1 / 24

Peer reviewer Workshop

Quality Assurance & Accreditation Project. Peer reviewer Workshop. Presented by: Prof. Dr. EZZ El Dean Abou Steut. National Quality Assurance & Accreditation Project. Who is the peer reviewer?. Characteristics. Appointment. Contribution. Position. Educational program. Caliber.

viola
Télécharger la présentation

Peer reviewer Workshop

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Quality Assurance & Accreditation Project Peer reviewerWorkshop Presented by: Prof. Dr. EZZ El Dean Abou Steut National Quality Assurance & Accreditation Project

  2. Who is the peer reviewer?

  3. Characteristics Appointment Contribution • Position Educational program • Caliber • Subject specialism • Institutional agreement

  4. What are the qualities of the peer reviewer?

  5. Discipline expert Credibility with subject area No conflict of interest Team work skills

  6. Cont. Ability to • Form evidence - based judgment. • Manage time and stress. • Organize and to chair meetings. • Work according to a prescribed “Evaluative framework”

  7. Cont. Commitment for the review process

  8. Peer reviewer recruitment • Successful completion of training with standard operating procedures in quality assurance and accreditation process. • Provided with quality assurance and accreditation handbook. • Allocated to reviews within their competence. • Make themselves available for 3 review / year. • Take a professional interest in the process and advancement of higher education.

  9. Peer reviewers essential specifications: - Sufficient status and academic reputation. - High order of evaluative skills. - Successful teaching practice. - At least 5 years teaching / or research / or community projects within the last 10 years. - Proven abilities in communication both in Arabic & English. - Competence in accurate analysis of data, verification and reconciliation techniques.

  10. Peer reviewers desirable specifications - IT skills. - Recent experience in external examining. - Effective practice in curricula development. - Acknowledged track record in research. - Recognized contribution to the community (projects, consultancy, teaching, coaching or mentoring).

  11. What is the key criteria for the team composition?

  12. Consultation Final allocation • Meet personal specification. • Team no. & leader. • Balance of interests. • Potential conflicts. Reviewer Professional practice Relevant perceptives

  13. Peer reviewers code of conduct - Knowledge and understanding of quality assurance and accreditation process. - Remain up to date with any developments. - Conduct activities with respect to the published method and protocols. - Reaching justifiable evidence-based judgment.

  14. - Respects the institution mission and avoids brining any prejudices to the process. - Show courtesy to all colleagues’ views and opinions. - Complete the assignment on time with high professional standard. - Respect the confidentiality of the review process. - Contribute positively to the evaluation of the process by offering constructive comments on their experiences as reviewers.

  15. Conduction of the developmental engagements. Planning for the site visit Preliminary visit Site visit After the site visit

  16. Planning for the site visit: Preparation of reports and documents. The institution with NQAAP consider: • Timing of the site visit. • Size and composition of the review team. • Nomination of the facilitator.

  17. Cont. planning for the site visit: NQAAP provisional review team Institution Factors determining size & selection of the team Institution NQAAP Confirmation of the review team

  18. Cont. planning for the site visit: (After review team confirmation)

  19. Cont. planning for the site visit: (After receiving the documentation)

  20. Cont. planning for the site visit: (After receiving the documentation)

  21. Cont. planning for the site visit: (After receiving the documentation) Facilitator is entitled to see these initial commentaries

  22. Chairman agrees with team on division of responsibilities Alternative ways for allocating responsibilities - specific aspects appropriate specialist - non-specific aspects an individual reviewer Complete allocation by aspect Focusing on specific aspects and responsibility to contribute anything of note to their colleagues.

  23. Thank you

More Related