Collaborative Peer-Supported Review of Teaching

Gosling, David

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7639-5_2

Cited by 61 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The model that Cassidy and Johnson (2006) developed and that Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology (CTLT) continues to use fits the collaborative model described by Gosling (2014) where teaching is improved through constructive facilitated dialogue and self and mutual reflections. Reviewees may choose any aspect(s) of course design, teaching, student learning and/or assessment to be included during the review process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Review of Teaching: Sharing Best Practices

Golparian

Chan²,

Cassidy³

2015

CELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Review of Teaching: Sharing Best Practices

Golparian

Chan²,

Cassidy³

2015

CELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Scholars agree that the structure of academic quality is built upon peer review. They agree with the fact that the higher education educators could find their class being assessed as confronting (Gosling, 2014;Healey, Ambler, Irhammar, Kilfoil, & Lyons, 2014;Kilfoil, 2014;Sachs & Parsell, 2014;Spencer, 2014) and disrespectful. Review of teaching, due to the anonymity and nature of the object of review involved, is different from an academic review of research work (Elizabeth, Fiona, & Tom, 2002;Hames, 2007;Sachs & Parsell, 2014;Spencer, 2014) in journals.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 62%

An Assessment of Marketisation of ‘Review’ Through Literature

Chandakar

Chen

2020

JSSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This exploratory qualitative study based on multiple-case studies collects reviewers' comments using a 'vector manuscript' that carries 5 obvious mistakes for assessment. On the basis of the synthesized guidelines prescribed for the reviewers, these comments are measured and assessed. The assessment of the collected review comments of conferences, international journals, and that of the institutional level (N=126), suggests that the elements of negligence and marketisation have already infused in the academics of review. Those who were more oriented towards money were found to be 6.9 times more threatening in comparison to those who were not money-oriented. In this study, at the institutional level, those accepting gifts from the student before reviewing the paper are coded as asking for money.

show abstract

“…Further, it is widely acknowledged that lack of confidence is a normal process when starting something new, and that confidence can increase with experience (McLeod, 2013). This is supported by Gosling (2014), who stated that courses and workshops can be useful to promote new practices and ideas, but the implementation of new skills can be difficult. Regardless of the medium of training, further support is essential to facilitate the implementation of the training into practice.…”

Section: Practice Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What are the experiences of therapists using the online Back Skills Training and implementing it within clinical practice?

Christou

Sellars

Barker

2019

Musculoskeletal Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The purpose of the present study was to explore the experiences of physiotherapists using the online Back Skills Training (i‐BeST). The aim of the this programme was to enable clinicians to facilitate group‐based treatment based on a cognitive behavioural (CB) approach to the treatment of lower back pain (LBP). Methods A qualitative, exploratory approach was chosen. Seven physiotherapists were interviewed. Participants were asked broad, open‐ended questions in order to explore: (a) their experiences with the training; (b) the online method; and (c) the implementation of BeST into clinical practice. The interviews were transcribed and analysed manually using interpretive phenomenological analysis. Results Four main themes were identified following the analysis: (a) Flexibility but lack of interactivity; (b) CB approach is a new way of working; (c) Facilitating group work after i‐BeST training; and (d) The need for managerial support. The flexibility of the online tool was perceived as a major advantage. However, lack of interactivity was identified by most participants as the biggest challenge. Participants found the online tool to be acceptable for attaining knowledge but not adequate for developing skills. After completing BeST, participants reported the application of key principles of the CB approach within routine physiotherapeutic practice, but were reluctant to refer into the group‐based treatment programme. Coordination of implementation of the group‐based treatment programme throughout a large trust was perceived as necessary, including sufficient staff training for all clinicians. Conclusions I‐Best can be implemented within everyday clinical settings but should be enhanced with additional face‐to‐face support mechanisms to improve effectiveness.

show abstract

Collaborative Peer-Supported Review of Teaching

Cited by 61 publications

References 35 publications

Peer Review of Teaching: Sharing Best Practices

Peer Review of Teaching: Sharing Best Practices

An Assessment of Marketisation of ‘Review’ Through Literature

What are the experiences of therapists using the online Back Skills Training and implementing it within clinical practice?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About