To get students thinking critically and learning independently, the role of a teacher is quite important in the university. The peer review and observation methods are widely applied in the American and UK universities to improve the academic practice. Different people have different feelings about the peer observation. Some could feel nervous like me and some could feel excited. The aim for doing the observation is essential to develop the way of teachings by receiving advice and helps from others.
The observation is effectively helping to critique aspect of practical in the higher education. From the class, the different ways of observations could be conducted based on the different ways of teaching. After the pandemic, the University has carried out hybrid teaching methods, which mixed with online teaching and face-to-face teaching. For the observation evaluation method, it is important to consider the limitations and environment when we are facing different ways of teaching. For example, when the observation for online teaching, it may need to consider about the virtual classroom presentation, facilitation and interaction are different comparing to face-to-face.
In the case study of Stephanie, the class discussed about the self-reflections and peer reflections from the reports, and from the peers. Professor Stephanie as a successful researcher, has yet developed and evaluated her teachings to the students. From the case study of Professor Stephanie, we discussed two aspects regarding to the observation report evaluation.
First, the University sent over questionnaire to the students and collected the feedbacks for Professor Stephanie. The questionnaire or survey has designed in certain fixed questions, which may not well tailor to each of the unit or course. It collected the information based on the general criteria to evaluate the quality of the teaching, which may lose more details. Moreover, the questionnaire sending to the student has been criticised as ‘student-as-customer’ perceptions in the higher education (Macfarlane, 2004). This could also a reason why Stephanie took a quite defensive way to review the reports. It could result in a poor game playing between students and teachers as she believes the students with lower grades giving her poor feedbacks.
Professor Stephanie, on the other hand, also needs to note some points made by students and reviewed the teaching methods, including the reading materials. In the report, the student criticised her innovated teaching method-peer assessment. Stephanie felt quite uncomfortable to read this harsh criticism but also, she needs to realize she needs to change the way of teaching, including a good communication with students. Stephanie did not clear state the reason she would like to do the peer assessment. The aim for the peer assessment is to give each other feedbacks also, supporting and learning from each other. However, she did not mention the aim to the students in the first place. Stephanie should take the results of her report to be more open-minded, learning others’ teaching methods. She could change the ways of delivering the contents and show more willingness to engage in the feedbacks and having dialog with students.
As a professional, it is the responsibility for us to challenge the traditional expert-novice relationship with students, but with an open-minded to transfer to a learning partnership. It is also important for teachers have their passions of teachings and for their own subjects. Not to take as a defensive way or overact for any extreme or harsh critical feedbacks. It is always worth professionals to review the teaching method and how to design the evaluation teaching method in the University.
Reference:
Macfarlane Bruce (2003). Teaching with Integrity: The Ethics of Higher Education Practice. Taylor & Francis Group