Peer Review of Faculty

OT Peer Review of Faculty

Faculty, at all ranks in the department of Occupational Therapy, is expected to devote substantial time to teaching. The department values excellence in teaching and engages in an ongoing process of feedback and review to enhance its teaching. Part of that process is the review by peers. The teaching peer review process at the department of Occupational Therapy is designed to provide an opportunity to faculty to obtain feedback from their peers. A faculty member going for promotion and tenure at any rank is expected to have at least two peer reviews done on her/his teaching. One such review should be from a faculty member outside the department while the other should be from a faculty member inside the department. Peer reviewers should be identified and approved by the department head. Peer reviewers should provide a written review directed to the department head. This letters, which are intended to provide faculty members with feedback, will be shared with the faculty member. The department head may seek more peer reviews if deemed necessary. Peer reviewers are expected to comment on the faculty’s quality of teaching and to facilitate the process we have developed a form that is suggested but not required. This form includes headings such as: content, organization, style of presentation, clarity of presentation and student interest and participation. In case that an external reviewer can’t be arranged a review of the class materials, syllabus and content is acceptable. Teaching peer reviews will be arranged by the department head accordingly.

Suggested Form:

1. Content
2. Organization
3. Teaching Style (e.g., style of presentation)
4. Clarity of presentation
5. Questioning skills
6. Student interest and participation
7. Quality of materials (if available)

Peer Observation Guidelines

Introduction: The document that follows, Peer Observation Guidelines for Content of Narrative Report, has been developed for your convenience to assist you in writing meaningful comments about your observation. The short-term goal of the peer observations is to create a dialogue about teaching between faculty in order to share ideas and perspectives. The department’s long term goal in supporting peer observation activities is to improve teaching effectiveness.

Recommended Procedure: In order to discuss areas/topics that an instructor specifically desires feedback on, it is recommended that the instructor being evaluated and the evaluator meet briefly prior to the scheduled peer observation. Immediate feedback (in person) following the observation is very helpful, as the observation will still be fresh (in recent memory). After completing the observation, the evaluator is asked to write up a narrative statement in which reactions to the observation will be described. A one page narrative is recommended, more is appreciated but not necessary.

How to Use the Peer Observation Form: The Peer Observation Guidelines were developed in order to provide guidance when writing up a narrative statement on a peer observation. The bulleted items on the form are provided as reminders of what you may comment on. You are not required to comment on each bulleted item listed. At least one comment on each of the 6 main areas listed is recommended to provide more comprehensive feedback. In the section titled “Observers Overall Impression”, you may wish to include comment on aspects of the lecture that went especially well, innovative teaching strategies, and considerations for future lectures/teaching experiences.

Items on the form followed by a (*) must be included in the final peer observation narrative report.

1

Peer Observation Report

GUIDELINES FOR CONTENT OF NARRATIVE REPORT

Date*:Instructor Observed *:Course Observed (title , #)*:

Observer*:Total time in observation (min)*:Type of class* (lecture, lab, etc.):

Instructor specifically requested feedback on*:

SUGGESTED TOPICS TO BE DISCUSSED IN REPORT:

• COMMAND OF MATERIAL

• PURPOSE OF LECTURE/CLASS

• VOICE CLEAR

• DEFINES NEW TERMS AND PRINCIPLES

• USES QUESTIONS TO GAGE STUDENT’S LEVEL

• RESPONDS TO NON-PROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR/ DISTRACTION/ BOREDOM

• DISTIGUISH FACT VS OPINION

• INSTRUCTOR STATES RELATION TO PREVIOUS CLASS/CURRICULUM

• PACE APPROPRIATE

• APPLIES INFO TO CLARIFY AS NEEDED

• USES FOLLOW-UP

• ENCOURAGES STUDENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSION

• AMOUNT OF CONTENT APPROPRIATE

• TEACHING METHOD MATCHES OBJECTIVE

• ENGAGES STUDENTS

• USES ALT. EXPLANATIONS AS NEEDED

• INVOLVES MORE RETICENT STUDENTS

• SUMMARIZES MAIN POINTS (OR ASKS STUDENTS TO SUMMARIZE)

• ENTHUSIASM FOR SUBJECT

• USES HANDOUTS / A.V. AIDS EFFECTIVELY IF APPROPRIATE

• ENCOURAGES STUDENTS TO LISTEN/?/RESPOND TO EACH OTHER

**Observer’s Overall Impressions**

Items on the form followed by a (*) must be included in the final peer observation narrative.

1