BEYOND THE STANDARD COURSE EVALUATION: EFFECTIVE PEER EVALUATION MODELS Moderator: Kelly Hogan 9:00 – 9:55am Associate Dean of Instructional Innovation, College A&S Please feel free to make comments/ask questions via pollev.com/carolina anytime during this session.
WHAT CONSTITUTES EFFECTIVE OR EXCELLENT TEACHING? WHO WEIGHS IN ON THE EVIDENCE? credit: Viji Sathy
Students Self- Peers Reflection
• Not linked to student learning (i.e. no correlation between learning more and highly rated professors) • Biased (age, race, gender) Students Limited but can provide students a voice Solution? “Reduce the weight of student ratings in decision making” B. Utl et al., Meta-analysis of faculty's teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 2017
A teaching Statements allows a teacher to reflect on: • what has worked/not Self- worked • growth over time Reflection • their goals for course design and class time • evidence they have that students are learning • student and peer evaluations of their teaching
Peer Review of materials and classroom • Can evaluate alignment between curricular goals Peers and teaching practices • Can evaluate climate/inclusiveness • Can evaluate content expertise and teaching practices
Summative peer revew: Formative peer review: are for the purpose of occurs frequently with reappointment, promotion, or consistency “for the sole VS tenure. “Summative purpose of fostering evaluations must be based on professional growth and a clear set of performance improved practice.” standards that are identical to standards used in the ongoing formative process. They must employ a rubric of criterion- referenced assessments.” Definitions adapted from: nea.org
PEER REVIEW AT SILS Ron Bergquist Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
The Mission of SILS is to educate the very best information professionals
WHY WE DO PEER REVIEW The purpose of the peer observation program is to contribute to the continual improvement of the SILS educational environment by helping those who teach develop their teaching abilities and by providing observing faculty members with a broader understanding of the SILS curriculum.
SELECTION OF REVIEWERS For tenure-track faculty, teams of two faculty members will form visitation groups for the evaluation procedure. At least one member of each team will be knowledgeable in the area being taught and at least one member of each team (preferably both) will be an associate or full professor.
THE PROCESS Pre-Observation Conference Provide Context Observation Narrative Notes Post-Observation Conference a balanced picture of the instructor's teaching, specifying areas of particular effectiveness as well as areas that could be improved
Afterwards
Periodicity Tenured – every third year Non-tenured – three consecutive semesters Term – every third semester Adjuncts – every semester
THE CHALLENGE
The Future?
Maybe some changes needed
Peer Review in Exercise and Sport Science Alain J. Aguilar Teaching Associate Professor
Peer Review in Asian Studies Li-ling Hsiao Associate Professor, Chinese Language and Literature Associate Dean and Director of First-year Curricula
When? • When a faculty teaches a new course in the department • When the first class observation has not gone well • When the faculty is reviewed for reappointment or promotion
How? • The faculty observed must provide the course syllabus, lesson plan of the class, and the reading assignments to the peer observer in advance. • After the class is observed, the observer will meet the observed faculty and brainstorm on how to improve the course. • The observer will then submit a report to the Chair to be part of the observed faculty’s dossier.
B. CLASS PRESENTATION AND MANAGEMENT C. CLASSROOM What? 1. Class started on time. ATMOSPHERE 1. Student participation 2. The lesson was presented effectively. was active and lively. 3. The lesson was presented clearly. A. PREPARATION 4. There were smooth transitions between activities. 1. The instructor had a 2. The class atmosphere clear lesson plan. 5. The time allotted for activities was appropriate. was positive, open and 2. The instructor 6. Major points of teaching and activities were sequenced in a logical way. accepting. planned activities to 3. The instructor was target specific teaching 7. The amount of teacher talk and student talk was appropriate. sensitive to students' goals. 8. The type and amount of teacher feedback was adequate. 3. The planned activities difficulties and abilities. 9. Cultural instruction was integrated into class activities. are appropriate for the 4. The instructor treated students’ level. students with respect 10. The activities/exercises chosen to achieve the objectives were effective. 4. The plan was geared while not allowing any 11. The instructor divided his or her attention among students appropriately. toward real/authentic disruptive behavior. 12. Student participation was focused on the task at hand. language use. 5. The instructor’s plan Record comments on the 13. The instructor used the target-language appropriately. includes specific observation and any exercises for students to 14. Audio-visual and other supplementary materials were used appropriately. suggestions for the perform and allots time 15. The use of technology (power point, web materials) was appropriate given instructor here: for each segment of the the material being presented. 16. The instructor displays enthusiasm for teaching the target language. class.
Why? • To assist new faculty develop the teaching skills at the very beginning stage • To plan strategies for improvements for new faculty • To ease the loads of multiple course observations required during the semester of reappointment or promotional review • To catch any problem early on instead of unexpected surprises in the reappointment or promotional review.
BEYOND THE STANDARD COURSE EVALUATION: EFFECTIVE PEER EVALUATION MODELS UNC School of Dentistry Faculty Development Committee Angela Broome, DDS, MS Associate Professor 9:00 – 9:55am Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology UNC School of Dentistry
PEER EVALUATION OF CLASSROOM TEACHING Mentoring Program Wilder RS, Guthmiller JM. Empowerment through mentorship and leadership. J Evidence Based Dent Pract 2014;14S:222-226.
PEER EVALUATION OF CLASSROOM TEACHING Faculty Peer Evaluation Newman LR, Roberts DH, Schwartzstein RM. Peer Observation of Teaching Handbook. Shapiro Institute for Education and Research at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. MedEdPortal ID# 9150; 2012. Available from: www.mededportal.org /
RESOURCES • UNC Division of Speech and Hearing Sciences • Peer Review of Classroom Teaching • University of Texas Dental Branch at Houston • Peer Evaluation Form for Lectures • Shapiro Institute for Education and Research at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center • Peer Observation of Teaching Handbook • Center for Teaching Vanderbilt University • Peer Review of Teaching • Center for Faculty Excellence University of North Carolina • Faculty Peer Visits Program
GOAL Provide a positive, learning experience through meaningful feedback Identify strengths and weaknesses as means of formative assessment Develop strategies excellent teaching skills Discover innovative ways of teaching
CURRENT PROCESS • Once per year by a peer member (three selected by faculty member, one chosen by mentoring chair) • Initial meeting of faculty member and peer reviewer for discussing the objectives of the presentation, teaching strategies, and the evaluation process. • During presentation, peer reviewer attends presentation and evaluates • Within 2 weeks following, faculty member and peer reviewer meet and discuss evaluation
CHALLENGES Meaningful Feedback Adherence to Process Review Calibration
OPPORTUNITIES Existing Form
OPPORTUNITIES Updated Form
Recommend
More recommend
