MINUTES - RECIPE MEETING IN Karmøy / Sand (Norway)

May, 9th to 11th 2016

17 participants from the five partners + the two external consultants attended the meeting

Meeting Objectives:

Quality assurance of general project progress through:

Summary of internal evaluations of project meetings and Course 1 (Sesimbra)

External project evaluation (current status)

Updating of action plan documents

Agree on

Further plans/ strategy for dissemination and sustainability

Necessary work progress before final report submission

Settle details for Course 2 →final agreement and distribution of work tasks

Summary of internal evaluations so far in project

TheresaMcGann, on behalf of P3 (Clare Edu. Centre) focused on Course 1 in Sesimbra andtook us through a summative report of evaluation, both qualitative and quantitative. Booklet handed out

Course Evaluation can be summed up in:

  • Preparation; over all positive
  • Challenging with two hotels; missing some of the informal gatherings
  • Participants like learning and sharing in informal discussions (listen to others’ similar practices and be able to discuss with them)
  • Possible Areas for Follow-Up?
  • Smaller groups and more ‘hands on’(will be put in the next course)
  • More participant interaction

Evaluation shows that it was a very successful course.

Dissemination plans for the last project months.

P5’s representative JoãoP. Proençahanded out papers with an overview. After some discussion on methods and output the following was summed up;

Conference/Course 2 is ready for launching

Website can be tidied up

We need to put an effort on publications

Sustainability

Partners were reflecting on(Individual, Group, Plenary):

  • What is the sustainability in this project?
  • How do we develop and sustain the project idea in our organizations?
  • Strategy plan?
  • Sustainability across Europe → the European dimension
  • How to address the role of Regional Educational Centres on this matter?

Matters partners presented were e.g.:

P1-NO: Link an ongoing I-PAD project (using apps in teaching and learning) to enhancing motivation and mastery as an element in preventing ESL. REC-staff is running this work.

P2-DK:Local network

International networks, sharing how we USE the new knowledge

Future courses, self-funding

P3-IRE:Accelerated readers

3rd Lego League link to ongoing activities

Job shadowing

P4-GR:Involvement from university, implement elements in the teachers training programme?

Sharing Good Practice

Inform the schools about Case Studies Reports.

The European dimension - E Twinning.

EUs Office courses in Thessaloniki

P5-PT:Circulate the product in local schools

Send the final report to the agency

Policy makers

Benfica Foundation, Spread Good Practice in the arena

Job-shadowing

Course articles on the web-site.

Case Study Reports

Some polishing work is still needed to make the collated report as informative and substantial as wanted. Some issues that were raised:

  • Reports are not written altogether according to guidelines
  • Analyses and general conclusions may be stronger
  • ESL prevention focus could be more highlighted
  • REC role related to case studies is not very stressed

Specificactionsdecided:

-All partners go through their own case study reports, focusing on:

  • General principles to be drawn
  • ”What works? Where? and Why?”
  • Analytical dimension
  • Linking back to the to topics ESL and REC

-Send new version in accordance with this to P4 by June, 30

-P4 has new collated version ready by July, 30

-P4 decides if there will be a printed version available

Course/ conference in Thessaloniki Oct, 2016

P2 presented the final plans for thecourse/ conference program

Announced as two different events, but will go on at the same time.

There are already enough interested participants to run the course, and there might very well be more.

Only minor adjustments were considered necessary for the program, e.g. give participant’s presentations a framework (What have we done? – What did we learn? – What is smart to do in the future?)

P4 as hosts for the course/conference presented their plans for practical arrangements (conference hall, accommodation, meals, translation device, school visits, cultural activities). Some discussions on logistics occurred, and P4 were asked to look at some of the plans again, to ensure this.

External evaluation, 3rd version

External evaluator Steve Molloy took the partner group through an updated evaluation related to the different Work Packages and Deliverables. He will update his comments and send them to the partners, and upload on Fronter.

The evaluator expressed an overall positive impression of the project progress and the delivery of promised products. However he made some comments and recommendations:

‘State of the Art’ analyses and reports:

  • Look good on paper
  • REC could be strengthened
  • Web has no explanation of/introduction to SoA
  • SoA ‘promises’ are not always reflected in case studies

Agreed on:

-Web page: a paragraph saying what SoA is

-SoA reflects status when we wrote; general Introduction could explain that we may not have done what we were planning to do and why Context should not be updated. Just check that there is sufficient addressing the role of REC

-All partners send in their reflections and ‘What should be put into General by June, 30.

Case Study Films:

  • No introduction on web (What? Why these two?)
  • Only placed within Case Studies folderon web, should also be more accessible

Agreed on:

-An introduction into webpage on the above

-Make more logically accessible on web

Public web site:

  • Some tidying up needed on folders, language, layout

Agreed on:

-Change some folder names

-Move some items

-Tidy up language (P5+P1)

-Look at lay-out and organisation (P5+P1)

-Quality assure that all project meetings are included

Handbook:

  • Uneven, could it be edited a bit?
  • Stylistic editing on the digital version? by an English speaking?

Agreed on:

-Leave the printed handbook as it is

-Edit the digital version

Final report issues

P1 were responsible for reminding all partners about the distributed ‘Timeline’for Final Report work, and to follow this and use the forms and patterns which have been shared. Deadlines must be kept!

Progress until Oct 2016

Some last comments and adjustments were made on:

-Items raised at and agreed on at the meeting

-Finances

-Board meeting Thessaloniki - Oct 2nd, Sunday

Work plan updated and uploaded to Fronter

Meeting objectives:

Addressedthese and decided they had been met.