Charles Sturt University
Charles Sturt University

Peer Review of Subject Design Practice

Peer Review of Subject Design Practice is framed around four key areas of subject design:

  • Assessment
  • Learning Resources
  • Learning Activities
  • Learning Support.

For the purposes of Peer Review, one or more of these areas of Subject Design can be selected. When Peer Review is conducted as Evidence for Promotion, a minimum of five specified dimensions within the chosen area must be negotiated with the Peer Reviewer. Inclusion of one unspecified dimension provides an opportunity for applicants to prepare a single sentence statement composed for their particular approach to Subject Design.

The dimensions and descriptors in the Subject Design Report templates illustrate what is expected to demonstrate effective Subject Design Practice. Advisory Notes on Learning Design Considerations are provided to inform Subject Design Practice.

CSU’s Online Learning Model should be used as a resource for evidence of practice in the Interact2 subject site and Subject Design documentation.

Stages in the Peer Review of Subject Design Process







Conversation to set parameters for Peer Review

Complete a self-review of your subject design practices or request a review by a learning and teaching expert i.e. Educational Designer, Learning Academy Academics, Learning and Teaching Lecturers.

Identify qualified Reviewers for Peer Review.

Organise a pre-observation meeting with your Reviewers.

Meet with Reviewee.

Agree on parameters to be reviewed.

** From the Discipline/Faculty
** A Learning and Teaching expert.

Peer Review of Subject Design Report Template
(for Promotion):

Peer Review

Observation and/or analysis, meeting discussion, complete Peer Review Report.

Provide access to Interact2, online resources and subject design documentation.

Subject Design: Online teaching sites, resources, and subject documentation are reviewed.

The four Peer Review of Subject Design Templates are designed to allow a minimum of five dimensions to be evaluated within each of the areas chosen for the review.


Reflection, discussion, giving feedback, action plan/SoTL activity to improve L&T.

Optional: Post-Review meeting organised by Reviewee with Reviewers.

If there are discrepancies between the two Peer Review Reports, request a third Peer Reviewer, e.g. a Sub Dean Learning & Teaching.

Reviewers complete and submit the Subject Design Peer Review Report to the Reviewee within two weeks of the peer observation.

Peer Review of Subject Design Practice Report(s)

Peer Reviewee Reflection and Action Plan Sheet