Peer review of teaching in Australian higher education: a systematic review

Abstract

Over recent decades, peer review of teaching has become an important mechanism for improving the quality of teaching in higher education. While there is considerable international research on peer review of teaching outcomes, these are not widely reported within Australian universities. This paper reports on a systematic review of published studies examining peer review of teaching characteristics that contribute to teaching development in Australian higher education. Following a search of peer reviewed literature published over three decades, 19 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. A thematic synthesis revealed teaching development outcomes gained through peer review of teaching span factors at organisational (N = 16), program (N = 13) and individual (N = 4) levels. Organisational factors included disciplinary context, program sustainability, collegiality and leadership. Program factors included framework, program design, basis of participation, observation, feedback and reflective practice. Factors at the individual level included prior experience and participants' perceived development requirements. In addition to reporting on teaching development outcomes, some studies reported on enhanced student learning outcomes (N = 5). Improved reporting of program design in addition to validated tools to assess outcomes are required to better understand how peer review of teaching supports teaching development. The growth of peer review of teaching within Australian higher education presents an important opportunity to advance our understanding of practices influencing academic teaching development.

A Systematic Literature Review of Higher Education Reputation Management: Active/Reactive Framework

“…Regarding organising and synthesising the literature, Suri and Clarke (2009) proposed the methodologically inclusive research synthesis (MIRS) to emphasise characteristics of research from ‘interpretive, participatory, and critical’ aspects, and this framework can be applied in both qualitative and quantitative studies. Moreover, Johnston et al (2022) specified this framework by supplementing key questions asked to dig deeper information of the literature (Table 1).…”

“…Moreover, Johnston et al (2022) specified this framework by supplementing key questions asked to dig deeper information of the literature (Table 1).…”

“…These definitions provide an initial point of reference in this study, Table 1. Supplemented Framework of Johnston et al (2022).…”

Leading Academic Development in Dynamic Higher Education International Settings

“…In 2009, I was invited to work with the Director of Teaching in one of the six schools in the Faculty. Although peer observation of teaching was well accepted internationally, it was not widely practiced in Australian universities (Johnston, et al, 2020). We started with five academics who volunteered to participate in peer observation of teaching in Semester 1, then recruited another five volunteers in Semester 2.…”

The Design and Psychometric Properties of a Peer Observation Tool for Use in LMS-Based Classrooms in Medical Sciences

“…Experienced and successful instructors in teaching can contribute to the professional growth and development of their colleagues (Speer, 2010). Nowadays, peer observation of teaching is one of the new components of empowerment programs or evaluation of faculty members in different universities around the world (Johnston, Baik, & Chester, 2020).…”