1 / 18

" SCOALA- ASA CUM O VAD EU"

DEZBATERE. " SCOALA- ASA CUM O VAD EU". 11 DECEMBRIE 2009. ATTENDEES : 47 STUDENTS FROM THE FOLLOWING CLASSES : IX D, IX H, X H, X C,X E, XI A, XI B, XI C, XI D, XI G, XI H,. TEACHERS : 4: CIOBANU MIHAILA, PREDEANU CLAUDIA, LUNGU IRINA, VISESCU EUGENIA

quincy-mcneil
Download Presentation

" SCOALA- ASA CUM O VAD EU"

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DEZBATERE " SCOALA- ASA CUM O VAD EU" 11 DECEMBRIE 2009

  2. ATTENDEES : 47 STUDENTS FROM THE FOLLOWING CLASSES : IX D, IX H, X H, X C,X E, XI A, XI B, XI C, XI D, XI G, XI H, TEACHERS : 4: CIOBANU MIHAILA, PREDEANU CLAUDIA, LUNGU IRINA, VISESCU EUGENIA VENUE OF THE MEETING : CNIM’S AMPHITHEATRE HOUR 10,00-12,00 THE TEACHER’S ROLE: OBSERVATING THE STUDENT’S COMMUNICATION MEANS, AND THE PROCCESS OF BUILDING THE ARGUMENTS FOR ONES PERSONAL OPINION THE EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT’S INTEREST

  3. THE PLAN OF THE DEBATE 1. THE ROMANIAN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM: STRONG POINTS 2. THE ROMANIAN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM: WEAK POINTS 3. SOLUTIONS FOR THE MODERNIZATION OF THE ROMANIAN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM 4. THE EVALUATION OF THE DEBATE: QUESTIONNAIRE Questions:1.What does quality in education represent for you? 2. What are the strong points of the Romanian school? 3. What are the weak points of the Romanian school? 4. What solution do you propose for modernization?

  4. 1. How would you characterize this debate? Interesting 31 65,9 % Boring Useful 28 59,5 % Dynamic6 12,7 % Useless  Formal 2 4,2 % Unfruitful

  5. 2. Do you think that the attendees have prepared their interventions through a serious reflection upon the theme of the debate? Yes18 38,2 % No5 10,6 % Possibly 24 51 %

  6. Do you think that the attendees have been motivated to participate in this debate? • Yes 37 78,72 • No 1 2,1 % • Possibly 9 19,14 %

  7. 4. Specify 3 reasons that determined you to participate in this activity: I was obligated I was curious 24 51 % I wished to express my opinion 29 61,7 % I wished to listen to my colleagues 25 53,19 % For my amusement I am interested in what is going on at my school 41 87,2 %

  8. During this debate, your role was to: • Listen19 40,4 % • To dispute with arguments a point of view5 10,6 % • To reflect8 17,02 % • To answer to a series of accusations • To express your personal opinion33 70,21% • To be a critic 3 6,38 % • To state what the teachers would like to hear0%

  9. 6. Have you felt embarrassed of the other colleague's presence? Yes1 2% No41 87,2 % To a certain degree5 10,6 %

  10. Have you felt embarrassed of the teacher’s presence? • Yes 0 % • No45 95,74 % • To a certain degree2 4,25 %

  11. Are you used to this kind of debates in your school/class/family? • Yes 14 29,7 % • No 7 14,8 % • Rarely26 55,31 %

  12. 9. How would you qualify the issues arose by your colleagues? •  Interesting17 36,17 % •  Real 29 61,7 % •  Mere accusations1 2,1 % •  Concrete aspects14 29,78 % • Only problems referring to the teachers1 2,1 %

  13. 10. How would you appreciate the quality of the cooperation among colleagues during the debate? Very good18 38,29 % Good25 53,19 % Satisfactory4 8,5 % Unsatisfactory 0 %

  14. 11. Who will you tell about this activity?  Theclassmates32 68 %  The parents 34 72,3 %  The colleagues from other schools26 5,31 %

  15. 12. During the debate I felt:  Marginalized  Valued  Useless  Attentive 24 51 %  Bored  Interested37 78,7 %  Amused

  16. Proposals 1.Cutting down the number of matters or classes 2 2. Cutting down the difficulty degree of the matters that are unspecific to the profile 2 3. Placing a bigger accent on practice instead of theory 15 4. The intensification of the student-student, student-teacher relationship’s sociability 5. Everyone should try and correct their own mistakes or flaws 6. More debates, and a bigger attendance degree 3 7. More seriousness from the students 3 8. To concern ourselves with the class development 9. Teachers should be more concerned with the project and talk about it more often 5 10 To organize the school activities better 3 11. To work in teams with a certain responsibility 1 12. A better student-teacher communication 2 13. Attracting the student’s interest 2 14. Motivating the shy students to take part in the project 15. A better debate structure 16. More students should be involved in the activities 6 17. More debate themes 4 18. To incarnate the proposals 8 19. More teachers-students debates3 20. Informativematerials 2

  17. Student-proposed solutions: • Matter restructuring by token of the profile • The use of the computerised system in the didactic process • The student’s involvement in practical activities starting from the already taught theoretical part. • Computerised lessons ( animations, virtual demonstrations) • Respecting the advanced-begginer levels in foreign languages • Structuring the classes by cabinets/laboratories with the afferent edowment • The use of authentic documents in the foreign language teaching process • The use of audio-video documents

More Related