Peer Review of Teaching: Lessons Learned from the University of Kentucky

Abstract

ABSTRACT The University of Kentucky Department of Agronomy insti-tuted a system of peer review of teaching in 1996. Professors ob-serve the teaching of their peers with the intent of helping oneanother improve. Reviews usually include a preliminary meet-ing between the instructor and two reviewers, several in-class vis-its, some analysis of classroom materials, and a wrap-up meet-ing. The peer review program now has met with cautious but gen-eral approval from participating faculty. By spring 1999, re-views were completed for 20 classes, 15 of which are consideredin this analysis. Overall departmental student ratings have notchanged as a result of peer review, but most participants havemade changes in their teaching as a direct result of review. Al-though instructors are not required to place peer review data intheir personnel dossiers, six reviewed professors included datain their 1998 files. Although peer review has not yet made sub-stantive differences in the way that teaching is rewarded in thedepartment, most professors consider peer review professionallyvaluable and personally satisfying. Our experience indicatesthat the most successful reviews require the instructor and re-viewers to have open attitudes, spend adequate but not excessivetime on reviews, and receive support from administrators andconsultants. Peer review is effective in helping this departmentto open teaching to discussion and recognition.