Write developmental teaching-observation feedback around a specific episode
Write a developmental teaching-observation note with a specific episode, a bounded interpretation and a useful discussion question.
About 5 min read · Allow extra time for the practical checks
Describe the teaching episode you observed, connect it to the agreed focus and offer a question that the colleague can examine with you. Useful developmental feedback gives the reader something concrete to recognise. A label such as “unclear teaching” supplies a judgement without showing what happened or what remains open to interpretation.
Check the purpose and procedure of the observation before drafting. This guide concerns a developmental feedback note between colleagues. It does not supply a formal assessment rubric, decide professional competence or replace an institution’s requirements for recording and sharing observation material.
Keep the agreed focus visible
Identify the question the observation was intended to explore. Feedback about the transition from pair work to a whole-group discussion needs a different focus from feedback about the explanation of a technical concept. A note can be selective while still being useful; it need not claim to assess every aspect of the session.
Durham University’s peer-observation toolkit, checked on 3 November 2026, connects purpose with observation scope and asks that discussion stay grounded in descriptions and illustrative evidence. Use your actual observation arrangement rather than treating the toolkit’s suggested timing or format as a universal requirement.
State which part of the session you observed when that boundary affects the comment. If you joined after the opening, do not write as though you know what instructions were given before you arrived.
Separate the episode from your explanation of it
Record what the available notes establish before deciding what it means. An observer may hear a request for clarification without knowing why it was needed. The request could concern wording, an earlier instruction, an unexpected task feature or another factor the observation did not establish.
Sheffield Hallam University’s feedback guidance, also checked on 3 November 2026, recommends specific examples, attention to agreed outcomes and questions that support reflection. Its procedure belongs to its own peer-observation approach. The writing principle used here is to make the basis of a comment inspectable, rather than describing the colleague’s personality.
Avoid turning a single episode into a general account of the instructor or every student’s understanding. If an interpretation is relevant, identify it as an interpretation and show the observation behind it.
Work through an original fictional feedback note
The seminar, instructions and observations below are invented teaching material. They are not an actual colleague’s performance record or student data.
Imagine that two fictional colleagues agreed to focus on the transition from pair work to a whole-group discussion. The supplied observation record says that the instructor asked pairs to compare two catalogue descriptions. Before the whole-group discussion, a pair asked what they should share. The instructor then asked pairs to identify one difference and the text supporting it. The exercise provides no assessment of learning or explanation of why the pair asked.
| Part of the feedback | What the fictional record permits |
|---|---|
| Agreed focus | Transition from pair comparison to whole-group discussion |
| Observed episode | A pair requested clarification about what to share |
| Subsequent instruction | Identify one difference and its supporting text |
| Interpretation to test | Whether the expected contribution needed to be stated earlier |
| Unsupported conclusion | That all students were confused or that the instructor cannot explain tasks |
A vague draft says:
Your instructions were confusing, so the students did not learn.
That sentence turns an observed question into two unsupported conclusions. A more useful developmental note could read:
Our agreed focus was the transition into the whole-group discussion. Before that discussion, a pair asked what they should share. You then specified one difference and the text supporting it. I wondered whether stating that expected contribution before pair work might be useful. How did you interpret the clarification request, and is this a transition you would like to explore further?
The note identifies the episode and presents a possible question. It does not establish that an earlier instruction would improve learning or that the colleague has agreed to change it. The instructor may provide context that changes the observer’s interpretation.
Make the note support a conversation
Read the colleague’s reflection alongside the observation rather than treating your first explanation as the only possible one. Distinguish a suggestion you offered from a change discussed, an action agreed and a change later tried. Those are different stages, and the written record should preserve their actual status.
Check the note against the agreed focus, your coverage and the material you actually observed. Remove personal labels, unsupported claims about motives and invented quotations. Follow the applicable arrangements for what is recorded, who receives it and how it is handled; do not assume that a developmental note is automatically suitable for a public portfolio.
The teaching-statement guide concerns an instructor’s own account of practice. The teaching-portfolio guide addresses selecting and explaining supporting material. This feedback note has a different immediate reader and purpose: help a colleague recognise an observed episode and consider a well-founded question about it.
