This is the general document that my group (number 2) make in order to self
assess the collaborative activity we carried out.
We will first show an evaluation of the participants’ attitudes towards
the topic and by activity; then we will try to provide a self evaluation for
the activities proposed.
Participants’ Assessment:
There were 5 groups structured as follows:
Group A: Chusa, Ariadna and Leticia
Group B: Belén, Ana, Daniel Muñoz and
Andrea González
Group C: Pablo, Daniel Jarque, Raúl and
Ruth
Group D: Gemma, Almudena Bellot,
Azahara and Athina
Group E: Blanca and Raquel
GROUPS
|
ACTIVITY 1
|
ACTIVITY 2
|
ACTIVITY 3
|
COMMENTS
|
A
|
Very positive attitude
Well performance in their
work (7 out of 8 questions answered)
|
Very positive attitude
They worked on their
texts properly
|
Question: not very
clearly expressed
Answer: correctly answered
although it took time to understand the question
|
Much interest was shown
|
B
|
Negative attitude.
Passivity while
accomplishing tasks (3 out of 8 questions answered)
|
They did not work on
their texts the way it was proposed, they cheated one another, maybe
collaborative work (?)
|
Question: The person
making the question did not even know what was asking for.
Answer: The answer was
correct.
|
Tasks were not divided in
a balanced way, it is a very heterogenous group.
|
C
|
Didn´t follow the
instructions given.
Fair performance in their
results for this activity (5 out of 8 questions answered)
|
Negative attitude
Although they worked a
bit on their texts.
|
Question: Well formulated
and interesting.
Answer: Did not give the
correct answer (the question was not well done, could this be the reason?)
|
Quite of interest was
shown despite their behavior since they made suggestions for improvement.
|
D
|
Very positive attitude
Well performance in their
work (6 out of 8 questions answered)
|
Very positive attitude
They worked on their
texts in a fair way.
|
Question: Well formulated
and interesting.
Answer: Did not give the
correct answer (the question was not clearly expressed, could this be the
reason?)
|
A very balanced group.
|
E
|
Didn´t follow the
instructions given.
Fair performance in their
results for this activity (5 out of 8 questions answered)
|
Very positive attitude
They worked on their
texts properly
|
Question: It was too wide
at the beginning, it needed to be narrowed.
Answer: The answer was
correct.
|
They were only two
participants in this group to do the same work as groups composed of 4
persons.
|
Self Assessment:
For our self evaluation we are going to highlight the things we belief
we have done better and things that we need to improve:
WELL DONE
|
IMPROVEMENT IS NEEDED
|
We adapted very well and
fast to new necessities that have arise during the activity:
-
Timing adaptation
-
Development of the
activity
|
Better timing planning
|
Natural role distribution
within our group:
-
Anna: Explaining
Activities and giving instructions
-
Elisa: Organizing the
work
-
Myriam: Observing within
the groups
-
Almudena: Assessment
|
More simple and clear
explanations
|
Make activities less
complex
|
|
Look for new techniques
for motivating demotivated participants
|
Suggestions:
A suggestion was made by a participant (Raúl) in order to improve our
activities; this was to repeat the first activity at the end of the rest of the
activities in order for them to make sure that they have understood properly
the topic.
We must conclude that from the participants’ point of view the topic was
well understood and learned, their self-assessment shows that almost all of
them acquired some knowledge about what ‘Special Education Needs provision
within Mainstream Education’ is.
Personal opinion:
From my point of view, our collaborative activity was well done in general
terms. We find some problems during the activity that we were able to solve and
the students that were focused on the activity learn the main ideas of our topic.
Of course, there are a lot of things that we have to learn and to improve for future
times, but I am glad with the work we did.
No comments:
Post a Comment