Charles Sturt University
Charles Sturt University

Peer Review of Teaching Practice

There are two categories of Peer Review of Teaching Practice currently being offered:

  • Peer Review of Face-to-Face Teaching by an academic peer.
  • Peer Review of Online Teaching by an academic peer.

A discipline peer provides feedback on primarily teaching content.

A peer with teaching expertise, internal or external to the discipline, provides feedback on teaching.

Peer Review is framed around nine core Dimensions of Teaching. A tenth dimension can be included to provide an opportunity for reviewees to prepare a single sentence statement composed for their particular approach to teaching in face-to-face and/or online teaching environments. The dimensions and descriptors illustrate what is expected to demonstrate effective teaching in these teaching environments.

The Peer Review of Teaching Practice Report Template is used to record details of the teaching practice being reviewed and the reviewers' observations and comments. It also outlines the Dimensions of Teaching that are being evaluated.

Peer Reviewees who may also be applicants seeking promotion should nominate a minimum of six Dimensions of Teaching.

Purposes of Peer Review of Teaching Practice

Peer Review of Teaching Practice can:

  • Improve teaching and student learning through dialogue, self- and mutual reflections (formative).
  • Stimulate innovation in teaching practice.
  • Provide evidence for teaching quality and scholarship (summative).

Peer review cycle: Making contact; initial review; observation or analysis of materials; de-brief; notes or report

Criteria for a successful Peer Review Process

To ensure success in the Peer Review Process, the following are essential criteria:

  • Choice: Flexible and easy to use: templates available
  • Collegial, enabling and non-threatening
  • Credible Peer Reviewers: Based on expertise and experience
  • Constructive, non-judgmental dialogue and feedback
  • Culture is trustworthy in which teaching is valued and discussed
  • Confidentiality

Examples of completed Peer Review Reports: CSU1 and CSU2; UNSW1 and UNSW2

Stages in the Peer Review of Teaching Practice Process

Stage

Purpose

Reviewee

Reviewer

Template

Pre-Review

Conversation to set parameters for Peer Review

Organise a pre-observation meeting with your appointed Reviewer

Meet with Reviewee

Agree on parameters to be reviewed

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

Peer Review of Teaching Practice Report Template
(for Promotion)

Formative Review of Teaching Templates

Peer Review

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

Teach agreed class observed by chosen Peer Reviewer

and/or

Provide access to Interact2 and online resources

Face-to-Face/synchronous online: A single teaching observation is reviewed.

Online: Online teaching sites and resources are reviewed.

The Peer Review for Promotions tool is designed to allow you to be evaluated based on some or all of nine broad Dimensions of Teaching activity.

Post-Review

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

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

Reviewer completes and submits the Teaching Practice Peer Review Report to PeerReview@csu.edu.au. The Report must be returned to the Reviewee within two weeks of the Peer observation.

Peer Review of Teaching Practice Report

Peer Reviewee Reflection and Action Plan Sheet

Two Models for Peer Review Implementation

Peer Reviews can occur in Pairs or Triads:

  • Pair (L&T/Discipline, Academic Reviewers)
  • Triad (L&T, Discipline, Academic Reviewers)