Peer Observation
Benefits of peer observation
- Maintains and improves teaching quality
- Builds self-awareness across instructional aspects
- Enables reflection on teaching practice
- Recognises good practice in others
- Identifies development needs
- Provides evidence for promotions
- Promotes good practice and innovation
- Deepens understanding of colleagues’ work
- Builds networks and discussion
- Increases collaboration and trust
Process of peer observation
| Step | What happens |
|---|---|
| Briefing | Teacher sets context and asks for specific focus |
| Observation | Observer takes structured notes |
| Post-observation | Both members reflect, observer gives feedback |
| Record | Written summary kept for future reference |
Four focus areas
- Planning, organisation, content
- Teaching strategies and resources
- Presentation and management
- Assessment and monitoring
Three formats
- Buddy: two colleagues, swap roles
- Circus: A observes B, B observes C, C observes A
- Teams of three: each member observed twice
COBBS for feedback
Clear, Owned, Balanced, Brief, Specific
Peer observation is one of the most useful tools for collaborative reflection. Two teachers who observe each other and exchange feedback can produce growth that neither could reach alone. The format is simple, but the rules around it are what make it useful rather than damaging.
Why peer observation matters
A long list of benefits comes out of well-run peer observation.
It maintains and improves teaching quality, which improves student learning. It builds self-awareness about a wide range of instructional aspects: how questions are asked, how time is paced, how transitions are handled. It enables structured reflection on practice, with evidence to reflect on rather than only memory.
It recognises and identifies good practice in others, which is a teaching tool in itself. The observer often sees something they want to try in their own classroom.
It identifies the practitioner’s development needs, often more accurately than self-assessment can. It provides evidence of teaching quality for promotion applications and external review.
It promotes innovation across a department by spreading what works. It deepens understanding of colleagues’ work, which improves cross-department collaboration. It builds networks for further professional discussion. It increases collaboration and trust because allowing colleagues into the classroom is itself a form of openness.
This list is long because the practice produces benefits at multiple levels: the practitioner, the observer, the department, and the school.
The four steps of peer observation
The process has four steps. Skipping any one tends to weaken the whole.
Briefing session
Before the observation, the practitioner being observed sets the context. They tell the observer what kind of lesson it will be, what students they will work with, and what specifically they want feedback on.
The briefing matters because it focuses the observation. An observer who knows the practitioner is working on questioning will notice the questioning. An observer with no briefing notices whatever happens to catch their attention.
Observation session
The observer watches the lesson, takes notes, and avoids interfering. The observer’s job is to capture what happens, not to evaluate it in the moment.
Notes are short and structured. Time markers help. Direct quotes from teacher or students preserve the tone.
Post-observation session
The post-observation conversation is where the value of the work appears. It is also the hardest part for both members.
The teacher who was observed begins. They share their own appraisal of the session: what they thought went well, what surprised them, what they would change.
The observer follows. They cover what they saw working, what they have questions about, and what areas might benefit from further development. The feedback follows the rules set out below.
The conversation is collaborative reflection, not a one-way evaluation. Both members are working on understanding the lesson together.
Record
A written record of the observation is kept. This serves two purposes: it gives the practitioner something to refer to later, and it builds the kind of evidence base that supports professional development over years.
Four focus areas during observation
A useful structure for observation breaks the lesson into four areas.
Planning, organisation, content
Were the teaching purposes clear and stated in appropriate terms (aims, outcomes)? Was the content appropriate for the level, abilities, needs, and interests of students? Was the content well researched and current?
This is the foundation. A lesson with weak planning will not be saved by good delivery.
Teaching strategies and resources
Were methods appropriate for the purpose of the session? Were they chosen with attention to students’ abilities and needs and the demands of the content? Were they chosen to gain interest and participation? Was classroom management effective and appropriate? Were resources used well?
This area is where most observable teaching choices sit.
Presentation and management
Were communication skills used effectively? Was questioning used to monitor and promote understanding? Were student contributions encouraged in a positive atmosphere?
This area focuses on how the teacher carries the lesson moment to moment.
Assessment and monitoring
Were suitable methods used to identify and monitor student progress? Was constructive feedback provided to students?
This area often gets less observation time than the others, partly because assessment is less visible. Deliberate attention to it is worthwhile.
Three formats for peer observation
Different schools use different formats. Three common ones are worth knowing.
Buddy system
Two colleagues agree to act as observer and observed. One observes the other in a lesson. Later, they swap roles. This is the simplest format and works well for two trusted colleagues.
The strength is depth. The two members can build a rich understanding of each other’s work over many observations. The weakness is limited perspective; both members see the same two teachers.
Circus
In a circus format, A observes B, B observes C, and C observes A (or some longer variant for more participants). Each colleague is observed once and observes once.
The strength is variety. Each participant gets feedback from a different observer and gives feedback to a different practitioner. The weakness is less depth; each pair of observers and practitioners has only one round.
Teams of three
Observations are organised within teams of three. Each colleague is observed twice (perhaps reversing the cycle so each member observes each other once).
The strength is balanced perspective: the practitioner gets feedback from two observers. The weakness is logistics; getting three teachers’ schedules to align is harder than two.
When you are the observer
A few rules apply specifically when you are the observer.
Discuss all aspects of the activity in the briefing, so the focus is clear before you start. Ensure the feedback is structured to save time and provide clear directions for the practitioner. During observation, do not be distracted by content if you are there to observe teaching strategies; stay on focus. Allow the practitioner to share their reflection before you give yours; their voice should come first. Focus your comments on the behaviour observed, not on the person teaching. Be specific. Give feedback as soon as possible. Prioritise your comments; do not flood the practitioner with everything.
COBBS for feedback
A useful checklist for feedback uses the acronym COBBS.
- Clear. The feedback is unambiguous. The practitioner knows exactly what is being said.
- Owned. The observer takes responsibility for the feedback as their view, not “everyone says”.
- Balanced. Both strengths and growth areas appear.
- Brief. Feedback is concise. Long feedback drifts into generality.
- Specific. Specific examples from the lesson, not general impressions.
A peer observer who runs feedback through this checklist before the post-observation session produces feedback the practitioner can use.
Clear, Owned, Balanced, Brief, Specific
Clear feedback is unambiguous. Owned feedback is the observer’s own view. Balanced feedback shows both strengths and growth areas. Brief feedback stays concise. Specific feedback cites examples from the lesson. Run any feedback through COBBS before delivering it.
The post-observation conversation
The post-observation is usually the most difficult part of the process. Giving criticism is hard. Receiving it is harder.
Two practices help.
The first is to remember what the observation was for. The aim is the practitioner’s growth, not the observer’s expertise. Feedback that serves the observer’s wish to look smart is not useful.
The second is to keep the conversation collaborative. The observer’s view is one source of evidence; the practitioner’s reflection is another. Both feed into the practitioner’s understanding. The observer is not the final authority on the lesson; the conversation is.
If the relationship is built on this footing, the post-observation conversation produces growth even when the feedback is hard. If it is treated as a judgement session, the practitioner will start to dread observations and find ways to avoid them.