This document discusses peer review processes for students and community faculty. It begins by outlining objectives to examine features of useful peer review, and how it can be used with students and faculty. Key considerations for planning peer review are discussed, such as the types of information desired, impediments, and whether the goal is formative or summative. Criteria for peer review should be behavior-focused, observable, and based on clear expectations. Specific, descriptive feedback is important. The document provides examples of effective peer review processes when used with students or community faculty, emphasizing collaboration in creating the review process. Potential issues like bullying or sham peer reviews are also addressed.

1. Peer
Review
D. Bonnycastle
College of Medicine
Regina General Hospital
November, 2010

2. Prerequisite Knowledge
Perspective creates world view
http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/pave.htm

3. Perspective Exercise
• Look at a point on the ceiling
• Point at it and draw a clockwise circle
around it with you finger
• Continue to circle clockwise but slowly bring
your hand down to waist level
• What direction is your finger turning?
-Thiagi

4. Objectives
Examine the features of
a useful peer review process
Identify how peer review can
be used with students
Identify how peer review can
be used with community faculty

5. Planning A Useful Peer Review Process
1. What kinds of information would you like to
get from a peer review process of students?
2. What kinds of information would you like to
get from a peer review process of community
faculty?
3. What are the major impediments to
implementing a peer review process?

6. Formative vs. Summative?
• How can peer review improve
someone’s skills in X? What role
does reflection on results play?
• How can peer review be used to
assess someone for promotion,
final grades, or competency.

7. Criteria
Behaviour focus
• Observable
• Based on clear expectations
 objectives for students
 type of teaching for faculty
• Beware of assumptions about
motivation
• Focus on possible change?

8. Specific Feedback???
Good job
Enjoyed working
with you
Great
Unprofessional
Disruptive
Uncooperative
Needs work
Doesn’t tell you
what to continue
doing
Doesn’t tell you
what to start doing
Criteria

9. Specific Feedback???
Description of
positive behaviour
to continue doing
Description of
problem behaviour
to change
Researched
topic thoroughly
Created
interactive
activities
Late 15+ min 5X
Used “read” and
“learn” in
objective
Criteria

10. Used with students
• Create a rubric
• Explain the rubric ahead of time
• Include clear behaviours that
result in each score
• Beware of bullying
http://www.teachervision.fen.com/teaching-
methods-and-management/rubrics/

11. Peer Review as bullying
• Focus on the person as
outsider, rather than on
behaviour
• Derisive and humiliating
statements about the person
• Statements that encourage
others to express anger at
person
• Mobbing

12. Formative with community faculty
Develop a sense of their perspective ahead of
time through conversation
• What do you like about teaching?
• What is your favourite technique?
• Why do you want feedback?
• What would you like feedback on?
• What criteria should we use?
• What are the objectives for your course/session?

13. Create the Process Together
• What behaviours will I be watching for? (No
more than 10 in an hour)
• How do I best track them?
– checklist
– commentary
• How will I provide the report?
– will there be an opportunity for faculty to respond?
• Who will the report go to?

14. Tactics Characteristic of Sham
Peer Review
• Secret investigation
• Guilty Until Proven Innocent
• Selection of only negative
examples
• Misrepresented “standards”
• False claims
http://www.jpands.org/vol14no3/huntoon.pdf
http://hollandhart.typepad.com/healthcare/2006/05/twelve_signs_of.html#more
http://www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/checklist.htm

15. Thank You