Appendix 2
Summary comparison of peer observation experiences using Johns’ model of structured reflection
Perspectives on Peer
Observation
Description of the experience
Describe the experience and
what were the significant
factors?
Draw out the key aspects
including thoughts, feelings and
contextual background.
As student on PGCE
course (1999)
PO undertaken as part of a unit
for PGCE ‘Teaching your
Specialism’ with a negotiated title
for the assignment ‘The
challenges of teaching a one-
year ‘A’ level English Literature
course to adult learners’
Context: Adult Education, 2 hour
taught session, 7 students
present (out of 12).
Topic: Critical discussion of the
play Blue Remembered Hills by
Dennis Potter
Observed by PGCE tutor.
As tutor on HE
continuing education
course (2001)
PO undertaken in response to my
request as tutor on a liberal
education course provided by the
university but delivered in the
adult education centre. The
‘Introduction to English Literature’
module was an HE level course
designed to provide a pathway
for mature students into part-time
degree study. As an open access
course it attracted a wide range
of students of all ages, abilities
and backgrounds. This particular
course had two students with
mental-health issues (undeclared
to the Adult Education Centre,
but declared in confidence to
me).
As Curriculum Leader
for Creative Studies
(2002)
In 2002 I was promoted to
Curriculum Leader for Creative
Studies in the Adult Education
Service (AES), a 0.5 FTE post.
My responsibilities included the
organisation of a curriculum that
comprised a curriculum of largely
non-vocational courses and both
non-accredited and accredited.
Some of the leisure courses had
been running for years as quasi-
social groups with the same
students and a long-established
tutor.
I was responsible for twenty
hourly-paid tutors in five
community centres, co-ordinating
their timetable and the
recruitment to the creative
studies courses. In addition in
2001 mandatory peer
observation was introduced, to
be conducted by the CL on all
tutors, which included grading the
tutors as Excellent, Good,
As Course Leader MA
in Education
(2008)
Last year was the first iteration of
the MA in Education a course
that I had helped to develop and
for which I was subsequently
appointed Course Leader. The
rationale and ethos of this course
continues to be teaching
enhancement through reflective
practice and shared critical
discourse on matters concerning
teaching and learning in creative
and cultural subjects in higher
education. Participants in the first
stage of the course, the PGCHE,
are paired up with a more senior
teacher as their own mentor. Two
peer observations are required
for the summative teaching
portfolio; these are both
constructed according to
Gosling’s developmental model
and conducted by the mentor and
myself as Course Leader.
Emphasis is place on the pre-
and post-observation discussion

Reflection
What was I trying to achieve
and what are the
consequences?
Examine your motivations and
the resulting actions, the
consequences of actions for all
stakeholders (including their
possible emotional reactions).
Influencing factors
What factors such as
internal/external/knowledge
affected my decision making?
Determine what internal and
external factors have influenced
decisions and actions. Determine
knowledge that did or should
have influenced decisions and
actions.
Motivational focus was on my
requirements to meet the criteria
of PGCE course rather than the
‘A’ level students’ engagement
with the content of the session.
The criteria for the PGCE unit
were constructed in such a way
that there was little possibility of
negative impact on the ‘A’ level
learners, but meant that I over-
prepared significantly to ‘impress’
the observer.
External factors included the
wide-ability and age range of the
students on this ‘open access’
course. Not all students had
gained GSCE (or ‘O’ level
English literature).
This course was pre the shift to
AS/A2 courses and the course
was designed to provide
preparation for examination in
less than 9 months (normally a
two-year course.
During the first term of the one-
year course it became apparent
that one student in particular was
highly disruptive to the class and
I was finding the situation difficult
to deal with effectively. Much of
my time was focused on
managing his behaviour rather
than on the learning of the wider
group. I requested the help of
my Curriculum Leader to observe
a session and advise me on how
to improve my handling of the
one difficult student to the benefit
of the group.
It turned out that this student was
know to other tutors at the Adult
Education Centre and had a
reputation for causing problems
but this information had not been
passed on by the administrative
office.
I expected that my Curriculum
Leader, with over 15 years
experience teaching in Adult
Education, would be able to
provide an instant solution.
Satisfactory or Poor.
During the three years I was in
this post the AES combined with
another service as a result of two
councils merging to form unitary
status. Greater emphasis was put
on evidence of quality delivery
and the new combined service
underwent a ‘Best Value’ audit.
Following the merger of the two
Adult Education Services there
was a noticeable increase in
managerial approaches to the
development and delivery of the
curriculum. Increased minimum
numbers, greater accountability
and need for paper-based
evidence. Peer observation
clearly was part of this evaluative
and evidenced-based approach. I
was decidedly unhappy about
and the student’s reflective
review is included in the teaching
portfolio.
The MA in Education Course
Handbook states: ‘Peer
observation (PO) is well
established in HE as an excellent
way to share and explore working
practices. In general terms, PO
aims both to support and
enhance practice through offering
opportunities for shared reflection
and to stimulate motivation for
further development.’
One of the key motivations for
continuing to encourage peer
observation is the opportunity it
provides for encouraging shared
perspectives on teaching and
learning.
Although the model of PO in the
MA in Education remains largely
developmental and is facilitated
by ‘senior’ tutors, the
conversations and shared
experiences are intended to
foster a collegial approach that is
sustained beyond the life of the
course. One of the mentors from
last year commented in written
evaluation that “It was a useful
experience in that it forces you to

Alternative strategies
What other choices did I
have and what were those
consequences?
Evaluation of your actions and
consideration of other possible
choices and their respective
consequences.
The relative ‘poverty’ of the AE
sector meant lack of teaching
resources. Students had to
provide their own texts and I was
unable to afford to buy a BBC
licensed copy of the play, so we
were limited to a textual
exploration. This limited the
range of teaching strategies and
response to different learning
styles.
The observer, as well as being
my PGCE tutor, was also a
personal friend (prior to the
course) which therefore ‘blurred’
the boundaries of our roles..
It would have been more
appropriate to have remembered
that the point of the PGCE
course was for the benefit of my
learners, rather than on the
acquisition of a teaching
qualification.
I could have requested to be
observed by another PGCE tutor
which might have provided some
greater ‘objectivity’ to the PO
relationship.
When making the original
selection of texts I should have
checked whether supporting
resources were readily available.
The minimum number of students
required to run this course was 8,
set by the university. I had eight
on the course and was worried
that if I ‘lost’ a student that the
course would be closed. This had
recently happened to a history
course.
I was also concerned that other
students would complain and that
the situation would reflect
negatively on my teaching,
therefore I wanted my line-
manager to witness the problems
first-hand.
I placed too much belief in the
Curriculum Leader’s ability to
change the situation. His
presence as observer served to
calm the situation and there was
no particular incident to report.
His understandable response
was to ‘log’ the problem and offer
to sit in on future sessions if
required. For me this was highly
frustrating as there was no
observable evidence to back up
my concerns. It was subsequent
to the session that, in discussion
with other tutors, I found that this
particular student’s issues were
known about, although there was
having to rank my tutors, there
was no training offered and in
addition it meant having to visit
classes during the day and
evening within the required
deadlines in addition to my other
duties as Curriculum Leader and
within a 0.5 allocation.
I was both resentful and
confused by what I was
supposed to achieve as
observer, recognising the tension
between the quality evidence
required by management and the
collegiality that I had established
with the tutors. I felt that this
managerial approach betrayed
their trust.
I was not happy with the idea of
‘ranking’ tutors’ teaching
performance:
a) If I was not the subject
specialist, how could I truly
represent their subject
knowledge?
assess your own teaching style
and methods” and an example of
student feedback is
“Being able to discuss problems
encoutered in a unique
environment where solutions are
offered in support.”
I am conscious the approaches
and context of the MA in
Education provide a particular
environment in which peer
observation is accepted and
embraced. Even within the
collegial environment of the
course I have to convince
participants that it is not a
‘surveillance’ exercise and am
aware of the undertones of
Foucaultian
power/discourse/resistance.
I continue to have reservations
as to the managerial imperative
for requiring mandatory peer

Learning
What will change because of
this experience and how did I
feel about the experience?
How has this experience
changed my ways of
knowing?
Situate the experience and
feelings within past experience
and future practice and in
providing support to others and
considering the impact the
experience will have on
subsequent action.
Feedback given at the time
includes:
“Some of your strategies could
have been more open-ended”.
“Your attitude was fair and
positive to all learners… the
problems is perhaps that in being
understanding towards those
who deserve it…. Others may not
push themselves as hard as they
could”.
Regarding the first point, I know I
have become more aware over
the years of how Socratic
no record of his mental-health
issues held by the administrative
office. His problems were
confirmed by another tutor who
knew his family. It was from other
AE tutors that I was able to gain
strategies to deal with the
students and the solidarity that
gave me the confidence to deal
with the situation. In the event in
one session the student become
quite aggressive and other
students confronted his
behaviour. He did not return to
the course having lost the
‘credibility’ of other students.
I am now aware of the tensions
and constraints that the
Curriculum Leader was working
within: students numbers,
financial viability, ethos of liberal
education and open access,
safeguarding the reputation of
the institution. The presences of
my line manager in the session
was sufficient to improve the
behaviour of the difficult student
although it did not provide any
evidence to provide guidance on
approaches to managing the
situation.
b) What did ‘excellent’ ‘good’ and
‘satisfactory’ mean?
c) If I ranked someone as
‘excellent’ would it mean that
there was no room for
improvement in the following
year?
d) Where was the opportunity for
me to share with colleagues the
good practice observed or the
issues to be addressed?
What I did was to achieve the
minimum required for
management evidence. The
exercise proved to be a ‘tick-box’
construct which was undermined
by all curriculum areas and
abandoned the following year.
In retrospect I realise that this
managerial imposition of peer
observation was the final element
in a catalogue of increasingly
tokenistic gestures towards
improving teaching and learning
that led me to leave the AES.
The increasing accountability
challenged my belief in adult
education as providing open
opportunities for extending
learning with benefits far beyond
the mere acquisition of
qualifications, resulting in a
significant tensions between my
observation. I know that there will
be much resistance from
colleagues who have not
participated in PGCE courses
and feel that this is tangible
interference into their academic
integrity.
I learnt that the ‘observation’ part
of peer observation can only ever
be a ‘snapshot’ of teaching and is
meaningless unless set in
context. The pre- and post-
observation discussion is the
most important aspect. In the
light of this I consider ‘peer
review of teaching’ to be a more
accurate description of the
process.
In reviewing the course and
literature on peer observation
within teaching development
dialogue and questioning can
tease out knowledge and extend
self-actuated understanding.
The second point is an aspect I
continue to need to address. In
endeavouring to creative a
positive and empathetic attitude
to the students’ rationale/position
on I may not be sufficiently
critical or rigorous towards
deadlines, attendance,
punctuality or participation). In
the light of a recent reading of
Hayes, D. & Ecclestone, K.
(2008) The Dangerous Rise of
Therapeutic Education, I am far
more aware of the need to
provide a context of academic
rigour above and beyond subject
knowledge.
This incident gave me an interest
in following up issues of mental
health and education with a view
to gaining a greater
understanding and ability to deal
with similar situations in the
future. I later attended several
staff development sessions and
now have greater awareness of
issues and capabilities of
classroom and student
management.
In addition I have subsequently
followed up issues around
confidentiality and meeting the
requirements of the Special
Educational Needs and Disability
Act (SENDA) 2001 in order to
create clarity about meeting the
specific learning needs of
students and providing the
appropriate support for teaching
staff.
personal values and the actions I
was required implement.
I learnt from the experience that
trust and collegiality are more
important factors in teaching
quality enhancement than paper-
based evidence of teaching
quality. I also experienced the
detrimental effect of introducing
an initiative without providing
adequate training and guidance.
In addition I learnt to question the
premise of peer-observation as a
mechanism for enhancing
teaching quality.
programmes, I would like to
extend the opportunities for peer
observation following Bell’s
model at the University of
Woolagong, Australia. This
model creates a unit comprising
solely of four observations, each
of which are followed by a written
reflection and all four reviewed in
a summative report on the
learning gained and relating this
to more theoretical aspects of the
course.
With regard to the institution-wide
implementation for peer
observation, I agree with Gosling,
Hammersley-Fletcher that
advance training and guidance is
crucial. I also think that guidance
needs to be available to the
Heads of Schools who are
required to implement and
manage peer observation within
their courses. Examples of a
range of models and processes
should be made available in
order to provide some flexibility in
approach, a common observation
form is to be used across the
institution.
In addition, a clear process of
sharing practice and issues
needs to be established in order
that PO does not become a self-
affirming exercise with little
tangible development outcome
for the institution as a whole..