Having a peer observe one's class can be an unnerving experience for some people, especially when the results of the observation are used in promotion, tenure and salary-increase decisions. However, peer evaluations can be an invaluable method for discovering new ways to strengthen one's instruction, provided that they are done in a positive and constructive manner. In order to assure that the peer evaluations are honest, and truly helpful to instructors, two basic conditions must be met. 1) It is very important to reduce the feeling (as much as possible) that one must provide a stellar classroom "performance" in which every student is fully engaged and all activities run smoothly on "Observation Day." The point of having a colleague observe your class is NOT to prove to your department that you are a perfect teacher who does everything well and has nothing more to learn-- such a person does not exist. Peer evaluations should be used as an opportunity for faculty members to discuss with colleagues how effectively they are accomplishing their goals in the classroom. Such a dialogue can be very refreshing because, in addition to receiving suggestions on how to improve certain aspects of instruction, it is also encouraging to hear a colleague talk about what you do particularly well in the classroom. 2) It is very important for the observer to feel comfortable pointing out "problem areas" or aspects of instruction which could be improved, as well as documenting the instructor's strengths. The purpose of the peer evaluation is completely destroyed if the observer feels uncomfortable (or incapable of) providing an honest and helpful critique of a colleague's instruction.

As mentioned above, if conditions one and two are met, the peer observation can be a highly effective tool for strengthening individual instruction as well as departmental programs in general. However, depending on how the results of peer evaluation are used, circumstances can arise which may cause faculty to feel hesitation in writing out completely honest evaluations of their colleagues. Knowing how the results will be used could also cause the instructor to feel the need to go to extraordinary lengths to produce a lesson which is not representative of his/her typical classroom instruction. I adress these potential problems and propose a solution in the section entitled "How the Peer Evaluation Results should be used."

Determining the Evaluation Partners

Peer evaluations are done every quarter between paired faculty members: Faculty member A evaluates faculty member B and vice-versa. The pairs are determined by the Evaluation committee no later than the third week of the academic quarter. In establishing pairs, the committee tries to match those whose schedules do not conflict and who have not recently had an opportunity to observe one another. All tenured, tenure-track, full-time temporary faculty, and the chairperson participate in the process. Junior and senior faculty members are paired, as well as instructors from different language groups. (Although faculty members across language groups may not understand the language in class they are observing, this in no way detracts from his/her ability to recognize how well students are engaged in the task at hand, or how conducive the classroom atmosphere is to learning). The Evaluation Committee then distributes the list of pairs to faculty members, and the guidelines detailed below. Each pair is responsible for setting up the dates on which the observation will take place.

Preparation-Before the Observation
The role of the "person observed."

The person observed should compose a 2-3 page description of his/her teaching philosopy and methodology. In this narrative, the instructor should explain not only what his/her teaching philsophy is, but also why s/he believes in it. In describing his/her teaching methods, instructor should pay particular attention to strategy and implementation. (This information could later become part of a teaching portfolio).

The person observed should write a detailed lesson plan which includes the goals or objectives s/he wants to reach by the end of the class period. The instructor should not spend an unusal amount of time trying to create the "perfect" lesson for "observation day." Nor should s/he always use those one or two lessons which have proven extremely successful year after year. Plan the class period just as you would any other day, or try to re-work a plan that didn't go so smoothly the last time you tried it, or try out a completely new idea. Remember that the peer observation should be an opportunity for learning, not for performing.

Photocopy these materials and give them to the "observer" before the observation takes place. These materials will help the observer determine how successful you are in using your teaching philosophy and methodology to accomplish what you want in the classroom.

The role of the "observer."

It is imperative that the "observer" read these materials before the observation takes place. While reading the materials, one should remember that different people have different philosophies, and believe in different methodologies. Just because methodologies and philosophies differ does not always mean that some are necessarily better than others. Remember that part of your duty as observer is to document how well the instructor met his/her class goals or objectives using his/her philosophy and methodology.

The Observation

Role of the "person observed"

The instructor may want to briefly explain to the students that s/he always looking for ways to improve instruction so s/he has invited a colleage to observe his/her teaching. (Students are often impressed with the idea that their teacher wants to strengthen his/her instruction). The instructor may also choose not to introduce the observer, which also poses no problems. Students may be slightly curious about who the observer is, but the presence of the observer, introduced or not, is not a disrupting influence.

The instructor should teach the class as if the observer were not present. Above all, the instructor should not be concerned with trying to "impress" the observer, or unduly concerned with following the lesson plan down to the most minute detail. All good teachers know that class periods sometimes do not go as planned. If you know it is in your students' best interests to change directions, review something more thoroughly, or go to a completely new topic, by all means do so. You can always discuss the new course of action with your colleague after class.

Role of the observer

Bring the Peer Obsevation Instrument to the classroom and/or a separate sheet of paper if you wish. Of course one can come early, but it's usually best to wait outside the classroom until the instructor arrives. The best place to sit is in the back of the room to the left or right. In this way you have a clear view of most of the students.

When your colleague begins teaching you can fill out the instrument, take notes on a separate sheet of paper or directly on the instrument. You may want to keep track of the time and what activities took place at certain time intervals. As you are taking notes, always keep in mind what goals and objectives your colleague is trying to accomplish.

After the observation

Role of the observer

After the class period is over, summarize your observation on the back of the instrument (or attached sheet of paper). Be sure to put positive comments regarding strengths of instruction first. If you have suggestions for helping your colleague more effectively reach his/her goals, or if you observed problem areas, be sure that your comments are phrased in a constructive and helpful manner. Give your colleague the instrument and any additional papers with comments. Try to do this within the next 2-3 days at the latest.

The Discussion

After the instructor has had a chance to read the observer's comments, they should meet to discuss the class period--within a week to ten days after the observation took place. (Memories fade with time!) If the observer and/or the instructor believe that the class period was somewhere between mediocre to disastrous, the evaluation form can be discarded and another observation can be scheduled. (Everybody has bad days when absolutely nothing seems to go right).

Finally

The instructor should write his/her reaction (whatever length s/he think is necessary) to the observer's written comments as well as to the discussion. Feel free to point out what suggestions you agreed with or disagreed with and why. Mention the things you might do differently, or things you will continue to do as a result of your colleague's observations. Attach your comments to the Peer Evaluation form. Make one copy and give it to the department chairperson. Keep the original in your files for future reference.

A written reaction to the results of the observation can be very helpful in terms of allowing the instructor to critically reflect on how well s/he is accomplishing his/her goals. This documentation can also be very helpful to the chairperson by keeping him/her informed about colleagues' thoughts on their teaching experience and development.

How the results of the Peer Observation Form should be used

How the results of the Peer Observation Form are used is critically important. One of the main reasons faculty members may hesitate to write honest and critical evaluations is because these evaluations are tied to promotion, tenure and salary-increase decisions. Another reason may include the hierarchial structure of academia. Junior faculty may feel uncomfortable criticizing senior faculty. Some senior faculty make feel uncomfortable criticizing the chairperson. In order to alleviate this potential problem, I propose that observations which are rated "good", "very good" or "excellent" receive the same weight for use in decisions about promotion, tenure, and salary-increase. Student evaluations(which are probably the most "honest" because of anonymity), chair evaluations, support materials and teaching portfolios can be used to separate "good", "very good" and "excellent" instructors for purposes of salary increases, promotion and tenure. Only when the peer evaluations are "poor" or "fair" should the instructor not be rewarded at the same level as faculty who are doing "good" or "excellent" work. Such a system will allow faculty to feel just as comfortable marking "good" as they would marking "excellent" on the peer evaluation form if they know both categories carry the same weight with regard to salary and rank increases. Faculty will not feel pressured to say that everything was excellent, or feel the need to make very neutral comments with no criticisms because they are worried about "upsetting" a colleague's chance for a salary-increase.

On the other hand, if there are serious and consistent problems in an instructor's teaching, the observer must feel secure enough to talk to the instructor and to indicate the problem on the evaluation form. And of course, the instructor has to be mature enough to accept that things are not going well, and be open to any suggestions on how to improve.

I realize that such a system deviates from the traditional method of separating the "very good" teachers from the "excellent" teachers, and awarding each accordingly in terms of salary, promotion and tenure. However, the peer evaluation presents a special case. Because it is not anonymous and because it involves our colleagues, tying the results of the peer evaluation so tightly to salary and rank decisions could automatically compromise the validity of those results in many cases.

One may argue that faculty will not strive to do "excellent" work if they know they may not gain much financial or "rank" advantage over someone who does "good" work. Of course money and rank are important to university teachers. However, one must ask the following question: Do instructors want to do well in the class because they are a) more motivated by money and status, or b) more motivated to become truly excellent teachers? I believe that the people who choose to come to an institution like Georgia Southern (where quality undergraduate education is extremely important) are primarily motivated by the desire to become excellent teachers. Because of a high dedication to their students and to their professional integrity as teachers, I do not think faculty would "settle for" doing good work in the classroom when they could do be doing excellent work.

If this proposed evaluation procedure is adopted, faculty members would truly know how well they are accomplishing their goals in the classroom, and departmental programs would be greatly strengthend. Last but not least, regular, open and friendly discussion among faculty about teaching philosophies and instruction would add to the collegial departmental atmosphere where everyone feels able to share their successes and concerns as they pursue the goal of teaching excellence.

Classroom Evaluation of_____________________________________________

by_____________________________________________

Quarter__________ Year__________ Class____________________

Evaluate the items in Parts I and II which occur during the observation. Please use the following scale: 1-poor, 2-fair, 3-good, 4-very good, 5-excellent. If the item did not occur during the observation, write N/A. Any explanation, detail, or example may be noted.

Part I. Subject matter and instructional strategies. The teacher

is prepared for class:________________________________________________________

uses procedures/routines:_____________________________________________________

sequences activities:_________________________________________________________

maintains focus:___________________________________________________________

varies activities appropriately:_________________________________________________

uses materials/aids which are relevant:__________________________________________

defines/describes clearly:_____________________________________________________

stresses generalizations/principles rules:_________________________________________

relates to student interests:____________________________________________________

challenges:________________________________________________________________

speaks the target language whenever possible:____________________________________

PART II. Classroom management and atmosphere. The teacher

creates an atmosphere conducive to learning:______________________________________

uses strategies to motivate students:_____________________________________________

communicates expectations:___________________________________________________

offers sufficient opportunities for student participation:______________________________

maximizes amount of time avalilable for instruction:________________________________

evaluates and provides feedback during instruction:__________________________________

prevents or redirects off-task behavior:____________________________________________

avoids sarcasm/negative criticism:_______________________________________________

PART III. Please write an over-all evaluation of the teacher. Remember to comment on how well the instructor met his/her class goals or objectives using his/her philosophy and methodology, as well as any aspects of instruction which may need strengthening.