1. A Critical Friend: Peer Review of Teaching at AUS Daniel Kirk dkirk@aus.edu Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

2. Why Peer Review?  For Improvement -- Mentoring Function -- Collegiality -- Personal / Professional Development  For Personnel Decisions -- Multiple kinds of evidence -- Professional Governance Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

3. Arguments for Peer Review of Teaching  Acknowledges complexity of teaching  Peers well-placed to judge some aspects of teaching – Critical Friend  Supports Shulman’s ‘Community Property’ theory for teaching  Multiple data sources for sound evaluation  Professionalization allows monitoring by peers Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

4. Reservations about Peer Review  Norms of privacy and egalitarianism of teachers  Peer selection and definition  Time commitment  Reduction of risk taking in practice  Standardization across academic units Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

5. What Can We Review?  Course goals / content  Instructional materials & methods  Evaluation of students’ work  Knowledge base of teacher  Academic unto commitment to teaching  Development of teaching practice  Classroom practice Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

6. Kinds of Evidence  Classroom performance  Instructional materials  Instructor’s record  Records from others Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

7. Classroom Practice  Least reliable, but most prevalent  Important to agree on criteria and approach  Critical Friend – focused approach  Multiple reviewers and points in time needed for reliability  Prompt, personal feedback necessary for development  Unit / Institution-wide reporting format Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

8. Instructional Materials  Syllabi  Course guides, policy documents  Course packets, textbooks  Course handouts  Assessment criteria / policy  Assignments, tests, exams  Feedback to student work Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

9. Instructor’s Record  Extent and quality of scholarship on teaching  Contributions to development of teaching in academic unit  Non-teaching duties and activities  Portfolio and reflection on teaching growth Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

10. Records Provided by Others  Student evaluations on teaching  Administrative reviews  Student tracking data  Conference and publication papers related to teaching Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

11. Implementing Peer Review  Establishing need  Discussion and collaboration with faculty  Preparing peers  Distributing responsibilities  Monitoring progress  Evaluation plan of peer review process  Policy and instrument creation and adoption Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

12. What next…?  Discussion and dialogue with all stakeholders  Peer review committee formation and staffing  Policy and practice guidelines  Implementation schedule  Professional development  Instrument creation and trials  Timeline for process Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007

13. Now over to you……………..  What concerns do faculty have regarding Peer Review?  Has anyone experienced such a system in the past?  How do we feel having a Critical Friend in our classroom?  What benefits can we see with this scheme?  What problems / issues to we envisage?  Do we, as faculty, feel Peer Review would help us both professionally and personally? Daniel Kirk: dkirk@aus.edu: Oct 2007