2 Overview of Peer Observation

In the previous chapter we defined peer observation of teaching as occurring whenever one teacher observes another teacher and there is subsequent conversation around this shared experience. While this simple definition captures the primary elements of peer observation of teaching, we now present a more substantive formal definition (Bennett & Barp, 2008):

[Peer observation of teaching is] a process whereby a teacher participates as an observer in a lesson taught by a colleague for the purposes of exploring the learning and teaching process and environment and where this ‘observation’ leads . . . to reflection and discussion, with the underpinning long-term aim of improving students’ learning (p. 559).

Peer Observation Models

Gosling (2002) identified three peer observation models; the evaluative model, the developmental model, and the peer review model. These models exist along a continuum from summative to formative and differ in purpose and hierarchical structure (Table 1).

The evaluative model is designed to obtain data on teaching performance for the purpose of informing personnel decisions such as continued employment, salary adjustments, and promotion and tenure decisions. This model is summative because its purpose is to simply describe current teaching performance rather than provide a information for future teaching improvement. The model is inherently hierarchical as administrators or senior faculty observe and evaluate more junior faculty members. Although teaching improvement may be an incidental byproduct of the evaluative model, the primary purpose is for evaluation.

The developmental model is designed to obtain information for teaching improvement. Because the primary focus is on teaching improvement, not on evaluation, the model is more formative in nature. However, the developmental model is somewhat hierarchical as it typically involves senior faculty observing and critiquing the teaching performance of more junior faculty.  The implied hierarchy is that junior faculty will be the sole beneficiaries as a result of the observation and subsequent discussion.

The peer review model  is a self- and mutual-reflection model designed solely for teaching improvement. This model is completely formative in nature and hierarchy-free. In this model, faculty are teaching peers and there are no assumptions about their relative teaching abilities or expertise. Both the observed and the observer enter the relationship with the expectation that they each have something to learn from the classroom observation and the subsequent reflection and discussion. The peer review model also holds potential to create wider discussions of teaching and teaching improvement within departments, colleges, and even university-wide (Bovill, 2010).

This remainder of this book focuses on the peer review model with one slight wording change – we will use peer “observation” instead of peer “review.” Given our commitment to the formative nature of peer observation and the equality of the observed and observing faculty, we choose not to use the word review, believing it implies unequal status and a somewhat summative purpose to this process.  The peer observation process we promote emphasizes equality of faculty, involves all faculty without regard to rank or teaching experience, is strictly formative in nature, and has the  potential to foster campus-wide discussions about teaching, teaching improvement, and student learning. The peer observation model is especially attractive to the authors because of our firm belief that teaching should be a community endeavor and that we all have much to learn about teaching from each other.

Components of the Peer Observation Model

The peer review model consists of five primary components: initial contact, pre-observation meeting, classroom observation, post-observation meeting, and the written observation report. In this section we will briefly describe each of these components with emphasis on the basic purpose of each component. Subsequent chapters will elaborate on each of these five components and will provide best practices and examples that you can use as a peer observer.

Initial Contact

The peer observation process is initiated by the faculty member who desires to be observed. This faculty member contacts a peer observer by to determine their availability to do the peer observation.  (Names and contact information for potential peer observers are generally made available by campus teaching centers.) If the initial peer observer is unavailable due to other responsibilities or scheduling conflicts, the faculty member may continue contact other peer observer until one is secured. Once a peer observer has agreed to do the peer observation, the two faculty members will set a date time and place for the pre-observation meeting. Before the meeting, the faculty member being observed should share a copy of the course syllabus and the peer observer should share a copy of the “Peer Observation Goals” worksheet. Understanding the course objectives and structure and refining goals for the peer observation will help both faculty members prepare for a successful pre-observation meeting. Suggestions and best practices for the initial contact are described in Chapter 3.

Pre-Observation Meeting

The pre-observation meeting generally lasts from 20 to 30 minutes and is an essential component of the peer observation process. If the two faculty members are meeting for the first time, the meeting allows them to learn about each other on a personal and professional level and begin the process building a positive, productive relationship. The meeting provides an opportunity to discuss the peer observation process, background information on the course and students enrolled, the observed faculty member’s goals for the peer observation, the lesson to be observed, and details concerning observation date, time, and location of the observation. The peer observer should send an email soon after this meeting to confirm all of the details discussed. Suggestions and best practices for the pre-observation meeting are described in Chapter 4.

Classroom Observation

The classroom observation is the core of the peer observation of teaching process. The goal is to carefully observe the professor and the students before, during, and after class and document  (in writing) classroom behaviors and the context in which these behaviors occur. For example, the observer might write, “8:00 – I (instructor) began class with a brief review of the previous lesson and provided an overview of today’s lesson and the specific student learning objectives. Students were attentive.” These detailed narrative notes, based on observable teacher and student behaviors,  form the basis for the post-observation meeting and the written observation report. If the teacher has identified specific areas where they desire feedback, be sure to record behaviors and reactions related to these areas. Suggestions and best practices for the classroom observation are described in Chapter 5.

Post-Observation Meeting

The post-observation meeting should be scheduled approximately two to five days after the classroom observation. This gives both parties time to reflect on the class session, and allows the observer to read through the observation narrative and summarize the key points in an informal manner. This reflection and summary help structure the post-observation meeting. The meeting should be best thought of as a respectful conversation between two teaching peers focused on observable behaviors related to improving teaching an learning. The observer should not take on the role of an evaluator, rather maintaining the peer-to-peer relationship is of utmost importance. Both good points and areas for potential improvement should be discussed. Any suggestions should be couched in an “observation-question” manner. For example, “I noticed that seven of the students did not appear to have done the pre-assigned reading. What ideas do you have about how to motivate them to do these readings?” In many cases the faculty member will identify several potentially effective strategies to improve instruction. In cases where the faculty member doesn’t, the peer observer can follow up with additional questions, such as, “What would happen if you required students to complete a small graded quiz on the readings prior to class?” Framing suggestions for improvement as questions, promotes mutual respect and continued dialogue between peers. Suggestions and best practices for the post-observation  meeting are described in Chapter 6.

Written Observation Report

The written report should be completed as soon after the post-observation meeting as possible. Be prepared to take some time on this! A good written observation report may take two to three hours or more to write. The report should be structured in narrative form, describing observable classroom behaviors based on the observer’s written classroom narrative and further informed by the post-observation meeting. The report should be collegial in tone and should highlight both things done well and questions designed to promote reflection and improvement in areas that didn’t go so well. When making suggestions for improvement, continue to use the observation-question format.

Transmit the written observation report to the faculty member as an email attachment and offer to meet to further discuss report if desired. Provide an assurance that the report is confidential and that you will not share it with anyone else, but that they are free to share it with anyone or use it for any purpose they so desire. Suggestions and best practices for writing the observation report are described in Chapter 7.

Summary

The ultimate goal of peer observation of teaching is to improve student learning through observation, reflection and peer-to-peer discussion related to teaching practices. Peer observation is a formative tool for teaching improvement that includes initial contact, pre-observation meeting, classroom observation, post-observation meeting, and finally, the written observation report. Each component of the peer observation process will be described in greater detail in subsequent chapters.

References

Bennet, S., & Barp, D. (2008). Peer observation – a case for doing it online. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 559-570.

Bovill, C. (2010). Peer observation of teaching guidelines. University of Glasgow. https://wiki.ubc.ca/images/0/0b/Peer_Observation_of_Teaching_Guidelines_-_Bovill_C.pdf

Gosling, D. 2002. Models of peer observation of teaching. LTSN Generic Centre.