PRT Soft Launch Resources

Background 

The development and implementation of Waterloo’s Peer Review of Teaching (PRT) process began in 2018 in response to a request from the Faculty Association of the University of Waterloo (FAUW) for more holistic methods of teaching assessment. PRT complements other sources of teaching feedback and helps foster a community of teaching excellence through systematic and collegial observations of teaching. Ongoing support for Waterloo’s PRT Process is provided through the Teaching Assessment Processes (TAP) team in the Office of the Associate Vice-President, Academic. 

Soft Launch 

Participation in the 2025 soft launch is optional and presents a valuable opportunity for faculty members to benefit from the feedback of trained peers. Any PRT Reports produced during the soft launch will be considered confidential to Reviewees (instructors being reviewed), and Reviewees alone will determine whether to share a soft launch PRT Report for consideration in teaching assessment.  

We are approaching the soft launch as an opportunity to gather feedback the elements of the PRT process that have been developed to date: 

  • Reviewer Training – co-developed by the Centre for Teaching Excellence and the TAP team with support from the Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Anti-Racism 

  • System – co-developed by the Centre for Extended Learning and the TAP team with support from Information, Systems and Technology and Human Resources 

  • Communications – developed by the TAP team 

  • Supporting Documents – co-developed by the Centre for Teaching Excellence and the TAP team 

Note: As of January 28, 2025, the PRT system has begun rolling out invitations to faculty to participate in the soft launch of the Peer Review of Teaching. If you received an invitation to participate and need to cancel or postpone your PRT, note that you can follow the link to the system to do so. If you have any questions about how to cancel or postpone your PRT please contact Kathy Becker, Specialist, Teaching Assessment Processes. 

The TAP team is grateful to those who have collaborated with us and those who are participating: thank you for your commitment to teaching effectiveness. 

Step 1: Reviewee and Reviewer Matching

Step 1: Reviewee and Reviewer Matching 

Overview:  

  • Possible Reviewee-Reviewer matches proposed by the System.  

  • Reviewees (instructors) or Reviewers (trained observers) can anonymously veto a match based on conflict of interest (e.g., family member, close colleague).  

  • Both Reviewees and Reviewers have 14 days to anonymously veto any proposed match; Reviewees complete this step before Reviewers. Excessive vetoing may impact the ability to participate in the process. 

  • Once the veto period (28 days) has passed, matching is completed. 

Communications from the System: 

  • Reviewee receives an email with three (3) possible Reviewers and instructions to veto a Reviewer or postpone the Review to a future Review period.  

  • Reviewer receives an email with possible Reviewees and instructions to veto a Reviewer if required. 

Key Actions: 

  • Reviewees and Reviewers review possible matches and use the anonymous veto option if required. 

  • Reviewees can request cancellation or postponement of Review and note the reason. 

Considerations: 

  • Reviewee-Reviewer matches are proposed by the System based on the Senate-endorsed recommendations of the Complementary Teaching Assessment Project Team (CTAPT). 

  • The System is designed to balance workload; no Reviewer should be allocated more than eight (8) Reviews in any given Review period. 

  • Reviewers complete training with a focus on the impacts of pedagogical and unconscious bias, collegiality, and power dynamics in the Review process.  

  • Reviewer training also includes practical advice on observing a peer’s teaching, reviewing teaching materials, and providing feedback that is aligned with Waterloo’s Framework for Teaching Effectiveness 

Resources: 

Step 2: Pre-Observation Meeting

Step 2: Pre-Observation Meeting 

Overview:  

  • Reviewee and Reviewer meet to discuss teaching goals, course structure, and observation logistics to ensure a shared understanding.  

Communications from the System: 

  • Reviewee receives an email with the name of their confirmed Reviewer; they are encouraged to send a quick email to connect with their Reviewer. 

  • Reviewer receives an email with the names of all allocated Reviewees; they are also encouraged to connect with their Reviewees. 

Key Actions: 

  • Reviewee and Reviewer work together to schedule the Meeting. 

  • Reviewer uses the completed Form to build familiarity with each of the Reviewees they will work with. 

Considerations: 

  • Both Reviewees and Reviewers should consider the best ways to foster and sustain a positive, collaborative rapport. 

  • Reviewees should ask Reviewers to consider only those teaching materials needed to provide an understanding of your teaching context. 

Resources: 

Step 3: Classroom Observation

Step 3: Classroom Observation 

Overview:  

  • The Reviewer observes the Reviewee’s class (live or online) to gather insights into their teaching practice. 

Communications from the System: 

  • The System does not send messaging pertaining to the observation.  

Key Actions: 

  • Reviewee teaches their class as usual; can discuss with Reviewer whether/how to inform students that observation will occur.  

  • Reviewer attends and observes the class, taking detailed notes on observable teaching and learning actions and behaviors. 

Considerations: 

  • Consider whether students might be curious about the new person in the classroom and how best to manage that. 

  • It’s natural for Reviewees to experience nervousness having an observer in the classroom. 

Resources: 

Step 4: Draft Report

Step 4: Draft Report 

Overview:  

  • The Reviewer drafts the Report based on the observation and shared teaching materials. 

Communications from the System: 

  • The System does not send messaging pertaining to drafting or reviewing the Report.  

Key Actions: 

  • Reviewer drafts the report and shares it with the Reviewee. 

  • Reviewee reads the draft report in preparation for the Post-Observation Meeting. 

Considerations: 

  • The Reviewee will base the Report on the categories, areas of focus, and actions outlined in the Framework for Teaching Effectiveness, as well as any specific areas about which the Reviewee requested feedback during the Pre-Observation Meeting. 

  • The Reviewer will include both positive and constructive feedback. 

  • Reviewers might need to ask follow-on questions, perhaps at the Post-Observation Meeting, before finalizing the Report.  

Resources: 

  • The Centre for Teaching Excellence has prepared a tip sheet on Receiving and Giving Effective Feedback 

Step 5: Post-Observation Meeting

Step 5: Post-Observation Meeting 

Overview:  

  • This meeting is a collaborative opportunity to discuss the draft report and provide clarifications or additional insights. 

Communications from the System: 

  • The System does not send messaging pertaining to the Post-Observation Meeting.  

Key Actions: 

  • Reviewee and Reviewee book a time to meet and discuss the draft Report.  

  • Reviewee provides feedback or clarification as needed. 

  • Reviewer might opt to complete revisions before finalizing the Report.  

Considerations: 

  • Approach the meeting with mutual respect and a focus on constructive dialogue. 

  • Review the draft together to ensuring accuracy and clarity. 

  • Work to create a collegial space to share perspectives and ask questions. 

Resources: 

  • The Centre for Teaching Excellence has prepared a tip sheet on Receiving and Giving Effective Feedback

Step 6: Final Report

Step 6: Final Report 

Overview:  

  • The Reviewer finalizes the Report; may incorporate insights gained through the Post-Observation Meeting. 

Communications from the System: 

  • Reviewee receives an email letting them know that their Report has been uploaded. 

  • Once they have uploaded a Report for each Assigned Review, Reviewer receives an email confirming their completion. 

Key Actions: 

  • Reviewer: Finalize the report(s) and upload to the System. 

  • Reviewee: Review the final report for their records. 

Considerations: 

  • Any PRT Reports produced during the soft launch will be considered confidential between the Reviewer and the Reviewee.  

  • Reviewees alone will determine whether to provide a soft launch PRT Report to their academic unit head for consideration in teaching assessment. 

Resources: 

Step 7: Reflect and Plan

Step 7: Review and Plan

Overview:

  • The Reviewee reflects on the feedback received and plans next steps for developing their teaching practice. 

Key Actions: 

  • Reviewee reflects on the Report and recommendations; creates a plan to integrate feedback into teaching practice. 

Communications from the System: 

  • The System does not send messaging pertaining to reflecting on the Report or planning for teaching development activities.  

Considerations: 

Resources: