Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

International Perspectives on Peer Review as Quality Enhancement

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Peer Review of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education

Abstract

Peer review of teaching at higher education institutions can mean many things to different individuals, faculties, universities and governments. In this chapter we cover a broad canvas, drawing upon the expertise of international academics as well as the results of studies at several different universities around the world. The result is an incisive analysis of a range of issues relating to peer review. We begin by exploring the wide varieties of peer review mechanisms and then focus on the central aspect of any peer review method: how to establish trust between the participants. Next we examine the tension between peer reviews for evaluative versus formative purposes, and provide a case study on how that gap can be closed. We follow this with some practical advice on the role of educational developers in helping set up successful peer review programs, and suggestions for areas of training for participants. We close with a proposal that peer review be seen as an important subject for inquiry-based scholarship.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Baskerville, D., & Goldblatt, H. (2009). Learning to be a critical friend: From professional indifference through challenge to unguarded conversations. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(2), 205–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, M. (2002). Peer observation of teaching in Australia. Learning and teaching support network generic centre. http://www-new1.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/resources/Peer_observation_of_teaching_in_Australia.pdf. Accessed 17 Sept 2012.

  • Bennett, S., & Barp, D. (2008). Peer observation—A case for doing it online. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 559–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, R., & Otterwill, R. (2001). Whatever happened to peer review? Revitalising the contribution of tutors to course evaluation. Quality Assurance in Education, 9(1), 22–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D. (1999). Situating academic development in professional work: Using peer learning. International Journal for Academic Development, 4(1), 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., & Middleton, H. (2003). Learning from others at work: Communities of practice and informal learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(5), 194–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., Rooney, D., & Solomon, N. (2009). Talking up learning at work: Cautionary tales in coopting everyday learning, International Journal of Lifelong Education, 28(3), 325–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered. Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, New Jersey: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, D. (2008). Review of Australian higher education: Final report. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. http://www.deewr.gov.au/highereducation/review/pages/reviewofaustralianhighereducationreport.aspx. Accessed 1 Oct 2012.

  • Brent, R., & Felder, R. M. (2004). A protocol for peer review of teaching. Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brew, A. (2001). The nature of research: Inquiry in academic contexts. London: Routledge, Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brew, A. (2003). Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 22(1), 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cariaga-Lo, L., Dawkins, P. W., Enger, R., Schotter, A., & Spence, C. (2010). Supporting the development of the professorate. Peer Review, 12(3). http://www.aacu.org/peerreview/pr-su10/pr-su10_index.cfm. Accessed 20 July 2012.

  • Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. (CASTL). (n. d.). http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/scholarship-teaching-learning. Accessed 19 July 2012.

  • Carter, V. (2008). Five steps to becoming a better peer reviewer. College Teaching, 56(2), 85–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). Learning and unlearning: The education of teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 5–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. New York, Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosh, J. (2006). Peer observations in higher education: A reflective approach, Innovations in Education and Training International, 35(2), 171–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Courneya, C. A., Pratt, D. D., & Collins, J. B. (2008). Through what perspective do we judge the teaching of peers? Journal of Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 69–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Andrea, V. (2002). Peer review of teaching in the USA. Learning and Teaching Support Network Generic Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1938). John Dewey experience and education. New York: Touchstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drew, G., & Ehrich, L. C. (2011). A model of organisational leadership development informing succession development: Elements and practices. Academic Leadership, The Online Journal, 9(1). http://www.academicleadership.org/. Accessed 20 July 2012.

  • Fullerton, H. (1993). Observation of teaching: Guidelines for observers and observed. In S. Jones, G. Jones, & S. Rawnsley (Eds.), Observing teaching (pp. 77–83). Birmingham: SEDA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Game, A., & Metcalfe, A. (2009). Dialogue and team teaching. Higher Education Research and Development, 28(1), 45–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, H. K. (2011). An appreciative approach to goal-setting for academic employees. Academic Leadership The Online Journal, 9(1). http://www.academicleadership.org/. Accessed 20 July 2012.

  • Gibbs, G. (2013). Reflections on the changing nature of educational development. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(1) (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosling, D. (2002). Models of peer observation of teaching. www.heacademy.co.uk. Accessed 25 Aug 2012.

  • Gosling, D. (2005). Peer observation of teaching. SEDA Paper 118. London: Staff and Educational Development Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosling, D. (2009). A new approach to peer review of teaching. In D. Gosling & K. Mason O’Connor (Eds.), Beyond the peer observation of teaching. SEDA Paper 124. (pp. 7–15). London: Staff and Educational Development Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosling, D., & Mason O’Connor, K. (2009). Preface. In D. Gosling & K. Mason O’Connor (Eds.), Beyond the peer observation of teaching. SEDA Paper 124 (p. 5). London: Staff and Educational Development Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley-Fletcher, L., & Orsmond, P. (2004). Evaluating our peers: Is peer observation a meaningful process? Studies in Higher Education 29(4), 489–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handal, G. (1999). Consultation using critical friends. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 79, 59–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K-L., Farrell, K., Bell, M., Devlin, M., & James, R. (2008). Peer review of teaching in Australian higher education: A handbook to support institutions in developing and embedding effective policies and practices. Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healey, M. (2000). Developing the scholarship of teaching through the disciplines, Higher Education Research and Development, 19(2), 169–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healey, M. (2012). Students as change agents. www.healeyheconsultants.co.uk/resources. Accessed 16 Sept 2012.

  • Keig, L., & Waggoner, M. (1995). Peer review of teaching: Improving college instruction through formative assessment. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching, 6(3), 51–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, P. (2002). A systematic approach to professional development: Learning as practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 229–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreber, C. (2002). Teaching excellence, teaching expertise, and the scholarship of teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 27(1), 5–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsson, M., & MÃ¥rtensson, K. (2012). Using teaching and learning projects as a way to integrate SoTL into an institutional culture. Paper presented at International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Conference, 24–27 October, Hamilton, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. V. (2010). The power of inquiry as a way of learning. Innovative Higher Education, 36(3), 149–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg-Sand, Ã…. (2011). Koloss pÃ¥ lerfötter? Utveckling av metodik för ett resultatbaserat nationellt kvalitetssystem i svensk högre utbildning. Lund University: Centre for Educational Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomas, L., & Nicholls, G. (2005). Enhancing teaching quality through peer review of teaching. Quality in Higher Education, 11(2), 137–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lund University. (2011). EQ 11—education quality 2011. http://www5.lu.se/o.o.i.s/4311. Accessed 9 Sept 2012.

  • Lund University. (2012). Teaching academy at the faculty of social sciences. http://www.sam.lu.se/about-the-faculty/teaching-academy. Accessed 9 Sept 2012.

  • Maher, J., Lindsay, J., Twomey, C., & Peel, V. (2006). Peer mentoring as an academic resource or Ê»my friend says… ʼ (online). Australian Universities Review, 48(2), 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • MÃ¥rtensson, K., RoxÃ¥, T., & Stensaker, B. (2012). From quality assurance to quality practices. Studies in Higher Education, iFirst Article, 1–12. doi:10.1080/03075079.2012.709493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, A. G., & Double, J. M. (1998). Developing higher education teaching skills through peer observation and collaborative reflection, Innovation in Education and Training International, 35(2), 161–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie, J., Pelliccione, L., & Parker, N. (2008). Developing peer review of teaching in blended learning environments: Frameworks and challenges. In Proceedings of Ascilite Conference, Melbourne.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action research: Principles and practice. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McTaggart, R. (1989). 16 tenets of participatory action research. In Y. Wadsworth (Ed.), Everyday evaluation on the run (1997) (2nd edn., p. 79). St Leonards, New South Wales: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mento, A. J., & Giampetro-Meyer, A. (2010). Peer observation of teaching as a true developmental opportunity, College Teaching, 48(1), 28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, R. (1993). Research and scholarship: perceptions of senior academic administrators. Higher Education, 25, 97–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • OʼBrien, R. (2001). Um exame da abordagem metodológica da pesquisa ação (An overview of the methodological approach of action research). In R. Richardson (Ed.), Teoria e Prática da Pesquisa Ação (Theory and practice of ation research). João Pessoa, Brazil: Universidade Federal da Paraíba. (English version). http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html. Accessed 5 July 2011.

  • Olson, M. (2000). Linking personal and professional knowledge of teaching practice through narrative inquiry. The Teacher Educator, 35(4), 109–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsson, T., & RoxÃ¥, T. (2012). A model promoting conceptual change in higher education—An integrated approach. In N. Brown, S. M. Jones, & A. Adam (Eds.), Research and development in higher education: connections in higher education, 35 (pp. 213–223). Hobart, Australia, 2–5 July 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsson, T., MÃ¥rtensson, K., & RoxÃ¥, T. (2010). Pedagogical competence—A development perspective from Lund University. In Ã…. RyegÃ¥rd, T. Olsson, & K. Apelgren (Eds.), A Swedish perspective on pedagogical competence (pp. 121–132). Uppsala: Uppsala University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peel, D. (2005). Peer observation as a transformatory tool? Teaching in Higher Education, 10(4), 489–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlman, B., & McCann, L. I. (1998). Peer review of teaching: an overview. Office of teaching resources in psychology, Georgia Southern University. http://teachpsych.org/otrp/resources/perlman98.pdf. Accessed 10 Aug 2012.

  • Piggot-Irvine, E. (2003). Appraisal training focussing on what really matters, The International Journal of Educational Management, 17(6), 254–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purvis, A., Crutchley, D., & Flint, A. (2009). Beyond peer observation of teaching. Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive. http://shura.shu.ac.uk/1497/. Accessed 20 July 2012.

  • Roberson, W. (ed.). (n.d.). Peer Observation and assessment of teaching: A resource book. The centre for effective teaching and learning and instructional s upport services, University of Texas at El Paso. http://academics.utep.edu/LinkClick.aspx?link=UTEPPeerObservationBooklet.pdftabid=58396mid=129801. Accessed 3 Oct 2012.

  • Rodriguez-Valls, F. (2010). The STAR project: teaching as a learning experience. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 7(1), 29–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, C. (1969). Freedom to learn: A view of what education might become (1st edn.) Columbus: Charles Merill.

    Google Scholar 

  • RoxÃ¥, T., & MÃ¥rtensson, K. (2011). Understanding strong academic microcultures—An exploratory study. EQ11 Report, Lund University. http://www5.lu.se/upload/EQ11/ReportAcademicMicrocultures.pdf. Accessed 9 September 2012.

  • SchÓ§n, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shortland, S. (2004). Peer observation: A tool for staff development or compliance? Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(2), 219–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shortland, S. (2010). Feedback within peer observation: continuing professional development and unexpected consequences. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(3), 293–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7, 221–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundre, D. L. (1992). The specification of the content domain of faculty scholarship. Research in Higher Education, 33(3), 297–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trower, C. A. (2010). A new generation of faculty: Similar core values in a different world. Peer Review, 12(3). http://www.aacu.org/peerreview/pr-su10/pr_su10_NewGen.cfm. Accessed 20 July 2012.

  • University of Cambridge. (2005). Peer review of teaching. www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/education/lts/lunch/lunch4.html. Accessed 1 July 2011.

  • University of Nebraska at Lincoln . ( n.d ) . Peer review of teaching project. www.unl.edu/peerrev/index.html. Accessed 19 Aug 2012.

  • University of Pretoria. (2010). Policy on academic professional development: Teaching and learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller, S. (2009). What does ‘peer’ mean in teaching observation for the professional development of higher education lecturers? International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(1), 25–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westergaard, J. (1991). Scholarship, research and teaching: A view from the social sciences. Studies in Higher Education, 16(1), 23–28.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Gloucestershire, Gloucestershire, UK

    Mick Healey

  2. Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

    Trudy Ambler

  3. Lund University, Lund, Sweden

    Malin Irhammar

  4. University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

    Wendy Kilfoil

  5. La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia

    Judith Lyons

Authors
  1. Mick Healey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Trudy Ambler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Malin Irhammar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wendy Kilfoil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Judith Lyons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mick Healey .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    Judyth Sachs

  2. Faculty of Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    Mitch Parsell

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Healey, M., Ambler, T., Irhammar, M., Kilfoil, W., Lyons, J. (2014). International Perspectives on Peer Review as Quality Enhancement. In: Sachs, J., Parsell, M. (eds) Peer Review of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Professional Learning and Development in Schools and Higher Education, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7639-5_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation