Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Peer reviews of teaching as appreciative inquiry: learning from “the best” of our colleagues

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research on peer review to date has focused on its role as a formal compliance mechanism, a process for enhancing and developing teaching practice, and as a considerable source of anxiety for educators. In this paper, we draw on scholarly reflections from our experience of undertaking a reciprocal, formative peer review in an Australian higher education setting. Our findings provide novel conceptual, empirical, and practical insights by providing the first application of an appreciative inquiry framework to the process of peer review. We argue that adopting an appreciative inquiry framework assists us in learning from “the best” aspects of our colleagues’ teaching. Moreover, it offers a framework for understanding and responding to some of the challenges long-associated with peer review. In doing so, it presents potential benefits pertaining to student retention and learning outcomes, while opening up new possibilities for researching and practicing peer review.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, J. M., & Innes, M. (2013). Using appreciative inquiry to frame the appraisal of an Australian initial teacher education program. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(11), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, A., & Mladenovic, R. (2008). The benefits of peer observation of teaching for tutor development. Higher Education, 55, 735–752.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J.B., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university. McGraw-Hill Education.

  • Bingham, R., & Ottewill, R. (2001). Whatever happened to peer review? Revitalizing the contribution of tutors to course evaluation. Quality Assurance in Education, 9(1), 32–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackmore, J. A. (2005). A critical evaluation of peer review via teaching observation within higher education. International Journal of Educational Management, 19(3), 218–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breeze, M. (2018). Imposter syndrome as a public feeling. In Y. Taylor & K. Lahad (Eds.), Feeling academic in the neoliberal university: feminist flights, fights and failures (pp. 191–219). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, A. (2019). Student retention models in higher education: a literature review. College and University, 94(2), 12–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bushe, G. (2007). Appreciative inquiry is not (just) about the positive. OD practitioner, 39(4), 30–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bushe, G.R. (2013). The appreciative inquiry model. In E. Kessler (ed.) The encyclopedia of management theory. London UK: SAGE Publications.

  • Cassidy, A. & Johnson, J. (2006). Developing your skills as a peer reviewer: introductory workshop handbook. Centre for Teaching and Academic Growth. University of British Columbia. Available at: https://wiki.ubc.ca/Documentation:CTLT_programs/PRT/UBC_docs

  • Cassidy, A., & Lee, J. (2011). Peer review: structured, informal, confidential, helpful! Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 4, 68–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chester, A., Clarke A., Wingrove, D., & Denny, B. (2013). Talking about teaching: empowering staff through peer partnerships. Proceedings of the 10th Enhancement and Innovation in Higher Education conference. Edinburgh

  • Christophel, D. M., & Gorham, J. (1995). A test-retest analysis of student motivation, teacher immediacy, and perceived sources of motivation and demotivation in college classes. Communication Education, 44(4), 292–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collington, V., & Fook, J. (2016). Instigating change through appreciative inquiry: a case study. International Journal of Higher Education Management, 3(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, R. (2019). The good university: what universities actually do and why its time for radical change. London, UK: Zed Books Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooperrider, D., & Srivastva, S. (1987). Appreciative Inquiry in organizational life. In R.W. Woodman & W.A. Pasmore (eds.). Research in organizational change and development (pp. 129–169). Vol.1. Stamford, US: JAI Press.

  • Cosh, J. (1998). Peer observation in higher education – a reflective approach. Innovations in Education and Training International, 35(2), 171–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, R., Amernic, J., & Tourish, D. (2014). Perverse audit culture and accountability of the modern public university. Financial Accountability & Management, 30(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crisp, G., Sadler, R., Krause, K.L., Buckridge, M., Wills, S., Brown, C., MacLean, J., Dalton, H., Le Lievre, K., & Brougham, B. (2009). Peer review of teaching for promotion purposes: a project to develop and implement a pilot project of external peer review of teaching at four Australian universities. Final project report. Strawberry Hills, NSW: Australian Learning and Teaching Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosling, G., Heagney, M., & Thomas, L. (2009). Improving student retention in higher education: improving teaching and learning. Australian Universities’ Review, 51(2), 9–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crutchley, D., Nield, K., & Jordan, F. (2005). Moving on from peer observation of teaching: a collaborative development using the principle of peer-support. Educational Developments, 6(1), 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dardot, P., & Laval, C. (2014). The new way of the world: on neoliberal society. London, UK: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Lautour, N. (2009). Through others’ eyes: reflections of a tertiary teacher. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 6(1), 79–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, K. (2011). Collegial feedback on teaching: a guide to peer review. Melbourne: University of Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fifolt, M., & Lander, L. (2013). Cultivating change using appreciative inquiry. New Directions for Student Services, 143, 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fifolt, M., & Stowe, A. (2011). Playing to your strengths: appreciative inquiry in the visioning process. College and University, 87(1), 37–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgiou, H., Sharma, M., & Ling, A. (2018). Peer review of teaching: what features matter? A case study within STEM faculties. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55(2), 190–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giannacopoulos, M. (2019). Nomophilia and academic work in the Austerity University. Journal of Global Indigeneity, 4(1).

  • Giles, D., & Kung, S. (2010). Using appreciative inquiry to explore the professional practice of a lecturer in higher education: moving towards life-centric practice. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 50(2), 308–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golparian, S., Chan, J., & Cassidy, A. (2015). Peer review of teaching: sharing best practices. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 8, 211–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosling, D. (2014). Collaborative peer-supported review of teaching. In J. Sachs & M. Parsell (eds) Peer review of learning and teaching in higher education (pp. 13 – 31). Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: reason and the rationalization of society (Vol. I). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley-Fletcher, L., & Orsmond, P. (2004). Evaluating our peers: is peer observation a meaningful process? Studies in Higher Education, 29(4), 489–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley-Fletcher, L., & Orsmond, P. (2005) Reflecting on reflective practices within peer observation. Studies in Higher Education, 30(2), 213-224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W & James, M (1997) ‘Assessment and Learning: Differences and Relationships between Formative and Summative Assessment’, Assessment inEducation Principles Policy and Practice, 4(3):365-379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, L. M., & Hasan, S. (2013). Appreciative inquiry in teaching and learning. New Directions for Student Services, 143, 65–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatzipanagos, S., & Lygo-Baker, S. (2006). Teaching observations: promoting development through critical reflection. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 30(4), 421–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iqbal, I. A. (2014). Don’t tell it like it is: preserving collegiality in the summative peer review of teaching. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 44(1), 108–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. A. (2014). Transformation of online teaching practices through implementation of appreciative inquiry. Online Learning, 18(3), n3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J., & Masika, R. (2020). Appreciative inquiry as a developmental research approach for higher education pedagogy: space for the shadow. Higher Education Research & Development, advance online publication.

  • Kadi-Hanifi, K., Dagman, O., Peters, J., Snell, E., Tutton, C., & Wright, T. (2014). Engaging students and staff with educational development through appreciative inquiry. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(6), 584–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinchin, I. M. (2005, September). Evolving diversity within a model of peer observation at a UK university. In British Educational Research Association (BERA) Annual Conference, University of Glamorgan, Wales (pp. 14–17).

  • Kung, S., Giles, D., & Hagan, B. (2013). Applying an appreciative inquiry process to a course evaluation in higher education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 25(1), 29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, K., Teng, M. Y., Barnes, S. J., Moore, K., Smith, K., & Lee, M. (2018). Using appreciative inquiry to understand the role of teaching practices in student well-being at a research-intensive university. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(2), 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomas, L., & Nicholls, G. (2005). Enhancing teaching quality through peer review of teaching. Quality in Higher Education, 11(2), 137–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, B. J., & Watkins, J. M. (2001). Resource book for appreciative inquiry: a constructive approach to organizational development. Bethel, ME: NTL Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nixon, S., Vickerman, P., & Maynard, C. (2010). Teacher immediacy: reflections on a peer review of teaching scheme. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34(4), 491–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peel, D. (2005). Peer observation as a transformatory tool? Teaching in Higher Education, 10(4), 489–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, C., Moore, C.M., Boss, G.J., Davis, T., & Louis, D.A. (2020). To be Black women and contingent faculty: four scholarly personal narratives. The Journal of Higher Education, 91(5), 674-697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prezas, R., Shaver, M., Carlson, T., Taylor, J. S., & Scudder, R. (2009). Peer review of teaching: multiple raters. Perspectives on Issues in Higher Education, 12(2), 59–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purvis, A., Crutchley, D., & Flint, A. (2009). Beyond peer observation of teaching. In Gosling, D., and O'Connor, K.M. (eds). Beyond the Peer Observation of Teaching. SEDA Paper (124). London, Staff and Educational Development Association, 23-28.

  • Richards, I., Wood, M. A., & Iliadis, M. (2020). Newsmaking criminology in the twenty-first century: an analysis of criminologists’ news media engagement in seven countries. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 32(2), 125–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. T., & Armstrong, A. C. (2019). Disrupting the deficit discourse: reframing metaphors for professional learning in the context of appreciative inquiry. Professional Development in Education, 45(1), 114–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shore, C., & Wright, S. (2003). Coercive accountability: the rise of audit culture in higher education. In M. Strathern (Ed.), Audit cultures (pp. 69–101). London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shortland, S. (2004). Peer observation: a tool for staff development or compliance? Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(2), 219–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, S., Chie, Q. T., Abraham, M., Jalarajan Raj, S., & Beh, L. S. (2014). A qualitative review of literature on peer review of teaching in higher education: An application of the SWOT framework. Review of Educational Research, 84(1), 112-159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Vaart, W. (2017). Appreciative peer review: a procedure. AI Practitioner, 19(4), 60–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, J. M., Mohr, B. J., & Kelly, R. (2011). Appreciative inquiry: change at the speed of imagination. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yiend, J., Weller, S., & Kinchin, I. (2014). Peer observation of teaching: the interaction between peer review and developmental models of practice. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 38(4), 465–484.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

    Bianca Fileborn & Claire Loughnan

  2. School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Deakin University, Victoria, Australia

    Mark Wood

Authors
  1. Bianca Fileborn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Claire Loughnan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bianca Fileborn.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fileborn, B., Wood, M. & Loughnan, C. Peer reviews of teaching as appreciative inquiry: learning from “the best” of our colleagues. High Educ 83, 103–117 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00637-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00637-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation