Article
Implementing
the Critical Friend Method for Peer Feedback among Teaching Librarians in an
Academic Setting
Yvonne
Hultman Özek
Senior
Librarian
Library
& ICT Unit
Faculty
of Medicine
Lund
University, Lund, Sweden
Email:
Yvonne.Hultman_Ozek@med.lu.se
Gudrun
Edgren
Professor
Centre
for Teaching & Learning
Faculty
of Medicine
Lund
University,� Lund,
Sweden
Email: Gudrun.Edgren@med.lu.se
Katarina Jandér
Librarian
Library
& ICT Unit
Faculty
of Medicine,
Lund
University, Lund, Sweden
Email:
Katarina.Jander@med.lu.se
Received: 9 Mar. 2012������������������������������������������������������������������ Accepted: 4 Nov. 2012
�2012 Özek, Edgren,
and Jandér. This is an
Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share
Alike License 2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ca/), which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
Abstract
Objective – The role of
the academic librarian has become increasingly educative in nature. In this study,
the critical friend method was introduced among teaching librarians in an
academic setting of medicine and health sciences to ascertain whether this
approach could be implemented for feedback on teaching of these librarians as
part of their professional development.
Methods
–
We used a single intrinsic case study. Seven teaching librarians and one
educator from the faculty of medicine participated, and they all provided and
received feedback. These eight teachers worked in pairs, and each of them gave
at least one lecture or seminar during the study period. The performance of one
teacher and the associated classroom activities were observed by the critical
friend and then evaluated and discussed. The outcome and effects of critical
friendship were assessed by use of a questionnaire.�
Results – The present
results suggest that use of the critical friend method among teaching academic
librarians can have a positive impact by achieving the following: strengthening
shared values concerning teaching issues; promoting self-reflection, which can
improve teaching; facilitating communication with colleagues; and reducing the
sense of "loneliness" in teaching. This conclusion is also supported by the
findings of previous studies.
Conclusion – The
critical friend method described in this study can easily be implemented and
developed among teaching librarians, provided that there is support from the
organization. This will benefit the individual teaching librarian, as well as
the organization at large.������
The
role of the academic librarian has changed rapidly over the past decade. An
important issue in this context is that these professionals are now being
required to play an increasingly educative role in institutions of higher
education. This can be described as a transition from being in charge of
bibliographic instruction and sessions aimed at teaching skills in locating
resources (expert-oriented tasks) to being educators in information retrieval
and reference management with a context-based, learner-centred focus.
Information literacy as a subject has gradually become embedded in the
curricula of undergraduate, masters, and postgraduate programmes, as well as in
the continuing work of researchers. Consequently, teaching in the area of
information literacy today is associated with a context-based situation in the
higher education environment (Biggs &Tang, 2007).
Handal (1999) has pointed out that
university lecturers have extensive expertise in their own fields, but they are
not always trained as professional teachers. He suggests that applying the
critical friend method during peer observation is one of many approaches that
can improve teaching skills among faculty. A similar situation exists for
professional librarians, who do not undergo teacher training, because their
education is focused on library and information science. Thus the evolving
complex role of the academic librarian also requires new competencies and
should include continued professional development in teaching and learning on
the same level as that provided to the teaching faculty at the institution. The
recent shift towards learning-centred teaching in higher education has prompted
universities in Sweden to introduce incentives to encourage teaching staff to
improve and raise their awareness of their teaching skills. These incentives
include: formal teaching awards nominated by students or colleagues, nomination
to academies of educators, and teaching portfolios for documentation and
reflection on one�s own teaching skills. It is equally important for the
academic librarian to understand and use learning theories, and to become
engaged in the teaching role (Giustini, 2008, 2009; Handal, 1999; Peacock 2001). In sum, fundamental
requirements for academic librarians as teachers include having knowledge of
theories and different learning styles, as well as the ability to communicate
with academics (Peacock, 2001). With the emergence of this new role,
redefinitions of the academic librarian have been offered, which emphasize that
it is essential both to take issues further in teaching and learning, and to
encourage a culture of reflective practice as a teacher (Lupton, 2002). For
example, by attending faculty development courses related to teaching in higher
education, an academic librarian will receive an orientation in learning
theories in a wider context and will also have the opportunity to create equal
partnerships with faculty members (Peacock, 2001). Peer feedback for improving teaching skills for professional development
is equally essential in the academic librarian�s teaching role (Castle, 2009; Norbury 2001; Samson & McCrea, 2008; Snavely & Dewald, 2011).
The
critical friend method, which entails being a friend as well as having one, has
proven to be a powerful tool to facilitate the process of continuous
improvement in teaching (Baskerville & Goldblatt,
2009; Costa & Kallick, 1993; Dahlgren et al.,
2006; Handal, 1999).�
This method involves observing and giving friendly criticism on a
colleague�s teaching, and it is based on integrity and mutual trust between
colleagues (Costa & Kallick, 1993; Dahlgren et
al., 2006; Handal, 1999; O’Keefe, Lecouteur,
Miller, & McGowan, 2009). This makes it possible to gain immediate access
to a colleague�s expertise and feedback, which can facilitate continued
professional development. For the academic librarian as a teacher, the critical
friend method can aid self-reflection and help improve teaching skills.
The
aim of this study was to implement the critical friend method and explore the
perceptions of the participants in an academic library setting. Other methods
of peer review are not explored, as the intention of the research was not to
compare the various methods, but instead to implement the critical friend
method.
Literature
Review
In
the literature search, information was retrieved from these databases: Web of
Science (SCI, SSCI), ERIC, Scopus, PubMed, Cinahl, LISTA, and SocIndex. The search
engine Google Scholar was also used. The years 1980 to 2010 were included in
the search strategies, and the following keywords were employed: critical
friend, critical friendship, peer observation, academic librarians,
professional development, teaching librarians, constructive criticism,
structured feedback, and self-assessment. When searching on terms related to
"critical friend," we also excluded terms related to "academic librarian" in
order to limit the results to information focused on professional development
in teaching. Use of the keywords "critical friend" and "peer observation"
frequently identified articles in the school improvement literature, higher
education, and more recently in the LIS literature. The search term "critical
friend" was extended to also encompass "peer observation," because it seems
that these two terms are used interchangeably in the literature. Citation
tracking in Web of Science and Scopus was performed for some key articles on
the topic "critical friend." Searching with the Google Scholar engine also
identified papers presented at conferences. A final literature search for 2011
was performed.
The
literature thus far has indicated that implementation of the critical friend
method in various projects involving teachers has mainly yielded positive
results that have contributed to
effective faculty development. Most studies used qualitative methodology; some
were quantitative. We found examples of beneficial outcomes for the individual
teacher, including increased confidence, confirmation of good practice, a sense
of belonging to a collegial community, and breaking the sense of isolation in
teaching assignments (Dahlgren et al., 2006; O’Keefe et al., 2009). It has also
been observed that more extensive improvement of teaching methods in the
educational organization has led to increased networking and team building that
creates a trusting working environment (Rosario, Lourdes, & De Juana,
2003). In the research report of a school reform project, Towndrow
(2008) states that colleagues alone could help each other by using their
reflective voices as a critical lens, concluding that "this strategic move has
the power to put teachers, not policy makers, in the driving seat of
educational transformation" (p. 919).� An
early study (Achinstein & Meyer, 1997), on the
other hand, demonstrated the difficulty of combining criticism with friendship,
as tension arose between participants of the study. The study ran for three
years and participation was voluntary. The authors state in their conclusion
that the ability to critically challenge teacher colleagues comes with time and
practice.
Thus,
considering the different uses of the critical friend method, it is clear that
this approach has mainly provided positive outcomes, despite the use of
variables reflecting disparate roles and purposes of the critical friend at the
various levels of educational organizations. However, the positive outcomes in
the literature may be due to publication bias, as negative results are rarely
published. Despite these positive results, it has also been pointed out that
formalizing and regulating a critical friendship can have a negative impact if
"critical friend" is used as a concept in official documents, thereby
distorting the original meaning (Swaffield, 2007).
However, it is not within the scope of this study to analyse the suitability of
using the critical friendship method. Nevertheless, some clarification is
needed, and hence these variables are discussed briefly below in the sections
concerning the definition of critical friendship.
The
"Friend" in Critical Friendship
As
mentioned in the introduction, there are various contexts and formats in which
the critical friendship approach has been implemented in the educational
settings of schools and universities. But what is a critical friend, and how
can we explain critical friendship to create a universal definition for this
method? The literature on critical friendship often quotes this statement made
by Costa and Kallick (1993): "a trusted person who
asks provocative questions, provides data to be examined through another lens,
and offers critiques of a person�s work as a friend" (p. 50). The term
"critical friend" has been discussed further by researchers, which has resulted
in a variety of definitions or statements. According to Swaffield
(2007), critical friend refers to a supportive yet challenging relationship
between professionals. Furthermore, the relationship between critical friends
is one that encourages and cultivates constructive critique. The main
conditions must exist; besides trust and commitment, it is necessary to have
knowledge of the context of the teaching environment. For example, considering
school improvement, Swaffield and MacBeath
(2005) disapprove of large-scale use of critical friendship in the
self-evaluation and policy-making of schools, and they have raised the question
of whether "it may be difficult for the [consultant or leader] to stray too far
from policy agendas and political objectives. The freedom to be intellectually subversive
and challenging of received wisdom lies close to the heart of the critical
friend�s value and purpose" (p. 251). Thus Swaffield
(2007) warns that the lack of knowledge of the local settings by outside
experts can have negative consequences, because the critical friend model will
become distorted and lose its original powerful form of support. In a research
action study by Baskerville and Goldblatt, a critical
friend has� been defined "as a capable
reflective practitioner � who establishes safe ways of working and negotiates
shared understandings to support and challenge a colleague in the
de-privatising of their practice" (2009, p. 218). These studies indicate that
implementing a more formalized version of the critical friend concept can
constitute one of many assessment methods when performed as part of career
steps or tenure track (summative purposes). Therefore, using the critical
friend method for formal peer observation (summative purposes) rather than for
individual professional development (formative purposes) in a non-hierarchical
setting can distort the original meaning of having a critical friend for
feedback. Thus, the critical friend concept should not be confused with peer
review of teaching for a formal reward system (summative purposes). Biggs and
Tang (2007) also stress that peer review of teaching � having a critical friend
� should be for formative purposes for reflection and improvement, and should
be separated from summative assessment.
In
this regard, we can ask what is the meaning and definition of �friend� in
critical friendship, if it is used in connection with broader goals rather than
the individual�s professional and personal development towards becoming a
reflective teacher. Thus, it has been pointed out that we need to extend our
understanding of the role of the critical friend, because little research has
been done in this area (Swaffield, 2004). Gibbs and Angelides (2008), shed some light
on the term �friendship� within the role and context of the critical friend and
take Swaffield�s criticism further for clarification.
In their extensive conceptual analysis, Gibbs and Angelides
conclude that "critical friends do not report their judgements to others" (p.
223) and then leave.� They state that
"critical friends visiting schools, giving feedback and then leaving can hardly
be considered friendship, although it might well be critical!" (p. 223),
indicating that using �friendship� to describe an evaluating process made by
external experts (summative purposes) is not justified here. In short, these
authors aim to give a more precise definition of �friendship.� They base their
discussion on historical writings such as those of Aristotle, Immanuel Kant,
Francis Bacon, and others in an attempt to depict the central characteristics of
relationships between friends, including mutuality, awareness of care,
engagement, and trust. Thus, Gibbs and Angelides
argue that the notion of trust is an essential aspect of critical friendship
that introduces "the competence of trust [which] functions as a means to an end
[and] is the adequate fulfilment of commitments and functions at the centre of
social structures. This is the trust in critical friends" (p.
219).
The
"Critical" in Critical Friendship
Having
established a definition of the friend in a critical friendship, we turn our
attention to the built-in force in the critical friendship � the constructive
criticism � that aids the development and improvement needed to become a
reflective teacher. Handal (1999) has pointed out
that, in academia and research, advancement of knowledge requires the critical
tradition of quality assurance, including aspects such as the peer-review
process for publication, the thesis defence, and journal clubs. Here, the
tradition of constructive criticism is an accepted and essential activity to
ensure the progression of research. In contrast, a similar tradition of
collegial feedback and constructive criticism in teaching is not as prevalent
in the higher education environment. The literature on assessment and evaluation
has shown that teaching can be a lonely endeavour, and at the same time there
are thresholds that must be crossed before allowing a peer to enter the sphere
of teaching to make observations (Dahlgren et al., 2006; Handal,
1999). Feedback on teaching is gained primarily through evaluations provided by
course participants (Handal, 1999), but relying
solely on such assessments can have a built-in bias and may not deliver
responses regarding feedback from all aspects of the teaching and learning
situation (O’Keefe et al., 2009; Wellein, Ragucci, & Lapointe, 2009).
Furthermore, self-assessment as a complementary tool for reflection and
improvement may not be effective enough, if it is performed in isolation and
without communication. Investigations of feedback and self-assessment have
suggested that a more successful approach is to recognize that there is a need
for an external source in goal-setting and continuous structured feedback on
the learner�s specific goals for improvement (Archer, 2010; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Kevin & Regehr,
2005).
So
the question is: how can learning aimed at improving teaching skills be
accomplished? To fill the void of managing reflection in isolation, the
teaching community in higher education has used the critical friendship method
for some time as a complementary tool in the regular evaluations and
assessments that are conducted to improve teaching methods and skills (Wellein et al., 2009). It has been shown that the built-in
structured feedback in the context of critical friendship is essential for
reflective thinking in the professional development of the individual.
Moreover, as Gibbs and Angelides (2008) argue, it is
the trust in the relationship that renders the giving and taking of criticism
effective. In critical friendship, once mutual trust and engagement have been
established, the next step is to provide and receive structured feedback, and
then use the benefits attained to develop teaching.
However,
structured feedback in constructive criticism can have different approaches in
this communication process and may or may not be as helpful as expected. In an
extensive literature review on assessment for learning, Wiliam
(2011) asserted that "information does not become feedback unless it is
provided with a system that can use that information to affect future
performance" (p. 4). This statement is derived from a conceptual analysis study
in which Hattie and Timperley (2007) describe the
benefits of feedback as a tool and present a model based on three questions:
What are the goals? What progress is being made towards the goals? What
activities are needed to progress?� After
those questions are answered, this model also discriminates between four
different levels of feedback: the task, the processing, the regulatory level,
and the self level. Hattie and Timperley
suggest that feedback seems to be most effective when it provides cues to
directions on the processing level, and this in turn appears to help the
receiver to pursue more challenging goals. They also conclude that giving
feedback as "praise" or by offering comments like "that was good" is
ineffective for professional improvement and development since comments made by
participants in various studies remained on a general level that gave no
specific cues about how to handle the task (i.e., the self
level of giving feedback). General statements about "self" may even lead
to negative effects such as insecurity. Furthermore, Wiliam
(2011) has stated that feedback must do more than simply provide information:
it must be domain-specific, which means that the information given must be
generated within a particular system and for a particular purpose. In this
context, information should alter the gap between the feedback and the goals
set by the learner. When the gap is closed, a learning process directed towards
improvement and reflection is begun, as has also been outlined in a review
article by Norcini (2010) and in a critique of the
literature by Archer (2010).
To
summarize, in contrast to self-assessment and evaluation by course
participants, the essence of critical friendship consists of structured
feedback and constructive criticism that can encourage improvement and
self-reflection. This means that having a critical friend involves doing the
following in order to become a reflective teacher: setting goals, embracing the
challenge of receiving feedback from a trusted colleague, and reflecting on the
goals that have been set and the work that is intended to achieve improvement (Handal, 1999; Towndrow, 2008).
Our
study focused on a critical friend who is an equal in a non-hierarchal setting
for formative purposes only, and who shares the context and values with the one
to be "criticized" and does not report observations to authorities or any
official records, nor to other people (formative purposes).
The
next section explains the process and outcomes of critical friendship applied
in the context of the teaching environment of academic librarians. The critical
friendship method used in this study emanated from the fundamental principles
of mutual trust, engagement, and commitment in a non-hierarchal setting (Costa
& Kallick, 1993; Dahlgren et al., 2006; Handal, 1999).
Methods
Context
Our
chosen method was a single, intrinsic case study (Stake, 1995). A case study is
suitable when contemporary events are the focus and behavioural events are not
controlled (Yin, 2009). The project was carried out within the Library Unit of
the Faculty of Medicine at Lund University in Sweden, which is a medium-sized
integrated support and service resource centre for students, researchers, and
faculty members. The Library Unit has facilities in two cities, Lund and Malm�,
and it serves 2,500 full-time students enrolled in nine undergraduate degree
programmes in medicine and health sciences, as well as 1,000 post-graduate
students and 1,200 employees. Some of the education provided by the Faculty of
Medicine Library Unit is conducted at the regional Sk�ne
University Hospital. At the time this study was carried out, the Library Unit
had 11 librarians who were in charge of operating the educational and research
resource centres of the Faculty of Medicine in both cities, and 4 of the 11
also served as contact librarians for all the educational programmes, including
PhD studies. In Swedish universities, librarians do not belong to the academic
staff, but rather to administrative staff, and their positions are not tenured
but permanent.� Thus formative assessment
is most appropriate for the teaching librarians. Teaching performed by the
librarians at that time consisted primarily of seminars and workshops, all
related to information literacy and scientific communication.
������
In
2002, the management of the Library Unit implemented a professional development
policy for the staff with the aim of requiring teaching librarians to at least
take the basic course, "Introduction to Teaching and Learning in Higher
Education," which is offered by the Centre for Teaching and Learning at the
Faculty of Medicine. Giving and taking feedback are topics included in the
course. The course program on teaching methods and learning is also part of the
required continued education for faculty development. The idea of also making
this course mandatory for teaching librarians was a first step in introducing
these professionals to the teaching and learning methods and values applied in
the parent institution. Participation in such courses is one of many strategies
that are intended to maintain continued professional development in teaching
and learning issues and to improve the teaching methods.
The
Case Study
In
2009, a project using the critical friend method was initiated at the Library
Unit. The Centre for Teaching and Learning was contacted for support, and the
project was started at the beginning of the academic year and continued for 10
months. Participation was voluntary, and eight librarians signed up, none of
whom had any previous experience in using the critical friendship method. The
peer observation was to be used for formative purposes only. The participants
had been asked to sign up in pairs if possible, but they did not. Accordingly,
they were assigned to pairs by the teacher from the Centre for Teaching and
Learning. Participants with similar prior experience and who had previously
worked together and knew each other were assigned to the same pair.
The
first group meeting took place in a neutral location, and the teacher from the
Centre for Teaching and Learning had prepared readings and activities to be
done. It was considered important to create a climate of trust. The intention
was to establish a common understanding of the concept of critical friend and
to discuss the participants� expectations and perceptions of potential
difficulties that could emerge. After the first meeting, it was up to the members
of the individual critical friend pairs to decide how to observe each other�s
teaching and how to give feedback. This opportunity to decide feedback criteria
within the pairs was chosen since teaching forms could vary between giving
lectures, facilitating group work, and leading seminars. To guide the process,
the participants could use articles published by Handal
(1999) and Dahlgren et al. (2006) and a critical friend protocol including an
extensive collection of different questions for the peer observation. One
participant dropped out at an early stage due to limited teaching during the
project time and difficulty finding the time to participate. The teacher from
the Centre for Teaching and Learning thus entered the project as a participant,
instead of being just an observer as had been planned. Two additional meetings
were held during the project period: one of these, the second meeting, was
conducted after five months to present a report from the critical friend pairs
and to discuss difficulties that had been experienced; the other (third)
meeting took place at the end of the project and concerned the final reports
from each pair. After the last meeting, a questionnaire (see Appendix) with
seven open-ended questions was distributed to the participants. Two of the
authors (GE and KJ) worked independently to evaluate the questionnaire
responses by content analysis (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004). An overview of the steps in the project is
illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure
1
Overview
of the project steps
Results
The
project was completed by all eight participants (after replacement of one
initial drop-out). After two preparatory meetings, at the third and final
meeting, all pairs were to report what they had done and how they perceived the
critical friend process and the results. The statements made at this meeting
clearly showed that the participants had taken the opportunity to tailor the
process to suit their individual needs. Overall, it seemed that their
impressions of critical friendship were positive, but there were negative
impressions as well. Some participants found it difficult to find the time for
discussions and agreements, and in particular to be
present at scheduled teaching. Some also would have preferred to select their
own partner.
After
the final meeting, all eight participants were asked to complete a
questionnaire consisting of open-ended items, and seven responded. The
participants were guaranteed confidentiality, but in such a small group they
were not anonymous to the authors. Four categories emerged from the
descriptions of their critical friend experiences, and we chose to call these
"peer learning," "change and innovation," "professional development," and "prerequisites"
(Table 1).
Table
1
Categories
and Codes in the Answers to the Open-ended Items in the Questionnaire
Peer learning |
Change/Innovation |
Professional development |
Prerequisites |
Informal communication about teaching |
New perspectives |
Teaching partnership |
Mutual trust |
Exchange of ideas and experiences |
Creative discussions |
Confidence building |
Open-mindedness |
Learning from observing and from being observed |
Improvement of teaching |
Librarian as a teacher |
Willingness to change |
New interaction with colleagues on an informal, �friendlier� basis |
|
Utilize and apply colleagues� experiences and knowledge |
Time and supportive management |
Reduced feeling of loneliness |
|
Reflection |
|
Peer
Learning
The
participants discovered new ways of learning from the following: receiving
feedback, observing someone else teaching, and giving feedback. Several pointed
out that discussions with a colleague in an informal
setting were important for learning.
"We
had some very fruitful discussions when meeting afterwards for penetrating the
structured evaluation outcome."
Learning
included increased awareness of positive aspects of their teaching, as well as
things that could be improved. In particular, the participants stressed the
realization of both their own strengths and those of the colleagues they were
paired with.
"It was also very nice and uplifting
getting constructive feedback on my work from a peer, particularly when the
feedback highlighted things that I previously was unaware of."
An
important issue here was that learning with a partner reduced the feeling of
being alone in the teaching situation.
"Having
a critical friend gave me a sense of not being entirely on my own."
Change
and Innovation
Several
participants mentioned that observing and being observed by a colleague had
given them the opportunity to see things from a new perspective.
"It was very interesting to observe
the participants from behind and see what they were doing at different stages
of the lesson."
In
the discussions that took place both before and after teaching sessions, the
participants had opportunities to exchange knowledge and ideas about teaching.
"Very fruitful as a forum for exchange of ideas
and 'tips and tricks.'"
Several
participants were convinced that the critical friend project had had immediate
outcomes in improved teaching.
"An
immediate impact of my teaching has been an improved 'student focus.'"
"The
students have benefited from the project, though in an indirect way."
Professional
Development
The
project gave the participants opportunities to develop as professionals, not
only through the activities in the critical friend pairs, but also as a result
of the two� project report meetings, once
an open climate had been established at the first meeting.
"The
meetings on two occasions with the whole group involved in the project gave us
a sense of coming closer together and may be a suitable forum for educational
matters in the future."
A
confirmation of the value of the new role of academic librarians as teachers
was also seen as an outcome of the project.
"It
has brought us together to reinforce our identity as teachers."
The
realization that it is possible to learn from colleagues can reinforce the
development of the professional community.
"CF
can open up new perspectives and identify 'hidden jewels' in the other person�s
teaching."
Some
of the participants pointed out that an increased awareness of personal
strengths can augment professional development.
"I
became more confident in what I was doing."
An
important aspect of professional development is reflection, and this was
mentioned by some of the participants.
"Gives you opportunity to reflect on your own
teaching."
Prerequisites
The
advice or recommendations that emerged from the informants� responses indicated
that the prerequisites for a successful critical friend process include aspects
such as the importance of mutual trust and respect between the members of the
friend pair.
"You
must have an open mind, be yourself, humble and open."
An
attitude of openness and willingness to change is also a prerequisite for the
success of a critical friend project.
The
external conditions mentioned most often concerned having the following: the
time and the opportunity to engage in the project; management that was
explicitly supportive and willing to understand the purpose in a broader
perspective and context; the ability to recognize the positive contribution of
professional improvement to the organization at large.
�������������� �
"Calculate
the time carefully - it takes more
time than you might think."
We
also found that the working process differed among the pairs. Some worked in a
more structured manner, using a common pre-formed evaluation protocol and
pre-meetings before each teaching session, whereas others worked in an
unstructured fashion without prior discussion about what to evaluate or to
select any common evaluation criteria.
The
most important thing that people learned about their own teaching was an
improved awareness of their own actions (such as moving around, turning away,
or not speaking loudly enough), and of what their students did during teaching
and how easily they became distracted. They also learned to make more use of
peer learning for the students by facilitating the exchange of prior knowledge
and experiences between them.
The
participants who responded to the questionnaire were favourable to giving and
receiving structured feedback in peer observations performed with a colleague.
One participant stressed that getting structured feedback was more useful than
hearing the general statement "that was good." This agrees with results
reported in a meta-analysis by Hattie and Timperley
(2007), indicating that professional development may be promoted by feedback
given on the task level, that is, during setting up of goals, identifying
needs, and reflecting on the challenge. Some participants experienced giving
feedback as more of a challenge than they had expected.
Another
positive perception was that the project decreased the feeling of being alone
in the teaching situation, and this beneficial outcome has also been
highlighted in previous peer observation projects (Baskerville & Goldblatt, 2009; Costa & Kallick,
1993; Dahlgren et al., 2006; Handal, 1999). Using a
critical friend can fill the void when results of course assessment are seldom
or never delivered to the teaching librarian, a situation that often arises
when teaching in undergraduate programmes because they are not always
compulsory. Furthermore, in independent workshops and courses given for faculty
members, whether or not course assessments are performed depends on how the
teacher perceives the value of such evaluation. In cases like that, it appears
that the critical friend method can be a useful way to fill the gap.
One
of the outcomes of the present critical friend project suggests that this
method has strengthened a number of values shared by the teaching librarians,
such as self-reflection and learning, as well as better communication with
colleagues. The respondents pointed out that such an undertaking takes time
(like any professional development) and that management should understand the
value of the activity and allow it to take the time that is needed.
Nonetheless, even though the participants had allocated time for the activity,
they still had to consider schedules and other tasks concurrently and this was
often perceived as a distraction. Thus it is clear that shared values that
include a clear vision aligned with the organizational values and beliefs are
needed to support and allow manifestation of an activity that is intended to
promote learning and professional development through teamwork (Senge, 2006).�
The
strengths of our study include the fact that we searched the literature for
possibilities of professional development of academic librarians as teachers,
and then we applied our findings in a realistic setting with no special
resources allocated, except for the teacher from the Centre for Teaching and
Learning. Another advantage was the high degree of completion of the project,
with only one drop-out at an early stage. Hattie (2009) has identified themes
that are important for professional development of teachers that can have an
effect on the outcomes of students. We applied most of those themes in our
intervention: involvement of an external expert; engagement; teachers talking
to teachers; and opportunities to challenge pre-existing beliefs about
learning.
The
weaknesses of our investigation were the low number of participants, the lack
of anonymity, and the fact that participation was voluntary. Some participants
might thus have been unwilling to report negative perceptions. It is plausible
that individuals who take part voluntarily in a project will be inclined to
perceive outcomes as positive. Another limitation was that the authors were
also participants, and so other participants may have been less inclined to
state negative feelings and outcomes. However, Hattie (2009) has reported that
voluntary involvement did not affect the outcomes of various� studies described in the literature.
Another limitation of the current work was that the only outcomes considered
were the perceptions of the participants; we were not able to study actual
results as improved teaching and learning.
However,
as one of the participants in the present study stated:
"Be
yourself, humble and open. This is not a competition. It is a great opportunity
for your professional development to utilize and apply the experiences and
knowledge of your colleagues. There is no course fee, and there are no travel
expenses!"
Acknowledgements
The
authors express their gratitude to all our colleagues who participated in and
contributed to the project. This project was first presented at the EAHIL
Conference, UCL, Brussels, Belgium, 4-6 July, 2012.
All
three authors participated in the project as librarians (YHO, KJ) and as a
teacher (GE). All authors took part in drafting the manuscript and performing
the critical reviews, and approved the final version of the manuscript.
References
Achinstein, B., &
Meyer, T. (1997, Mar. 24-27). The uneasy marriage between friendship and
critique:� Dilemmas of fostering critical
friendship in a novice teacher learning community. Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Chicago, IL.
Archer, J. C. (2010). State of the science in health
professional education: Effective feedback. Medical
Education, 44(1), 101-108.����������������������������������
Baskerville, D., & Goldblatt, H. (2009). Learning to be a critical
friend: From professional indifference through challenge to unguarded
conversations. Cambridge Journal of
Education, 39(2), 205-222. doi: 10.1080/03057640902902260
Biggs, J. B., Tang, C. S. (2007). Teaching
for quality learning at university: What the student does (3rd ed.).
Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill/Society for Research into Higher Education &
Open University Press.
Castle, S. (2009). Peer observation and information skills
teaching: Feel the fear and do it anyway!: The introduction of peer observation at the University
of East London SCONUL Focus, 72-75.
Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B.
(1993). Through the lens of a critical friend. Educational Leadership, 51(2),
49-51.
Dahlgren, L. O., Eriksson, B. E., Gyllenhammar, H., Korkeila, M.,
S��f-Rothoff, A., Wernerson, A., & Seeberger, A. (2006). To be and to have
a critical friend in medical teaching. Medical
Education, 40(1), 72-78. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02349.x
Gibbs, P., & Angelides, P. (2008). Understanding friendship between
critical friends. Improving Schools, 11(3),
213-225. doi: 10.1177/1365480208097002
Giustini, D. (2008). Utilizing learning theories in the digital age: An
introduction for health librarians. Journal
of the Canadian Health Libraries Association 29(3), 109-115.
Giustini, D. (2009). Utilizing learning theories in the digital age: From
theory to practice. Journal of the
Canadian Health Libraries Association, 30(1), 19-25.
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in
nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness.
Nurse Education Today, 24(2),
105-112. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001
Handal, G. (1999). Consultation using critical friends. New Directions for Teaching & Learning(79),
59-70.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1),
81-112.
Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible
learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement.
London: Routledge.
Kevin, W. E., & Regehr, G. (2005). Self-assessment in the health
professions: A reformulation and research agenda. [review]. Academic Medicine, 80(10), S46-S54.
Lupton, M. (2002). The getting of wisdom: Reflections of a teaching
librarian. Australian Academic Research
Libraries, 32(33.2).
Norbury, L. (2001). Peer observation of teaching: a method for improving
teaching quality. New Review of Academic
Librarianship, 7(1), 87-99
Norcini, J. (2010). The power of feedback. Medical Education, 44(1), 16-17. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03542.x
O’Keefe, M., Lecouteur, A., Miller, J., & McGowan, U. (2009). The
Colleague Development Program: A multidisciplinary program of peer observation
partnerships. Med Teach, 31(12),
1060-1065. doi: 10.3109/01421590903154424
Peacock, J. (2001). Teaching skills for teaching librarians: Postcards
from the edge of the educational paradigm. Australian
Academic and Research Libraries, 32(1), 26-40.
Rosario, A., Lourdes, C. S., & De
Juana, S. (2003). Critical friends: A tool for quality improvement in
universities. Quality Assurance in
Education: An International Perspective, 11(1), 31-36.
Samson, S., & McCrea, D. E. (2008). Using peer review to foster good
teaching. Reference Services Review, 36(1),
61-70.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth
discipline : The art and practice of the learning organization (Rev. and
updated ed.). London: Random House Business.
Snavely, L., & Dewald, N. (2011). Developing and implementing peer
review of academic librarians� teaching: An overview and case report. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(4),
343-351.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The
art of case study research.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Swaffield, S. (2004). Critical friends: Supporting leadership, improving
learning. Improving Schools, 7(3),
267-278. doi: 10.1177/1365480204049340
Swaffield, S. (2007). Light touch critical friendship. Improving Schools, 10(3), 205-219. doi:
10.1177/1365480207077845
Swaffield, S., & MacBeath, J. (2005). School self-evaluation and the
role of a critical friend. Cambridge
Journal of Education, 35(2), 239-252. doi: 10.1080/03057640500147037
Towndrow, P. A. (2008). Critical reflective practice as a pivot in
transforming science education: A report of teacher-researcher collaborative
interactions in response to assessment reforms. International Journal of Science Education, 30(7), 903-922. doi:
10.1080/09500690701279014
Wellein, M. G., Ragucci, K. R., & Lapointe, M. (2009). A peer review
process for classroom teaching. American
Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(5), 79.
Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 3-14. doi:
10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case
Study Research. Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Appendix
Critical Friend: The Project Questionnaire
Briefly describe how you worked together with your critical
friend, in particular considering how you reached consensus on the criteria for
evaluation!
What aspects of your participation in the critical friend
project were positive?
What was the most important thing you learned by taking part
in the critical friend project?
Do you think you will change anything in your teaching as a
result of the critical friend project?
Besides professional development of teaching, do you feel
that work in the critical friend project has had any other effects?
Will you continue to use the critical friend method even if
the organized activities with a group leader are no longer conducted? Why or
why not?
Do you have any advice or recommendations you would like to
give to others who want to test the critical friend method?