Peer review of teaching should include a detailed analysis of the instructor’s plan for learning, including material selection, goals for students, methods of measuring learning, indicators of success, and use of time with students during scheduled classes, studios, and labs. There is no required process. The process can include a sharing of course materials, observation of one or more class periods, and a group or individual meeting before and/or after the observation. We suggest the following:

Getting Started: The candidate may provide course materials to the reviewer(s) in advance of meetings and observations. This may include a syllabus, examples of assignments and criteria for assessing student performance, examples of student work on the assignments (anonymized), and (for reviews that require them) teaching, research, advising, or diversity statements. The candidate and reviewer should coordinate the timing and nature of class observations. A candidate might prefer particular dates for many reasons, such as content covered, planned exercises, stage of the semester, and plans with other reviewers.

Class Observation: For the chosen day of observation, the reviewer should have the course materials needed to understand classroom activities that day, such as readings, discussion prompts, or problem sets. The candidate should decide how the reviewer observes, participates, or refrains from participating in class activities.

Meeting(s): The reviewer and candidate may meet to discuss observations and materials, including reasons for decisions about content and goals, elaboration of instructional design, and reflection on students’ achievement. This includes overall goals for the class, as well as the observed class period; how the day’s activities are designed toward those goals, and what assessments or assignments will enable the instructor to determine whether students have achieved them. Meetings may take place before and/or after class visit(s), and may be one-on-one or with reviewers collectively in a group.
Preparing Review Document: Finally, the reviewer should prepare a document that summarizes review of any supplied materials, conversations, and classroom observations. The document should speak to the  criteria, using evidence from the process above.

The order and details of the RTP criteria can inform every stage of the process sketched above; candidates may wish to structure materials, conversations, and observations to provide relevant details, while reviewers may wish to look for relevant details in materials, and structure the final document around the criteria. Owing to the great diversity of courses, each criterion may manifest differently, and may take on varying significance for each review. We provide some examples of evidence of each. Note that not every evaluation will include all of the elements below.

A pedagogy that embraces inclusive practices;

How does the faculty member support student engagement, disrupt traditional power dynamics, and demonstrate success in teaching and mentoring students, including those who are underrepresented, first generation, those with dis/abilities, and other students traditionally marginalized in the academy? Examples or evidence may include:

• Classroom climate is responsive, encourages engagement, and is accessible to all students;
• Faculty has expanded ways in which students demonstrate proficiencies, honors multiple ways of knowing, and supports diversity as an asset;
• Is transparent about pedagogical choices, and encourages and responds to student feedback;
• Creates opportunities for students to build a rapport with one another (and with faculty member);
• Faculty participates in opportunities to examine one’s own biases, social identities, and positionality;
• Teaching practices reflect ongoing professional development and consideration in the areas of equity and inclusion.

Inclusive pedagogy is learner-centered and focused on equity, with the aim of creating a learning environment in which students feel equally included. For additional examples and information, see https://cndls.georgetown.edu/inclusive-pedagogy/

Strong evidence of self-reflection, exploration, and growth as a teacher, including ongoing professional development;

How has the faculty member’s teaching changed over time? How has change been informed by evidence of student learning, pedagogical training, or student and colleague feedback? Examples or evidence may include:

• Infuses repeated courses with new pedagogical methods or structural changes to improve student learning;
• Is responsive to student feedback and regularly makes adjustments to teaching based on reflections on student learning;
• Reports improved student achievement of learning goals based on past course modifications;
• Explores how one’s views and experiences in regard to identity, power, and teaching role have shaped — both intentionally and reflexively — boundaries and interactions.
• Describes plans for future coursework in response to new insights.

Scholarly competence, including staying current in one’s field and providing opportunities for encouraging and engaging students as scholars;

In what ways has the instructor continued to build scholarly competence in one’s field in order to enhance one’s pedagogy? Examples or evidence may include:

• Revision of course materials/syllabi to reflect current trends and topics.
• Attendance of professional/teaching workshops/conferences as opportunities for scholarly growth.

In what ways has the instructor provided opportunities to encourage and engage students as scholars? Examples or evidence might include:

• Provides opportunities for students to interact with professionals and scholars in the field though Purposeful Work, Community Engaged Learning, speaker engagements, or workshops.
• Infuses courses with activities that engage students in the processes of scholarship.
• Collaborates with students in areas or activities of scholarship, and provides opportunities for students to practice presentation of their scholarship.

Evidence-based pedagogical strategies that encourage deep learning and that are reflected in one’s philosophy of teaching and learning;

How does the course material reflect the faculty member’s philosophy of teaching and learning? In what ways is the content challenging, meaningful, and aligned with course objectives and assessment? How does the faculty member use effective and/or innovative methods to engage with students and encourage deep learning? How do activities and projects provide opportunities for students to practice important skills and concepts? Examples or evidence may include:

• Coursework and presentation of material utilizes an array of communication modes and learning methods that vary according to topic. Possibilities include but are not limited to reading text, writing responses, review and summation of existing research, observation, formal analysis, field work, field trips, guest lectures, film clips, aural recordings, diagrammatic illustration, etc.
• Syllabus design shows a clear progression of concepts with one topic linking to another. Care is taken to illuminate context as well as competing ideas.
• Assignments are appropriately ambitious and have clear connections to skill sets that are supported in the course.
• Course materials are identified and gathered with support from affiliated library science staff, representing current best practices and recent scholarship.
• When possible, students are given choices within assignments so that their work reflects their individual interests.

Evaluations and assessment, both formative and summative, of student learning that align with stated course goals and objectives;

What is the evidence of student learning and engagement? How does the faculty member provide opportunities for meaningful assessment of progress? In what ways do assessments acknowledge and support student’s demonstration of knowledge and skills? What strategies are employed to make achievement equitable for all students? Examples or evidence may include:

• Multiple forms of assessment and demonstrations of competency are available to students and could include tests and quizzes, group reviews, panel discussions, oral presentations, peer review, individual consultations, and guidelines for self-assessment, to offer a few examples.
• Coursework includes varied opportunities for students to process and respond to assessments, for example with submission of revised work, assignments that encourage multiple engagements with crucial material across time, projects designed to revisit material and integrate it with a growing body of knowledge, etc.
• Course structure includes regular opportunities for students to reflect on challenges and discuss effective strategies for overcoming obstacles.
• Syllabus design allows for time to respond to assessment outcomes—both expected and unexpected—as they emerge, in order to support student success equitably and achieve stated goals and objectives.

Availability to, and effective mentoring and advising of, students;

Advising and mentoring play an important role in overall student development and faculty play an essential role in this work. Evaluation of advising and mentoring may be best achieved by conversation with the candidate and review of the written portfolio. How has the faculty member demonstrated effectiveness as a student advisor/mentor? Examples or evidence may include:

• Articulation of advising/mentoring style (e.g. developmental vs prescriptive) and advising/mentoring relationship goals in dossier materials.
• Description of the ways in which the faculty member enacts articulated principles, including time spent engaging in mentoring and advising activities.
• Additional examples or evidence that a candidate may note in dossier materials may include workshops/clinics offered in preparation for graduate school, number of reference letters written, speaking with prospective employers, numbers of advisees, logs of office hours spent advising, student advocacy, offering summer professional and research opportunities, alumni support, support for prospective students, and participation in recruitment and admission initiatives.

A classroom climate that permits an open exchange of ideas.

As instructors we need to be mindful of the social and emotional dynamics in a course as they influence learning and performance. In what ways has the instructor attuned to elements of climate in their instruction and in the classroom? Examples or evidence may include:

• The inclusion of different perspectives in course materials and/or course discussion
• Demonstrated excitement for discovery among faculty and students rather than fear, apathy, or avoidance
• Students are engaged in classroom discussions and exercises