Peer teaching and evaluation
This blog can be commented by anyone in the world. Students have also been asked to evaluate their peers constructively according to the following criteria:
- Do you like the title?
- Does the book review grab your attention? Challenging adjectives or old, plain adjectives?
- What do you think about the analysis?
- Is the structure clear and comprehensible? (a beginning, a middle and an end)
- Has the author focused on describing the character or just provided a description of the plot?
- Is there some kind of theory, something the writer is trying to prove about the character? Is it successful? Is their any solid proof, such as quotes?
- Why do you like it / why not? Which details/quotations are the best?
- How could it be developed further?
Media / Appearance
- Are there links / videos / pictures? Are they relevant?
- What do you think about the mind map? Does it seem like the analysis is based on the map?
- Has the author considered copyrights and used only pictures/text that he/she is allowed to use?
- Do you like the appearance and why? (paragraphs, titles, fonts etc.)
- Have the sources been cited properly? (bibliography, quotes)
- Can you spot any mistakes and how could they be fixed?
- Have the ten challenging words been translated properly?
The teacher will comment the posts according to the same criteria on a scale of satisfactory / good / very good / excellent.
- Jerry – Adama
- Taru – Jere
- Lotta T. – Kristiina
- Noora – Maria T.
- Roote – Olga
- Arto – Maria M.
- Warin – Amel
- Winni – Ben
- Cathy – Joonas K
- Vi – Sini
- Jasmin – Sanna
- Mikko K. – Johannes S.
- Suvi – Konsta
- Julia – Samuli
- Atte – Joanna
- Tuulia – Kerli
- Gonzi – Johannes B.
- Niklas – Mikko H.
- Rando – Iina
- Omar – Petra
- Kristina – Sami
- Rosa – Mira J.
- Mira L. – Aku
- Heidi – Lotta L.
- Joonas – Valtteri N.