Collaborative Inquiry Description and Purpose This technique involves the development of a new course or the revision of an existing one in collaboration with a colleague. Two instructors teach different sections of the same course. They develop the syllabus together, jointly develop evaluation techniques including assignments and tests, and meet weekly during the course for ongoing planning and reflection. Each instructor keeps a journal about his/her teaching in the course, and shares it with the other instructor at agreed upon times. The purpose is to provide an opportunity for dialogue about and new ways of teaching all aspects of a course. The outcome is a completely designed course, including syllabus, class materials, and methods of evaluating students. Following completion of the course, each instructor creates a portfolio of materials from his/her class. Source: Time involved: Variable; could involve from 15 to 40 or more hours. One or more meetings to design the syllabus, one or more meetings to design assignments and tests, weekly or bi-weekly meetings of 30 to 60 minutes (or longer) during the course, time to write journal entries, one or more meetings at the end of the term or semester to reflect on their experiences. Time to assemble the portfolio. Who is the reviewer? Peer (whether teaching assistant, instructor, faculty) teaching the same course. Who is reviewed? Peer teaching the same course. Format of instruction: This technique can be used for any type of class - lecture, lecture-discussion, seminar, laboratory or distance education. Unit of observation: No direct observation in the classroom. The unit is the course. Criteria for review: Most generally, the criterion would be whether the instructors achieve their objectives. In both the design and the ongoing review of the course, discussion would focus ion the effectiveness of the various components - syllabus, assignments, classroom activities, and examinations - in achieving those objectives. Scope: The review is of the process of course development or revision, including design of syllabus, consideration of teaching philosophy and practices, evaluation of students, and concerns about teaching this course. Documentation: Journals prepared by each instructor. Portfolios completed by each instructor. Pre- or post-course meetings: One or more meetings before the course begins, and one post-course meeting. Audience: The faculty member teaching the class. Observation of the instructor with students: None. Interaction of reviewer with students: None   Comments: Pros: Both instructors benefit from opportunity to share ideas about the course. Provides on-going support for teaching. Produces a substantial course portfolio.   Cons: No direct involvement of students. No feedback re impact on student learning. Requires considerable time if done in depth.   Specific Directions:  When  Faculty Member Colleague Before semester begins Identify collaborating peer Draft course syllabus Meet to finalize syllabus, arrange logistics AV resources, special equipment, etc. Same activities During semester Teach course Write entries in journal Meet weekly to plan, reflect Same activities End of semester Exchange journals Meet to reflect on experience Same activities After semester ends Assemble course portfolio Assemble course portfolio