Participants will be able to:
- provide feedback on how to make classes more active and student-centered using a mentoring rubric
- provide an objective snapshot of the current use of engaged pedagogies using an evaluation rubric
- develop a 1-year plan for visiting the classes of your peer-mentor using these rubrics to help one another develop reflective practices
Blurb for Annual Evaluation
Authored by Peggy Brickman, UGA
"As part of participating in the Mobile Summer Institute, faculty members will be undergoing peer evaluation of their teaching using the Course Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS). This protocol was recently highlighted in Science magazine as an answer to the repeated calls for improved data collection on the use of evidence-based instructional practices by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (Stains et al., 2018). The COPUS along with the peer mentoring and observation provided by the participants can provide data for peer reviews of teaching such as those that are becoming a required step for promotion and tenure at many institutions across the country (CU Boulder, UT Austin, University of Arizona). This observation conducted by the participants of the Mobile Summer Institute can provide that evaluation. In addition, we know that peer evaluation can help provide evidence of performance on aspects of teaching such as depth of subject knowledge and appropriateness of course material that are better assessed by peers rather than students (Berstein 2008; Peel 2005) . Studies examining peer evaluation have also documented several positive outcomes for faculty involved in the process including: improved self-assurance (Bell and Mladenovic 2008); collegiality and respect (Quinlan and Akerlind 2000) ; and improved classroom performance (Freiberg 1987) .
Bell, Amani, and Rosina Mladenovic. 2008. "The Benefits of Peer Observation of Teaching for Tutor
Development." Review of. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education
and Educational Planning 55 (6):735-52.
Berstein, Daniel J. 2008. "Peer Review and Evaluation of the Intellectual Work of Teaching." Review of.
Change 40 (2):48-51.
Freiberg, H. Jerome. 1987. "Enriching Feedback to Student-Teachers Through Small Group Discussion."
Review of. Teacher Education Quarterly 14 (3):71-82.
Peel, Deborah. 2005. "Peer Observation as a Transformatory Tool?" Review of. Teaching in Higher
Education 10 (4):489-504.
Quinlan, Kathleen M., and Gerlese S. Akerlind. 2000. "Factors Affecting Departmental Peer
Collaboration for Faculty Development: Two Cases in Context." Review of. Higher Education 40
Stains, M., Harshman, J., Barker, M. K., Chasteen, S. V., Cole, R., DeChenne-Peters, S. E., ... & Levis-
Fitzgerald, M. (2018). Anatomy of STEM teaching in North American
universities. Science, 359(6383), 1468-1470."
- Video Introduction to GORP: https://cee.ucdavis.edu/tools
- Teaching Evaluation Feedback Guide .docx
- Peer Mentoring Evaluation 2019.pdf