Grant recipients: Cynthia Richard, Elaine Lillie and Thomas McFarlane, School of Pharmacy; Mary Power, Centre for Teaching Excellence
Portraits of (Left to Right): Cynthia Richard, Elaine Lillie, Thomas McFarlane, Mary Power
(Project timeline: September 2016 - August 2017)
Description
In 2015, the University of Waterloo School of Pharmacy developed a standardized instrument and initiated a formal process for peer review of teaching. At the time of study completion, 32 instructors had participated in the process.
The purpose of this project was to investigate whether the peer review process had any impact on teaching practices or perceptions of teaching. Descriptive feedback on the peer review process was collected from instructors via survey, semi-structured interviews, and focus groups. Data collection emphasized changes that instructors have made to teaching practices based on feedback provided as well as any changes in attitude towards teaching and peer review. We found that the process was well-received, but only led to minimal changes in teaching practices.
As a result of the study, we hope to enhance the peer review process to provide more meaningful feedback to those being evaluated and ultimately enhance teaching and learning.
Questions investigated
This study investigated whether peer review of teaching in pharmacy has affected:
- teaching practices;
- attitudes toward teaching;
- attitudes toward peer review
Findings/insights
Our findings are described in the paper, Peer Review of Teaching in a Canadian Pharmacy School: Attitudes and Impact on Teaching Practice, published in the American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. As described in the paper, we had a number of key findings:
- Peer review of teaching in pharmacy was well-received. Instructors indicated that they felt comfortable with the process, and viewed peer review of teaching as a development opportunity and a requirement for teaching.
- There was limited evidence that our peer review of teaching program impacted attitudes toward teaching or peer review, or contributed to changes in teaching practices. The lack of change in attitude may have resulted from the high value that instructors already placed on teaching. The lack of changes to teaching practices appeared to result at least in part from the lack of constructive criticism provided; most feedback was viewed as being positive or confirmatory in nature rather than identifying areas that needed to be improved.
- There was some confusion and disagreement about the intent of peer review of teaching, specifically whether it would be used for formative or summative purposes.
Dissemination and impact
- At the individual level: Results of this research study were shared with third-year pharmacy students in a research seminar course; they were used as an example of educational scholarship as a form of research. In terms of impact on colleagues, results have led to changes in the approach to peer review undertaken by members of the peer review of teaching team.
-
At the Department/School and/or Faculty levels: Results were presented to the School of Pharmacy Assessment Committee; this is the Committee responsible for the peer review of teaching program. The School anticipates making changes to the process based on the research findings, but will await formalizing these changes until recommendations come forward from the university’s Complementary Teaching Assessment Project Team. Results were also shared briefly with the Faculty of Science Teaching Fellows, and will be presented in more detail at an upcoming meeting.
-
At the institutional (uWaterloo) level: Results were presented at the University of Waterloo Teaching and Learning Conference 2018.
-
At the national and international levels: Results were presented in poster form at a national pharmacy education conference June 2017 (Canadian Pharmacy Education and Research Conference, the national meeting of the Association of Faculties of Pharmacy of Canada). We also published a paper in the American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, which is considered to be a leading journal in pharmacy education.
Impact of the project
- Teaching: Members of our peer review of teaching team have started to make small changes to the peer review of teaching process as a result of our research findings. For example, as peer reviewers we have asked instructors in advance if there are specific areas where they would like feedback, and had face-to-face meetings to provide the feedback. We feel this leads to a better opportunity to provide feedback that may lead to changes in teaching practices (based on the literature). In addition, in some instances, we have provided more suggestions for improvement than we had done previously, in response to the research findings that indicated that there was not sufficient constructive criticism. Further changes in the process are anticipated, but will not be formalized until recommendations come forward from the university’s Complementary Teaching Assessment Project Team.
- Involvement in other activities or projects: Dr. Richard was appointed by FAUW to participate in the university’s Complementary Teaching and Assessment Project Team. The purpose of this team’s work is to “research and develop methods of assessing teaching and learning complementary to Student Course Perception surveys, and to consult widely with the University community about best practices for such assessment”. Dr. Richard's appointment to this team was a direct result of the LITE grant-supported research on the pharmacy’s peer review of teaching program.
- Connections with people from different departments, faculties, and/or disciplines about teaching and learning: Our presentation at the University of Waterloo Teaching and Learning conference (April 2018) resulted in a number of informal conversations on peer review of teaching during the discussion period as well as immediately following the presentation. In each instance, we were able to share our findings, and also suggest adopting some strategies that were different from our original process (such as in person pre- and post-observation meetings with reviewees); we hope others learn from some of our pitfalls, so that they can have a greater impact on teaching practices than what we observed in pharmacy.
References
Project Reference List (PDF)