Peer Evaluation

Reykjavik

Please choose one of the documentation items below:

3.1.	Feedback
3.2.	Peer Evaluation	3.2.1.	Hamburg
		3.2.2.	Kaunas
		3.2.3.	Reykjavik
		3.2.4.	Rovaniemi
		3.2.5.	Rzeszow
3.3.	Diary
3.4.	Photo Evaluation
3.5.	Diverse

---

Innovation and new teaching approaches in Versló

An experiment in peer evaluation

Participants	Subjects
Ármann Halldórsson	Philosophy, English
Ingólfur Gíslason	Mathematics
Alda Jóna Nóadóttir	Current Affairs
Sólveig Friðriksdóttir	Current Affairs

Innovation in Versló

The motivation behind this small initiative was an idea that teachers in different subjects have been working on various new things in isolation, and that peer evaluation would be and ideal place to start work on forming a better awareness and understanding of new approaches and to learn from each other and generate progress. A lot of barriers need to be overcome when the desire to change is to be realized. The choice of teachers participating was a little bit arbitrary, but my general plan is to form some kind of a platform for teachers from all subjects who are working on new ideas and are looking for support and, possibly most importantly, mutual recognition that their efforts are appreciated and lead to something. Because to be fair the atmosphere towards newness has a tendency to be a shade negative..

Procedure:

The group met for a few informal meetings where we told each other about our subjects and shared our thoughts on teaching and the culture around innovation in our school. A plan was laid down for visiting each others classes and communication has continued informally and via e-mail. The plan of this peer evaluation was more like observation to gather information rather than any attempt to criticise or analyse performance. Since we come from different subjects and are new to peer evaluation this was a clear understanding from the start.

Subjects

Philosophy. Innovation in philosophy is largely based on the introduction of ideas from the area of practical philosophy into college work. Two elements ‘the philosophical café’ and ‘Socratic dialogues’ have been experimented with. These approaches encourage student participation and innovation and make for a more democratic philosophy class. Unfortunately no visits were made to philosophy classes.

English. In English a variety of new approaches have been creeping in, but some variations on communicative approaches have been what I have been trying out. I have fashioned a short writing program that I will be trying out later in April and for which I hope to get my peers for a visit!

Mathematics. In math, like in most subjects, there is an ongoing debate on whether the emphases should be on understanding or on technical skill and rote learning. Ingólfur comes down firmly on the side of understanding (irritating some of his students) and is very passionate about changing the way math is taught. He is commited to the ideas of learning by induction and in developing cognitive skills in students. I visited him for a session where he was working on probablity theory and he had the students working in groups on a problem – they had to figure out which methods to use and then create a comparable problem. The whole thing was more or less a success, except the problems created by the students tended to be very similar to the original one (same or similar numbers etc.)

Current Affairs. Is an elective course taught in the last year. It is probably the only course in Versló that is purely based around innovation with a high degree of student democracy, project based learning etc.- originally based on an approach known as ‘story line’. There are no exams and the evaluation is based on various projects created by the students. Every Friday morning a pair of students get to introduce a topic that they personally know something about. I visited a class where a couple of girls gave an impressive lecture on ballroom dancing, with pictures etc. All the other students get a sheet to evaluate the lecture. The problem here, and it is a universal problem is that the students’ participation is sometimes a bit routine, it seeemed to me that their evaluation was a bit haphazard and that they didn’t really pay attention to what their peers were saying. This approach to giving grades, however, is very interesting and it is clearly intresting to see how students evaluate each other.

Finally

Like most initiatives of its kind this one has not been unproblematic, and we have not put nearly as much time and energy into it as we would like to. Personally I find that I am more aware of what is going on in the school and I’m confident that it’s very important to bring together teachers based on a larger variety of criteria than just what subject they teach.

April, 2006, Ármann Halldórsson