item. Checklists might be perceived to be evaluative,
particularly those that rate aspects of teaching on a scale.
Consider the amount of feedback that is appropriate to give in any one discussion. Too much feedback
can be overwhelming and the teacher may have difficulty in focusing sufficiently to make improvements.
Feedback might be categorized and provided at different times or in different formats, for example,
some may be verbal and written and other just a written narrative and checklists.
Feedback should be based on what was originally determined in discussions between the teacher and
peer reviewer. Going beyond the original scope of the review should only be done if all parties agree.
Phrase the feedback in specific terms so that the teacher has something concrete on which to focus.
Open ended questions posed to the teacher in a way that describes the particular aspect of teaching
and seeks confirmation or clarification can promote self-reflection on that aspect of the teaching
under discussion. In this way, the teacher is coming to an understanding rather than the reviewer
making a judgment. The teacher can also consider the feedback in light of what was originally intended.
Receiving feedback is also a skill. The receiver of the feedback has to be prepared, that is they
should have reflected on the material or teaching and they need to be able to listen without interrupting
and being defensive. It is possible that the peer relationship may become strained or even completely
break down. In your planning for peer feedback, discuss the feedback process and how you might deal
with conflict if it arises. Brinko (1993) provides further advice on effective
feedback.
While not advocating for standardized processes and templates for peer feedback, some comparative
information might be useful both for an individual considering their own development as well as for
those who are evaluating a teacher for probation and promotion or as part of an awards process. Checklists
do carry an evaluative or judgmental tone and can be seen in a negative light by the teacher. If
a checklist is used, particularly where the peer feedback is for development purposes, sufficient
narrative data or comments should be provided along with the checklist so that the teacher can see
why they have been evaluated in that way for each item on the checklist and has concrete evidence
on which to implement change. Select the appropriate forms and checklists
for recording and providing feedback or using these generic ones as templates or the checklist
sets, create your own to suit the particular peer feedback context and process.
If the feedback is to be included in a teaching portfolio or presented to a third party for evaluative
purposes, the teacher and the colleague(s) providing the feedback may choose to present an agreed
upon and condensed version of the feedback. Evidence could be collected in a number of ways and then
summarized and presented in a more coherent and structured manner.
Back to Top
References
Atwood, C.H., Taylor, J.W. & Hutchings, P.A. (2000). Why are chemists and other scientists afraid
of the peer review of teaching? Journal of Chemical Education, 77(2), 239-243.
Bell, M. (2005). Peer observation partnerships in higher education. Milperra, NSW: Higher
Education Research and Development Society of Australasia Inc. (HERDSA)
Bernstein, D., Nelson Burnett, A., Goodburn, A. & Savory, P. (2006). Making teaching and
learning visible: Course portfolios and the peer review of teaching. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Chism, N. Van Note (1999). Peer review of teaching: A sourcebook. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Cohen, P. A., & McKeachie, W. J. (1980). The role of colleagues in the evaluation of college
teaching. Improving College and University Teaching, 28, 147-154.
Cosh, J. (1998). Peer Observation in Higher Education – A Reflective Approach. Innovations
in Education and Training International, 35(2), 171-176.
Handal, G. (1999). Consultation using critical friends. New Directions for Teaching and Learning,
No. 79, 59-70.
Hutchings, P. (1996). Making teaching community property: A menu for peer collaboration and peer
review. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.
McMahon, T., Barrett, T. & O'Neill, G. (2007). Using observations of teaching to improve quality:
finding your way through the muddle of competing conceptions, confusion of practice and mutually
exclusive intentions. Teaching in Higher Education (12), 4, 499-511.
Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher's life.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed.). Routledge, London.
Seldin, P. (2004). The teaching portfolio: A practical guide to improved performance and promotion/tenure
decisions. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Svinicki, M. & Lewis, K. (nd). Preparing for peer observation: A guidebook. Austin, TX:
The Center for Teaching Effectiveness, The University of Texas at Austin.
http://www.utexas.edu/academic/cte/PeerObserve.html Accessed
03.07.07.
Back to Top
Web Resources
Acknowledgement
This material is adapted from a variety of sources including the references and websites listed.
Back to Find out about
|
