Inside the peer review process: how academics review a colleague's teaching portfolio

被引:11
作者
Quinlan, KM [1 ]
机构
[1] Cornell Univ, Coll Vet Med, Off Educ Dev, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA
关键词
faculty evaluation; evaluation methods; cognitive processes; problem solving; scholarly communication; protocol analysis; course evaluation;
D O I
10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00058-6
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Understanding how academics review and make judgments about teaching portfolios is important as the peer review of teaching becomes more common. This think-aloud study examines the processes seven academics used in reasoning through a colleague's biochemistry course portfolio. Analysis of the interview transcripts revealed that participants used a normative, case-based reasoning approach, comparing the reviewee's practices to their own experiences, their colleagues, and to prototypical or traditional practices. They considered contextual factors and their pre-existing knowledge of the teacher and the context. The readers justified their final decisions based on the appropriateness and achievement of educational goals. The teacher's reflective commentary, the student evaluations of teaching, and the syllabus were important in their review. Implications are discussed. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1035 / 1049
页数:15
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], TEACHING PORTFOLIO P
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1995, RECOGNISING REWARDIN
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1998, The Course Portfolio: How Faculty Can Examine Their Teaching To Advance Practice
[4]  
Boyer E. L., 1990, Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate
[5]  
Cashin W. E., 1999, CHANGING PRACTICES E, P25
[6]  
CENTRA J, 2000, EVALUATING TEACHING, V83, P87
[7]  
CERBIN W, 1996, MAKING TEACHING COMM
[8]  
Cerbin William, 1994, J EXCELLENCE COLL TE, V5, P95
[9]   CATEGORIZATION AND REPRESENTATION OF PHYSICS PROBLEMS BY EXPERTS AND NOVICES [J].
CHI, MTH ;
FELTOVICH, PJ ;
GLASER, R .
COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 1981, 5 (02) :121-152
[10]   Towards the design of a system of peer review of teaching for the advancement of the individual within the university [J].
Cosser, M .
HIGHER EDUCATION, 1998, 35 (02) :143-162