Peer review: teaching vs. research

"While most academics express few concerns about peer scrutiny of research activities, they tend to be skeptical of any process of peer review involving teaching." (Taylor & Richardson, 2001)

A connection between "peer review of teaching" and "peer review of research" is made variously by a range of universities. For instance:

Peer review of teaching (as well as research) is being used in some universities as a way of ... improving teaching. Peer review can be used to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of teaching by examining aspects not covered by student evaluations, including paper design, assessment tasks, classroom practice, and student learning. It is also particularly useful when used formatively to create a culture of collaboration and collegiality between colleagues. (Peer Review, n.d.)

• Peer Review (n.d.). Retrieved 24 March 2005 from http://www.utdc.vuw.ac.nz/documentation/peer.shtml

• Taylor, P. and Richardson, A. (2001). Validating Scholarship in University Teaching. Retrieved 28 March 2005 from http://www. dest.gov.au/archive/highered/eippubs/eip01_3/01_3.pdf

The importance and weight of peer review of teaching has been questioned at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, "Should peer review of teaching effectiveness be undertaken as systematically as peer review of research in promotion and tenure cases, and given equal weight in decisions?" (Ball, 1991) and answered at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, "A peer perspective on teaching has become so highly valued ... that all tenure and promotion files now must include peer review of teaching, just as they have long included peer review of research" (Bernstein, 1997).

• Ball, C. (1991). Colloquium to Address Teaching in a University. Retrieved 28 March 2005 from http://web.mit.edu/ newsoffice/tt/1991/sep25/25358.html

• Bernstein, D. (1997). Establishing Effective Instruction Through Peer Review of Teaching. Retrieved 28 March 2005 from http://www.fipse.aed.org/grantshow.cfm?grantNumber=P116B951748

Ramsden and colleagues (1995) make a case for the benefits of peer review of teaching by saying,

Academic staff are acquainted with the process of peer review of research performance, and the use of the same process to assess and improve teaching would help increase its status while at the same time emphasising the links between aspects of academic work.

The Center for Educational and Development and Academic Methods (1996) caution that while "there is a tendency to think that peer review of teaching works in the same way as peer review of research and publication. Its greater virtue, however is in the development of teaching".

• CEDAM (1996). Peer review and self-evaluation. Retrieved 28 March from http://www.anu.edu.au/CEDAM/evaluation/toolkit.html

• Ramsden, P., Margetson, D., Martin, E., Clarke, S. (1995). Recognising and Rewarding Good Teaching in Australian Higher Education. Retrieved 28 March 2005 from http://www.autc.gov.au/pubs/caut/rrgt/6.htm

Taylor and Richardson (2001) see peer review of teaching as an "emerging reality" as "the activities of teaching and learning are now claimed as public territory".

Knox et al (1999) counter instead that "teaching occurs almost wholly in private, behind the closed classroom door. There is neither public currency nor consensual standards between pieces of practice or among practitioners. Consequently, it is difficult to understand the process of peer-review in the same way".

• Knox, D., Goelman, D., Fincher, S., Hightower, J., Dale, N., Loose, K, Adams, E., Springsteel, F.(1999) The Peer Review Process of Teaching Materials. Retrieved 24 March 2005 from http://fox.cs.vt.edu/JERIC/wg1report.pdf

• Taylor, P. and Richardson, A. (2001). Validating Scholarship in University Teaching. Retrieved 28 March 2005 from http://www. dest.gov.au/archive/highered/eippubs/eip01_3/01_3.pdf