PEER MENTORING February 2002 Teaching Scholarship Committee Introduction Over the years we have discussed ways in which the Daniels College of Business faculty could work together to become more effective teachers. This document is an initial attempt to create a model for that process. It consists of three primary elements: Index: Faculty Pairing, On a voluntary basis, faculty would be paired to provide mentoring opportunities. 2+2 Peer Mentoring Issues to Discuss Initially, the three areas of course design, course presentation and course evaluation could be used to guide discussions 2+2 Discussion Faculty pairs could use the 2+2 model as a method for discussion of teaching issues. Feedback Form Faculty Pairings The Teaching Committee has discussed a bi-directional mentoring vehicle that places faculty into a pair in which the pair members complement each other in terms of strengths. Traditional pairing of a new faculty member with a seasoned one implies that there are standard and acceptable ways of achieving our teaching objectives, and that the seasoned member will guide the new member. It is our belief that such a system perpetuates the status quo, and implies that we are doing things close to perfectly. The unstated objective in the traditional system is to bring the new faculty member into the world of teaching nirvana. We believe that each of us should constantly strive to get better at what we do, and that we can learn from each other. Therefore we propose an alternative vehicle, one that we believe would bring a higher probability of emphasizing collegiality, collaboration and continuous improvement. We believe that our overall knowledge base can be expanded, and our awareness of best practices enhanced. Pairs would: help each other with skill development; offer advice about best practices in and out of the classroom; attend some of each other's classes; offer help with students difficulties; share cases, projects, and other macro teaching vehicles; offer different points of view and generate new ideas. Faculty would be paired each quarter, for a quarter at a time. The pairings would be based on choosing people whose strengths are complementary. The anticipated outcomes are: a faculty group more open to new ideas; help bridge the gap between departments; better overall collegiality and collaboration; better appreciation of other approaches to classroom teaching; a strengthening of our weakest areas return To Top Peer Feedback Using the 2+2 Model February 16, 2001 Teaching Scholarship Committee One of the most important sources of learning is feedback. While we have solicited feedback on our teaching effectiveness from students for many years, ironically, in our current classroom situation, we as faculty have no systematic opportunities for receiving feedback from our peers. To remedy this, we propose that the 2+2 system of feedback used in the HPM course for student peer feedback be utilized as a mechanism for providing and receiving peer faculty feedback on a regular basis. The 2+2 system, described in the attached paper, is designed to offer a simple, but powerful framework for faculty to provide regular feedback to each other. The 2+2 system is based on three fundamental principles: balance, specificity and helpful accountability. Each 2+2 session involves the delivery of two compliments and two suggestions for improvement in a spirit of helpfulness and continuous improvement. As a first step in the implementation of 2+2 as a peer to peer faculty feedback system, we propose a pilot program be implemented with the following design features: 2+2 Feedback Teams - Volunteer teams of two faculty members will be formed to give each other feedback over one or preferably two or three quarters. Teams can be formed independently, or with the help of the Teaching Committee. 2+2 Format - A single page, 2+2 form (sample attached) can be used to capture compliments and suggestions. The form can be used as a guide during the 2+2 discussion and can be retained by the receiver as a feedback record. Optional Confidentiality - The 2+2 system is intended primarily as a source for personal development (although it has been implemented in some places as a supplement or replacement for the formal performance appraisal system). Therefore, the forms and verbal feedback can remain confidential at the discretion of the receiver. If the receiver wishes, he or she can use the 2+2 feedback as evidence of teaching success. In addition, the teaching committee asks that anonymous copies of the 2+2 forms be submitted directly to the committee by the receivers so that we can analyze collective faculty strengths and developmental needs on an ongoing basis. This will also allow us to monitor the effectiveness of the program over time as well. All analysis by the committee will be summary in nature and will not focus on individual performance. Mutual Classroom Visits - Each faculty member will arrange to visit their partner's classroom at least twice during each quarter. The visit may last the entire class period but could end as soon as the faculty member has compiled two significant compliments on their partner's teaching skills as well as two suggestions for improvement. 2+2 Discussions - After each set of classroom visits, the 2+2 team should arrange to get together for a short face-to-face conversation where each team partner has an opportunity to receive verbal feedback from their counterpart. The discussion, as well as the content of the form should reflect the spirit of helpfulness which is a fundamental element of the 2+2 model. Focused 2+2 - Receivers can ask their partners to offer feedback on general teaching and classroom skills, or ask that the feedback be focused on a certain area of concern (such as facilitation of class discussions, leading case study discussions, effective use of powerpoint, grading, etc.). It is our hope that use of the 2+2 feedback system will support the DCB faculty's commitment to continuous improvement in our teaching. Appendix A: Possible Areas of Discussion in Peer Mentoring (Abstracted from the University of Nebraska Lincoln Website) Your Course Design Course Goals - What do want students to learn from your course? What do you want them to know? What do you want them to be able to do? What do you want them to understand? What perspectives or attitudes do you want them to have? What is important for them to learn about your field? What should they learn about themselves as students or as contributors to our society? What are the learning outcomes for your course: o Knowledge? o Skill? o Perspective? Intellectual Rationale - Why did you choose the goals you did? Why is it necessary your student achieve these goals? What perspectives of your discipline or field shaped your goals for the course? How did you decide between the breadth of content vs depth of content? Course Content and the Broader Curriculum - How do the goals for your course connect with other goals? How do your goals fit in with the goals of other courses in your discipline? How does it lay the foundation for courses that follow it or build on what students have already learned in other courses? How do your goals fit in with the goals of other courses in your discipline? How does it lay the foundation for courses that follow it or build on what students have already learned in other courses? Specific Teaching Methods Teaching Methods/Course Materials/Course Assignments What teaching methods (lecture, group work, question/answer, etc.) are you using during your contact time with students to meet your focus objectives? How do each of these teaching methods facilitate students achievement of focus objectives? How will you apportion out the use of each of these methods during class time and over the course of the quarter? What course materials (textbooks, course notes, etc.) are you using to meet your focus objectives? What characteristics make each course material useful in students' achievement of the course objectives? How should students use each of the course materials? What course assignments or activities outside of class (projects, papers, exams, computer simulations, web exercises, practica, groupwork, etc.) are you using to meet your focus objectives? Why have you structured your assignments in the way that you have? What, in particular, do you hope your students will demonstrate in their work on each assignment? What are your expectations? Intellectual Rationale - What is the rationale behind the methods, materials, and assignments you have chosen? In what ways do you expect your choices for methods, materials, and assignments to assist your students in meeting the goals of your course? What influence has your discipline or field had on your choices? Course Choices and the Broader Curriculum - How do the methods, materials, and assignments prepare your students for the broader curriculum? How do your choices for methods, materials, and assignments assist students in their future courses and/or endeavors beyond graduation? How do your choices for methods, materials, and assignments build upon what students have learned in previous courses? Student Achievement Criteria for Evaluating Students - What are the major dimensions on which your three work samples (high, medium, and low pass) differ? How do these differences parallel the criteria you use in grading the assignment? How do these criteria compare with those you would use in a more introductory/advanced class? What are the measurable criteria for the course? Information about Student Understanding - What do your assignment and students' responses to it tell you about how students are constructing the ideas that are central to the course and your teaching goals? What misconceptions do they have about these ideas? How do you identify and address student errors and misinterpretations? Student Performance and the Broader Curriculum - How has your course prepared students within the broader curriculum? Does student performance on your assignments indicate that students are prepared for other courses or have achieved the aims of the broader curriculum? Does student performance on your assignments indicate students have developed a foundation for the discipline or that they have built upon the understanding from previous courses? How and when are students assessed? Guiding Improvement What thoughts do you have about improving your assignment, your course, or your teaching as consequence of completing this reflective Return To Top Appendix B A Tool for Feedback: 2+2 Equals Better Performance By Doug Allen Trying to open a new box of videotape with an outer wrap of plastic covering can be very frustrating. Many learn to dread the battle to find a loose comer, and finally to pry a bit of plastic wrapping loose with their teeth. The task doesn't get easier over time. The ritual is repeated with continued frustration. For others, however, it is a simple matter to find the tab of the zip tape which has been prepositioned to easily tear off one end of the wrapping. But the video tape comes with no instructions on how to remove the wrapper, and if a person is not aware of the zip tab he is unlikely to discover it in the course of opening the box. Often, there is no one to ask. Even more often, the person does not think to ask. What is missing is feedback. Without feedback, there is little opportunity to improve performance. In the many tasks of life, feedback is a very uncertain process, and even when it is available it is often not presented in a way that makes it most useful or most likely to be considered. Our behavior changes most powerfully when feedback is given and received in a positive environment where trial and error is encouraged. When we first try to modify our behavior, we are unlikely to perfect a new skill instantly. It is often the trial and error process itself which is integral to achieving the desired performance. For instance, it is almost impossible to learn to ride a bicycle without falling off. Falling off is a necessary part of the learning process. Trial, error and the resulting feedback leads to a very sharp, positive learning curve. Trying to learn to ride a bicycle simply by studying a manual, even a very good manual which describes the trial and error process, is basically impossible. The same is true in our worklife ?? whether in the classroom, the workplace, the battlefield or the sportsfield, feedback and encouragement are prime sources of success. Without adequate feedback and the opportunity for trial and error experience, we will not be able to develop fully, our professional capacity. Yet, in many aspects of life and professional practice, feedback is not readily available. Where it is available, it is often not given in an environment of encouragement and may not recognize the benefit of trial and error learning. We propose a new approach to feedback and encouragement called 2+2. The approach is very simple, takes relatively little time, and can be implemented in an organization either in place of, or as an informal supplement to an existing performance appraisal system. After discussing the 2+2 approach, we will focus on two different, but related venues for its application: the workplace and the school. We hope that the examination of these situations will help to highlight the 2+2 feedback process and to encourage its use. The 2+2 Feedback Model A fundamental principle of human motivation is the importance of feedback. Positive behavior is less likely to continue if it is not recognized and reinforced while dysfunctional behavior may well continue if corrective feedback is not offered. Motivation theory strongly suggests that much of the problem behavior exhibited by employees and managers alike (whether in schools or businesses) can be traced to poor feedback mechanisms. There are many models of feedback, often known more formally as performance appraisal (PA). We find it ironic that the feedback process, and the intrinsic satisfaction which can come from the process of the mastery of a task and the improvement of performance, has been turned into a process cloaked with fear and dread. The feedback given in performance appraisal becomes solely associated with evaluation and the possibly negative consequences of judgment. It is a process which is often feared and avoided by supervisors and subordinates alike. All too often, its developmental potential is lost. It is the task of another discussion to examine why and how PA has developed into such a negative process, or the merits of such a development. Instead we propose a very simple, positive process which will accomplish most of the objectives of PA ?? offering substantial opportunities for performance improvement without the intimidating complexity associated with most PA systems. The 2+2 system we describe is already being successfully implemented in schools and we hope it will soon be introduced into business organizations as well. The 2+2 feedback model is based on powerful principles of teaching and learning including the following: Learning is substantially enhanced by joy, confidence and trust Focused learning is more likely to be successful than diffuse learning Consistent, regular feedback is more powerful than infrequent feedback with the same content Multiple sources of feedback are useful Feedback is likely to be more successful if the person or persons providing feedback look forward to providing the feedback Peer feedback can be as powerful (even more powerful) than "supervisory" feedback Too much feedback can be as ineffective as not enough If the person receiving feedback feels that he or she has a choice in how to respond, there is more likelihood that the feedback will change performance To be useful, all feedback does not have to be accurate or timely Giving and receiving feedback is a process which can mature over time and still be productive as it matures The credibility or quality of feedback is not necessarily related to the length of observation or the status of the observer. The feedback process benefits the observer, sharpening analytical skills and providing perspective on his or her own performance and skills. Based on these principles, 2+2 is an observation protocol. It can be used any time it is desirable to have a formal and systematic record of observation on one hand, or casual and informal feedback at the request of an individual who feels he or she needs some feedback in a given area on the other. 2+2 was initially developed as an alternative to more formal, elaborate evaluation visits, but is now used in much broader contexts, essentially whenever it is desirable to provide feedback based on observation. 2+2 involves the giving of two compliments and two suggestions to a colleague (senior, junior or peer) based on the observations of a person's behavior or performance. The observer is asked to identify and record the most important compliments and suggestions for improvement based on an observation session (which may last for as little as several minutes or as long as several days). 2+2 is very flexible. Even inexperienced observers can find behaviors to compliment and make suggestions for improvement. As the sophistication of the observers improves through experience, so will the quality of their suggestions. 2+2 can be used for "general" observation comments or the observer can be cued to focus compliments and suggestions on specific aspects of performance. it may be desirable to suggest a focus for the 2+2 observation, but allow the observer discretion. If the observer feels that behaviors other than those chosen for focus are more important to comment on, they can honor their own sense of priority. If observers are sophisticated (trained supervisors or, evaluators, for example), 2+2 can, over time, result in a comprehensive evaluation. The theory is simple. Each time an observation takes place, behaviors noted for compliment and suggestion are deemed to be most noteworthy. If the observer has a record of earlier compliments and suggestions, the scope of evaluation gradually broadens. Eventually, elements of performance not noted in 2+2 observations can be assumed to be satisfactory but not noteworthy. Meanwhile, strengths and weaknesses are systematically recorded and improvements can be documented. A key design feature of 2+2 is the informality of the observation session. A "session" may involve nothing more than the routine observation of a supervisor as he or she interacts with a subordinate. In the classroom, a "session" may involve a casual five minute visit from a colleague who stays just long enough to note down two compliments and two suggestions. Of course a session may also be much more structured. The key is that all participants need to know in advance what to expect. In the classroom it will be useful to make sure that students know about the system, that the observational visits are as natural and welcome as any other collegial activity and that this is not in some way a form of monitoring or a signal of distrust. In the workplace, all levels of employees must understand these same principles. Overcoming the isolation of the classroom and the workplace is an important goal of 2+2. Instead of relying solely on an often poorly implemented and intimidating formal PA system, frequent, focused feedback and encouragement is fostered. By simplifying the feedback task, and expanding the possible and legitimate sources of feedback well beyond the supervisor, opportunity for individual development increases. 2+2 is designed to benefit both the observer and the observed. When 2+2 is successful, observation is viewed positively by all who participate, a major advantage over traditional evaluation. All are encouraged to be free in giving and receiving comments. If those observed are assured that all comments are for their benefit and that they are free to take the suggestions or ignore them, suggestions for improvement are most likely to be seriously considered. Focus and balance are two pivotal concerns in 2+2. It is well known that behavior is more likely to be influenced if feedback addresses no more than one or two elements at any one time. Behavior is also more likely to change if suggestions for improvement are balanced with the issue; focus and balance are key design features. The 2+2 process can provide needed balance and focus ?initially as a supplement to more formal evaluation, perhaps later, as an alternative to it. 2+2 for Faculty A spirit of collaboration can facilitate improved feedback in schools. In the classroom the teacher is isolated and no tradition exists to encourage teachers to visit each other and provide feedback and support. A new tradition of openness is needed, a system of observation and feedback which will give teachers a new perspective on their current performance and the confidence to try new approaches in anticipation of feedback and encouragement to help them gauge their success. Colleagues may begin to work together more systematically, feeling less isolated in their efforts to improve their performance. Using 2+2, professors may substantially increase their classroom visitations knowing that brief focused visits will be well received.. Groups of faculty members may undertake instructional development programs, confident in collegial support. School faculties or sub groups may choose to develop specific new skills of instruction, their close collaboration insuring both a higher level of success and a quicker cycle of improvement made possible by constant feedback. 2+2 empowers those who work with it. It gives confidence to everyone involved that they have important things to say, new perspectives which can lead to the improvement of their colleagues' performance ? as well as their own. And everyone can look forward to receiving suggestions for their own improvement. Vital to their looking forward to suggestions is the core notion that they are free to accept or reject suggestions they receive. The old notion that teachers or employees must mindlessly heed the call of managers and administrators is now clearly seen to be counter productive to the effectiveness of the organization. Unfortunately organizational traditions still promote the old notions. 2+2 can signal new thinking and demonstrate a functional commitment to new organizational behaviors. Conclusion 2+2 is not only a new approach to performance appraisal, it serves as a symbol of new employee employer relationships. It helps condition administrators and teachers alike to become sensitive to new expectations. It is both symbol and substance, process and content, instrument and portfolio. Performance appraisal must sometimes be open?ended and responsive to the uniqueness of each relationship. In other cases, it needs to be programmatic, seeking to develop, shape and assess systematic, new behaviors. 2+2 responds to both needs. It can be as open?ended as saying to an observer, "Use your own judgment, sense your own priorities for highlighting successes and opportunities for improvement." Or it can provide an observer with a specific agenda, focusing on specific behaviors or attitudes in a programmatic sequence. 2+2 is deceptively simple. It is easy to use. It encourages observers and those observed to examine their behavior more closely and to try new approaches. Used properly it creates a "zone of safety" making risk more acceptable. Exposing weakness may take on a positive rather than a negative connotation as the critical focus is coupled with encouragement and recognition for strengths as well. We believe that 2+2 can help transform a working or teaching environment into a more productive learning environment. Feedback and encouragement are keys to higher productivity and 2+2 is a performance appraisal system which, in itself, can be motivational and encourage better performance. Return To Top 2+2 Feedback Form TO: (Recipient's name) FROM: (Your name) Here are two things that you are doing very well: Thanks and keep up the good work! A. B. Here are two areas that need some improvement: let me know how I can help! A. B. Reflections: