Peer review of teaching
In the context of the pedagogy course at UiT, I have been involved in a peer review of teaching that consisted of providing a feedback on a colleague’s teaching and receiving feedback on my own teaching. The whole process was operated according to the following guidelines http://www.uvett.uit.no/ilp/pm/kbase/kol.html. Peer review of teaching favours the enhancement of teaching quality and allows the continuing professional development of individual lecturers (Lomas and Nicholls, 2005) through a genuine and constructive process (Kinchin and Nicholls, 2005).
- Context of the observations
For each observation, my observer and I met before and after the observation phase. We used the forms provided by Result (see attached document) as a framework for conducting the observation successfully and efficiently. We filled out the forms before and after each observation in order to direct our feedbacks (what specific points we wanted to be given feedback about).
I paired up with a young female associate professor in dental health with an immigrant background. Both of us conduct our teaching in English. We have performed two observations of each other. The setting was always very casual and the atmosphere extremely friendly, which is a mandatory prerequisite for a successful outcome.
- My experience of being observed
I have chosen to be observed during one lecture and one seminar at the master level (course BIO-3009). The lecture covered theoretical background information about ecotoxicology/marine pollution while the seminar aimed at providing some methodology to write a scientific abstract using a paper that covered the theoretical concepts taught over the previous two lectures (to illustrate in what context that theoretical background can be used).
On both occasions, I have introduced my fellow observer to the class. It made feel a bit uncomfortable at first because I feared that the students might interpret me being observed by a fellow professor, as being not very experienced but the students did not seem to give too much thoughts about it.
Knowing that I was being observed was a bit stressful but also made me more self-conscious about my teaching and forced me to analyze my own performance from a different perspective. Yet, the observation went smoothly and I received very nice comments from my fellow observer, both orally and in writing (through the Result forms). I very much appreciated the positive feedback that she provided about my teaching; it is very motivating to keep up the good work. I was however mainly keen on hearing about the aspects of my teaching that needed improvement. The main weakness that was pointed out to me was the fast pace of my lectures. Because of this high tempo, I do not spent enough time on questions to the students.
I used the opportunity of being observed to submit an anonymous questionnaire to my students (on a piece of paper). At the end of the seminar, I gave them a couple of minutes to answer 8 questions (including 5 short questions and 3 opened questions; attach the poll from the students). On average, 90% of the students attended the whole week of teaching, i.e. two lectures and one seminar (16 students filled in the questionnaire). About the lectures, students reported having a prior knowledge of 30%, which increased to 78% after the lectures. They enjoyed the seminar at the level of 85%. Overall, their comments concurred with those of the observer regarding the fast pace of the lectures. Besides that, they all had positive comments about me and the content of my lectures, which was extremely rewarding. I was a bit concerned that the students would see this questionnaire as an annoying task but I was surprised to read that 90% of them would find it useful to fill in a questionnaire weekly.
From next year, I am therefore going to address the issues raised. For starter, I am going to add an additional hour to cover these concepts and I will use this extra time to make pauses during the lectures devoted to debates with the students (using tools such as Kahoot and/or Flinga). I will also use short questionnaires more often during the semester.
- My experience as an observer
I was asked to observe a lecture (flipped classroom) and one seminar (practical work). Attending a flipped classroom was a completely new experience to me and I found it extremely informative and inspiring. I have learned some tricks. It was also very illuminating to physically sit on the students’ side. I could observe that their attention could not be held for too long and that having breaks (in the form of questions/examples) did help maintain their interest and concentration.
My peer performed extremely well during both the lecture and seminar. Yet, I had a couple of minor suggestions that she paid great attention to. I found it gratifying to contribute to improving someone’s teaching and it made me realize that regardless of one’s experience, we all have relevant inputs to contribute. My experience could only agree with the statement by Lomas and Nicholls (2005) who reported that peer review of teaching benefits both the reviewer and the reviewee.
- Conclusion
It has been a constructive process to take part to peer review of teaching both as an observer and as being observed. I am glad that I have been observed by someone my own age with a similar teaching experience and a similar cultural background. It was also beneficial that my colleague had a different background within science. However, although she could easily assess the form of my teaching, she was more limited to assess its content. I will therefore make sure to ask a fellow professor at my department to assess the content of my teaching.
I do not think that it is necessary to be observed by someone that we observed. It could even be more fruitful to be observed by different people with different backgrounds, the more the merrier! Peer review of teaching should not be a one-time thing but should be an ongoing process in one’s teaching career. As researchers, we are used to being reviewed by peers whenever submitting our work for publication. As stated by Lomas and Nicholls (2005), there is opposition to peer review of teaching which can be perceived as a loss of academic freedom while it should serve as a developmental tool to enhance the quality of teaching. Practice and dissemination will surely contribute to a more collegial acceptance of the process and its long-term implementation.
References
Lomas, L. and Nicholls, G. (2005). Enhancing teaching quality through peer review of teaching. Quality in higher education, 11 (2), 137-149
Lomas, L. and Kinchin, I. (2006). Developing a Peer Observation Program with University Teachers. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 18 (3), 204-214.