Peer review
- Introduction
- What is peer review?
- Types of peer review
- Principles for peer review
- Peer review for promotion
- Additional resources
- Literature and research on peer review
Introduction
Peer review of teaching is a tool for academic staff to evaluate and enhance their teaching practice. Peer review can provide academic staff:
- feedback on the quality of teaching for developmental purposes;
- evidence for use in promotion, probation or teaching award applications; and
- affirmation and development of good teaching practice
In addition to academic staff at UniSA engaging with peer review informally, they also engage formally with peer review throughout their academic career at UniSA. As part of their induction, all academic staff at UniSA attend the Teaching@UniSA course that offers peer observation of teaching as an optional activity.
UniSA has had a 'guide to peer review' since 1999 produced by the Learning and Teaching Unit (LTU) and there are two research projects on peer review at UniSA currently being undertaken by the divisions of EAS and BUE with LTU input. An online resource supporting the ALTC peer review project of online teaching and learning at UniSA is available.
To discuss peer review, contact your Head of School, your Dean Teaching and Learning, or an Academic Developer in your division or on your campus.
What is peer review?
A typical peer review requires a teacher to negotiate with a peer about the amount and conditions under which teaching performance will be observed, the areas in which judgements are sought, the standards that will be used in making judgements and the ways in which the evaluation will be reported
Peer reviews can be conducted on any aspect of teaching including informal and formal evaluation of a course or program, design of a course, lecturing, laboratory teaching, large and small group teaching, online learning, online materials, and assessment.
While peer review encompasses evaluation both of classroom performance and non-classroom curriculum activity, peer observation describes the more confined activity of visiting and learning about classroom teaching performance. For an overview of the process of peer observation of teaching at the University of Wollongong, see this flowchart.
Types of peer review
There are two inter-related types of peer review: formative and summative. Formative reviews are focused on gaining information for the purposes of the ongoing improvement of teaching. Formative review may be confined to a specific focus such as the use of questioning in a classroom setting or the use of a discussion forum in online teaching. Summative reviews have a particular endpoint in mind. They are mainly focused on the demonstration of quality in support of processes such as promotion or program evaluation.
Summative reviews can also have a formative dimension by informing ongoing practices.
Principles for peer review
Peer review should:
- Be voluntary
- Be beneficial
- Have criteria that are context-specific, relevant and able to be evaluated
- Be conducted in a professional and ethical manner
- Have agreement on purpose, focus and criteria applied
- Be documented
- Be confidential with some exceptions
Peer review for promotion
Academic staff applying for promotion at UniSA are required as part of their evidence for teaching performance to provide a summary of the results of at least one peer review of teaching (See University Academic Promotion Policy HR-26.0).
UniSA does not have official peer review instruments. Instead, we draw on instruments made available through the latest research on peer review that has been supported by the ALTC. In particular, see the Protocols and instruments for peer review of teaching for promotion. Keep in mind that these resources will require alignment to UniSA's approach to promotions (see information on academic promotion).
Additional resources
- Forms and checklists for providing feedback from Bell, M. (2005). Peer observation partnerships in higher education. Milperra, NSW: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia Inc. (HERDSA).
- Guidebook for Peer Review of Teaching at University of Queensland (PDF 70kb - opens in a new window. Download Adobe Acrobat).
- Guide to Peer Review of Teaching with tailored observation schedules and templates at University of Tasmania (PDF 564kb - opens in a new window. Download Adobe Acrobat).
- Information on a peer observation of teaching program including a manual for conducting peer observation at La Trobe University
- AALTC Peer Review project - handbook - comprehensive handbook on peer review of teaching, designed to support institutions in the development and embedding of programs of peer review: Harris, K.-L., Bell, M., Devlin, M., and James, R. (2008). "Peer Review of Teaching in Australian Higher Education: A handbook to support institutions in developing an embedding effective policies and practices"
Literature and research on peer review
- Bell, A., & ladenovic, R. (2008). "The benefits of peer observation of teaching for tutor development." Higher Education, 55, 735-752.
- Brinko, K. T. (1993). "The practice of giving feedback to improve teaching." Journal of Higher Education, 64, 574-593.
- Gosling, D. (2002). "Models of peer observation of teaching". City: LTSN Generic Centre: London.
- Hammersley-Fletcher, L., & Orsmond, P. (2004). "Evaluating our peers: is peer observation a meaningful process?" Studies in Higher Education, 29(4), 20-33.
- Kohut, G. F., Burnap, C., & Yan, M. G. (2007). "Peer observation of teaching: perceptions of the observer and the observed." College Teaching, 55(1), 19-25.
- Peel, D. (2005). "Peer observation as a transformatory tool?" Teaching in Higher Education, 10(4), 489-504.
- Shortland, S. (2004). "Peer observation: a tool for staff development or compliance?" Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(2), 219-228.
- Siddiqui, Z. S., Jonas-Dwyer, D., & Carr, S. E. (2007). "Twelve tips for peer observation of teaching." Medical Teacher, 29, 297-300.
- Swinglehurst, D., Russell, J., & Greenhalgh, T. (2008). "Peer observation of teaching in the online environment: an action research approach." Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 383-393.