Peer Observation of Teaching in Higher Education: Systematic Review of Observation Tools
Saved in:
| Title: | Peer Observation of Teaching in Higher Education: Systematic Review of Observation Tools |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Fernando Manuel Otero Saborido (ORCID |
| Source: | Educational Process: International Journal. 2024 13(1):84-101. |
| Availability: | UNIVERSITEPARK Limited. iTOWER Plaza (No61, 9th floor) Merkez Mh Akar Cd No3, Sisli, Istanbul, Turkey 34382. e-mail: editor@edupij.com; Web site: http://www.edupij.com/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 18 |
| Publication Date: | 2024 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Information Analyses Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Observation, Peer Evaluation, Foreign Countries, Measures (Individuals), College Faculty |
| Geographic Terms: | Australia, United States |
| ISSN: | 2147-0901 2564-8020 |
| Abstract: | Background/purpose: This study presents a systematic review of teaching observation instruments in the current literature based on PRISMA standards. Materials/methods: Three researchers performed searches on two databases, SCOPUS and Web of Science, focusing on two criteria: A) peer observation of teaching and B) higher education, with search terms included in the "Title/Keyword" fields. The AND command was used to join certain words, including peer observation and teaching, whilst the OR command was used to separate search terms within each criterion. Five exclusion criteria were defined and applied following the initial searches. The quality of research conducted in the literature using observation tools was assessed using a validated instrument in social science research. Results: The results revealed a total of 13 instruments that were analyzed in terms of four variables: country, validation, observation, and feedback: A) Country: More than half were designed by researchers from universities in the United States and Australia, B) Validation: Only three studies were designed following some kind of validation procedure, C/D) Observation and feedback: The number of items ranged from very loosely structured, with only a few items, to more comprehensive research. The most repeated item (8 of 13 instruments) was about the objectives of the observation section. Four study instruments included only an observation section, with no specific feedback section. Of the remainder, some included all three aspects of "strengths," "weaknesses," and "comments" in the feedback section, while others included only a feedback section. Conclusion: Excessive question numbers could make observation exercises overly complex, unless the items are distributed and observed across several sessions. An appropriate number of questions would correspond to the amount deemed by teachers themselves to be essential to observe the teaching process. Observation tools should include fields in which observers may add qualitative comments to deepen the understanding of the record and to improve the feedback quality. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2024 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1416202 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 CustomLinks: – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ1416202 Name: ERIC Full Text Category: fullText Text: Full Text from ERIC |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1416202 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Peer Observation of Teaching in Higher Education: Systematic Review of Observation Tools – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Fernando+Manuel+Otero+Saborido%22">Fernando Manuel Otero Saborido</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7016-2414">0000-0002-7016-2414</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22José+Antonio+Domínguez-Montes%22">José Antonio Domínguez-Montes</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7207-4143">0000-0002-7207-4143</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22José+Manuel+Cenizo+Benjumea%22">José Manuel Cenizo Benjumea</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8009-4806">0000-0002-8009-4806</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Gustavo+González-Calvo%22">Gustavo González-Calvo</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4637-0168">0000-0002-4637-0168</externalLink>) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Educational+Process%3A+International+Journal%22"><i>Educational Process: International Journal</i></searchLink>. 2024 13(1):84-101. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: UNIVERSITEPARK Limited. iTOWER Plaza (No61, 9th floor) Merkez Mh Akar Cd No3, Sisli, Istanbul, Turkey 34382. e-mail: editor@edupij.com; Web site: http://www.edupij.com/ – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 18 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Information Analyses<br />Reports - Research – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Observation%22">Observation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Peer+Evaluation%22">Peer Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Measures+%28Individuals%29%22">Measures (Individuals)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Faculty%22">College Faculty</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Australia%22">Australia</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22United+States%22">United States</searchLink> – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 2147-0901<br />2564-8020 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Background/purpose: This study presents a systematic review of teaching observation instruments in the current literature based on PRISMA standards. Materials/methods: Three researchers performed searches on two databases, SCOPUS and Web of Science, focusing on two criteria: A) peer observation of teaching and B) higher education, with search terms included in the "Title/Keyword" fields. The AND command was used to join certain words, including peer observation and teaching, whilst the OR command was used to separate search terms within each criterion. Five exclusion criteria were defined and applied following the initial searches. The quality of research conducted in the literature using observation tools was assessed using a validated instrument in social science research. Results: The results revealed a total of 13 instruments that were analyzed in terms of four variables: country, validation, observation, and feedback: A) Country: More than half were designed by researchers from universities in the United States and Australia, B) Validation: Only three studies were designed following some kind of validation procedure, C/D) Observation and feedback: The number of items ranged from very loosely structured, with only a few items, to more comprehensive research. The most repeated item (8 of 13 instruments) was about the objectives of the observation section. Four study instruments included only an observation section, with no specific feedback section. Of the remainder, some included all three aspects of "strengths," "weaknesses," and "comments" in the feedback section, while others included only a feedback section. Conclusion: Excessive question numbers could make observation exercises overly complex, unless the items are distributed and observed across several sessions. An appropriate number of questions would correspond to the amount deemed by teachers themselves to be essential to observe the teaching process. Observation tools should include fields in which observers may add qualitative comments to deepen the understanding of the record and to improve the feedback quality. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1416202 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1416202 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 18 StartPage: 84 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Observation Type: general – SubjectFull: Peer Evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries Type: general – SubjectFull: Measures (Individuals) Type: general – SubjectFull: College Faculty Type: general – SubjectFull: Australia Type: general – SubjectFull: United States Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Peer Observation of Teaching in Higher Education: Systematic Review of Observation Tools Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Fernando Manuel Otero Saborido – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: José Antonio Domínguez-Montes – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: José Manuel Cenizo Benjumea – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Gustavo González-Calvo IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2024 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 2147-0901 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 2564-8020 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 13 – Type: issue Value: 1 Titles: – TitleFull: Educational Process: International Journal Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
