Abstract:

This paper consider the importance of three sorts of teaching and learning data: student evaluations (SET), peer review (PRT), and student academic performance (grades)—and how these can be meaningfully combined to indicate the calibre of teaching in a course offering will be delineated.The data are from key informant interviews (Bernard, 2012) conducted with 25 academic leaders from across the anglosphere, which were analysed naturalistically (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) using Atlas.ti qualitative software (Scientific Software, 2020).

Currently universities are over-reliant on SET data, despite known limitations: low response rates; questions geared towards affect rather than learning; grade inflation reward; required, early morning or large lecture format courses being penalised; and highly “performative” teaching rewarded regardless of effectiveness. Further, Indigenous, minority, queer, and female academics whose teaching reflects critical positionalities that challenge hegemonies are routinely given “poor” SET evaluations.

PRT offers one excellent contrast to SET scores. PRTs can include things like course design, delivery and assessment from a collegial perspective. PRTs offer opportunities to improve and advance teaching practice: perhaps more importantly, they offer a substantive alternative evaluation of the quality of one’s teaching. Grades are another important data source. In addition to the distributions in a given offering, one’s teaching across multiple offerings can be considered. Whether a grade distribution is skewed (including who are the underperforming students), and the assessment methods used to assess student performance are also indicators of quality.

How these diverse data sources are to be synthesised varies by discipline and institution. Academics themselves should use these data to tell their own “teaching story”. The delineation of a standard for each appointment type and level should be made explicit to new hires, as part of a plan to meet or exceed the standard during processes like continuation, re-appointment, and promotion.

Keywords:

Teaching quality, student evaluation of teaching, peer review of teaching, leadership, quality.