Using Most Significant Change to Evaluate Impact of the PRO-Teaching Project
The university-wide initiative PRO-Teaching explored the potential for the peer review of teaching to enhance teaching practice and the learning outcomes of students to address the perceived need to improve teaching quality (teaching for learning), provide opportunities for academic staff to improve their understanding of effective teaching (learning for teaching) and enact a scholarship of learning and teaching. This chapter appraises the project using data and applying the most significant change (MSC) technique to a new area of work. The outcomes of the project are presented, and the effectiveness of the MSC technique considered throughout. Four groups within the one university were involved in the PRO-Teaching project. These included: Arts, Education and Law (AEL); Griffith Business School (GBS); Science, Environment, Engineering and Technology (SEET); and Health (HEALTH). To support claims of excellence in learning and teaching within these groups, evidence was derived from a range of sources, as is advocated to be best practice (Nygaard & Belluigi, 2011; Shah & Nair, 2012). Alternative sources of data that complement the student evaluations for quality of courses and teaching include: peer evaluation or observation of teaching (Barnard et al., 2011; Ginns, Kitay, & Prosser, 2010; Lomas & Nicholls, 2005; Smith, 2008; Swinglehurst, Russell, & Greenhalgh, 2008); structured reflection on teaching practice (Askew, 2004; Bamber & Anderson, 2011; Biggs, 2001; Boud, 1999; Healey, 2000); and student learning outcomes. These data sources were made use of in this project.
Teaching for Learning and Learning for Teaching: Peer Review of Teaching in Higher Education
Curriculum and Pedagogy Theory and Development