91ÊÓƵ

The peer review applicant has the responsibility of contacting you to organise a pre-observation meeting. If this meeting cannot be conducted face-to-face simultaneously with you and the other reviewer, another medium may be used (e.g. Google Hangouts, Skype, phone) to conduct the meeting, or separate meetings will be organised.

You will be sent a copy of theÌýpeer review report templateÌýpriorÌýto the pre-observation meeting with Section A completed. During the meeting you will complete Section B and you should ensure that it is identical to that of the other reviewer.

At the pre-observation meeting, you should receive the following information from the applicant:

• The dimensions of teaching that will be observedÌý(the applicant is asked to choose a minimum of four dimensions, up to maximum of 6). Carefully readÌýthe indicative strategies that are aligned to each dimension, so that you have a good idea of what constitutes effective teaching and as a guide to your report writing. (Note that there is a Dimension 11, which allows you to comment on areas relevant to institutional priorities that you observe during the teaching session, which were not covered by the other dimensions).Ìý
• The proposed learning outcomes and specific objectives of the teaching session. This information may be given to you in writing, but you are not expected to read extensive course documentation.
• Applicants have been asked to review this information about writing learning outcomes to ensure these are focused on student action and learning.
• A brief verbal overview of the course, including what stage it is at, and what has been covered so far with the students that is relevant to the peer observation. Applicants are asked to provide you with any relevant information on the cohort, the learning space and their teaching approach(es) to further inform your understanding prior to the observation. If the applicant teaches as part of teaching team, they will advise you of this and provide some context on the nature of the team.

Feel free to ask the applicant questions to clarify any information they have given you, or if you feel some important information has not been provided.

It is not your role to advise applicants on which dimensions they should be observed on, what sort of session they should be observed in, or to provide advice on what teaching approaches should be employed in the session.

If you cannot attend the observation due to illness or sudden crisis on the day, notify the applicant immediately. The Office of the PVC(Student Learning) will then assist the applicant to reschedule the observation.

You are required to use theÌýpeer review report templateÌýto report on the session you have observed.

Attend the peer observation for strictly one hour. It is at the discretion of the applicant to confirm the precise time that you are required to attend. You must only attend for that one hour (and not sit in the session prior to or following the hour that you have been asked to attend). Students are informed that there will be guests observing the class (but not for peer review), and you should remain as unobtrusive as possible during the observation.

The dimensions of teaching that you are commenting upon will at times overlap i.e. a teacher will demonstrate practice that satisfies (and can be reported on) for more than one teaching dimension at a time.

Keep in mind that knowledge of the applicant’s discipline is not crucial – it is more important to look for the engagement of students in the learning and the effectiveness of the teaching in relation to the nominated dimensions.

A post-observation meeting between you, the other reviewer and the applicant only occurs if any unexpected issues arose at the peer observation that might have impacted the session e.g. a student falling ill or a fire alarm going off. In this meeting the applicant will ask whether you think the disruption was significant enough for them to request another review from the Office of the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Learning)

You are required to complete your peer review report within two weeks of the observation. Peer review reports must be typed and emailed to the peer review email address.

Your report should not make recommendations about whether a teacher should receive a teaching award, be approved for academic promotion or be appointed as an Education Specialist. Reports are about what was observed during the teaching session only.

If there are significant differences between the two completed peer review reports, the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Learning) may call for another review to take place. The additional review will involve only one (different) reviewer, and all three completed reports will be included with teaching award, academic promotion or Education Specialist applications.

The applicants are University of Adelaide staff applying for individual teaching awards, academic promotion (excluding research-only), or conversion to Education Specialist appointments.

Our reviewers include the PVC (Student Learning), Associate Deans (Learning and Teaching), and Education Specialists, as well as other teaching staff from all faculties. All reviewers are selected based on their teaching and education expertise, including teaching experience, knowledge of learning and teaching, key positions in learning and teaching within the University, and awards for teaching. All peer reviewers must participate in peer reviewer training facilitated by the Office of the DVC(A) before they join the list of approved reviewers.

Each peer review requires two reviewers, usually one from a cognate discipline and the other from a different faculty. Both are chosen by the PVC (Student Learning) to conduct the review. Peer review reports are completed by the two reviewers observing the same one hour session of an applicant’s teaching. This follows a pre-observation meeting where the applicant explains to the reviewers the context of the teaching that will be observed.

A peer review report template is used by reviewers to record their observations of the session. The reviewer uses the dimensions of teaching outlined in the template to indicate whether they observed evidence against the dimensions and whether this evidence appeared to be effective teaching in the context of the session.

It is important to understand that the reviewer is not making a judgement about whether the applicant should receive a teaching award, academic promotion or Education Specialist conversion.

As a panel member deciding on individual teaching awards, academic promotion or Education Specialist conversion, you are expected to use peer review reports to triangulate evidence of claims by the peer review applicant in their application.

The peer review reports provide you with independent third party evidence of the applicant’s effectiveness in demonstrating activity against the dimensions of teaching. The reviewer has not been involved in the application process, and is providing peer feedback for you to complement the student feedback that you will have in your data set for the applicant.

To assist you in triangulating the peer review report with the claims of the applicant, for each dimension of teaching you will see that the reviewer provides some evidence to illustrate why they selected the quantity and quality of examples for each relevant teaching dimension.

The peer review reports are not likely to be identical, but would normally be consistent with each other. If there is a significant difference in the reviewer reports a third report may be in your data set to allow you to better interpret the session observed.

The reviewee is offered the opportunity to write a one page rejoinder based on the peer review reports. In this case, you will have the review reports and the rejoinder (if submitted) to assist you in your deliberations on the application from the reviewee.

Because reviewers only observe a one hour session, you would not expect a teacher to necessarily use all dimensions equally in the observed time. You should consider the overall pattern in the report, and use individual dimensions in relation to the claims made in the application.

The reviewee is encouraged to advise the reviewers of particular dimensions that will not be addressed in the session to be observed because they are not relevant. A minimum of four dimensions, up to maximum of 6 must be chosen for the observation.

The boxes in each dimension of teaching are not numeric scales and should not be used as numbers. The reviewer is indicating how well the dimension was achieved. Not, partially and clearly are all appropriate indicators, but the prevalence of examples must be considered alongside their achievement.

The comments for each dimension of teaching should be very succinct, with the aim of supporting the choices made in identifying the quantity and quality of evidence.