Academics' resistance to summative peer review of teaching: questionable rewards and the importance of student evaluations

Abstract

This study draws from 30 semi-structured interviews with tenure-track faculty members in a research-intensive university to examine their lack of engagement in the summative peer review of teaching. Findings indicate that most academics in the study do not think peer review outcomes contribute meaningfully to decisions about career advancement and believe that, in comparison, student evaluation of teaching scores matter more. The findings suggest that faculty member resistance to summative peer reviews will persist unless academics are confident that the results will be seriously considered in decisions about tenure and promotion. This article also contends that senior administrators should provide further clarity about the purpose and use of peer review outcomes in high-stakes career decisions.