Peer Review and Evaluation of Teaching

Since 2016, the Office of the Provost, the University Senate and United Academics have been working together to critique and revise all aspects of teaching evaluation. For more information, please see Revising UO's Teaching Evaluations.

UO Senate legislation of 1996 and the 2015-2018 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the university and United Academics require periodic peer review of teaching for all faculty. The legislation also established criteria and procedures for conducting these reviews. These procedures are equally relevant to the peer review of teaching for tenure-related faculty and instructional non-tenure-track faculty. 

Peer review of teaching at the University of Oregon is the written assessment by a faculty peer of how an instructor enacts professional, inclusive, engaged, and research-informed teaching (and other unit standards that are part of the unit’s Teaching Evaluation Rubric) based on, for example, a class observation, contextual materials like the syllabus and Canvas site, a conversation between the instructor and the reviewer, and an instructor’s answer to standard questions devised by the unit.

Evaluation of teaching is done for promotion and/or tenure, contract renewal or merit raises, and involves multiple windows into a faculty member’s teaching including: peer review, student feedback and self-assessment via narratives or Instructor Reflection.

Departments are urged to adopt procedures that protect both the formative and summative nature of the separate peer review and evaluation of teaching processes.

Recordkeeping

  • A copy of the written peer review should be provided to the faculty being reviewed prior to placement in their personnel file.
  • The faculty being reviewed should be able to provide corrections to any factual errors in the written peer review and be provided the opportunity to acknowledge with their signature that they have read the review. Then, one copy of the written peer review, signed and dated by the reviewer shall be placed in the permanent personnel file of the faculty being reviewed. 
  • The faculty being reviewed may submit a response to the written peer review to also be placed in their permanent personnel file.
  • All written peer reviews (and any responses) shall be included in the evaluation of a faculty member’s teaching for the purpose of contract renewal, promotion and/or tenure, and are to be carefully reviewed at the department and school/college level. 

Frequency of Peer Review of Teaching

  • Pro Tempore: Peer teaching reviews may be conducted for pro tempore faculty at the unit’s discretion when warranted; e.g. periodically when the position is ongoing, when a longer-term appointment is under consideration, or when there are concerns.
  • Career Instructional Faculty: one peer review of teaching per review period.
  • Assistant Professor: one peer review before the first mid-term review, and at least two peer reviews during the three years preceding the faculty member’s tenure review. Three peer reviews are necessary for the promotion and tenure dossier. 
  • Associate Professor: at least one every other year. Three peer reviews are necessary for the promotion to full dossier.
  • Professor: one every three years. NB: two peer reviews are necessary for 6th-year post-tenure review. 

Tenure-Track Faculty Peer Review of Teaching and Years of Credit

  • Zero years of credit: gather materials in year five, three UO peer reviews.
  • One year of credit: gather materials in year four, three UO peer reviews.
  • Two years of credit: gather materials in year three, three UO peer reviews.
  • Three years of credit: gather materials in year two, two UO peer reviews and one prior peer review.
  • Four years of credit: gather materials in year one, one UO peer review (preferably two), two prior peer reviews if possible.
  • Five years of credit: gather materials in fall of year six, one UO peer review if possible, two prior peer reviews if possible.
  • Accelerated review: gather materials in fall of year six, one UO peer review if possible, two prior peer reviews if possible.
  • Expedited review: gather materials prior to beginning at UO (and with offer letter deadlines in mind). Peer reviews are not specified in the expedited review policy.

Best Practices

The Teaching Engagement Program outlines best practices in peer review of teaching, and offers a number of example tools, procedures, and documents to support units.