Search

Peer observation of teaching is seen as a supportive and developmental process for improving the quality of teaching in universities. Evidence is emerging that the process of observing is just as if not more valuable than being observed and given feedback. In this study lecturers completing a Foundations program in university learning and teaching were interviewed about their experience of participating in a reciprocal peer observation exercise. The benefits for observers include learning about a new strategy and enhancing their confidence to try this strategy in their own teaching. Receiving feedback was also perceived to be useful but not more beneficial than watching a peer teach. We discuss implications of our results for units and institutions planning to implement peer observation as part of a strategic approach to improve the quality of learning and teaching.

Davenport and Prusak's Working Knowledge is aimed at practitioners. The tenth anniversary of the paperback edition of Davenport and Prusak's Working Knowledge is evaluated using two approaches. First, a practitioner view of knowledge management (KM) is examined from two lenses: the authors' definition of knowledge and their view of knowledge processes for knowledge sharing or hoarding. The second approach considers their advice to ensure that knowledge is neither mismanaged nor unmanaged in organisations (p. xxi). Davenport and Prusak's advice takes three forms. First, they provide a rationale for knowledge sharing based around its value when lost. Second, they provide advice on the processes that facilitate knowledge sharing. Third, they reinforce the continuing importance of organisational values. At a time when the cost pressures facing contemporary businesses reduce funds available for technological codification of knowledge and knowledge-supporting activities, Working Knowledge reminds us that knowledge involves individuals making judgements and providing insights. However, the continuing lack of a clear definition of knowledge makes for difficulties in gaining acceptance for KM and knowledge practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]