Resources Section Image TEP Home Page

Resources Home

Evaluation of Teaching

Universal Design

 

TEP newsletter subscribe icon with link Twitter logo with link to TEP Twitter

TEP Recommended Report Content

The peer review process should be documented with a summary to be placed in the reviewed faculty member’s file.  The summary will likely be used to inform summative evaluations of overall performance relating to contract renewal, tenure and promotion, and merit raises.  As such, it should contain an overall judgment of the faculty member’s performance supported by evidence from the observation, course documents, and discussions with the faculty member.  The report should also include information about the overall process and specific instruments or guides used to conduct the review, as these help the summative evaluation committee assess the validity of the overall review.  To summarize, the report:

  1. Should detail who did the review, the process followed, and which instruments or guides were used for the self-evaluation and the observation. 

  2. Should use specific information from the instruments to construct an accurate picture of the faculty member’s teaching philosophy, intentions and practices. Support your statements by discussing:

    a. Areas of strength:  Cite specifics from the observation guide. 


    b. Areas to develop: Identify particular areas in which the faculty member could improve.  Report plans the faculty member has articulated to address these areas—this part of the report creates occasions for ongoing conversation about teaching development and captures some of the ongoing innovation and reflection that characterize good teaching.

  3. Should not include the completed observation or self-evaluation instruments, as this could lead to reticence on the part of the faculty member and/or reviewer.  A major goal of the peer review should be to support and improve teaching.  This is difficult to achieve when the review has a summative component, but keeping the observation and self-evaluation instruments out of the file should allow for a more frank and formative assessment and discussion during the review.

  4. Should be shared with the faculty member before being placed in the file.  The faculty member should be allowed to suggest changes to the report and/or be given the opportunity to respond to the report in writing.  The response should be included in the personnel file along with the report.