Two Cheers for Peer Review: Problems of Definition, Interpretation, and Appropriate Function

Authors

  • Ellen Strenski Author

Keywords:

Peer Review

Abstract

The term peer review masks various expectations when used uncritically. Some beliefs are mutually exclusive; not all are benign. This analysis focuses on summative evaluation, exposing the conflicting interests and mixed metaphors of faculty evaluation that obscure the process and the principles at stake. Seven desirable characteristics of peer review (Chubin, 1994) are adapted as fundamental distinctions for clarifying discussion about five different kinds of faculty evaluation: judging, critiquing, assessing, appraising, and rating (Riegle & Rhodes, 1986). Peers can contribute uniquely to faculty evaluation of teaching, and therefore most effectively, in two ways: interpreting colleagues’ teaching portfolios and interpreting students’ testimony about colleagues.

Published

2024-10-14