Peer Review and Evaluation of Teaching

The Office of the Provost and the University Senate are currently 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 and evaluation of teaching for all faculty. The legislation also established criteria and procedures for conducting these reviews and evaluations. These criteria and procedures are equally relevant to the peer review and evaluation of teaching for tenure-related faculty and instructional non-tenure-track faculty. 

Peer review of teaching is the written assessment of a class observation and the contextual material informing that observation (e.g., syllabus, faculty member’s self-assessment, other framing information provided by the faculty member). Peer reviews are an opportunity to support and improve faculty teaching efforts, and to assess how individual teaching choices reflect the department’s curriculum and goals.

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 evaluation and self-assessment, narratives or inventories.

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


  • 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, ideally, 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

  • Each career non-tenure-track instructional faculty member is expected to undergo at least one peer review of teaching per contract period. 
  • Each untenured tenure-track faculty member must have at least one peer review before the mid-term review, which must be included in the faculty member’s file and contribute to the overall evaluation of teaching for the mid-term review.
  • Each tenure-track faculty member must have at least one peer review during each of the three years preceding the faculty member’s promotion and tenure review. 
  • Each tenured faculty member at the rank of associate professor must have at least one peer review every other year until promotion to full professor.
  • Each tenured faculty member at the rank of full professor must have at least one peer review every three years. 

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.