Jump to:
- PRT administration
- PRT reviewers
- PRT and UW’s holistic teaching assessment model
- PRT Process
- Use of PRT reports
PRT administration
How often will instructors be scheduled for a PRT review?
The 2024 implementation of the peer review of teaching (PRT) process has been planned in accordance with the Senate-supported recommendation from the Complementary Teaching Assessment Project Team (CTAPT), that is:
- Probationary/definite term faculty members will be scheduled for one PRT review every two (2) years on average, and
- Tenured/continuing faculty members will be scheduled for one PRT review every eight (8) years on average.
Once the PRT process has been implemented, it is possible that campus stakeholders may determine that PRT reviews should be completed more or less frequently. Should the frequency be adjusted, the Teaching Assessment Processes (TAP) office will modify the related processes and systems as needed.
What is the role of the TAP office?
The TAP office was established in 2021 to provide logistical support for the implementation of the Senate-endorsed holistic model of teaching assessment. The TAP office also provides ongoing analysis and evaluation of the new processes, coordinating working groups and consultations as additional steps are taken by the University on the road to full implementation of the holistic model. The work of the TAP office is guided by a commitment to quantify and mitigate the impacts of systemic biases on teaching assessment, and an understanding of (and, where appropriate, recommending the adoption of) better practices as described in the literature. The TAP office takes its mandate to include learning from the experiences of (and, where appropriate, collaborating with) other U15 institutions, assessing the performance of our evolving teaching assessment processes using both qualitative and quantitative research methods, and ongoing consultation with campus stakeholders. The TAP office is not involved in conducting actual assessment processes for faculty or making decisions around merit, promotion, or tenure. If you have any question about Waterloo’s teaching assessment processes, please contact the TAP office.
How will we schedule PRT reviews and manage PRT reports?
A PRT system has been developed to handle the following administrative tasks:
- Equitably distribute PRT review workload between reviewers
- Suggest reviewer-reviewee matches
- Provide opportunity for either the reviewer or reviewee to anonymously veto a match due to conflict of interest
- Send reminder messages
- Serve as a repository for completed PRT reports
The PRT system will automatically alert instructors when their PRT review window has begun, connect instructors with their PRT reviewer, and prompt instructors to complete the process within a one-year period. When it comes time for performance review, tenure, and promotion activities, it will be easy for instructors and department chairs/school directors to access PRT reports.
Who will see a faculty members’ PRT report(s)?
Instructors will work with their PRT reviewer and have the opportunity (if they desire) to include a response to the PRT report. Once it’s complete, the reviewer will upload the report to the PRT system where both reviewer and reviewee will have access. Department chairs/school directors will have access to PRT reports for faculty members in their unit. Tenure and promotion committees will see PRT reports that are included in tenure and promotion (and, for lecturers, continuing status) packages.
This initiative sounds like a lot of work. Who is organizing this?
It’s a team effort!
- The Teaching Assessment Processes (TAP) office is overseeing implementation.
- The Centre for Teaching Excellence (CTE) is overseeing PRT reviewer training.
- The Centre for Extended Learning (CEL) systems team is overseeing the PRT system.
What resources and supports are available to facilitate PRT processes?
TAP office
- The TAP office is leading the implementation of PRT processes and will happily answer teaching assessment questions.
PRT reviewers from each Faculty
- Faculty Teaching Fellows (in consultations with Faculty leadership) have identified experienced faculty members to serve as PRT reviewers. The processes for identifying reviewers vary slightly from Faculty to Faculty.
PRT reviewer training: Piloting November 2023
- PRT reviewers will complete this CTE offering in preparation for conducting PRT reviews. The training includes a focus on the impacts of pedagogical and unconscious bias, collegiality, and power dynamics in the PRT review process. Participants will also receive instruction in and practical advice on observing a peer’s teaching (in person or online), reviewing related teaching materials, and providing feedback that is aligned with Waterloo’s teaching effectiveness framework.
PRT process: Soft launch
- The PRT implementation is being approached as a soft launch; instructors will be invited to participate, but there will be flexibility. The PRT review experience will provide instructors with a more nuanced assessment of their teaching practice and add invaluable context to student course perception (SCP) survey scores, so those who participate will benefit from a more complete assessment of their teaching for performance review, tenure, and promotion decisions.
PRT reviewers
Who can be a PRT reviewer?
To ensure the process is fair for everyone involved, only those who have completed the PRT reviewer training may serve as a PRT reviewer.
What if there’s a conflict of interest between the instructor and a proposed PRT reviewer?
Both the instructor and the PRT reviewer will have the option to anonymously veto any proposed matches. Since the process is anonymous, neither has to worry that exercising a veto will harm their working relationship with a colleague.
Will the PRT reviewers ‘actually’ know what they’re doing?
In consultation with Faculty leadership, Faculty Teaching Fellows have identified experienced faculty members to serve as PRT reviewers. These individuals will complete the CTE’s PRT reviewer training in preparation for conducting PRT reviews.
Why are instructors matched with PRT reviewers from inside their Faculty but outside their unit?
This was the recommendation of the Complementary Teaching Assessment Project Team (CTAPT) based on related research and the experiences at peer institutions. Having PRT reviewers from outside an instructor’s department or school helps keep the process more objective and is generally accepted as a better practice. Matching instructors with PRT reviewers who don’t have discipline-specific expertise also helps prevent the bias that can result when a reviewer has strong feelings about the “right way” to teach a specific subject in a sub-discipline. During the 2024 roll out, requests for different matching approaches will be accommodated where feasible.
Doesn’t a PRT reviewer need to be an expert in the specific area being taught?
No, they do not! UW is amidst a very important culture change related to teaching assessment. To create a more holistic system for the assessment of teaching (that is also less prone to the impacts of systemic bias), assessment processes are grounded in Waterloo’s teaching effectiveness framework. This means the goal of peer review is to assess teaching as it relates to UW’s teaching priorities. Matching instructors with PRT reviewers who don’t have discipline-specific expertise also helps prevent the bias that can result when a reviewer has strong feelings about the “right way” to teach a specific subject in a sub-discipline. During the 2024 roll out, requests for different matching approaches will be accommodated where feasible.
Is there credit or recognition for being a PRT reviewer?
Serving as a PRT reviewer is considered a service task since it positively contributes to teaching effectiveness. Additionally, PRT reviewers benefit from observing different teaching styles and practices, and can view this as a type of professional development - a key area in Waterloo’s Teaching Effectiveness Framework. Questions about PRT reviewer service credit would be best directed to the faculty member’s department chair/school director.
How can an interested faculty member serve as a PRT reviewer?
Instructors who would like to serve as a PRT reviewer are best advised to contact their Faculty Teaching Fellow or their department chair/school director. Because serving as a PRT reviewer represents a service task, it’s important that a faculty member’s chair/director is aware and on board before contacting the TAP office for more information.
PRT and Waterloo’s holistic teaching assessment model
Where is this coming from? Why is Waterloo using PRT?
The process leading to the implementation of an institutional PRT process has been underway since 2018.
- The complementary teaching assessment project team (CTAPT) was struck in direct response to FAUW’s request for more holistic methods of teaching assessment.
- CTAPTs work spanned four years and included numerous campus-wide consultations to develop recommendations for implementing an institutional PRT assessment process.
- CTAPT’s recommendations were supported by Senate in June 2022.
With the implementation of PRT, faculty will benefit from the input of experienced and skilled faculty colleagues. The use of PRT in teaching assessment will also help mitigate the impact of systemic biases, which can be amplified with overreliance on a single measure such as end-of-term student surveys. This is the primary driver behind UW’s transition to a holistic model of teaching assessment, of which PRT is a key piece. And finally, the use of PRT is in alignment with the 2018 recommendations made by arbitrator Kaplan for Toronto Metropolitan University (formerly Ryerson University), who named peer review as part of the “gold standard for measuring teaching effectiveness.”
What’s wrong with using just SCP survey scores to assess teaching?
There are many things wrong with over-reliance on SCP survey data. Student perceptions of their learning experience matter; students are in a unique position to comment on how the teaching they experience impacts their learning experience. But there are elements of teaching practices that students are ill-equipped to assess, and those are the elements for which peers can provide meaningful feedback. Part of what makes PRT part of "the gold standard" is that having multiple sources of information about teaching performance is an important measure to mitigate the impact of bias present in any individual method. Mitigating the impacts of systemic bias is the primary driver behind Waterloo’s transition to a holistic model of teaching assessment, of which PRT is a key piece.
Who is making the decisions about teaching assessment at Waterloo?
Decisions about teaching assessment at Waterloo are the responsibility of senior, collegially selected academic leadership of the University (e.g., the deans and provost), and at Waterloo, key decisions about changes to teaching assessment processes have been made or endorsed by Senate. But before a decision is made, teams of faculty members work with expert support to consider and assess accepted practices and relevant research. This is followed by cross-campus consultations, including consultations with Faculty leadership, faculty members, students, and other stakeholders (e.g., staff involved in the logistics of implementing processes). This describes the general process undertaken by a number of committees since this work began in 2014 (CEPT1, CEPT2, CTAPT1, CTAPT2, graduate supervision committee). The goal of this work has been to produce recommendations to create more equitable and comprehensive teaching assessment processes at Waterloo.
PRT Process
What’s the PRT review process?
We can provide a high-level description, but the PRT review process can look different depending on the instructor, the teaching context (e.g., if an instructor teaches all or almost all asynchronous online courses, the process of the observation will be different), the PRT reviewer, etc. The PRT review experience is generally expected to include an observation, a review of related course materials, a number of meetings between the instructor and the PRT reviewer, and a PRT report. The steps are outlined in more detail below:
- Instructor matched with PRT reviewer
- Instructor corresponds with PRT reviewer to schedule pre-observation meeting which could include:
- confirming logistics (time and location of observation)
- discussing observation goals and expectations
- providing PRT reviewer with course materials for review (e.g., syllabus, assessments, slides, readings, etc.)
- providing PRT reviewer with context about the teaching event
- PRT reviewer completes review of course materials and observation of teaching.
- PRT reviewer corresponds with instructor to schedule post-observation meeting which could include:
- self-reflection shared by instructor
- observed strengths and opportunities shared by PRT reviewer
- PRT reviewer prepares PRT report (1-2 pages) and shares with instructor, who may add a response
- Reviewer uploads report to PRT system
This sounds like a lot of work! I am already too busy.
There’s no way around it; this will involve some additional work. But remember that the goal is to correct a problematic over-reliance on student survey data. Like the SCP survey, the PRT process is grounded in Waterloo’s eaching effectiveness framework, which helps mitigate the impacts of systemic bias in teaching assessment. And it’s an important part of Waterloo's holistic model of teaching assessment.
How do instructors know when they will be expected to complete a PRT review?
A PRT system has been developed to coordinate as much of the PRT review process as possible. The PRT system will automatically:
- alert instructors when their PRT review window has begun,
- connect instructors with their PRT reviewer, and
- prompt instructors to complete the process within a one-year period.
The PRT launch is being approached as a soft launch; instructors are not required to participate. The PRT review experience will provide instructors with a more nuanced assessment of their teaching practice and add invaluable context to SCP survey scores. Those who participate will benefit from a more complete assessment of their teaching for performance review, tenure, and promotion decisions.
What input do faculty members have as instructors?
Instructors being reviewed have input in two key ways. First, the PRT system will suggest three (3) potential PRT reviewers. To address potential conflicts of interest, the PRT ystems was built to give both reviewer and reviewee an opportunity to anonymously veto any suggested match. And second, instructors will have the opportunity to review and provide a response to the PRT report before it is finalized.
How will instructors be matched with PRT reviewers?
Faculty members will generally be matched with PRT reviewers from another unit within their Faculty. This approach to PRT reviewer-reviewee matching was recommended by the complementary teaching assessment project team (CTAPT) as an important way to limit potential conflicts of interest. For example, a conflict may occur if a faculty member were matched with their former graduate supervisor. A conflict may also occur if a reviewer were matched with a colleague who later becomes their department head. It also helps prevent the bias that can result when a Reviewer has strong feelings about the “right way” to teach a specific subject in a subdiscipline. During the 2024 roll out, requests for specific matches will be accommodated where feasible.
What kind of documentation is used in the PRT review process?
As part of the PRT reviewer training, CTE has developed suggested classroom observation forms and sample PRT reports. These samples will be added to the PRT web page. Note that Faculties may choose to modify these documents to better suit their specific context.
Can instructors request an additional PRT review?
Because this is an additional task for a PRT reviewer, instructors are best advised to confirm that their department chair/school director supports the request for an additional PRT review. If they do, instructors can connect with Kathy Becker, Teaching Assessment Processes Specialist to have an additional PRT review scheduled.
Can instructors opt out of a PRT review?
The PRT launch is being approached as a soft launch; instructors are strongly encouraged to complete their scheduled PRT review. The PRT review experience will provide instructors with a more nuanced assessment of their teaching practice and add invaluable context to SCP survey scores. Those who participate will benefit from a more complete assessment of their teaching for performance review, tenure, and promotion decisions, as well as framing to describe any efforts they make towards their professional development as teachers in future performance reviews. Except in the case of probationary faculty members, instructors who decline their scheduled PRT review will not be rescheduled until all other instructors have completed their scheduled PRT reviews.
Use of PRT reports
How will PRT reports be used in performance reviews or tenure and promotion decisions?
Once policy 76/77 have been settled, we anticipate that a team of faculty members and expert supports will be established to develop recommendations on how to interpret PRT Reports, informed by Waterloo’s teaching effectiveness framework. Until that time, PRT reports will serve as a valuable complement to SCP survey scores, and Faculties that are already using peer review in tenure and promotion decisions will likely continue as they have.
Can the PRT process be used formatively or is it just a summative assessment?
Absolutely, it CAN be used formatively. In fact, it would be difficult to work through the PRT review process without the instructor (and the PRT Reviewer!) developing a new perspective on their teaching practice. CTE is available to support instructors looking to enhance their teaching practice, through PRT or other means. That said, the PRT will also be used summatively.
I have a PRT question that isn’t answered here. Who can I speak to?
Please connect with Kathy Becker, Teaching Assessment Processes Specialist.