Observing Classroom Teaching in Higher Education

Abstract

Describes the operation of a scheme to appraise teaching quality through classroom observation at Bournemouth University during 1993. Outlines the principles, design and evaluation of the scheme.

A Qualitative Review of Literature on Peer Review of Teaching in Higher Education

“…Some of the problems associated with PRT as identified by Hutchings (1996) include issues in publicizing teaching practice, establishing standards of good teaching practice, issues in dividing limited time for PRT and teaching responsibilities, as well as selecting the right methods and reviewers to assess teaching performance. This is supported by research that shows the reliability and validity of feedback from nonspecialist reviewers is persistently questioned although proven otherwise by Hanson (1993). Some faculty members may prefer having expert feedback in addition to peer feedback due to concerns that their peers might be too inexperienced to provide valuable feedback (Bell & Mladenovic, 2008).…”

“…The question is, "Can reviewers without subject expertise provide equally valid feedback as reviewers who are with subject expertise." Hanson (1993) addressed this concern through a pilot study in a PRT program by having a subject specialist evaluate a group of faculty members. The evaluation revealed that feedback from nonspecialist appraisers and subject specialists are equally reliable and valid.…”

“…There is also limited research published in this area in high-impact journals. Most relevant studies on PRT programs were conducted in the late 1980s to early 1990s (Freiberg, Waxman, & Houston, 1987;Hanson, 1993;Odell & Ferraro, 1992). Recent research by Bingham and Ottewill (2001), Kohut et al (2007), Bell and Mladenovic (2008), as well as Kell and Annetts (2009) were identified using specific search terms related to PRT such as peer observation, peer feedback, and reflective practice.…”

“…There are a wide range of positive outcomes for the development of faculty members as a result of practicing PRT. The benefits concluded from the literature include the confirmation of existing teaching practices and motivation for faculty members to teach from a different perspective (Hanson, 1993), the development of assurance to instruct and learn about teaching, change in educational perspectives (Bell & Mladenovic, 2008), the development of collegiality, respect for the approaches of colleagues (Quinlan & Akerlind, 2000), and integration of tutors into the department (Allen, 2002). Formative peer evaluation with feedback has the ability to give the faculty and its members the responsibility for self-monitoring, on content relevance…”

“…A survey among science faculty members and administrators revealed that there is uncertainty about the fairness of the review process (Atwood et al, 2000). Hanson (1993) suggested faculty members can overcome this issue by having reviewers provide feedback from additional resources other than observation records, such as adopting teaching portfolios. In addition, reviewers could also evaluate different competencies through different methods.…”