. "Appendix C: Examples of Questions for Conducting Peer Evaluations of Teaching." Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2003.
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Appendix C Examples of Questions for Conducting Peer Evaluations of Teaching
This report has emphasized the importance of using multiple approaches in evaluating teaching effectiveness. As discussed in Chapters 4 and 5, feedback from faculty colleagues can be a highly useful source of information for improving teaching and learning. However, research has indicated that faculty colleagues can be far more effective in this role if they are trained in how to conduct peer evaluations and if they work from an accepted set of criteria.
The forms included in this appendix serve as examples of peer evaluation surveys. French-Lazovik’s (1981) form is designed to assist faculty in evaluating their colleagues on the basis of written materials that are provided in a dossier. The forms from Syracuse University and The University of Texas outline behaviors that colleagues can observe directly when they visit their colleagues’ classrooms.
Form
Found on Page(s)
From French-Lazovik (1981): Suggested Form for Peer Review of Undergraduate Teaching Based on Dossier Materials
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole. Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 185
Appendix C
Examples of Questions for Conducting Peer Evaluations of Teaching
This report has emphasized the importance of using multiple approaches in evaluating teaching effectiveness. As discussed in Chapters 4 and 5, feedback from faculty colleagues can be a highly useful source of information for improving teaching and learning. However, research has indicated that faculty colleagues can be far more effective in this role if they are trained in how to conduct peer evaluations and if they work from an accepted set of criteria.
The forms included in this appendix serve as examples of peer evaluation surveys. French-Lazovik’s (1981) form is designed to assist faculty in evaluating their colleagues on the basis of written materials that are provided in a dossier. The forms from Syracuse University and The University of Texas outline behaviors that colleagues can observe directly when they visit their colleagues’ classrooms.
Form
Found on Page(s)
From French-Lazovik (1981): Suggested Form for Peer Review of Undergraduate Teaching Based on Dossier Materials
186–187
Syracuse University: Classroom Observation Worksheet
188–192
University of Texas at Austin, Center for Teaching Effectiveness: Checklist of Teaching Skills
193–195
OCR for page 186
SUGGESTED FORM FOR PEER REVIEW OF UNDERGRADUATE TEACHING BASED ON DOSSIER MATERIALS
QUESTION
DOSSIER MATERIALS
SUGGESTED FOCUS IN EXAMING DOSSIER MATERIAL
1. What is the quality of materials used in teaching?
Course outline
Syllabus
Reading list
Text used
Study guide
Description of non-print materials
Hand-outs
Problem sets
Assignments
Are these materials currents?
Do they represent the best work in the field?
Are they adequate and appropriate to course goals?
Do they represent superficial or thorough coverage of course content?
Peer Reviewer’s Rating: Low
Very High
Comments _________________________________
2. What kind of intellectual tasks were set by the teacher for the students (or did the teacher succeed in getting students to set for themselves), and how did the students perform?
Copies of graded examinations
Examples of graded research papers
Examples of teacher’s feedback to To students on written work Grade distribution
Descriptions of student performances, e.g., class presentations, etc.
Examples of completed assignments
What was the level of intellectual performance achieved by the students?
What kind of work was given an A? a B? a C?
Did the students learn what the department curriculum expected for this course?
How adequately do the tests or assignments represent the kinds of student performance in the course objective?
Peer Reviewer’s Rating: Low
Very High
Comments ______________________
3. How knowledgeable is this faculty member in subjects taught?
Evidence in teaching materials
Record of attendance at regional or national meetings
Record of colloquia or lecture given
Has the instructor kept in thoughtful contact with developments in his or her field?
Is there evidence of acquaintance with the ideas and findings of other scholars?
(This question addresses the scholarship necessary to good teaching. It is not concerned with scholarly research publication.)
Peer Reviewer’s Rating: Low
Very High
Comments _____________________
OCR for page 187
4. Has this faculty member assumed responsibilities related to the department’s or University’s teaching mission?
Record of service on department curriculum committee, honors program, advising board of teaching, special committees (e.g., to examine grading policies, admission standards, etc.
Description of activities in supervising graduate students learning to teach.
Evidence of design of new courses
Has he or she become departmental or college citizen in regard to teaching responsibilities?
Does this faculty member recognize problems that hinder good teachings and does he or she take a responsible part in trying to solve them?
Is the involvement of the faculty member appropriate to his or her academic level? (e.g., assistant professors may sometimes become over-involved to the detriment of their scholarly and teaching activities.)
Peer Reviewer’s Rating: Low
Very High
Comments ___________________
5. To what extent is this faculty member trying to achieve excellence in teaching?
Factual statement of what activities the faculty member has engaged in to improve his or her teaching.
Examples of questionnaires used for formative purposes.
Examples of changes made on the basis of feedback.
Has he or she sought feedback about teaching quality, explored alternative teaching methods, made changes to increase student learning?
Has he or she sought aid in trying new teaching ideas?
Has he or she developed special teaching materials or participated in cooperative efforts aimed at upgrading teaching quality?
Peer Reviewer’s Rating: Low
Very High
Comments ________________________
Peer Reviewer’s Signature ______________
Date _____________________________
SOURCE: French-Lazovik (1981).
OCR for page 188
Syracuse University
Resource B: Sample Forms
Classroom Observation Worksheet
Instructor ____________ Course ____________
Date _____________ Observer _____________
Directions: Below is a list of instructor behaviors that may occur within a given class or course. Please use it as guide to making observations, not as a list of required characteristics. When this worksheet is used for making improvements to instruction, it is recommended that the instructor highlight the areas to be focused on before the observation takes place.
Respond to each statement using the following scale:
Not observed
More emphasis
Accomplished very well
1
2
3
Circle the number at the right that best represents your response. Use the comment space below each section to provide more feedback or suggestions.
Content Organization
Not Observed
More emphasis Recommended
Accomplished very Well
1
2
3
1.Made clear statement of the purpose of the lesson.
1
2
3
2.Defined relationship of this lesson to previous lessons
1
2
3
3.Presented overview of the lesson
1
2
3
OCR for page 189
4. Presented topics with a logical sequence
1
2
3
5. Paced lesson appropriately
1
2
3
6. Summarized major points of lesson
1
2
3
7. Responded to problems raised during lesson
1
2
3
8. Related today’s lesson to future lessons
1
2
3
Comments:
Reflective Faculty Evaluation
Presentation
Not Observed
More emphasis Recommended
Accomplished very Well
1
2
3
9 Projected voice so easily heard
1
2
3
10. Used intonation to vary emphasis
1
2
3
11. Explained things with clarity
1
2
3
12. Maintained eye contact with students
1
2
3
13. Listened to student questions and comments
1
2
3
14. Projected nonverbal gestures consistent with intentions
1
2
3
15. Defined unfamiliar terms, concepts, and principles
1
2
3
OCR for page 190
16. Presented examples to clarify points
1
2
3
17. Related new ides to familiar concepts
1
2
3
18. Restated important ideas at appropriate times
1
2
3
19. Varied explanations for complex and difficult material
1
2
3
20. Used humor appropriately to strengthen retention and interest
1
2
3
21. Limited use of repetitive phrases and hanging articles.
1
2
3
Comments:
Resource B: Sample Forms
Instructor-Student Interactions
Not Observed
More emphasis Recommended
Accomplished very Well
1
2
3
22. Encouraged student questions
1
2
3
23. Encouraged student discussion
1
2
3
24. Maintained student attention
1
2
3
25. Asked questions to monitor students’ progress
1
2
3
26. Gave satisfactory answers to student questions
1
2
3
27. Responded to nonverbal cues of confusion, boredom, and curiosity
1
2
3
OCR for page 191
28. Paced lesson to allow time for note taking
1
2
3
29. Encouraged students to answer difficult questions
1
2
3
30. Asked probing questions when student answer was incomplete
1
2
3
31. Restated questions and answers when necessary
1
2
3
32. Suggested questions of limited interest to be handled outside of class
1
2
3
Comments:
Reflective Faculty Evaluation
Instructional Materials and Environment
Not Observed
More emphasis Recommended
Accomplished very Well
1
2
3
33. Maintained adequate classroom facilities
1
2
3
34. Prepared students for the lesson with appropriate assigned readings
1
2
3
35. Supported lesson with useful classroom discussions and exercises
1
2
3
36. Presented helpful audio-visual materials to support lesson organization and major points
1
2
3
OCR for page 192
37. Provided relevant written assignments
1
2
3
Comments:
Content Knowledge And Relevance
Not Observed
More emphasis Recommended
Accomplished very Well
1
2
3
38. Presented material worth knowing
1
2
3
39. Presented material appropriate to student knowledge and background
1
2
3
40. Cited authorities to support statements
1
2
3
41. Presented material appropriate to stated purpose of course
1
2
3
42. Made distinctions between fact and opinion
1
2
3
43. Presented divergent viewpoints when appropriate
1
2
3
44. Demonstrated command of subject matter
1
2
3
Comments:
Resource B: Sample Forms
45. What overall impressions do you think students left this lesson with in terms of content or style?
46. What were the instructor’s major strengths as demonstrated in this observation?
47. What suggestions do you have for improving upon this instructor’s skills?
OCR for page 194
Use of Questions
Yes
Some times
No
NA
Comments
31.
Asked questions to see what the students knew about the lecture topic.
____
____
____
____
32.
Addressed questions to individual students as well as the group at large.
____
____
____
____
33.
Used questions to gain students’ attention.
____
____
____
____
34.
Paused after all questions to allow students time to think of an answer.
____
____
____
____
29.
Encouraged students to answer difficult questions by providing cues or rephrasing.
____
____
____
____
30.
When necessary, asked students to clarify their questions.
____
____
____
____
31.
Asked probing questions if a student’s answer was incomplete or superficial.
____
____
____
____
32.
Repeated answers when necessary so the entire class could hear.
____
____
____
____
33.
Received student questions politely and enthusiastically.
____
____
____
____
34.
Requested that very difficult, time-consuming questions of limited interest be discussed before or after class or during office hours.
____
____
____
____
Interaction
35.
Established and maintained eye contact with the class.
____
____
____
____
36.
Listened carefully to student comments and questions.
____
____
____
____
37.
Facial and body movements did not contradict speech or expressed intentions (e.g., waited for responses after asking for questions).
____
____
____
____
38.
Noted and responded to signs of puzzlement, boredom, curiosity, etc.
____
____
____
____
39.
Encouraged student questions.
____
____
____
____
Use of Media
27.
Writing on board/overhead/slides was legible.
____
____
____
____
28.
Information presented on board/overhead/slides was organized and easy to follow.
____
____
____
____
29.
The AV-materials used added to the students’ comprehension of the concept(s) being taught.
____
____
____
____
30.
The AV-materials were handled competently (e.g., the instructor did not walk in front of the image for overhead or slide projector; the instructor spoke to the class, not the screen or board; etc.).
____
____
____
____
Individual Style
40.
Voice could be easily heard.
____
____
____
____
41.
Voice was raised or lowered for variety and emphasis.
____
____
____
____
42.
Speech was neither too formal nor too casual.
____
____
____
____
43.
Speech fillers (e.g., "ok now", "ahmm", etc.) were not distracting.
____
____
____
____
44.
Rate of speech was neither too fast nor too slow.
____
____
____
____
45.
Wasn’t too stiff and formal in appearance.
____
____
____
____
46.
Wasn’t too casual in appearance.
____
____
____
____
47.
Varied the pace of the lecture to keep students alert.
____
____
____
____
48.
Spoke at a rate which allowed students time to take notes.
____
____
____
____
OCR for page 195
Comments:
* Adapted from material in Improving Your Lectures from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Used by permission.
