Peer-review programme for teachers

University introduces assessment system for instructors. Nadia M. Saleem reports

Teachers have no problem telling students what they are doing wrong - but who will tell professors how to improve their teaching skills? An effort is being undertaken in which one instructor will work with one another to review course materials, teaching methods and classroom practices.

Under the Faculty Development Centre (FDC) at the American University of Sharjah (AUS) and its director, Dr Ahmad Al Eisa, a pilot programme on "peer review" is to be implemented in the near future.

Critical friend
Daniel Kirk, a professor in the Department of Writing Studies at the AUS, gave a presentation introducing the programme. Members of the faculty were in attendance, as well as Dean William Heidcamp of the College of Arts and Sciences.

Kirk defined peer review as the "process of having a colleague whom one respects as an educator, to work with on examining your teaching practice and helping you develop as an effective teacher."

He presented the pros and cons of having a "critical friend" reviewing one in class. Several concerns were raised, such as privacy, who should be reviewed, time commitment and the risk of standardising teaching styles across academic units.

According to Kirk, the pros outweighed the cons, with peer review generally improving mentoring functions, bringing about cooperative interaction among colleagues and
helping in personal and professional development.

"What we do in class has a huge impact on students," said Kirk. "Therefore the necessity to be effective teachers can not be stressed enough."

Some professors in attendance brought up other concerns, such as the possible use of the reviews in personnel decisions.

Elaborating, Kirk said the goal was not part of an institutional, merit or pay evaluation but rather to create an interpersonal and informal process of assessment.

He stressed that many issues could not be resolved in a single session. "The purpose of this presentation was to get a good discussion going," he said. "Attendees brought up points which I had not thought of that can help faculty development at the AUS."

"Hopefully, peer review will be seen for what it is - a way to improve the teaching practices of the faculty and allowing teachers to examine what it is that they do in the classroom," he said.

International practices
Kirk mentioned similar programmes in other institutions that are being conducted around the world.

"Peer review and reflective practices are growing areas in teaching," he said. "Many universities in the UK and North America that value improving the teaching and learning experience for students and faculty have similar programmes."

Viewing peer review positively
Kirk stressed the need to view the programme in a positive light. "If you think that you are being evaluated it can be worrisome," he said.

"The programme should be looked at as an opportunity for learning, a collegial conversation about teaching and improving."

He suggested that professors have many tools they can utilise for self-reflection. Some of these include teaching journals, lesson reports and video recordings.

Emphasising the importance of learning through reviews, Kirk said an educator's focus should be on answering the question: What kind of a teacher am I?

The basics of peer review
A participant in the seminar offered to be reviewed as a pilot for the programme which the FDC is planning.

Kik defined the ideal attitude of a professor who is the subject of the peer review as "someone with a willingness to learn and share ideas, and who is committed to professional development and learning."

"There is always room for improving one's teaching practices," he added.

"During the process of peer review, one can become more aware of the many aspects of his or her teaching practices and things that were never noticed before: the open self, the secret self, the blind self and the hidden self."

He suggested that participants should view peer review in a friendly context.