What catches the eye in a class observation? - Lecturers' perspectives in a program of multidisciplinary peer observation of teaching
Author(s):
Ana Cristina Torres (submitting) Amélia Lopes (presenting)
Ana Mouraz (presenting) Jorge Valente
Conference:
ECER 2015
Network:
22. Research in Higher Education
Format:
Paper

Session Information

22 SES 02 A, Dialogues between Peers through Feedback, Observation and Instruction

Paper Session

Time:
2015-09-08
15:15-16:45
Room:
393. [Main]
Chair:
Norman Brady

Contribution

In increasingly demanding social and economic contexts, the quality of higher education has been widely discussed, particularly concerning its pedagogical practices. Knight and Trowler (2000) have suggested that the most effective practices in promoting students’ learning are the ones that involve deeper approaches to teaching through emphasizing the students’ motivation and independent learning and establishing a conducive environment to learning. Oppositely, surface approaches tend to emphasise the teacher, the content to be taught and the need to `cover the ground’. Furthermore, these authors concluded that a shift from surface to deeper approaches to teaching involves cultural changes in a departmental level that can only work through collaboration. Consequently, there has been a wider development of programs of Peer Observation of Teaching (POT) as collaborative devices for the improvement of pedagogical practices (Donnely, 2007; Mouraz, Lopes, & Martins Ferreira, 2013; Tenenberg, 2014). Gosling (2005) distinguished three POT models, according to the observer objectives and position: the evaluation model, the professional development model and the peer review model. In the peer review model, the objective is the improvement of lecturers’ practices but the observer is a peer who is often also observed (Weller 2009). Usually, class observation is considered to allow the observed learning through feedback from the observer (Fletcher and Orsmond, 2005, cited in Tenenberg, 2014). However, more recently, Tenenberg (2014) have defended that observation of teaching also leads the observer to learn. Mouraz, Lopes and Martins Ferreira (2013, p. 378) referred that “playing the role of observer is of fundamental importance to become aware of teacher and student behavior and attitudes, as well as to learn about other ways of being a teacher”.
In the University of Porto, a POT program is being implemented since 2011, with a multidisciplinary nature associated. Every semester, lecturers from 15 faculties of this university are invited to participate voluntarily in the program. Quartets are organized with 2 pairs of lecturers of 2 different faculties, in which each lecturer observes a class from a colleague of the same faculty and a colleague of a different faculty and is observed in the same conditions. These observation cycles involve pre-observation and post-observation moments. Emphasis is placed on the importance of the pre-observation moments, to establish the curricular context and the underlying teacher-student relationships and teacher concerns. In relation to the post-observation moment, emphasis is placed on the importance of the feedback, and on the associated communication skills, in order to foster reflection and professional development (Mouraz, Lopes, & Martins Ferreira, 2013). The training aspect associated with the observer’s role in this Multidisciplinary Peer Observation of Teaching (MPOT) program is addressed through the use of a specific form to be completed anonymously during and post-observation, in order to stimulate reflection in the observers.
Furthermore, an impact study was carried out in 2014 in which several participants in the MPOT program were interviewed. Drawing from data collected both in fulfilled observation forms since 2012 and from the interviews of 2014, a study was made with the aim of identifying which pedagogical aspects lecturers that participated in the MPOT program paid more attention in their class observations.
To lead this study the following research questions were established:
- To which pedagogical dimensions higher education lecturers pay more attention in their class observations? And, are there any differences between lecturers of different faculties?
This paper aims at presenting and discussing preliminary findings from this study in order to identify indicators of teachers’ learning in the MPOT program under consideration and possibilities of shift from surface to deeper approaches to teaching.

Method

This paper is based on data obtained within a multidisciplinary peer observation of teaching (MPOT) program at the University of Porto. In this program, lecturers are asked to complete a specific form during and post-observation, from an observer point of view and to stimulate reflection on observed practices and their own practices. This form includes four sets of questions. The first set addresses course and class information: year, semester, program year, class number, total number of classes in course, time of observation, number of students in class, classroom capacity, type of class. The second set, to be answered during class observation, requires lecturers to score from 1 (poor) to 5 (strong), at least one of several predetermined items in each of five dimensions: i) class structure; ii) class organization; iii) class climate; iv) content; v) teacher’s attitude. Observers are also asked to elaborate brief comments on those items if they wish to. A third set of questions, inspired in the work of Vieira and colleagues (2004), to be answered in the post-observation, invites the observer to compare the observed class with her/his own classes, offering four leading questions: 1) What was most striking? 2) What questions would I like to ask to my colleague? 3) What similarities / differences were found in relation to my own lecturing practice? 4) Can I make any suggestions? Finally, the fourth section covers the post-observation reflective discussion. This form, in use since 2012, results from an adaptation and validation of a previous form used in 2011 (Mouraz, Lopes, & Martins Ferreira, 2013), which in turn was adapted from a form used in various US academic institutions (eg., North Idaho College, 2010). Furthermore, an impact study was carried out in 2014 in which 24 participants in the MPOT program were interviewed. Collected data from the forms since 2012, and from the interviews of 2014, was subjected to a statistical analysis (quantitative data) and a content analysis (qualitative data). This study focus on data from the scored items of the second set of questions of the observation forms and on data from the open question “1) What was most striking?” of the same forms. Data from the interviews, when participants where asked about which aspects they paid more attention in their class observations, was also analyzed. Obtained findings are discussed complementarily and in relation with pedagogies in different faculties.

Expected Outcomes

The analysis of the quantitative data in the observation forms indicates that more attention was paid by lecturers to items related with class structure, organization and content, since these had a higher number of valid scores. There is some deviation in the responses according to the observer’s faculty. However, most of these deviations are not large (though a few indeed are). Furthermore, and although the exact value differ, the scores that are chosen more or less often are mostly similar across faculties. Curiously, when these same teachers were asked to write about what was most striking in their class observations, their references corresponded mainly to aspects of class climate and teachers’ attitude. Lecturers’ frequently referred to notice and analyse more thoroughly aspects related with class behaviour and students’ engagement in the class, as well as the way the teachers interact with the students and the strategies she/he uses to stimulate the students’ interest and participation. These aspects also appear consistently in references of lecturers of different faculties. Similar results were obtained when interviewing 24 different lecturers of 10 faculties. Additionally, some substantial references were also made to the teachers’ posture and movement in the classroom, in terms of how it influenced the students’ attention. Furthermore, teachers from different faculties tended to compare general characteristics of class climate between faculties thus perceiving and reflecting about different academic cultures. These findings suggest some concern from the participant lecturers in the MPOT program in learning about strategies to stimulate students’ interest and engagement in the class across different faculties and academic cultures, as these were the aspects that mostly “caught their eye”. Concerns from lecturers across faculties are similar, as are the acquired understandings that students have distinguished profiles and responses to the teachers’ strategies according to their faculty.

References

Donnelly, R. 2007. Perceived impact of peer observation of teaching in higher education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(2), 117-129. Gosling, D. 2005. Peer observation of teaching. Birmingham, WM: SEDA. Knight, P., and P. Trowler. 2000. Departmental-level cultures and the improvement of learning and teaching. Studies in Higher Education 25, no. 1: 69-83. Mouraz, A., Lopes, A., & Martins Ferreira, J. M. (2013). Higher education challenges to teaching practices: perspectives drawn from a multidisciplinary peer observation of teaching program. International Journal of Advanced Research, 1(6), 377-386. North Idaho College. 2010. Teaching observation form. http://www.nic.edu/modules/images/websites/108/file/obs1.pdf Tenenberg, J. (2014). Learning through observing peers in practice. Studies in Higher Education, 1-18. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2014.950954 Vieira, F., Silva, J.L., Melo, M.C., Moreira, M.A., Oliveira, L.R., Gomes, C., Albuquerque, P.B., & Sousa., M. (2004). Transformar a pedagogia na universidade: Experiências de investigação do ensino e da aprendizagem. Braga: Universidade do Minho, CIEd. Weller, S. 2009. What does “peer” mean in teaching observation for the professional development of higher education lecturers?. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(1), 25-35.

Author Information

Ana Cristina Torres (submitting)
CIIE – Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Educativas, Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação, Universidade do Porto, Portugal
Amélia Lopes (presenting)
CIIE – Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Educativas, Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação, Universidade do Porto, Portugal
Ana Mouraz (presenting)
CIIE – Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Educativas, Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação, Universidade do Porto, Portugal
Jorge Valente
LIAAD – INESC TEC Faculdade de Economia, Universidade do Porto, Portugal

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.