Round robin

Initial situation

In order to enhance the professional value of university education, this course allows students to identify and acquire different skills in the field of sustainable development. In order to do so, the teacher proposes that students formulate project proposals based on individual reflection. Each project was initially the subject of an oral presentation. Given the increase in the number of students, these presentations became too time-consuming and the teacher opted for a new formula. Instead of dedicating an entire session to PowerPoint presentations that could prove monotonous, he proposed a round robin presentation with peer evaluation to make the course more dynamic.

Project implementation

The students, in groups of 3, must, following a personal reflection, design a concrete project around sustainable development. The final work submitted at the end of the semester must be a project proposal situated in the context of the university’s call for projects in sustainable development, linked to the U change program call. Some of the projects developed may be proposed for funding at the end of the semester.

The course lasts 4 hours, the first two hours are dedicated to theoretical presentations and the next two to practical aspects. Thus, during the first two hours, students can be presented with reflections on the different conceptions of sustainable development or other themes on which the project they will have to write can be based. The following 2 hours can be dedicated to round table discussions on potential issues, to the definition of groups for the projects, to the training in practical skills such as budgeting.

Following the writing of a preliminary project in group, which counts for 15% of the final grade, the students present their finalized project in the form of a round robin. This format proposes for each group to alternate presentations, questions and observations of the relationship between questioner and questioned. The groups are divided around several tables. At each table, a group presents its project in 10 minutes, then a group asks questions for 10 minutes to launch a discussion. One group observes the presentation and the discussion that follows. Each group plays each role at least once. Each group changes tables after 2 rotations, for a total of 6 rotations. The teachers circulate between the tables, but do not intervene.

The observation results in the writing of an observation report by group which must present the content of the observed exchange, the quality of the presentation of the project, the control of the project and the quality of the answers to the questions. This report counts for 10% of the final grade.

The evaluation of the course includes not only the proposed pre-project (15%), the round robin observation report (10%), but also the handing in of a written project document in group (45%) as well as an individual reflection on sustainable development (30%). The purpose of this individual reflection is to enrich the students’ thoughts on the idea of sustainable development and to link it to their group project. Students will be given the evaluation grid from which this report will be corrected.

Thoughts and advice

It is difficult at the university to articulate theory and practice. The project-based learning format seems to be a possible answer to this problem. The teacher notes, however, that it is essential to be well prepared in order to justify a thesis that does not follow the traditional logic by offering a very practical dimension. It is necessary to have an increased knowledge of the specific framework in which the exercise is situated.

The teacher notes that the round robin presentation format allows for student accountability within the groups as everyone will have different roles at any given time.

Student feedback

“I was skeptical at first, but we were all surprised by the added value of this round robin approach. In the end, it pushes us to think about our project, to test it in front of people, and thus makes it really concrete. I think it’s really great.” “This method of presentation is very good because it allows for easy discussion about the different projects. Also, this method is more constructive than a simple presentation in front of the whole class.” “This type of presentation allows for more direct interaction between students, which allows for improvement of the projects and direct discussion of the issues raised. I think it is a more effective way to improve the project than a traditional presentation. I also found it good to be able to see the work of others and the round-robin makes it easier to ask questions.” “I didn’t think it was very good, we had to present the project three times to people who had already evaluated our preliminary draft, it was a bit redundant.” “Very interesting mode. The fact of being in a small group greatly favored the discussion with the other people, the questions came out more easily, in a more relaxed way than during classic face-to-face presentations which establish a distance between the presenters and the audience. The only drawback was the organization of the program: some groups listened to the same presentations several times, some presented their project only once and others three times. Another disadvantage is that we don’t have a point of view on all the projects. There are many groups whose projects I have no idea about.