The Planning and Implementation of a Faculty Peer Review Teaching Project

Abstract

Objectives. Describe the planning and implementation of a pilot peer review system, assess factors related to acceptance by faculty and administration, and suggest ways to increase the number of faculty members reviewed and serving as reviewers. Design. A faculty-driven process was used to create a model for peer review. Faculty members completed a survey instrument with open-ended responses for indicating reasons for participation or nonparticipation, components of the evaluation process that they would like to see changed, and what they found most helpful or insightful about the process of peer review. Assessment. Faculty acceptance of and satisfaction with the peer review process is attributed to the development and implementation process being faculty driven and to peer reviews not being required for promotion and tenure decisions. Faculty members who were reviewed stated that the process was helpful and insightful and would lead to better teaching and learning. Conclusion. A successful faculty peer-review process was created and implemented within 6 weeks. All of the faculty members who chose to be peer reviewed or serve as reviewers reported satisfaction in gaining insights into their teaching, learning innovative approaches to their teaching, and gaining confidence in their teaching pedagogy. Techniques for achieving 100% participation in the peer review process should be addressed in the future.

Evaluation of a pilot peer observation of teaching scheme for chair-side tutors at Glasgow University Dental School

“…All tutors teaching paediatric dentistry (14) were invited to be involved in evaluation of the POT scheme and attended a training session where the potential benefits of POT were explored. This two-hour training session took place as part of a wider study day and consisted of a PowerPoint presentation, workshop and discussion.…”

“…2 POT has also been shown to be worthwhile for development of teaching in a variety of disciplines. 12,13,14,15 In addition to the potential benefits to the individual already described, POT can be viewed as a collaborative project to establish a culture that nurtures the improvement of teaching within a department or wider institution. Collaborative peer observation of teaching is about finding ways of creating and sustaining conversations about teaching which are constructive and purposeful and which open problems in teaching to debate and discussion.…”

A Peer Review Process for Classroom Teaching

“…12 In response, some colleges of pharmacy are developing peer-evaluation processes, and at least 2 have been described in the literature. 13,14 The first publication described the peer-evaluation process developed at the Shenandoah University Bernard J. Dunn School of Pharmacy. 13 An instructional design faculty member created a peer review program based on faculty input collected during retreats and meetings.…”

“…13,14 The first publication described the peer-evaluation process developed at the Shenandoah University Bernard J. Dunn School of Pharmacy. 13 An instructional design faculty member created a peer review program based on faculty input collected during retreats and meetings. The faculty members preferred to keep their results from their department chairs, making the process more formative as opposed to a requirement for annual evaluation or promotion and tenure.…”

Assessment of Full-time Faculty Preceptors By Colleges and Schools of Pharmacy in the United States and Puerto Rico

“…While all these factors should be evaluated, the literature regarding pharmacy faculty evaluation has focused largely on classroom teaching, [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] with the most common evaluation strategies being peer assessment of classroom teaching [5][6][7][8] and student evaluations (print and Web-based). [9][10][11][12][13] There is a paucity of published data regarding the assessment/evaluation of faculty members in experiential or clinical teaching settings.…”