You are on page 1of 2

Department of Psychology

24 April 2015
To whom it may concern,
RE: Informal peer-observation Dr Ann-Marie Creaven
Dr Creaven and I worked together in the Spring semester of 2015 to deliver PS4033 and
PS6112, a combined course on Research Methods for Psychology. Dr Creaven taught the
first half of the module and I taught the second. As part of our efforts to calibrate our
teaching styles and methods for the module, and to contribute to our personal growth as
third-level educators, we sat-in on each-others lectures for informal peer observation.
When I arrived the lecture had already started and students were focusing intently on the
lecturer to the extent that very few noticed when I walked in, even though I entered
through a door at the front of the lecture theatre. There was almost universal attention
from students, with most taking notes and making excellent visual contact with the
lecturer.
The most characteristic feature of Dr Creavens teaching was the quality of the rapport she
had with the class. Although it was a large class (consisting of two modules) in a large
venue, there was a great deal of interaction between the lecturer and the class.
Dr Creaven consistently asked the class for their input, and received it. It was clear that
this engaged and supportive atmosphere was the result of appropriate teaching
techniques and consistent attention to student engagement over the course of the
semester.
Dr Creaven knew the names of many of the students in the class, and was able to ask them
questions by name. Several times in the lecture she asked students to discuss questions
amongst themselves and report back their conclusions to the class. Her response to
dreaded silences was impressive: she was able to stare the class down while waiting for a
response and then call on individuals to contribute which broke the ice and launched
interesting class discussions. This is something that I personally have difficulty with, often
letting students off the hook by releasing the tension with my own answers to questions
addressed to the class! I noted that Dr Creaven called on different students each time,
cementing the impression that she was interested and engaged with the class as
individuals, not just as a nameless mass.

Roinn na Sceolaochta

Dr Creavens ability to generate and maintain student engagement in the lecture was
impressive, and her responses to student contributions was simultaneously supportive
and challenging. After watching how Dr Creaven engaged with the class in this way I have
resolved to try to incorporate some of these obviously effective techniques into my own
teaching, particularly: 1) making an effort to learn students names, even in large classes;
2) asking students to discuss topics in small groups and report back; and 3) expecting
engagement and calling on individuals individually when it is not immediately forthcoming.
Dr Creaven managed student discussions skillfully, subtly correcting and synthesizing
students perspectives in a way that provided an excellent platform for critical dialogue.
She was also able to summarize key points in a way that made them very clear to
students.
Statistics and research methods modules are traditionally feared by psychology students,
who are often drawn from the Arts and Humanities disciplines. Dr Creavens ability to
generate rapport with the class was matched by technical proficiency and clarity in
explaining difficult statistical and methodological concepts.
I was impressed with Dr Creavens teaching and have taken useful tips from this
observation to improve my own.
Sincerely,

Mike Quayle

You might also like