Peer Evaluation

Rovaniemi

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	a)	SEFES Form
				b)	SEFES Peer Evaluation Form
		3.2.5.	Rzeszow
3.3.	Diary
3.4.	Photo Evaluation
3.5.	Diverse

---

Peer evaluation

Four pairs of teachers made peer evaluation in the first step and later one more pair did their own.  In peer evaluation the targets were teacher`s activity, students´ behaviour, good points about teaching and issues to be developed.

Participant	Subject
1.Liisa Kauraniemi	Swedish
1.Marja Hyvönen	Food production
2.Ritva Timonen-Kunnnari	Finnish
2.Outi Määttä	Nutritions
3.Jari Koivumaa	Social sciences
3. Marko Pakarinen	Consumer law
4. Päivi Niska	Serving
4. Jussi Raittimo	Alcohol drinks
5. Solja Upola	Marketing
5. Leila Tunturi	Finnish

Results

Peers fiil up the followup forms during the lessons.

Teacher`s activities were normal, so that the peer got right idea about the standart of teaching

Students´ behaviours were good because there was an other adult person present but still they were quite passive to participate in lessons.

Conclutions

Method developed the quality of the school on the grass root level, because you learnt a lot from the peers during the evaluation discussion. After the discussion there were small chances in the teaching.