Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Peer Review of Teaching
Transcript of Peer Review of Teaching
"Arm's-length judgment of quality by a colleague with specialized knowledge of standards of excellence in a field" (Bernstein, 2008) What Do We Mean by Peer Review? Observation of a single class session by a faculty colleague? Why Use Peer Review? In the teaching context:
"Informed colleague judgment about faculty teaching"
(Chism, 2007) "...implies a systematic act, based on appropriate evidence and thought process." "...someone with similar professional status... a person who is qualified by expertise or training to serve as a knowledgeable judge." Positions teaching as a community endeavor Scholarship is public, open to review, and available for peers to build upon. (Shulman, 1999) Treats teaching as scholarly work Bernstein, D. (2008). Peer review and evaluation of the intellectual work of teaching. Change, 40:2.
Bernstein, D., Burnett, A. N., Goodburn, A., & Savory, P. (2006). Making teaching and learning visible: Course portfolios and the peer review of teaching. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Cavanagh, R. (1996). Formative and summative evaluation in the faculty peer review of teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 20:4.
Cerbin, W. (1996). Inventing a new genra: The course portfolio at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. In P. Hutchings (ed.), Making teaching community property: A menu for peer collaboration and peer review. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Chism, N. (2007). Peer review of teaching. Boston: Anker.
Hutchings, P. (ed.) (1996a). Making teaching community property: A menu for peer collaboration and peer review. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Hutchings, P. (1996b). The peer collaboration and review of teaching. American Council of Learned Societies Occasional Papers, 33.
Ismail, E., Buskist, W., & Groccia, J. (2012). Peer review of teaching. In M. Kite (ed.), Effective evaluation of teaching: A guide for faculty and administrators. American Psychological Assocation.
Kaplan, M. (1998). The teaching portfolio. University of Michigan Center for Research on Learning and Teaching Occasional Papers, 11.
Shulman, L. (1999). Taking learning seriously. Change, 31:4. Provide faculty with formative assessment Acknowledges the complexity and context-dependence of teaching "We close the classroom door and experience pedagogical solitude, whereas in our life as scholars, we are members of active communities..." (Shulman, 1993) "Any evaluation system must be supported by activities that promote development of skills being evaluated." (Bernstein, 2008) Some argue (Cavanagh, 1996) that formative and summative assessment should be kept separate... ...but others (Hutchings, 1996a; Bernstein et al, 2006) argue that formative processes can yield evidence useful in summative evaluations. What Is Effective Teaching? That which is "without visible defect"?
(Hutchings, 1996b) "An ongoing, reflective process aimed always at improvement"?
(Hutchings, 1996b) Congruence or alignments among goals, methods, and results?
(Cerbin, 1996) One Model: Auburn University Teacher shares materials (syllabus, handouts, teaching statement, teaching portfolio, perhaps student evals) with observer. Teacher and observer meet to discuss the class session to be observed. Observer visits the teacher's classroom on designated date and time. Observer meets with the teacher's students to discuss their learning experiences. Observer prepares a written report, noting strengths and suggestions for improvement. Teacher and observer meet to discuss the observation and written report. Another Model: AAHE Class observations Student interviews Review of materials (Similar to the Auburn model) Department collections of teaching materials "Pedagogical colloquia" by faculty candidates (Ismail, Buskist, & Groccia, 2012) (Hutchings, 1996a) "Like research or art, teaching is judged in part based on its impact on the intended community." (Bernstein, 2008) Cautions for Class Observations The reliability of class observations as conducted by unprepared peers is poor. (Arreola, 2007) Observations miss important aspects of teaching unless part of a larger review process.
(Kaplan, 1998) "Because informal observations do not generate valid evidence for comparisons among faculty or with established standards for classroom practice, most resources recommend they not be used as evidence in summative review." (Bernstein, 2008) References Derek Bruff, Center for Teaching, Vanderbilt University
January 28, 2012 Teaching Portfolios Structured, selective, representative, not exhaustive Continuing projects, not finished artifacts Include reflections that provide context and make arguments Include materials (from oneself and others) that provide evidence for those arguments Goals
Results "It is the relationship or congruence among these elements that makes for effectiveness."
(Cerbin, 1993) Key Questions about Portfolios What components will be required? How long can/should portfolios be? How much reflection will be expected? How will portfolios be evaluated? What rubric will be used? How will faculty be supported in the creation of portfolios? Types of Portfolios Teaching Portfolios Course Portfolios Benchmark Portfolios Inquiry Portfolios Provide continuity among instructors
Reveal gaps in the curriculum
Focus on a coherent unit of study (Kaplan, 1998)