Abstract
The professoriate, as a whole, is growing older and more experienced; yet institutions often overlook the professional development needs of mid-career and senior faculty. This article, based on a review of the literature and the development of a peer coaching project, examines peer coaching as a professional development opportunity for experienced faculty that meets many of their immediate needs and offers a variety of longer-term benefits to their institution. Six recommendations for creating a peer coaching program emerge from the literature and the authors’ experience.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
For our purposes, we define “experienced faculty” as mid-career or senior faculty members who have received tenure and have been teaching for 10 years or more.
Nine of the ten peer coaches were tenured at Seattle University, and the tenth had been tenured at another institution. As a result, all of them were regularly engaged in the peer review process of junior faculty in their departments.
Of the two coaches who did not continue in Year 3, one was going on sabbatical but asked to be included in the coaching pool the next academic year; and the other had unexpected professional commitments that reduced her availability.
By collecting the names of faculty colleagues who seek out coaches, the faculty development office sponsoring the peer coaching program can follow-up with these colleagues and assess the quality of the coaching they received and identify additional training that the coaches might need. This was the main motivation in establishing this kind of reporting at the authors’ home institution, and coaches and faculty colleagues are given full assurance that this list of names is not shared with anyone beyond the program’s director. Because we have been able to follow up with faculty members who sought a coach, we have received confidential feedback that has enabled us to make immediate improvements in how coaches are assigned to work with instructors seeking a coach.
References
Alstete, J. W. (2000). Posttenure faculty development: Building a system for faculty improvement and appreciation. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 27(4). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers, (2nd edn.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ashenfelter, O., & Card, D. (2002). Did the elimination of mandatory retirement affect faculty retirement? The American Economic Review, 92, 957–980.
Austin, A. E. (2003). Creating a bridge to the future: Preparing new faculty to face changing expectations in a shifting context. Review of Higher Education, 26, 119–144.
Baker, A. C., Jensen, P. A., & Kolb, D. A. (2002). Conversational learning. An experiential approach to knowledge creation. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Bernstein, D. J., Johnson, J., & Smith, K. (2000). An examination of the implementation of peer review of teaching. In K. E. Ryan (Ed.), Evaluating teaching in higher education (pp.73–86). New directions for teaching and learning, vol. 83. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Boyle, P., & Boice, R. (1998). Systematic mentoring for new faculty teachers and graduate teaching assistants. Innovative Higher Education, 22, 157–179.
Brancato, V. C. (2003). Professional development in higher education. In K. P. King & P. A. Lawler (Eds.), New perspectives on designing and implementing professional development of teachers of adults (pp. 59–65). New directions for adult and continuing education, vol. 98. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brinko, K. T. (1993). The practice of giving feedback to improve teaching: What is effective? Journal of Higher Education, 64, 574–593.
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carroll, J. G., & Goldberg, S. R. (1989). Teaching consultations: A collegial approach to better teaching. College Teaching, 37, 143–146.
Cataldi, E. F., Bradburn, E. M., & Fahimi, M. (2005). 2004 national study of postsecondary faculty (NSOPF:04): Background characteristics, work activities, and compensation of instructional faculty and staff. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Cavanagh, R. (1996). Formative and summative evaluation in the peer review of teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 20, 235–240.
Centra, J. A. (1985). Maintaining faculty vitality through faculty development. In S. M. Clark & D. R. Lewis (Eds.), Faculty vitality and institutional productivity (pp. 141–156). New York, NY: Columbia University, Teachers College.
Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Farr, J. J. (1988). Nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.
Chism, N. V. N. (1999). Peer review of teaching: A sourcebook. Boston, MA: Anker.
Crawley, A. L. (1995). Senior faculty renewal at research universities: Implications for academic policy development. Innovative Higher Education, 20, 71–94.
Daley, B. J. (2000). Learning in professional practice. In V. W. Mott & B. J. Daley (Eds.), Charting a course for continuing professional education: Reframing professional practice (pp. 33–42). New directions for adult and continuing education,vol. 86. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. A restatement of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston, MA: D. C. Heath Company.
Erickson, G. (1986). A survey of faculty development practices. In M. Svinicki, J. Kurfiss & J. Stone (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional and organizational development, 5 (pp. 182–196). Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.
Franz, A. C., Beebe, S. A., Horvath, V. S., Canales, J., & Swee D. E. (2005). The role of teaching and learning centers. In S. Chadwick-Bossey & D. R. Robertson (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional, and organizational development, 23 (pp. 72–110). Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.
Hicks, O. (1999). A conceptual framework for instructional consultation. In C. Knapper & S. Piccinin (Eds.), Using consulting to improve teaching (pp.9–18). New directions for teaching and learning, vol. 79. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hornum, B. (2002). Transforming post-tenure review into faculty, department head, and departmental renewal. In C. M. Lacata & J. C. Morreale (Eds.), Post-tenure faculty review and renewal: Experienced voices (pp. 155–166). Washington, DC: American Association of Higher Education.
Hubball, H. T., & Burt, H. (2006). The scholarship of teaching and learning: Theory-Practice integration in a faculty certificate program. Innovative Higher Education, 30, 327–344.
Huber, M. T., & Hutchings, P. (2005). The advancement of learning: Building the teaching commons. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hutchings, P. (1996). The peer review of teaching: Progress, issues and prospects. Innovative Higher Education, 20, 221–234.
Kane, R., Sandretto, S., & Heath, C. (2004). An investigation into excellent tertiary teaching: Emphasizing reflective practice. Higher Education, 47, 283–310.
Karpiak, I. (2000). The “second call”: Faculty renewal and recommitment at midlife. Quality in Higher Education, 6(2), 125–134. Retrieved March 16, 2007 from http://www.ebscohost.com
Keig, L., & Waggoner, M. D. (1994). Collaborative peer review: The role of faculty in improving college teaching. 1994 Report No. 2. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. Washington, DC: The George Washington University School of Education and Human Development.
Kreber, C., & Cranton, P. A. (2000). Exploring the scholarship of teaching. The Journal of Higher Education, 71, 476–495.
Lacata, C. M., & Morreale, J. C. (Eds.). (2002). Post-tenure faculty review and renewal: Experienced voices. Washington, DC: American Association of Higher Education.
Ma, J. (2004). Trends and issues: Recent trends in faculty demographics and employment patterns. TIA-CREF Institute. Retrieved February 20, 2007 from http://www.tia-crefinstitute.org/research/trends/tr110104.html
Malik, D. J. (1996). Peer review of teaching: External review of course content. Innovative Higher Education, 20, 277–286.
Menges, R. J. (1987). Colleagues as catalysts for change in teaching. In J. Kurfiss (Ed.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional and organizational development, 6 (pp. 83–93) Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.
Menges, R. J., Mathis, B. C., Halliburton, D., Marincovich, M., & Svinicki, M. (1988). Strengthening professional development: Lessons from the program for faculty renewal at Stanford. Journal of Higher Education, 59, 291–304.
Miller, M. A. (1999). State-level post-tenure review policies. Innovative Higher Education, 24, 17–24.
Millis, B. J. (1999). Three practical considerations for peer consultations. In C. Knapper & S. Piccinin (Eds.), Using consulting to improve teaching (pp. 19–28). New directions for teaching and learning, vol. 79. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Fall.
Millis, B. J., & Kaplan, B. B. (1995). Enhancing teaching through peer classroom observations. In P. Seldin & Associates (Eds.), Improving college teaching (pp. 137–151). Bolton, MA: Anker.
Minor, J. F., & Preston, K. M. (1991, May). Peer coaching at the junior college level: Developing a non-threatening environment. Paper presented at the National Conference on the Adult Learner, Columbia, SC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED339410).
Mott, V. W. (2000). The development of professional expertise in the workplace. In V. W. Mott & B. J. Daley (Eds.), Charting a course for continuing professional education: Reframing professional practice (pp. 23–31). New directions for adult and continuing education, vol. 86. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mundy, V., & Grabau, L. J. (1999). Planning for peer review of teaching. [Electronic Version]. Journal of Natural Resources and Life Science Education, 28, 31–36. Retrieved January 10, 2007 from: http://www.jnrise.org
National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). Digest of Education Statistics: 2005. (NCES 2006-030). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved Feb. 3, 2006 from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d05/tables/dt05_230.asp
National Research Council. (2003). Evaluating and improving undergraduate teaching in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. In M. A. Fox & N. Hackerman (Eds.), Center for education, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
O’Meara, K. A., & Rice, R. E. (2005). Faculty priorities reconsidered: Rewarding multiple forms of scholarship. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Quinlan, K. M., & Akerlind, G. S. (2000). Factors affecting departmental peer collaboration for faculty development: Two cases in context. Higher Education, 40, 23–52.
Romano, J. L., Hoesing, R., O’Donovan, K., & Weinsheimer, J. (2004). Faculty at mid-career: A program to enhance teaching and learning. Innovative Higher Education, 29, 21–48, Fall.
Schmuck, R. A. (1995). Process consultation and organizational development. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 6, 199–205.
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Towards a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Scriven, M. (1973). The methodology of evaluation. In B. Worthen & J. Sanders (Eds.), Educational evaluation: Theory and practice (pp. 60–104). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Scriven, M. (1996). Types of evaluation and types of evaluator. American Journal of Education, 17(2), 151–161.
Seldin, P. (2006). Tailoring faculty development programs to faculty career stages. In S. Chadwick-Blossey & D. R. Robertson (Eds.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional and organizational development, 24, (pp. 137–146). Bolton, MA: Anker.
Skinner, M. E., & Welch, F. C. (1996). Peer coaching for better teaching. College Teaching, 44, 153–156.
Slater, C. L., & Simmons, D. L. (2001). The design and implementation of a peer coaching program. American Secondary Education, 29(3), 67–76, Spring.
Sorcinelli, M. D. (1999). Post-tenure review through post-tenure development: What linking senior faculty and technology taught us. Innovative Higher Education, 24, 61–72.
Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., Eddy, P. L., & Beach, A. L. (2006). Creating the future of faculty development. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Vohra, N., & Singh, M. (2005). Mental traps to avoid while interpreting feedback: Insights from administering feedback to school principals. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16, 139–147.
Webb, J., & McEnerney, K. (1995). The view from the back of the classroom: A faculty-based peer observation program. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 6, 145–160.
Weimer, M. (1990). Improving college teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Weimer, M. (2006). Enhancing scholarly work on teaching and learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Acknowledgements
We are indebted to Jeffrey Anderson and David Green for their thoughtful feedback on earlier versions of this manuscript and to the entire cohort of peer coaches for their time, energy, and commitment to improving teaching.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Therese A. Huston
is the Director of the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning at Seattle University. She received her B.A. from Carleton College and her M.S. and Ph.D. in cognitive psychology from Carnegie Mellon University. Her research interests include faculty development and satisfaction, college teaching, diversity and social justice, and student learning.
Carol L. Weaver
is an associate professor in Adult Education at Seattle University’s College of Education. She received her B.S. Degree from Washington State University. Both her Master’s degree work (Oregon State University) and her Doctorate (The Ohio State University) focused on adult education. Her teaching and research focus on faculty development, course design, and workplace learning.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Huston, T., Weaver, C.L. Peer Coaching: Professional Development for Experienced Faculty. Innov High Educ 33, 5–20 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-007-9061-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-007-9061-9