Peer reviewerWorkshop

Presented by:

Prof. Dr. Hussein Mahmoud El Magraby

National Quality Assurance & Accreditation Project

Who is the peer reviewer?

Characteristics

• Position

Appointment Contribution

Educational program

• Institutional agreement

• Caliber

• Subject specialism

What are the qualities of What are the qualities of the peer reviewer?the peer reviewer?

Discipline expert

Team work skills

Credibility with subject area

No conflict of interest

Form evidence - based judgment. Manage time and stress. Organize and to chair meetings. Work according to a prescribed “Evaluative

framework”

Ability toCont.

Commitment for the review processCont.

November 2006November 2006

- Successful completion of training with standard operating procedures in quality assurance and accreditation process.

Peer reviewer recruitment

- Provided with quality assurance and accreditation handbook.

- Make themselves available for 3 review / year.

- Take a professional interest in the process and advancement of higher education.

- Allocated to reviews within their competence.

November 2006November 2006

Peer reviewers essential specifications:

- At least 5 years teaching / or research / or community projects within the last 10 years.

- Sufficient status and academic reputation.

- High order of evaluative skills.

- Successful teaching practice.

- Proven abilities in communication both in Arabic & English.

- Competence in accurate analysis of data, verification and reconciliation techniques.

November 2006November 2006

- Acknowledged track record in research.

- IT skills.

- Recent experience in external examining.

- Effective practice in curricula development.

- Recognized contribution to the community (projects, consultancy, teaching, coaching or mentoring).

Peer reviewers desirable specifications

What is the key criteria for the team composition?

Meet personal specification.

Consultation

Reviewer

Balance of interests.Potential conflicts.

Professional practice Relevant perceptives

Final allocation

Team no. & leader.

November 2006November 2006

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.

November 2006November 2006

- 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.

- Show courtesy to all colleagues’ views and

opinions.

- Respects the institution mission and avoids brining any prejudices to the process.

Conduction of the developmental engagements.

Planning for the site visit

Preliminary visit

After the site visit

Site visit

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.

NQAAP provisional review team

NQAAP

Cont. planning for the site visit:

Institution

Factors determining size & selection of the team

Institution

Confirmation of the review team

(After review team confirmation)

Cont. planning for the site visit:

Responsible authority

TaskRecipient

NQAAPSend names & addresses of the reviewers

Institution

InstitutionSend advance documentations

Reviewer 6w. before the site visit

InstitutionSend 2 hard copies & é version of self-evaluation report

NQAAP6w. before the site visit

(After receiving the documentation)

Cont. planning for the site visit:

Responsible authority

TaskRecipient

Review chair

ContactReview team

the representative of the institution 4w. before the site visit

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

Responsible authority

TaskRecipient

Peer reviewer

Read course / program / faculty reports & strategic review reportPrepare initial commentary & consider review chair guidanceSend the prepared commentary(1w before 1st day of site visit)

Chair reviewOther members

Facilitator is entitled to see these initial commentaries

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

Alternative ways for allocating responsibilities

Chairman agrees with team ondivision of responsibilities

Complete allocation by aspect

- specific aspects appropriate specialist

- non-specific aspects an individual reviewer

Focusing on specific aspects and responsibility to contribute anything of note

to their colleagues.