By Dr Kay Guccione, Senior Lecturer in Academic Development
I’ve been working recently on a priority area of academic development for GCU: enhancing peer-support for learning and teaching. This covers new mentoring programmes, network building, and working with departments to reframe how peer-led development (for example resource sharing; special interest groups, networks and mailing lists; ’skills exchange’ sessions; seminar series; shadowing; observations of teaching; and ad hoc support) is positioned, practiced and evaluated.
It’s important to be clear about the purpose, mechanisms and benefits of how we encourage staff to think about the development that is all around them in their departments. This is because I often find the term ‘peer-support’ gets mixed up with ‘peer-review’ and/or ‘peer-assessment’. No wonder then that some colleagues can felt a sense of resistance to getting involved; people are quite right to be wary of anything that is presented as development, but feels judgemental.
I’d say, and I don’t know how you feel, that this is particularly true for ‘peer-observation of teaching’; a development practice that many-to-all universities deploy as standard, and yet which has been known to throw up concerns.
Peer observation of teaching is a tool that can generate rich personalised feedback for those teaching in universities. It commonly involves a process whereby the observer feeds information back to a peer, with the intention of enabling reflective learning for that colleague. When peer observation of teaching is incorporated into university practice and culture, and is managed in a mutually respectful and supportive way (McLeod, et al 2012), it has the potential to facilitate reflective change and growth for teachers. It can additionally, if the observer adopt different roles in the process, ensure that a variety of perspectives feed into the reflection (Kenny et al, 2014). Further, it holds clear benefits for the observer as well as the person being observed (Siddiqui et al., 2007). The peer-to-peer aspect is advantageous, meaning that the feedback given is qualitatively different from the limited data generated through reportedly inaccurate, gender-biased, language-biased, racially-biased (and often deeply personal and inappropriate) student evaluations.
Overall, peer observation of teaching seems to be a positive thing, but note the conditional dependencies throughout the above paragraph. It is useful if it’s managed properly, if it’s mutually respectful, and, additionally, if it’s part of a wider culture of development (Teoh et al, 2016).
If the above conditions aren’t in place, peer observation of teaching can come across far less appreciative, and more like a:
- Peer-review experience, where an evaluation takes place and external judgements are made about the equality and standard, with recommendations made for improvement.
- Peer-assessment experience, if for example the review is numerically scored, if the recommendations are made visible to others (e.g. the reviewee’s line manager), or if the observation is linked to probation, performance management, or has been initiated in reaction to poor student evaluations.
A lot depends then, on how peer observation of teaching is set up. Here are some parameters to consider if you are going to be encouraging staff to engage with peer observation:
- Is it optional or compulsory? Do colleagues choose to engage, or are they required to? This can shift the tone from on where staff feel trusted, in control and ready to engage, into a space where the exercise feels ’tick box’ or part of a command and control culture.
- How is it resourced? Have staff been given time for this? What can be periodically de-prioritised from their full workload, to enable them to focus their minds on this.
- Who decides the pairs? We all have people we will respond positively to feedback from, and people whose opinions we don’t particularly value. Here is another opportunity to increase or decrease trust in the process. Can a pairing be declined? You may have a good reason for pairing particular staff together, but within that, how can you ensure there is still variety and choice? Maybe one specified partner and one self-selected?
- Who decides the focus? Do the development goals come from the learner? Or are they externally supplied by you, or through other mechanisms?
- How is feedback handled? What kinds of feedback can be given? And when? Has this been made explicit? Will participants be graded or categorised? Is it an expectation that feedback will always be acted upon? Or simply reflected upon? Have you sought out ‘good practice’ to create a template for peer observation? Does it specify the process of observation, and the giving of feedback? One example of a template is available to download at the end of this post, feel free to adapt it to make it work for you.
- How good is the conversation that accompanies the observation? See this post.
- Are the notes/outcomes formally reported? Who writes the observation notes? Who keeps a copy of the notes? Where do they go after the observation? Do they link into formal appraisal, probation or promotion systems? Is there transparency in terms of paper trails, and confidentiality? Do all parties know who will be privy to their observation outcomes?
- If development areas are identified, will development be supported? Will there be any follow up from you in terms of acknowledging the development needs and investing (energy, time, or funding) in staff in order to support growth in the areas identified through peer observation? What mechanisms do you have to support priority areas for development?
- Who is the learner in the observation? We saw above that peer observation can hold clear benefits for the observer as well as the person being observed. But what if the roles were entirely switched?
Below is a downloadable template for peer-observation that reverses the orientation of roles. It also therefore changes the whole tone of the traditional (‘perform and get feedback’) observation into one where we can learn from viewing the good practice of an experienced colleage. This second download is a template for an observation process where supporting the development of the observer’s understanding is the primary objective. I created it for staff undertaking the final module of the GCU PgCert in Academic Practice, and is designed to ground their future professional learning in supportive conversations.
Anyone teaching in Higher Education, who feels they would benefit from observing how others teach will be able to make use of the template. It is not a prescriptive observation method and again you should feel free to adapt it to make it work for you. Try them both, see which you think informs your development more, or if they are complementary approaches. I hope you learn through the process, and if you do please let me know!
GCU Academic Development & Student Learning 
2 Replies to “Re-framing, and reversing, peer observation of teaching”