Leadership: A Cultural Perspective on Review as Quality Assurance Versus Quality Enhancement

  • Jemina Napier
  • Mehdi Riazi
  • Christa Jacenyik-Trawoger
Part of the Professional Learning and Development in Schools and Higher Education book series (PROD, volume 9)


This chapter explores the culture of leadership at Macquarie University and how that might influence the culture of engagement with peer review by comparing the practices and perceptions across four faculties. In particular we examine views of “top-down” and “bottom-up” approaches to peer review to investigate suggestions that a top-down approach can lead to a particular perception of peer review as a form of quality assurance or managerial surveillance imposed by leaders, rather than a form of quality enhancement encouraged through distributed leadership. What emerges is the importance of leadership actively encouraging a culture of learning and collective community of practice. We present a case study of how institutional policy on peer review contrasts with the perceptions of the same policy by staff.


Quality Assurance Leadership Team Quality Enhancement Collective Learning Teaching Culture 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Other members of the Leadership team: Ayse Bilgin, Kelsie Dadd, Verity Greenwood, Kerry-Ann O’Sullivan, Mitch Parsell, Deborah Richards.


  1. Bernstein, D., Burnett, A. M., Goodburn, A., & Savory, P. (2006). Making teaching and learning visible. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  2. Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (1993). Through the lens of a critical friend. Educational Leadership, 51(2) 49–51.Google Scholar
  3. Gosling, D. (2002). Models of peer observation of teaching. ITSN generic centre: Learning and teaching support network.Google Scholar
  4. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage .Google Scholar
  5. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Lewis, R. (1996). Cooperation or collaboration. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 12(2).Google Scholar
  7. Lomas, L., & Nicholls, G. (2005). Enhancing teaching quality through peer review of teaching. Quality in higher education, 11(2), 137–149.Google Scholar
  8. Moore, A. B., & Brooks, R. (2000). Learning communities and community development: Describing the process. Learning Communities: International Journal of Adult and Vocational Learning, 1–15.Google Scholar
  9. Parsell, M. (2011). The PEER Model. Plenary paper given to the international symposium on leadership and communication in peer review, Macquarie University, Sydney., 22 September 2011.Google Scholar
  10. Rose, M. A. (2004). Comparing productive online dialogue in two group styles: cooperative and collaborative. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 73–88.Google Scholar
  11. Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and i nteraction (3rd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Smith, C., & Bath, D. (2006). The role of the learning community in the development of discipline knowledge and generic graduate outcomes. Higher Education, 51(2), 259–286.Google Scholar
  13. Southwell, D., & Morgan, W. (2010). Leadership and the impact of academic staff development and leadership development on student learning outcomes in higher education: A review of the literature. Unpublished research report. ALTC.Google Scholar
  14. Stacey, E., Smith, P. J., & Barty, K. (2004). Adult learners in the workplace: Online learning and communities of practice. Distance Education, 25(1), 107–123.Google Scholar
  15. Trena, M. P. (2005). Collaborative and cooperative approaches to online group work: The impact of task type. Distance Education, 26(1), 111–125.Google Scholar
  16. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard university press.Google Scholar
  17. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jemina Napier
    • 1
  • Mehdi Riazi
    • 2
  • Christa Jacenyik-Trawoger
    • 2
  1. 1.Heriot-WattEdinburghUK
  2. 2.Macquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations