Teaching Philosophies and Peer Review of Teaching

This article, included in a post in Tomorrow’s Professor, thoughtfully examines ideas popular in higher ed right now: learner-centered education, teaching philosophy statements and peer-review of teaching.  While there is much good information there, I notice that he makes the same mistake that so many do: they assume “peer-review of teachin” has to be an authoritative, judgemental process.  When I have particpated in peer review, I have treated it the same way that I teach my students to treat peer review of writing: as standing next to a colleague, trading ideas, sharing insights.  We are too limited by an authoritarian model which says that the tenured people know some secret code of the “right” way to teach.  In fact, tenure is granted based on many factors, of which teaching ability is only one.  And the idea of using one’s statement of teaching philosophy as a guide for discussion of what you are teaching and why, is actually a good start!  I found in a workshop this summer that many professors haven’t revisited their philosophy statements in a while (if they have one) and that we often haven’t looked at the values we say we hold, our ideas about how people learn, etc. and APPLIED them–from the philosophy statement to the syllabus and assignments.  I found the exercise of doing this with peers to be very helpful.  I continue to work from this model when I work with faculty. And I think faculty respond well to this model because: 1. it is personalized to them and their own content and beliefs and 2. I am not holding myself out as an expert on the “right” way to teach.  Conversations are more productive, and faculty are actually more open to the ideas I have to share with them about ways to teach that they may not have been exposed to, but fit well with their philosophy and needs.

I know that UR was looking at instituting some kinds of peer review of teaching.  I wish I could be in on the conversation to make this a positive experience for faculty.  Last I heard, it was left up to each individual department chair to institute as he/she thought best.