spain evaluation report of students performance

EVALUATION REPORT OF STUDENTS PERFORMANCE

2015 –2017F L w I C T

Erasmus+ KA2 Project

MULTIDISCIPLINARY FLIPPED LEARNING WITH ICT

Turkey is the Main Coordinator of the ProjectParticipant Schools are Lithuania, Poland, Italy, Latvia, France, Portugal, Spain

KA2 - Cooperation for Innovation and the Exchange of Good PracticesStrategic Partnerships for Schools Only

Project Number: 2015-1-TR01-KA219-021988

Prepared byJOSE LUIS LEÓN

I.E.S. MIGUEL DE CERVANTESSeville/SPAIN

Web Page: http://flippedlearning.wix.com/homee-twinning:https://twinspace.etwinning.net/12713/home

Multidisciplinary Flipped Learning with ICTParticipant Countries: Turkey-Lithuania-Latvia-Italy-Poland-Portugal-Spain-France

2

In 2015-2016 academic year, during the implementation process of Multidisciplinary Flipped Learning with ICT Project’s first year, the students of Miguel de Cervantes School have studied about the subjects which are given below.

First Year - First SemesterImproving Digital Skills

First Year - Second SemesterImproving Intercultural Awareness

September 2015Preparation of the project board

February 2016Preparing a presentation about the culture

October 2015Creating the project logo

March 2016Preparing an e-guide about the culture

December 2015Preparation a digital postcard – Making an e-guide about how to make a movie – Preparing a video about the students’s own school

April 2016Preparing a presentation about the custom and etiquette

January 2016Preparing a presentation about Cyberbullying

May 2016General evaluation of student’s products

At the end of May, the evaluation form, which was prepared in order to assess the students’ all products by the main coordinator of the project, was filled for each student monthly. The goal of the evaluation form is to obtain information about the quality degree of the students’ monthly products and the performance of students. This year, 20 students of Miguelde Cervantes Secondary School have participated in FLwICT project. The evaluations of our students’ performances are given below in details as graphics. The scale level for each item represents the least positive value 1 (Poor), 2 (Average), 3 (Above average) and 4 the most positive (Superior).



3

September 2015: Preparation of the project board

Graphic 1

In Graphic 1, the evaluation of the students’ performance on preparation of the project board is seen. Totally 20

students worked on this subject. From the analysis of Graphic 1, we can say that the evaluation of the students’

performance on preparation of the project board is mostly considered good.

0

5

10

15

20

11 10 10 913

9 10 10 107

1

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor



4

October 2015: Creating the project logo

Graphic 2.1

Graphic 2.2

0

5

10

15

20

1 2 2

9

13

86

4

6

16

1011

7

12

1

Superior

Above Av-erage

Average

Poor

0

5

10

15

20

1

3

4

11

5

3

5

8

15

5 8

7

2

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor



5

In Graphic 2.1 and Graphic 2.2 show the evaluation of the students’ performance on preparation of the

project logo. From the analysis of Graphic 2.1, it is found that regarding the information provided for

creating the project logo, the most of the students used computer programs to prepare the project logo

properly and designed a creative logo . However, the Graphic 2.1 shows half of the students didn’t study in

a big cooperation with each other regarding the preparation of the project logo.

From the analysis of Graphic 2.2, the most of students worked on this subject constantly and productively.

And most of them completed the work on time. But the students aren’t successful to share their products

on Facebook group and e-twinning platform.

As a result, the evaluation of the students’ performance on creating the project logo is mostly

considered positive but the communication and broadcasting must be improve.



6

December 2015: Preparation a digital postcard – Making an e-guide about how to make a movie – Preparing a video about the

students’ own school

Graphic 3.1 –

Graphic 3.2 –

0

5

10

15

20

10

37

5

4

5

42 2

3

8

8 1114

24

7 8 74

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor

0

5

10

15

20

2 24

8

2

1012

10

10

2

6

86 6

10

2

10

8

2

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor



7

In Graphic 3.1 and Graphic 3.2, the evaluation of students' performance on preparing a digital postcard,

making an e-guide about how to make a movie and preparing a video about the students’ own school is

seen. As is shown in Graphic 3.1, while preparing the products on the areas at issue, the logos of Erasmus+,

NA and the name of the project aren’t used correctly by the most of the students . And regarding to define t

the sources, five students were evaluated in level 2 and 7 students in level 1. Nevetheless, it can be said

that based on the data in Graphic 3.1, mostly all students have improved language skills throughout this

activity. They tried to use proper English. This shows that they didn’t pay enough attention to define the

sources on their products.

As seen in Graphic 3.2, the students cooperated with each other and studied consistently and productively.

Beside this, their motivation is high related to working on this project and they used the time efficiently,

completing their products on time. We can observe at the fifth column in Graphic 3.2, the students had

difficulties about uploading the products on e-Twinning platform most. When we look at the sixth column

in Graphic 3.2, we see students improved their participation on Face group comparing with the October

activity.

As a result, the evaluation of the students’ performance on performance on preparing a digital postcard,

making an e-guide about how to make a movie and preparing a video about the students’ own school:

Students must pay attention to define sources on their products and to use the name and logo of the

project.



8

January 2016: Preparing a presentation about CyberbullyingGraphic 4.1 - (only for students who attended the meeting in Italy)

Graphic 4.2 (only for students who attended the meeting in Italy)

As shown in Graphic 4.1 and Graphic 4.2, the students participated in the Italy meeting were able to

complete all their responsibilities with regards to preparation of representative presentation about their

school and the bad sides of Cyberbullying perfectly. During the workshops on Cyberbullying in Italy, we can

say that the students improved languge skills via working with other students. With regards to publish the

work on e-twinning platform and facebook, it can be said that they were not successful.

0

1

2

3

4

1

3

12

3

34

2

43

1

Superior

Above Av-erage

Average

Poor

0

1

2

3

4

43 3 3

1 1 1

34

1

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor



9

February 2016: Preparing a presentation about the culture

Graphic 5.1 - (only for students who attended the meeting in Spain)

Graphic 5.2 - (only for students who attended the meeting in Spain)

Four students participated in Spain meeting. As shown in Graphic 5.1 and 5.2, the results related to

students’ performans on preparing a presentation about the culture are mostly superior. Students were

able to complete all their responsibilities perfectly. And they have improved their English language skills

and tried to use proper English troughout Spain meeting. Besides,, they cooperated with other students

during the meeting, too.

0

1

2

3

4

1 1

34

1

4 43

3Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor

0

1

2

3

4

1

34 4 4

23

21

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor



10

From the analysis of Graphics, it is seen that there are two problems. One of them is that these students

didn’t give importance to define the sources on the products, and other one is that they couldn’t publish the

work on e-Twinning platform without any problems. These problems can be seen at third column in

Graphic 5.1 and at fifth column in Graphich 5.2 respectivly.



11

March 2016: Preparing an e-guide about the culture

Graphic 6.1 -

Graphic 6.2

0

5

10

15

20

1

7

1917

19 1916

1

13

21 1

4

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor

0

5

10

15

20

1

9 6

1

19

1011

19

111

20 20

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor



12

In Graphic 6.1 and Graphic 6.2, the evaluation of students' performance on preparing an e-guide about

culture is seen. During March, totally 20 students worked on this activity. Based on the results of Graphic

6.2, we can say that generally the performance of the sudents is high related to using the logos and the

name of the project correctly. While working on this subject, the students improved their Language skills,

tried to use English language properly and researched enough related to the subject.

Rearding to complete the work on time all students show a level poor because this activity was in fact made

in April and May. They researching enough but they didn’t publish the works on etwinning platform.

Most of the student’s didn’t give importance to these subjects.



13

- April 2016: Preparing a presentation about the custom and etiquetteGraphic 7.1 (only for students who attended the meeting in Latvia)

Graphic 7.2 (only for students who attended the meeting in Latvia)

0

1

2

3

4

4 4 4 4

2

2

2

2

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor

0

1

2

3

4

43 3

4

0

4

1 12

2

Superior

Above Average

Average

Poor



14

As shown in Graphic 7.1 and Graphic 7.2, the students participated in the Latvia meeting were able to complete all their responsibilities with regards to preparation of a presentation about the custom and etiquette perfectly. As seen in Graphic 7.1, it is said that they gave importance to use the logos and the name of the project on their work. Beside this, we can say that they improved their English language skill during the meeting.

From the analysis of Graphic 7.2, it is seen that most of the students studied consistently and productively. And the motivation of the students was high. But they didn’t publish their products on Face group and etwinning successfully. If we look at the third and sixth columns in Graphic 7.2, it is seen that these students didn’t define the sources on the products, and they didn’t give enough time for researches related to their presentations. With regards to complete the work on time.



15

CONCLUSIONS

As we said before, the goal of this performance assessment is to decide the level of competence of the

students. However, this performance assessment also provides useful information to assess whether the

students improved their language skills or not throughout the first year of the project. And it can help the

teachers about which subjects to be given more special attention while the students are working on the

products. This assessment strategy can be used to monitor students’ English language skills, as well as their

competence in particular areas.

Based on the results of this study the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. The students have improved their English language skills throughout the implementation processes

of the project’s first year.

2. Mostly all students tried to use proper English while preparing the works.

3. Mostly all students cooperated with each other while working on the their responsibilities.

4. As shown in Graphics, the most of the students’ motivation was really high.

5. Mostly all students tried to use computer programs properly especially while preparing

presentations, logos and videos.

6. Mostly all students assumed the responsibilities on the area at issue selflessly.

7. Mostly all students studied consistently and productively during the first year of the project.

8. Mostly all students tried to use the logos of Erasmus+ and NA on their products correctly.

9. Most of the students used the name of the project on their products.

10. Few students published their works on Face group successfully.

11. Most of the students didn’t pay enough attention to define the sources on their products.



16

12. Mostly all students used the time efficiently. Most of the students completed their products on time.

13. Most of the students couldn’t publish their products on e-twinning platform without any problems

Summing up, we consider, in general, the implementation of the project in our school has

been very successful and profitable, achiving the main goals defined.

Nevertheless, iIt can be said that the students must be more active about publishing the

products on Face group and e-Twinning platform. And they have to paid more attention to

define the sources of their products.

spain evaluation report of students performance

Education