Chapter 18: Faculty Peer Coaching: A Catalyst to Improve Academic Program Quality Available to Purchase

This chapter shares lessons of a faculty peer coaching regime developed at Aga Khan University. All academic programs are required to be reviewed every 5 years as per university’s academic quality framework. To challenge the notions of hierarchy with the top–down review, the University’s Network of Quality Teaching and Learning (QTL) established a mechanism of “self-assessment review” (SAR) and “peer-assessment review” to improve the quality of the program. To supplement the self-assessment process, the QTL network organized and provided training for faculty, students, and program administrators to critically evaluate the program based on evidence.

After the first round of reviews, it was noticed that while the review process supported critique of the programs, little change was discernible in the programs themselves. Considering the context of the geographies where the university functions—in Southeast Asia and East Africa in the main—the QTL educational development staff leveraged a culturally relevant approach for the training of the program staff: peer coaching with reflexive storytelling. This approach engaged peers from across faculty domains, supported the promotion of best practices, open and confidential self-assessment while building a collegial environment across the institution, and dissemination of entity improvement plans. A two-fold, peer coaching approach to both share experiences through in-training storytelling (i.e., sharing of experiences from participating in SAR) and post-training group mentorship scaffolded with training offered to undertake self-assessment reviews. The dean’s appointed review team including program chairs/directors, faculty, program administrative academic staff, and student representatives, participated in the training conducted for the self-assessment review process.

The approach catalyzed conversations about program quality, student learning outcomes, and the contribution of courses to the university’s mandate. Faculty peer coaches shared their experiences, with the program review team undertaking the self-assessment in a nonthreatening and open manner where they were able to speak about the development of their own courses and the personal journeys they themselves undertook. Faculty stories detailing their experiences of conducting self-assessment exercises can be categorized along quality assurance indicators to improve their course offerings to enhance student learning experiences. This included identifying, gathering, summarizing, discussing, reflecting on the evidence gathered in the self-assessment, considering areas of improvement, and implementing the quality improvement recommendations emanating from the self-and peer-assessment review exercise. The approach of using peer coaching with storytelling in the training contributed to quality assurance and program reviews in four distinct ways: (a) creating buy-in to approach self-assessment as an authentic, faculty-led exercise; (b) breaking departmental silos and developing synergies across disciplines and geographical regions; (c) institutionalizing program review exercises as an essential component of quality education; and (d) identifying common needs across the institution to be supported by the development of the training offered to faculty.