University of Plymouth - Case study

 

 

The main aims of our pilot were to:


‘explore the efficacy of peer observations, particularly in terms of constructive feedback.’


‘make recommendations on how peer observations can be structured and used effectively on initial teacher training programmes.’


ITT Reform Pilot Proposal from University of Plymouth 2005

 

Introduction and Background to the Project

We aimed to research the advantages and disadvantages of having peers from the same teacher trainee cohort conduct teaching observations . The teacher education team at this university has been involved in using peer observations for many years and the feedback from the students is often that these are a key part of the programme. Some students go as far as to say that they have been more useful than tutor observations. We see them as an essential part of the professional development of new teachers. They are already incorporated into many CertEd/PGCE (PCET) programmes, but the amount of research on them is very limited indeed. Recent Ofsted (2003) and DfES (2003) reports have called for a higher profile for formal tutor-led observations in initial teacher training (ITT) in the post-compulsory sector, and the DfES is proposing an increase in the number of teaching observations from 2007. This was therefore seen as an opportune moment to complete this research.

 

A key member of staff from all the teacher-training teams involved in the project was released to form a research team. It was proposed that 10 staff and 40 students/trainees from a cross-section of cohorts would be involved in the project but, in the end, only 8 staff and 24 students/trainees were available. The project was managed by the Programme Director, Post-Compulsory Education and Training, Faculty of Education.

 

Conceptual Rationale

  1. Community of Practice (Lave and Wenger 1991, Lingard et al 2003). This research recognises that many seasoned teacher educators think that peer observations are powerful mechanisms for developing a ‘community of practice’ or ‘productive pedagogies’.
  2. Transformatory and democratic education (Kincheloe 2004, Giroux 2004). It is possible that peer observations could support tutor observations so as to offer a more democratic and transformatory professionalism for new teachers.
  3. Creative-interpretive model of Professionalism (Hargreaves 1994 and 2003, Gale 2001). It is possible that peer observations could form an important part of a new professional framework that looks to creative, interpretive and divergent possibilities for teaching in the new knowledge economy.
  4. Reflective Practice (Schon 1983, Bleakley 1999, Bolton 2005). This research recognises that many teacher educators work within a reflective practice model that would see peer observations as an important part of reflexive activity about teaching, not only as an observer but also as an observee. The FENTO standards and the new Lifelong Learning UK (LLUK) standards support the model of the reflective practitioner.
  5. The Learning Professional (Guile and Lucas, 1999), which reflects a new and extended concept of professionalism where further education (FE) teachers, in particular, have managerial and inter-professional roles as much as traditional teaching and learning responsibilities.

 

Aims

Our aims in this project were to:

  1. explore the efficacy of peer observations, particularly in terms of constructive feedback
  2. make recommendations on how peer observations can be structured and used effectively on ITT programmes

 

Objectives

Our objectives in this project were to:

 

  1. conduct a literature review of recent research into the efficacy of peer observations
  2. analyse the purpose of peer observations
  3. analyse the needs of the observer
  4. analyse the needs of the observee
  5. conduct a research project using qualitative research methods
  6. offer some observations on the efficacy of peer observations in the development of the Passport to Teaching award and the Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills (QTLS) award
  7. produce some policy recommendations for the university PCET team
  8. report back to a PCET staff development event (university and partner college staff).