Skip Navigation

ELT Journal 1999 53(1):22-27; doi:10.1093/elt/53.1.22
© 1999 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cosh, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Articles

Peer observation: a reflective model

Jill Cosh

Senior lecturer in EFL and English Studies at Anglia Polytechnic University, Cambridge, UK, where she has a particular interest in teacher training.

The purpose of this paper is to examine attitudes to peer observation, and to put the case for a more reflective approach. Peer observation is frequently carried out for purposes of appraisal or judgement of the observed, and this can be detrimental both to teacher confidence, and to a supportive teaching environment. Furthermore, this approach seems to have little value for active teacher development, since the focus is on being developed, rather than on self-awareness and self-development. Peer observation, therefore, should not be a vehicle for the evaluation of others on the basis of our assumptions, but a reassessment of those assumptions on the basis of their teaching. To this end, I propose two active self-development models of peer observation, with suggestions for their possible implementation.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ELT JHome page
G. J. Harfitt
Exploiting transcriptions of identical subject content lessons
ELT J, April 1, 2008; 62(2): 173 - 181.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.