Skip to Main Content

Instruction Resources

What is Peer Review of Teaching?

Peer review of teaching is evaluation, conducted by a peer or colleague, of all aspects of one’s teaching and typically is used in a summative manner for promotion and tenure. Peer review is often identified with peer observations, but it is more broadly a method of assessing a collection of information about the teaching of an instructor under review. Peer review can also involve evaluation of other modes of teaching, such as instructional materials, tutorials, course guides and video content.

Formative vs Summative Reviews

Formative Review of Teaching

 

Reflective Peer Mentor Program

 

To encourage reflective practice and a more intentional venue for instructor sharing and support, a Reflective Peer Mentoring (RPM) program, based on Memorial University Library (Canada), will begin in Fall 2018. The RPM Program will pair two librarians with teaching responsibilities together to serve as reciprocal peer mentors for one another. While traditional mentorship focuses on the idea of a student/teacher hierarchy, where one member is “coaching” the other, the RPM program is based on co-mentoring or reciprocity, where both members benefit equally from discussion, reflection and participation.  

 

Classroom observation is highly encouraged, with at least 2 classroom observations per instructor. If classroom observation is not possible, pairs may instead opt to focus on outside of class instructional content such as handouts, libguides, videos, tutorials or Canvas modules or a discussion before and after an in-person session without observation.

 

Classroom Observation Worksheet

Post-Lesson Reflective Conversation Questions

Librarian Teaching Reflection Template

 

Summative Review of Teaching

 

Summative Evaluation of Teaching will remain mostly the same with a few substantive changes:

 

  1. Probationary librarians will have a summative peer review in their 2nd year and then again in their 4th year
  2. Librarians with continuing contract are not required to have a summative evaluation every 5 years after receiving continuing contract but it is required if they chose to go up for Principal Librarian
  3. Evaluators will out-rank candidates receiving the review, if possible. For example, probationary librarians will be reviewed by librarians with the rank of Associate or Principal, but not their direct supervisor
  4. Regional campus librarians will develop their own instructional effectiveness process as applicable to their campuses
  5. The Learning and Engagement Department will coordinate the selection of evaluators, training and facilitation of the peer review process

Faculty Feedback

Sample email to Faculty:

 

Greetings! The Libraries regularly collect feedback from faculty members regarding sessions that librarians teach. We use this feedback towards instructor improvement, and betterment of our instruction program as a whole.

 

I am asking for you to provide feedback for the recent session taught by ______ in your ______ class. The survey takes no more than 5 minutes to complete, and the link can be found at the end of this message. Results are shared with the librarian and aggregated each semester as a part of our instructional assessment plan.

 

If you have concerns or feedback that is not best provided by using this form, please let me know. Again, thank you for taking the time to provide this feedback!

 

Survey link:

https://forms.gle/CzLCmAeSeErPamcr6

 

Sincerely,

Peer Review documents