Peer Evaluation of Teaching

Joan Middendorf & Alan Kalish. TRC Newsletter, 6:2 (Winter 1995).

In the last year the Teaching Resources Center has received frequent inquiries about peer evaluation of teaching. This is no surprise, as the university community feels increasing pressure from the public to be accountable. Many universities and departments are experimenting with peer evaluation as a more complete assessment of teaching than student evaluation alone. Teaching is, indeed, best evaluated through multiple viewpoints (students, peer, self and expert). However, many who have asked us about peer evaluation seem to think that classroom observation to make tenure and promotion judgments is the only type of peer evaluation of teaching.

Unfortunately, the literature (of which there is very little) on peer classroom observation for purposes of making tenure and promotion decisions reports that there is neither validity nor reliability for this practice. That is, the results vary from observer to observer and from day to day.

On the positive side, the literature supports peer review of classroom teaching to get feedback for teaching improvement. Developing a knowledge of one another’s teaching practices and encouraging discussion about teaching within the department can be a means of gaining our colleagues’ invaluable assistance in learning to teach the content of our field.

As to other kinds of peer evaluations, we haven’t seen any studies on the effectiveness of peer evaluation of course materials. Even so, peers are in a better position to judge whether one’s course content is up–to–date and relevant than are students or teaching experts. Also, by reviewing graded exams and assignments, colleagues can make judgments about the way the students in a course are evaluated. Are students required to think or simply regurgitate? Are the questions so easy anyone can get an A? At the other extreme, do students have to work and think hard, possibly to the point where they give the professor lowered teaching evaluations?

But these judgments must be based on clearly articulated criteria which the department has discussed and agreed upon. If a department wants to use peer evaluation, especially for promotion and tenure, it is important that its faculty first determine a set of criteria. What can we agree is important for good teaching in our discipline? This will give them a starting place so that peer evaluation is consistent.

Departments interested in peer evaluation are best advised to do so only for purposes of discussion and improvement. One negative aspect of peer evaluation is the possibility of fueling distrust among departmental colleagues, “If I show someone my weakness so they can help me, some day that person may be on my tenure or promotion committee.” The method that seems to lead to the least distrust involves reciprocal visits. Faculty are paired up, with each one observing and giving feedback to the other. One Arts and Sciences department is planning a project where reciprocal pairs of faculty will interview each other’s students and provide one another with results.

The AAHE has undertaken a major study of peer review of teaching (Hutchings, 1994). Soon it should give us a better idea of how to organize peer evaluation programs for tenure and promotion purposes. The preliminary findings:

  1. Faculty want to discuss teaching.
  2. Peer evaluation should not be limited to peer observations. Other techniques include colloquia, reciprocal visits, and sharing teaching materials.
  3. Departments can work from the bottom up to find out what their faculty are thinking about teaching and to invent their own techniques for encouraging more peer interaction about pedagogy.

TRC staff members are happy to work with departments to plan useful and reliable peer evaluation programs. See also the Observation of Teaching Rating Form for ideas about issues about which colleagues can provide feedback.

References

Braskamp, L.A., and Ory, J.C. (1994) Assessing Faculty Work: Enhancing Individual and Institutional Performance. San Francisco: Jossey–Bass.

Centra, J.A. (May–June, 1975). Colleagues as raters of classroom instruction. Journal of Higher Education, 327–337.

Hutchings, P. (1994) Peer review of teaching. AAHE Bulletin. 47 (3), 3–7

Sorcinelli, M.D. (1986). Evaluation of Teaching Handbook. Indiana University Bloomington, Dean of the Faculties Office*.

* Available upon request at the Teaching Resources Center. Email or phone us for a copy. This handbook has further information about and strategies for evaluation of teaching and the role of colleagues as sources and reinforces the points made in the article above.

[Back to top]