Graduate Peer Review of Presentations


In this section of our website, you will find information about the CTLT (formative) Peer Review Program addressed specifically to the unique context of graduate students.

Through the Graduate Formative Peer Review program (GPR) we offer Formative Peer Review of Teaching and Formative Peer Review of Presentations services for Graduate Students at UBC.

Peer review of presentations is a form of evaluation designed to provide feedback on presentations.

Peers may evaluate the following elements of presentations:

  • Classroom presentations
  • Conference presentations
  • Thesis/dissertation defense presentations

Ideally, the peer review of presentations is a critically reflective and collaborative process in which the graduate student under review works closely with his/her peer or group of peers to discuss his or her presentation.

For information about Formative Peer Review of Teaching for Graduate Students, see here

For more information about the Graduate Peer Review of Presentation Program contact: Dr. Shaya Golparian.

For information about Formative Peer Review of Teaching for Faculty, see here

For information about the UBC Peer Review of Teaching Initiative, see here.

Peer Review of Presentations Program

What is it?

The Graduate Peer Review of Presentations (GPRP) Program coordinated by the Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology offers you the chance to participate in a formative peer review of presentations process. The peer review of presentations program described below is open to all UBC graduate students who plan to present their work in conferences, defenses, or as part their classrooms assignments. In addition, graduate students are welcome to take part in workshops on peer review of presentations in order to acquire the necessary skills as reviewers.

How does it work?

The Graduate Student Peer Review of Presentations (GPRP) program coordinated by CTLT is a voluntary and confidential process. As a reviewee, you will select and meet with up to two volunteer peer reviewers. The reviewers are selected graduate students at UBC who have completed at least one workshop (4 hours) offered by CTLT on becoming a peer reviewer. The reviewers will discuss your presentations objectives, observe your presentation and presentation, and give you formative feedback.

How will I benefit?

The GPRP Program aims to encourage dialogue about presentation amongst graduate students of all levels at UBC. By talking with your reviewers, you will likely gain new insight into your presentation skills and styles and get feedback about improving your presentation.

How it works

The peer review process is generally organized around an informal presentation observation. A peer reviewer will observe a presentation and provide the reviewee with formative feedback based on what she or he observed.


Anyone interested in participating in the peer review of their presentation may contact an individual reviewer listed on our website. Details of the peer review process will be worked out between the reviewer and the reviewee. For example, you will discuss “what” you want to have peer reviewed, where are you planning on presenting your research/work? What are your objectives for this presentation?, etc.

The following describes what happens before, during and after the presentation observation:

Part 1: Before the presentation observation

  • No less than one week before the presentation observation, the peer reviewer and reviewee either meet in person for 10-30 minutes, or connect via e-mail to set goals for the peer review process and to discuss the reviewee’s development goals, and his/her plans for the presentation to be observed.
  • The reviewee forwards their first draft of presentation to the reviewer.
  • The reviewer offers feedback on the presentations material within a week.
  • The reviewee and reviewer decide on the date and location of observation.
  • Before the observation, the reviewee should plan and prepare his/her as s/he normally would.

Part 2: Presentation Observation

  • The reviewee presents his/her work while the peer reviewer observes the session. The peer reviewers’ observation is guided by any goals set at the pre-observation meeting/communication.

Part 3: After the presentation observation

  • Either immediately after the observation or within a week after the observation, the reviewee and peer reviewer will meet for approximately 30 minutes to discuss the presentation.


All graduate peer reviewers have completed the Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology workshop: "Developing Your Skills as a Peer Reviewers of Presentations: Introductory Workshop". In addition, the reviewers have shown a commitment to teaching and learning in higher education. For a full description of the formative peer review process, please read the Peer Review Process section of our website.

When you email a reviewer for a request, please indicate:

- a brief statement of your goal for peer review

- an on campus location for the observation

- a time range within which you are hoping to be peer reviewed and a few possible dates for the observation

- your contact information

List of peer reviewers

  • Tiera Naber (PhD Student, Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences)

Additional information on reviewers:

  • Sai Diwan, PhD Candidate, Asian Studies.

I am a PhD candidate in Asian Studies. My field of research is Audience Studies and Media Studies. I hold an MA and a BA in English Literature from Mumbai University, India. Currently, I analyze viewers’ YouTube interactions to understand the uptake of video streaming media in India. I enjoy conducting qualitative analysis on complex data to be able to tell the story that it holds. Through my years in graduate school I have had the opportunity to present my work at conferences and guest talks. To me, teaching too is the story of effective communication. Completing the feedback loop of “good teaching” involves effecting “good learning”. I value facilitating active learning experiences, creating equitable classrooms and supporting students in building on their existing knowledge to advance learning. My ideas of what good teaching entails have developed through the pedagogical workshops and training that I completed at UBC: the Instructional Skills workshop, the Course Design Intensive program and the Facilitator Development workshop. With respect to my own experience as an educator, I have been a TA for courses in Asian Studies and am currently a Sessional Instructor in the department. I have experience with course and syllabus design, face-to-face as well as online course delivery and TA mentorship and management. I am also a Graduate Facilitator with the CTLT where I facilitate the Instructional Skills workshop, Presentation Skills workshop and TA training sessions. As a peer reviewer of teaching and presentation, I would be happy to work with you to support you in meeting your goals. During the review process I will support you in reflecting on your own teaching or presentation practice through the use of an evidence-based approach. My feedback will aim at helping you identify the tools, teaching techniques, classroom activities that best support your students’ growth and your own development as an instructor. I look forward to collaborating with you and learning from you in the process!; please write “GPRT” in the subject line.

  • Sophie MacDonald, PhD Student, Department of Mathematics.

I am a facilitator with CTLT, a PhD student in the Mathematics Department, a big fan of graphic novels and strong coffee, and an omnivorous learner. My research experience is in statistical physics and theoretical computer science. Mostly this has meant drawing pictures and occasionally doing some linear algebra, as a treat. I have worked as a TA for various courses in math, as well as in the Master of Data Science program. Other great teaching-related experiences have included assisting with my department's TA training program and leading workshops for high school and undergrad students at a Diversity in Math summer program. I have presented my own research at several online and in-person conferences, and I take great pleasure in developing innovative presentation formats.

My teaching-related priorities are focused on access, autonomy, and dignity for learners as well as all members of the teaching team. Some of my favourite areas in which to help instructors develop include online assessment strategies, communication of expectations, and the connection between students' values, feelings, and attitudes and their "hard" or discipline-specific skills. However, the thing I like most of all is a surprising challenge, so no matter how you would like to grow as an instructor or presenter, I would be excited to observe and support you.

Email:; please write “GPRP" in the subject line.

  • Julie McNutt, PhD Candidate, Department of Chemistry.

As a PhD candidate in the Department of Chemistry and collaboratively in the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, my research is at the interface of molecular biology and analytical chemistry where I am interested in breast cancer treatments. My teaching journey began as a teenager where I was swim instructor and it continued through undergrad into graduate school where I have held several teaching assistant positions from course development to leading tutorials. More recently, I have become involved with the Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology (CTLT) where I am a part of the Graduate Student Facilitator Team. Here, I facilitate TA training workshops as well as Instructional Skills Workshops for graduate students. I am also a part of the 2021-2022 Certificate in Advanced Teaching and Learning (CATL) where I have had the opportunity to strengthen my pedagogical knowledge and grow as an instructor through teaching practicums and mentorship from educational leaders. As an instructor, I value participatory learning that engages students and actively involves them in the learning process. As a peer reviewer of teaching and presentations, I hope to create a safe and welcoming space to discuss your goals and values as a teacher and determine how I can best support you through your lesson/presentation. My goal is to provide you with constructive and focused feedback while giving you the space to reflect on your teaching/presenting experience and most importantly, learn with you throughout the process.

Email:; please write “GPRT" in the subject line.

  • Tiera Naber, PhD Student, Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences.

I am a graduate student in the Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences (EOAS) studying the mineralogy of syenite intrusions and their altered host rocks in the Yukon Territory. I enjoy studying rocks, teaching, hiking, sushi, and snuggling my dogs. My journey of teaching began during the final year of my undergraduate degree, where I looked for instructing opportunities to see if I liked teaching. Thankfully, I was given the opportunity to instruct a first-year geology lab of eighteen students every week for one semester. It turns out I liked teaching more than I thought I would! Since coming to UBC in September 2018, I have continued to develop my instruction skills by teaching as TA in the EOAS and Integrated Sciences departments, and taking courses and workshops from EOAS and CTLT. Some of these include an Instructional Skills Workshop equivalent course (EOSC 516 – Teaching and Learning in EOAS) and the Facilitator Development Workshop. Now, I am a facilitator with CTLT and a co-facilitator for EOSC 516. I am also currently part of the 2020–2022 Certificate in Advanced Teaching and Learning cohort. I have experience teaching in and creating content for face-to-face and online (synchronous and asynchronous) settings. When teaching, I value creating a welcoming and active learning space for students. In my lessons, I focus on using real-world examples and creating opportunities for students to construct knowledge from their previous experiences. As a peer-reviewer, I look forward to collaborating with you and providing you with any support you need.

Email:; please write “GPRP" in the subject line.

  • Natalie Westwood, PhD Candidate, Zoology

My work surrounding my PhD focuses on Community Ecology in aquatic invertebrates along with a Public Scholars project that examines how TAs value their experiences in biology classes. My previous education includes a MSc from Université du Québec à Montréal in Biology as well as an Hon. BSc in Biology from Western University. Throughout my education I have had many opportunities to present my work at local, national, and international conferences. I have also shared my work with a diverse range of audiences, from other colleagues to the larger public, including children and teens. In addition to having been a TA in a number of biology course, I have worked as a Graduate Facilitator and as the CIRTL Program Developer at CTLT. Here I have helped to develop and facilitate workshops to support fellow graduate students in teaching and presentation skills. I have had the opportunity to work and adapt topics to a wide range of fields including Engineering, Art History, and Philosophy. I believe it centering the experience around the people I am working with and adjusting existing programming to their unique situation. I always aim to create a supportive environment where those around me feel free to experiment and honestly reflect on their experiences. As a peer reviewer of presentations, I am able to support you during any part of the process. My goal is to not only provide you my feedback but to allow you to reflect yourself on how the experience went in order to give you new tools to continue this review process after our work. Please also include information on the topic of the lesson, the date, and your teaching, reviewing and ISW experiences.

Email:; please write “GPRP" in the subject line.

Alumni Reviewers

  • Mabel Ho (PhD, Sociology, UBC)
  • Jens Vent-Schmidt (PhD, Experimental Medicine, UBC)
  • Roselynn Verwoord (PhD, Faculty of Education, UBC)


Frequently asked questions about the Peer Review of Teaching Program


Formative peer review

Promotes the development of an instructor’s teaching practice. The formative model is said to contribute to continuing professional development and to enhance teaching quality through reflective practice and collective learning (Gosling, 2005; Peel, 2005; Shortland, 2004). It is commonly assumed that this improved teaching quality will ultimately boost student learning (Bovill, 2008; Cavanaugh, 1996).


What is the purpose of the peer review?

Within the context of higher education, peer review assists graduate students enhance their presentation skills.

Do academic rank or classification matter in the process?

Professorial rank and job classification are disregarded in the program. All graduate students are invited to participate and learn from one another.

How is confidentiality handled in the formative peer review program?

The only people involved in the discussions will be the reviewee and the reviewers. The process is confidential, unless you decide to include reflections or documentation about the process to your portfolio or personnel file.

What control do reviewees have over and during the process?

Each reviewee selects the peer reviewer with whom they will work, sets the objectives and focus for the observation, and decides what to do with the feedback they receive from the reviewers.

Who will review my presentation?

The list of reviewers is available on a section of this website. You will choose a reviewer among the people listed.

What training do the peer reviewers receive?

All peer reviewers complete an intensive training course run by CTLT which teaches them how to conduct peer reviews and to observe presentations. All reviewers have also completed an Instructional Skills Workshop (ISW).

When should peer reviews take place?

The peer review can happen any time deemed suitable for you and your reviewer. Each reviewee may decide when to schedule the observations. Scheduling them earlier will give you timely and relevant feedback that may be useful in your actual presentation. Also keep in mind that reviewers are all graduate students and may be busy towards the end of semester with their own classes and assignments.

How will reviewees receive feedback?

Reviewees will receive verbal. Reviewees will meet with their reviewers after the observation and engage in a friendly, collegial dialogue about the presentation that the reviewer observed.

What is formative feedback?

Formative feedback is information that is intended to support a graduate student's growth towards becoming a better presenter. The feedback aims to be non-evaluative and is not intended to be a snapshot or final judgement of the presenter's fitness or competence. Rather the goal is to provide information that can help you reflect on your teaching and plan changes for the future. Formative peer review aims to help you better understand how you approach the task of university teaching, and who you are as a teacher.

How much time will the process take?

The process will take approximately 1.5 to 2 hours to complete.


Developing Your Skills as a Peer Reviewer of Presentation: Introductory Workshop for Graduate Students (4 hours)

Description: The peer review process introduced in this experiential workshop is intended primarily as a form of formative (and developmental) feedback.

By the end of this workshop participants will be able to:

  • Describe the peer review of presentation process
  • Conduct appropriate Pre- and Post-observation interviews
  • Respond to various peer review of presentation situations
  • Provide constructive feedback for the person being reviewed

This workshop is open to all graduate students in the UBC who have completed an Instructional Skills Workshop (ISW).


Below are links to websites that focus on the subject, a list of academic references (journal articles, book chapters) and UBC resources on the peer review of presentation.

If you have a resource that you would like to add, please email Isabeau Iqbal.