To encourage and support improvement of teaching and personal staff development:
This policy applies to all staff with significant teaching roles. Deans / programme leaders should define 'significant' reflecting the nature of staff allocation to teaching.
Deans / programme leaders should consider the situation regarding non-University staff (e.g. honorary lecturers) and tutorial assistants, post-graduate demonstrators etc, seeking advice of the dean were appropriate.
The policy should normally be implemented on an annual basis.
Recognition that a peer can provide developmental comments that are useful, show understanding of context, and may complement or moderate other sources and means of feedback -e.g. from students.
Outputs should be confidential to the teacher, unless the teacher chooses to volunteer information for any purpose.
The process should not be linked to staff appraisal or review for advancement / promotion unless the teacher chooses to volunteer information.
Experience suggests that there are generally developmental benefits for the peer as well as for the teacher.
The process does not apply in any situation when there has been a complaint about a teacher's approach to teaching. It is recognised that there may be situations when a dean (or their delegated nominee) may need to observe an individual's teaching for a particular purpose e.g. in response to specific feedback or comment. It must be emphasised that such a situation would not be classed as "peer support", and the comments in this guidance note would not be applicable. Such a situation would properly be a matter to be dealt with by the dean in a manner which he/she considers appropriate.
Deans / programme teams should:
Members of staff should engage with the process - either as teacher or peer in ways that reflect the aims and principles, respecting confidentiality
Members of staff may contact the Director of Academic Professional Development on an individual basis if they wish to discuss any development needs.
If a member of staff has a concern or complaint about any aspects of the process, they should contact the dean or equivalent in the first instance, and the College Vice Principal thereafter.
Who is the peer? Schools / programme teams should decide the most appropriate basis e.g.:
Focus - what to be observed / considered. In traditional approaches to teaching, this could involve observing a lecture or tutorial. However the focus should be directed on activities or aspects that would benefit most from the involvement of, and comment by a peer, and should reflect:
Themes or issues to be considered:
The process should include the following stages:
Schools should maintain a record of:
This annual record should be made available to the Director of the Educational Development Division, Library & Learning Centre to promote dissemination of good practice.
They should also consider any generic staff development needs identified through the process and take actions as appropriate.
Annual report form (see Peer support of teaching - Annual report form) View  
Any questions are comments should be addressed to any of the following - whoever seems most appropriate:
The following references provide further guidance and ideas on approaches. These can be supplemented by www searches of other universities' approaches -the term 'peer observation of teaching' is used widely.
del.icio.us
digg
reddit
facebook
stumbleupon