Feedback for the Next Iteration of P2P

“I think the model works well” (survey response) is in keeping with the sentiment of the responses overall from the pilot cohort. Participants were very supportive of the continuation of the program. “It was a great initiative!” “Yes! It should continue and I would support it to continue.”

Format. While some variation was expressed on workshop length or program length, the general format, culture and intent of the program should go forward intact. General consensus is that beginning the workshop before the main term was beneficial and that it is best if both members of the partnership have courses in the term in which they participate. Adding a check-in point for pairs by a CTSI staff member mid-way through the program was recommended and this would help determine where additional support might be provided by CTSI. Many pairs found it impossible to connect every single week but they perceived the program as having enough flexibility to accommodate different meeting schedules. Going forward the program should make clear up front the time expectations and the range with which flexibility can be exercised in timing, frequency and length of pair meetings.

Despite the reported difficulty with finding time to meet, participants suggested that in the next iteration of the program, CTSI consider a way to connect partners before the first workshop, (e.g., informal meet and greet reception). Many pairs did do this on their own prior to the first workshop in the pilot and recommended it. More get-to-know-you partner time in the first workshop was also recommended as was the creation of opportunities for pairs to interact with other pairs and program participants. Overall time commitment and balance of skill development information with interaction between partners and cohort members will be considered for the next iteration.

Recognition. Recognition or incentives for involvement and level of involvement mattered a great deal to participants. There was some concern that this information be communicated adequately to department Chairs, so a comprehensive letter is recommended for next time.

Resources. The resources most valued were the workshops, and the CTSI Peer Observation of Teaching: Effective Practices guide and templates. Use of the book, methods associated with the reciprocal mentor-coach model are of value despite some initial resistance to this new model. There is evidence in these findings of successful rethinking of mentorship, reflection on the value and practice of reciprocity, and engagement with new listening techniques.

Any lengthy text-based resources would best be accompanied by a summary or directions to specific elements of the resources. Forms and activity sheets and templates could be offered in digital fillable format. Bluepulse wasn’t well received by all but one participant. However, CTSI noted the initial technical elements for integration at U of T made for a rushed pilot of this specific resource. It may be that it is now ready for a smooth implementation and so it could be offered as a more integrated or separate and supplementary workshop.

Exercises and Activities. It would be worthwhile to carefully consider which exercises to include and which documents the participants will be required to submit in order to create more consistent participation, sharing and data collection via these items. Perhaps use of an online tracking system of what is expected by when could be included in the portal. Consent to use any of these as research instruments would best be obtained at the start of the program even if CTSI wanted to allow time for people to consider their consent for research elements that come later in the program.

Faculty moved through a process of relationship building, reflection, skill development, skill sharing, discovery and reflection over the course of the P2P program. Adding a reflective exercise near the conclusion of the program to invite faculty to reflect on and articulate their transformation would round out their learning and wrap up the experience for them. This may also serve them well in documenting their professional development experience. That documentation could, in turn, inform elements of their dossier and their mentor-coaching of others. They may benefit from prompts that ask them to ponder their understanding and experience of mentor-coaching, their evolving understanding of themselves as teachers and their perceptions of leadership in teaching.

Final remarks. The feedback from participants indicates that this was a highly successful program and its continuation will continue to shape the existence, notions and practice of faculty peer mentorship across the University.

“(P2P) can reinvigorate your teaching and your connection to teaching and connection to teachers in different divisions. It actually made me really proud to be a part of this institution, and connected to the whole idea of it, and that they valued the teaching.”