Docstoc

Peer Observation of Teaching- Leeds.pptx

Document Sample
Peer Observation of Teaching- Leeds.pptx Powered By Docstoc
					Staff and Departmental
Development Unit




Peer Observation of Teaching


Dr Clara Davies, SDDU
Annual Pro-Deans and Directors of Student Education Event
7th October 2011
Staff and Departmental
Development Unit

Outline:
• Consideration of University policy
• Reflection on School practices
• What do we want now?
• Peer Review Working Group
Staff and Departmental
Development Unit

Current University policy on Peer Review of Teaching is:
"... each School/Faculty should be required to have in place a
procedure for the assurance and enhancement of the quality of all
teaching including that delivered by postgraduate students, technical
staff, clinical staff and external lecturers who have a substantial role
in the teaching of either undergraduate or taught postgraduate
students. The procedure must involve the direct observation of
teaching for staff with a substantial teaching load but may also rely
upon indirect evidence of teaching quality such as that obtained
through student feedback and other mechanisms Schools identify as
appropriate."


http://www.leeds.ac.uk/qmeu/documents/policy/ltb/Peer%20Observation%20%20of%20Teaching.pd
f
      LTB Approved 02/11/04                  Implementation from start of 05/06
Staff and Departmental
Development Unit

Current University policy on Peer Review of Teaching is:
"... each School/Faculty should be required to have in place a
procedure for the assurance and enhancement of the quality of all
teaching including that delivered by postgraduate students, technical
staff, clinical staff and external lecturers who have a substantial role
in the teaching of either undergraduate or taught postgraduate
students. The procedure must involve the direct observation of
teaching for staff with a substantial teaching load but may also rely
upon indirect evidence of teaching quality such as that obtained
through student feedback and other mechanisms Schools identify as
appropriate."
Staff and Departmental
Development Unit

Current University policy on Peer Review of Teaching is:
"... each School/Faculty should be required to have in place a procedure
for the assurance and enhancement of the quality of all teaching including
that delivered by postgraduate students, technical staff, clinical staff and
external lecturers who have a substantial role in the teaching of either
undergraduate or taught postgraduate students. The procedure must
involve the direct observation of teaching1 for staff with a substantial
teaching load but may also rely upon indirect evidence of teaching quality
such as that obtained through student feedback and other mechanisms
Schools identify as appropriate."

 1. The definition of teaching in this context is broad: it includes all types of class
    (lectures, seminars, tutorials, practical classes, clinical etc.) and encompasses the
    teacher’s performance in and management of the session. The amount of teaching
    will be defined by the School and considered during the Periodic Review process.
                                                                            Inclusion
                                                                            • PGRs/TAs only
                                                                            • All with > 10 hours contact
                                                                              time
                                                                            • Needs-based



                                                                            Reporting
                                                                            • Report to DLT
                                                                            • Confidential
                                                                            • Record that occurred
                                                                                                                                                                      Development Unit




                                                                            • Encouraged to identify /
                                                                              share good practice
                                                                                                                                                                      Staff and Department




                                                                            Frequency
                                                                            • Within first 2- 4 weeks
                                                                            • Annually
                                                                            • Every 2 years
                                                                            • Every 3 years



                                                                            Selection
                                                                            • Free to choose
                                                                            • Allocated
                                                                            • Only observed by qualified
                                                                              / experienced staff
                                                                            • One person observes all


                                                                            Feedback
                                                                            • Grade
                                                                            • Specific aspects / criteria
                                                                            • Broad checklist
                                                                            • Strengths / development
                                                                              areas only
~ 20% of schools have no active peer review scheme: High SSRs, workload …




                                                                            • Observee’s agenda
                                                                                                            And how? - Examples of school-based peer review schemes
Staff and Departmental
Development Unit

Current thinking in the HE Sector:
•   QE rather than QA
•   Mutual benefits, reflective and developmental
•   A process rather than an event
•   Community of practice
•   Shift in focus to student learning
•   Cross-subject groupings
•   Sustainability –
    • themes or changes in focus
    • linked to strategic initiatives / requirements
    • protected time to discuss teaching - workload model?
Staff and Department
Development Unit
                     What do we want now?
• What do we want peer review for and to achieve?
  • Audit trail for quality management?
  • Development of individuals/teams/schools for quality enhancement?
  • Focus on enhancing the student learning experience?
• One University - is there scope for University-wide scheme?
• If so what could it look like?
  • QA vs QE?
• How practicable is it? How sustainable?
  • Cycle of strategic themes e.g. VLE, Assessment, R-T links?
Staff and Department
Development Unit
                  Peer Review Working Group
Terms of Reference
• To receive and consider information on a range of good practice examples for
  peer review from across the University and external HEIs
• To develop a set of principles and values to underpin a revised University
  of Leeds peer review scheme
• To propose an institutional framework for peer review of teaching and to
  draft policy documentation
• To make recommendation to TSEB
• To propose ways to support schools in the development of their peer review
  schemes
• To propose an institutional process for monitoring the operation of peer review
  processes, their effectiveness and impact on teaching quality
Staff and Department
Development Unit
                Peer Review Working Group
Sept / Oct      TSEB     Working Group set up

16/11/2011      TSEB     Progress Reports as appropriate
18/01/2012               Recommendation for Institutional Framework for Peer
                TSEB
or 29/02/2012            Review
March            FLTCs Review of Institutional Framework for Peer Review
                         Development of Institutional Framework for Peer
25/04/2012       TSEB
                         Review
May / June       FLTCs Faculty implementation plans
                         Final approval of Institutional Framework for Peer
13/06/2012       TSEB
                         Review
Start of 2012/13 session Target date for implementation across the University

        DSE or HoS Representation from each of the 9 Faculties

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:7
posted:2/11/2014
language:English
pages:10