OT Peer Review of Faculty
Faculty, at all ranks in the department of Occupational Therapy, is expected to devote substantial
time to teaching. The department values excellence in teaching and engages in an ongoing
process of feedback and review to enhance its teaching. Part of that process is the review by
peers. The teaching peer review process at the department of Occupational Therapy is designed
to provide an opportunity to faculty to obtain feedback from their peers. A faculty member going
for promotion and tenure at any rank is expected to have at least two peer reviews done on
her/his teaching. One such review should be from a faculty member outside the department while
the other should be from a faculty member inside the department. Peer reviewers should be
identified and approved by the department head. Peer reviewers should provide a written review
directed to the department head. This letters, which are intended to provide faculty members with
feedback, will be shared with the faculty member. The department head may seek more peer
reviews if deemed necessary. Peer reviewers are expected to comment on the faculty’s quality of
teaching and to facilitate the process we have developed a form that is suggested but not
required. This form includes headings such as: content, organization, style of presentation, clarity
of presentation and student interest and participation. In case that an external reviewer can’t be
arranged a review of the class materials, syllabus and content is acceptable. Teaching peer
reviews will be arranged by the department head accordingly.
Suggested Form:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Content
Organization
Teaching Style (e.g., style of presentation)
Clarity of presentation
Questioning skills
Student interest and participation
Quality of materials (if available)
1
Peer Observation Guidelines
Introduction: The document that follows, Peer Observation Guidelines for Content of Narrative
Report, has been developed for your convenience to assist you in writing meaningful comments
about your observation. The short-term goal of the peer observations is to create a dialogue about
teaching between faculty in order to share ideas and perspectives. The department’s long term
goal in supporting peer observation activities is to improve teaching effectiveness.
Recommended Procedure: In order to discuss areas/topics that an instructor specifically desires
feedback on, it is recommended that the instructor being evaluated and the evaluator meet briefly
prior to the scheduled peer observation. Immediate feedback (in person) following the
observation is very helpful, as the observation will still be fresh (in recent memory). After
completing the observation, the evaluator is asked to write up a narrative statement in which
reactions to the observation will be described. A one page narrative is recommended, more is
appreciated but not necessary.
How to Use the Peer Observation Form: The Peer Observation Guidelines were developed in
order to provide guidance when writing up a narrative statement on a peer observation. The
bulleted items on the form are provided as reminders of what you may comment on. You are not
required to comment on each bulleted item listed. At least one comment on each of the 6 main
areas listed is recommended to provide more comprehensive feedback. In the section titled
“Observers Overall Impression”, you may wish to include comment on aspects of the lecture that
went especially well, innovative teaching strategies, and considerations for future
lectures/teaching experiences.
Items on the form followed by a (*) must be included in the final peer observation narrative
report.
2
Peer Observation Report
GUIDELINES FOR CONTENT OF NARRATIVE REPORT
Date*:
Instructor Observed *:
Course Observed (title , #)*:
Observer*:
Total time in observation (min)*:
Type of class* (lecture, lab, etc.):
Instructor specifically requested feedback on*:
SUGGESTED TOPICS TO BE DISCUSSED IN REPORT:
CONTENT
STYLE OF
PRESENTATION
ORGANIZATION
CLARITY OF
PRESENTATION
STUDENT INTEREST AND
PARTICIPATION
QUESTIONING SKILLS

COMMAND OF
MATERIAL

PURPOSE OF
LECTURE/CLASS
CLEAR

VOICE CLEAR

DEFINES NEW
TERMS AND
PRINCIPLES

USES QUESTIONS TO
GAGE STUDENT’S
LEVEL
OF UNDERSTANDING

RESPONDS TO NONPROFESSIONAL
BEHAVIOR/
DISTRACTION/
BOREDOM

DISTIGUISH FACT VS
OPINION

INSTRUCTOR STATES
RELATION TO
PREVIOUS
CLASS/CURRICULUM

PACE APPROPRIATE

APPLIES INFO TO
CLARIFY AS NEEDED

USES FOLLOW-UP
QUESTIONS TO
PROMOTE
REFLECTION,
INCREASE STUDENT
UNDERSTANDING

ENCOURAGES
STUDENTS TO
PARTICIPATE IN
DISCUSSION

AMOUNT OF
CONTENT
APPROPRIATE

TEACHING METHOD
MATCHES
OBJECTIVE

ENGAGES
STUDENTS

USES ALT.
EXPLANATIONS AS
NEEDED

INVOLVES MORE
RETICENT
STUDENTS

SUMMARIZES MAIN
POINTS (OR ASKS
STUDENTS TO
SUMMARIZE)

ENTHUSIASM FOR
SUBJECT

USES HANDOUTS /
A.V. AIDS
EFFECTIVELY IF
APPROPRIATE

ENCOURAGES
STUDENTS TO
LISTEN/?/RESPOND
TO EACH OTHER
**Observer’s Overall Impressions**
Items on the form followed by a (*) must be included in the final peer observation narrative.
3