J.M. Cancela1, H. Vila Suárez1, C. Ferragut2

1University of Vigo, Faculty of Education and Sport Science (SPAIN)
2University of Alcalá, Physical Education and sport unit. Faculty of Medicine (SPAIN)
Evaluation is an essential element for innovation, improvement and enrichment of any human activity and, of course, education. This paper analyzes a teaching experience based on the implementation of an active methodology. 162 check lists were collected from students of third and fourth of Science Degree in Physical Activity and Sport registered on the degree course of gerontology of Physical Activity and Physical activity and exercise for adult people. Students have to evaluate their classmate work and its oral presentation.

The main objectives to be achieved with this methodology were:
1) to encourage active learning from the involvement of the students in the evaluation to reinforce their self-sufficiency
2. Enhance their critical thinking in regards to their self-assessment and their classmate's evaluation and to analyze their scores reliability (inter-evaluations).
3 To analyze the concordance degree with teacher´s scores.

In order to perform the evaluation, a check list with four sections:
the work accomplished (TR),
literature review (REV),
oral exposition (EXO) and
academic discussion (DT) was designed.

Ten points was given to each section.
Standard statistical methods were used to calculate the mean and standard deviations and Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients; taking into account the four sections of the check list and three roles : students who prepared the work, students who evaluate the work of their classmates and teachers The results show that the scores given by the students to their classmates (TR= 7.74±1.17; REV=7,50±1.11; EXO=7,89±1.63; DT= 7,83±1.39)are much higher than the points given by teachers (TR=7.19±1.30; REV=7,11±1.50; EXO=7,37±1.16; DT= 7,27±1.59) but these differences do not reach Statistical differences. Moreover statistical analysis performed, determined that the values given by different teachers to the same work are more stable than the values given by the students. A disparity of criteria is manifested among students when evaluating their classmates. A difference of opinion was established between students evaluating their classmates, and this difference is more relevant in the oral presentation section. (Teachers: r=0.629, p<0.05; students: r=0.446, p<0.05) and academic discussion (Teachers: r=0.774 p<0.05; students: r=0.597 p<0.05). We can conclude that there is relative consensus between the scores of the teachers and the students.