The aim of this contribution is to present some crucial aspects that characterize teacher education with a particular focus on the development of teachers’ professional competencies through peer review.

In this contribution we present the second step of a qualitative research project referring to the Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2006; Glaser and Strauss, 1967).

To enable a real development of teachers’ competencies it is important to practice a triangulation of looks: the expert’s look and knowledge (researcher) that intertwine with those of the practitioners (teachers), assuming a double meaning, the “outside” one, linked to the concrete experience “on the field” (co-reflection with a peer), and the “inside” one, related to self-reflective and self-evaluating practices about their work (Hammersley-Fletcher and Orsmond, 2004; 2005).

This triangulation is fundamental, but it needs a common Syllabus-Framework of competencies that identifies and describes the skills and competencies that each teacher should master in order to fulfill what teaching profession requests.

The framework we have crafted according to Italian and international standards (MIUR, 2015; INDIRE, 2018; OECD, 2009; 2019; Danielson, 2007; Call, 2018), was presented as a pilot study during ECER 2019 (Network 27-Special Call) and it rapresent the first step of the whole research project.

The framework is divided in three different macro areas: 1. Area of professional competencies; 2. Area of teaching competencies; 3. Area of organizing competencies. The three areas contain 16 different competencies and 77 specific behavioral indicators (Cramerotti and Ianes, 2019).

Using this framework as a self-evaluation and co-reflecting tool with a peer is an exercise for practicing introspection, relationship building and a helpful occasion for deeply reflect on their own professional effectiveness. It is a fundamental tool for directing the peer review between teachers, too (Darling-Hammond, 2013).

Peer review of teaching is a method for evaluating a portfolio of teaching information. This portfolio generally includes curricula vitae, students’ assessment, self-evaluation, peer observation, reflective diaries and any other elements useful for this purpose (Chism, 2007).

The literature on this topic reports a distinction between two different forms of peer review: the summative assessment (more evaluative) and the formative one, that is typically oriented to exclusively improve one's own teaching processes and professional growth. It is based on the use of formative feedback, peer tutoring, coaching, mentoring and co-reflection (Bernstein, 2008).

A model based on professional development through collaborative peer-supported review, was chosen for this study because of its focus on parity, reciprocity and dialogue between the peers (Gosling, 2009).

The specific aim of this second step of the research was to investigate the teachers’ perception regarding the development of their professional competencies through peer review.

In particular, the research questions are: which teaching competencies benefit most from a peer review approach? How useful is the application of peer review in teacher training? According to teachers' professional experience, how important is to receive formative feedback from an expert colleague? How often have the teachers had the opportunity to benefit from an expert teacher’s peer review during their training/professional experiences? Which are the strengths and weaknesses of this approach?

Method The main assumptions of the epistemology of this research refer to professional knowledge as a specific knowledge, not directly derived from theoretical knowledge, but that can be expressed mainly through narrations as a generative place of relevant knowledge about practice (Tacconi, 2011). The research uses a set of methods referring to the Grounded Theory approach (Charmaz, 2006; Glaser and Strauss, 1967). Quantitative data have also been collected and analysed to decrease the risk of neglecting relevant elements. Participants This study involved two different groups (Group 1=15; Group 2=54) of Middle school teachers attending a University Specialization Course for support teachers. This sample was chosen because this course's plan includes specific activities of peer observation in the classroom and moments of co-reflection with a tutor (an expert in-service teacher). Procedures The first group attended a focus group gaimed to understand which are the teaching competencies that benefit most from a peer review approach. To facilitate the discussion and the responses’ explanation, the facilitator used PhotoVoice methodology like “ice-breaker” and “explanation-tool” (Latz, 2017). The second group focused the activities on filling out an online survey based on the research questions. Each item was evaluated through a Likert-type scale (rating from 1=not useful/important/never to 5=very useful/important/often). The last survey’s question asked the participants to write three strengths and three weaknesses of the peer review approach. Results The focus group’s output showed that the competencies that benefit most from peer review seem to be: Classroom management; Manage relationships/leadership; Collaboration/team working; Problem solving; Teaching-learning/didactical planning; Organizing educational resources; Inclusion; Students’ observation/assessment; Evaluate the effectiveness of didactical interventions. Referring to the questionnaire, it emerged that 33% of teachers find useful and 54% very useful the application of peer review; 20% find important and 76% very important to receive formative feedback from an experienced colleague. Regarding the frequency of how often the participants have directly experienced a teacher’s peer review, the results were: 11% never, 28% rarely; 26% sometimes; 22% often, 13% very often. Finally, the three strengths most reported were: 1.Sharing/comparison/co-reflection with a peer; 2.Receiving external feedback; 3.Professional growth, while the three weaknesses were: 1.Difficulty in interaction/relationship with peer; 2.Fear of being judged instead of receiving feedbacks; 3.Difficulty in getting involved/resistance to change.

These preliminary results indicate that peer review seems to be an approach that provides professional growth. Teachers can use it to acquire confidence, build experience in their work and open opportunities for professional learning in a peer-supported way. Our school contexts need teachers that act as collaborative and supportive peer for being more effective colleagues to one another (Hutchings, 1995). It is necessary to adopt critical co-reflectivity as “a habit of mind” and a “modus operandi” (Andresen, 2000) Teachers need to conduct self-evaluations and peer-evaluation, in order to use what emerges for reflecting and think critically about their daily teaching practice. Reflection is for a teacher “an intentional act of the mind” that makes teachers able to deeply investigate their own practice (Lyons, 2002). However, the answers to the questionnaire also highlight some critical and conflicting aspects of the school system. While on the one hand, the participants assign great importance and usefulness of having moments of teaching peer review, on the other hand, it is evident that this practice is still not widespread and implemented in the Italian school system. Indeed, the main part of the teachers involved in this research’s phase, reported few occasions where they were involved in a significant teaching peer review process. For this reason, the final part of the whole research project will be focused on understanding what are the fundamental and workable elements required for a concrete implementation of a useful peer review model (with a bottom-up direction from practitioners’ experience to a theoretical model, without forgetting and mapping the already existing models in literature). This objective will be pursued by conducting individual narrative interviews (Atkinson, 2002) to “novice” and “expert-in service” teachers and by doing a content analysis of teachers’ reflective diaries for in-depth probing of peer review practices.

Andresen, L.W. (2000). A Useable, Trans-Disciplinary Conception of Scholarship. Higher Education Research and Development, 19 (2), pp. 137-153. Atkinson, R. (2002). L’intervista narrativa. Milano: Raffaello Cortina. Call, K. (2018). Professional Teaching Standards: A Comparative Analysis of Their History, Implementation and Efficacy. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43 (3), pp. 93-108. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory. London: Sage Publ. Chism, N. (2007). Peer Review Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bernstein, D.J. (2008). Peer review and evaluation of the intellectual work of teaching. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 40 (2), pp. 48–51. Cramerotti S., Ianes, D. (2019). Il Progetto Expert Teacher. Definizione di un Syllabus di competenze, individuazione di profili del docente ed esiti della prima fase di sperimentazione. L'integrazione scolastica e sociale, 18 (2), pp. 167-183. Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching, Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting Teacher Evaluation Right: What Really Matters for Effectiveness and Improvement, New York: Teachers College Press. Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Gosling, D. (2009). A new approach to peer review of teaching. In Gosling, D., O’Connor, K.M. (eds.), Beyond the Peer Observation of Teaching, pp. 7–15, London: SEDA Publications. Hammersley-Fletcher, L., Orsmond, P. (2004). Evaluating our peers: Is peer observation a meaningful process? Studies in HE, 29, pp. 489–503. Hammersley-Fletcher, L., Orsmond, P. (2005). Reflecting on reflective practices within peer observation. Studies in HE, 30, pp. 213–224. Hutchings, P. (1995). From Idea to Prototype: The Peer Review of Teaching. Washington: AAHE. INDIRE (2018), Indicazioni per il bilancio iniziale delle competenze, Firenze: Indire. http://neoassunti.indire.it/2018/files/indicazioni_bilancio_iniziale.pdf Latz, A.O. (2017), Photovoice research in education and beyond: A practical guide from theory to exhibition, NY: Routledge. Lyons, N. (2002). The personal self in a public story: The portfolio presentation narrative. In N. Lyons, V. Kubler LaBoskey (Eds.) Narrative inquiry in practice: Advancing the knowledge of teaching, pp. 87-100. NY: Teachers College Press. MIUR, (2015), DM 850 “Obiettivi, modalità di valutazione del grado di raggiungimento degli stessi, attività formative e criteri per la valutazione del personale docente ed educativo in periodo di formazione e di prova”. OECD (2009), Evaluating and Rewarding the Quality of Teachers, Paris: International Practices. OECD (2019), TALIS 2018 Results: An International Perspective on Teaching and Learning, OECD Publishing. Tacconi G. (2011), La didattica al lavoro, Milano: Franco Angeli.