FEATURE HIGHLIGHTED: External peer review

NUS supports four parallel academic career tracks: a Tenure Track, a Practice Track, a Clinician Track and an Educator Track. The Educator Track was launched in 2015 in response to concerns that the previous ‘teaching track’ was not underpinned by well-defined promotion criteria or metrics to demonstrate the candidate’s achievements in teaching and learning. The new Educator Track established a clearly articulated set of progression criteria (framed around the candidate’s ‘sphere of influence’ as defined in the Career Framework for University Teaching) along with guidance on the types of evidence that could be used to demonstrate this impact (framed around the four evidence domains proposed by Denise Chalmers* : self-assessment, peer assessment, student input, and student achievement). In 2017, NUS also established an External Review Panel (ERP) to contribute to the ‘peer assessment’ evidence domain for candidates for appointment or promotion on the Educator Track.

For appointments and promotions on the NUS Tenure Track, the peer review process includes assessments from six external referees who provide an independent expert evaluation of the candidate's profile and impact within their research field. The ERP was established to offer an equivalent independent external evaluation for appointment and promotion on the Educator Track. The panel comprises a rotating group of four or five hand-picked global thought-leaders in teaching and learning, selected from peer research-intensive universities worldwide. The panel convenes annually to review Educator Track candidates and to benchmark their impact on university teaching.

The ERP meets on site at NUS over a two-week period and is informed by three sources of evidence:

1. a review of the candidate’s application, covering a teaching statement and impact narrative;

2. an observation of a teaching session led by the candidate;

3. a face-to-face interview with the candidate.

Drawing on these three sources, the panel is asked to look for evidence of the candidate’s impact in two domains. The first is evidence of student learning, which has been collected by the candidate and systematically shared with colleagues at NUS. The second is evidence of educational leadership, showcasing the candidate's influence not only on the students they teach but also on their academic peers and the broader institutional environment for educational excellence. Based on the evidence collected, the ERP is asked to compile a ‘consensus report’ that provides an independent assessment of the candidate for the consideration of the subsequent NUS promotion committees.

* Chalmers, D. (2007). A review of Australian and international quality systems and indicators of learning and teaching. Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, Sydney, NSW.