QUALITY AND VALUE-ADDED OF PEER REVIEW EXPERIENCES FROM HELSINKI CULINARY SCHOOL PERHO

QUALITY AND VALUE-ADDED OF PEER REVIEW EXPERIENCES FROM HELSINKI CULINARY SCHOOL PERHO

HELSINKI CULINARY SCHOOL PERHO www.perho.fi founded 1935 maintained by Haaga Institute Foundation from 1997 430 students 30 teachers total number of staff is 70 including the personnel of Restaurant Perho Vocational Qualification in hotel and restaurant services Restaurant Meal Production, restaurant cook Restaurant Services, waiter/waitress Hotel Services, hotel receptionist 3 years (120 study weeks) from comprehensive schools 2 years (80 study weeks) from upper secondary schools includes on-the job-learning 24 40 study weeks one school building, in the heart of the city 2

In Finland three reviews Helsinki Culinary School Perho 30.-31.10.2006 Jyväskylä Vocational Institue and Catering College 14.- 15.11.2006 South Carelia Vocational College 29.-30.11.2006 3

BACKGROUND Familiarize with the manual and the way to make Peer Review Manual (English version) too difficult to understand some concepts not used in Finland (eg.final tests, In Finland skills demonstrations) discussions with other Finnish Peers translation into Finnish abbreviated version, core idea 4

Information to the staff, self evaluation and self report Why Peer Review The project and aims Choosing the evaluation / quality areas (2 will be enough for two days visit) What is going to happen during the process. What will be the outcomes (diploma, good practises, international contacts, report, improvement)? what's the use of taking part in Peer review? How to get the staff to take part in the self-evaluation. Clear up the indicators and criteria to the people (overlapping and difficult to understand some criteria) writing the report according to the instructions given in Peer review manual sending the self-report to the Peers in good time (min 1-1,5 month before review visit) 5

Selecting the Peers / Sending the self-report to the peers Choosing / asking the Peers (How?) Team: at least one Peer should be a teacher and have knowledge about the study program to be evaluated. Interest for Peer review Background information from the School and the local educational system (What, how much, in what way, etc normally there are too much materials no time to familiarize) Preparation of a transnational peer to the school system in different country should carefully be taken into account. Peer s own activity (contact ) resources (time is the biggest problem and money) Acquaint before the review with self-report, make questions and observations about important matters. Contact other Peers 6

PEER REVIEW-MEETING Organising the Peer review meeting Schedule and discussions about it with coordinator, facilitator, international peer, evaluation expert and other peers Premises, equipments, other materials on facilitators responsibility Choosing the people interviewed a versatile facts, enough teachers, students stakeholders etc.. On Peer coordinator s responsibility is to arrange pre - meeting before review (get to know each other better, create the Peer-spirit, discussions, share practices and points of view, strengthen each other own thoughts, etc) active role One extra day before (needs money) or e-mail? Interview-questions should be prepared carefully. To make sure that peer get all the information they need. How could you find the most essential content and questions? Work in tandems who asks, who writes in consensus 7

Peer Review Arrange enough time for preparing the visit; give enough time for the peer to prepare the materials and also for making conclusions and writing the report together It was very interesting to take part in the Peer Review. The atmosphere was relaxed, you don t have to stress in interview-session although I didn t speak so good English. Maybe 45 minutes was too short time. We didn t have time enough to express our all thoughts. 8

Language problem? Interviews through an interpreter? Interpreter s role? Know-how about the Peer review and its contents? Interviews according to the agreed questions stick to given schedules. Take time enough for the interviews (1 hour) all participants should be interviewed. Not too many people in one session (6 persons enough). Was there something we forgot to ask you? What is good in your school? What should be done better? These kind of questions gives you good information. Summaries right after the interviews. Things are fresh in your memory. Visit itself seemed to be very encouraging and teachers, students and other staff were courageous to express their true opinions. It will be other way when it is question about the normal audition-session. Peer Review is a good way to make evaluation. Keep it open-minded and simple. Good opportunity to learn from others. You also see your own strengths (when comparing how we do in our school). Help other to find their strengths and points of improve (mutual / reciprocal learning). 9

AFTER PEER REVIEW Peer Review is a good way to look the things that you do and the way that you do it from another point of you, with somebody else glasses. The international view is important and gives a lot. Peer review is a good way not only to find out things to improve but to be more certain about the things which are good. Sometimes some good things are too obvious to us and it might be good to emphasize those more 10

Verbal feedback after the review is an important part of the Peer Review. First impressions, first thoughts Interaction in feedback is very important comments from peers and interviewed people check that there are no misunderstandings After Peer Review-visit it should be agreed about common schedule for reporting, comments and changing the reports between the peers. It is on coordinator s responsibility. It would be better if some extra time could be arranged after the Peer Review visit for the peer team to write the results. When the peers go back to their own work, there isn t unfortunately much time to concentrate on writing (one extra day for reporting MONEY) Also it would be good in addition to do Peer Review also make benchmarking and create cooperation networks during the visit. Getting to know better each other and discuss about the future and possible cooperation. In this Peer Review session there was no time for this. 11

The best was getting to know new people and to work with professionals and persons who are committed to and enthusiastic about their work. I was also pleased by the good and respectful atmosphere which we had during the visit. I learned about the peer review procedure as a whole; how to prepare, how to do the interviews, how to write reports, how to arrange a visit, and by reflecting it all now I know how to do it better next time. Absolutely better way to make evaluation than normal auditionsession. This is more human and relaxing I liked it. We all have same kind of strengths and problems we are not alone. Transnational aspects were interesting and meaningful. 12

PEERING THE DINNER 13