My initial apprehension about the prospect of the peer observation element of the PGCert was entirely ego-based; imposter syndrome as a new lecturer can be intense when surrounded by many experienced professionals with years of practice behind them. I arranged to meet with the colleague I had been paired with soon after the session to ‘break the ice’. The exchange that followed helped dispel these fears as we were both feeling very similarly nervous about this and both were relatively new to teaching, despite having many years of experience in our relative disciplines. The fact that the disciplines we teach are so different to each other’s, and relatively unknown to us respectively, helped us to relax about the process and focus on the teaching elements rather than the subject itself. I can imagine the actual observation I performed would have been trickier had I been observing someone teach in my own discipline.
The experience of the observation of my own lecture was still somewhat nerve wracking as it happened to be the first session that I was teaching in a live context with the students, as opposed to the online setting that I had been limited to until then and was therefore the first instance in which I was meeting the students face-to-face. However, knowing that the observer would be present did not greatly affect the approach I took; I was worried that I would adjust my method to incorporate new elements that would ‘perform’ teaching for the PGCert purposes, rather than give an authentic representation of what I do when I teach. I was very pleased to find this did not occur at all. Since my students are all new to the subject I am teaching, and the observer was also not knowledgeable about my subject, helped align the sense of observation, as I am always aware that the students are always observing my practice to some extent. I think my experience as observer a couple of weeks later was similar in this regard.
The feedback I received contained comments and questions that were very helpful, raising structural issues that I had been aware of and helped me to focus on very practical steps I could take to address these.
The observation by my tutor was somewhat different as limited availability and so had to be provided as a recorded session. Despite feeling comfortable with him personally, this felt much more like a potential ‘evaluation’, due to the context of his ‘discipline being teaching itself, and involved the interesting difference in feeling about being observed ‘live’ and handing over a recording of oneself. These fears were completely dispelled and while offering structural and organisational suggestions, offered a reflection on elements of my teaching that were not so fully explored in the previous observation. Focus was given to the passionate knowledge conveyed and reminded me of feedback I had received two years prior to a document I had produced as a guide to filmmaking. This re-focussing on the more personality-based elements of teaching gave me a lift that I needed at that moment in my own current course of study and reminded me of why I enjoy teaching what I teach. The balance between these two experiences have helped me to reflect more fully on what I need to do more of in practical terms and what I need to keep in mind about myself as sort of conduit for inspiration. The space peer observation offers as a way of guiding self-reflection has already proved to be extremely valuable and is something that I would be keen to repeat at regular junctures.
“Wanting to communicate a passion for a subject is a laudable goal. Indeed, it is a goal that attracts many to an academic career. Lecturers who fail to communicate their passion or commitment to their subject are unlikely to inspire their students. But, as Nelson and Watt (1999) point out, good teaching is about the successful combination of passion and reason or ‘passionate reason’.” (Macfarlane, B. 2004. Teaching with Integrity: The ethics of higher education practice)
In the case studies we explored in the session on peer observation, the concept of charisma was one that I felt was not fully unpacked. While the issues with the ego of the observed in the case study was reflected in their own observation, conversations during the session about charisma in teaching tended to look at problems of identifying what charisma is, rather than championing passion and personality.
When developing video materials and approaches to use of video in my work as a technician for LCF, I have tried to look from the position of the learner who feels they know nothing of the subject they are asked to learn and who fear the technology involved. The resistance to technology from some academic colleagues during the pandemic has been sometimes frustrating, considering the successes I had experienced in this with technicians I had taught to make videos. This resistance seems to be associated with issues of ego when having to record performance, rather than abilities in engagement with technology. Charisma in this context is, I believe, misleading – I would rather talk about palpably ‘passionate reason’.
“Charisma is theorized as a mystical trait, one that is ineffable and irreducible, and therefore inimitable. The enigmatic account of charisma has discouraged communication scholars from undertaking any technical description of this phenomenon.”