Put-a-tick-in-the-chosen-box by asafwewe

VIEWS: 38 PAGES: 6

More Info
									                                    Comenius 2.1 Project
                                    EUROPROF: The European Foreign Language
                                    Teacher Professional Profile and Portfolio
                                    Number: 129337_CP-1-2006-1-IT-Comenius C21



RESULTS OF SELF-EVALUATION SHEET (for the project group)

Institution and country: University of Cumbria, UK (1 questionnaire); University College Syd, DK
(1 questionnaire); Vilnius Pedagogical University, LT (1 questionnaire); SSIS TOSCANA, IT (4 questionnaires);
NKJO Puławy, PL (1 questionnaire); IUFM de Bretagne, FR (1 questionnaire); University of Iceland, IS
(1 questionnaire); Pädagogische Hochschule Tirol, AT (1 questionnaire)1.

Put a tick in the chosen box

MOTIVATION
Ongoing motivation         Strong    1111 = 4
                           Good      1111111 = 11
                           Weak      
                           Poor      
Comments
    This has continued to be strong and has increased because of the improvement in communication,
     organisation, the way we work together during international meetings etc. The group has
     developed a real identity and we work very well together. This in turn means that we (as a local)
     team) feel more motivated to do our bit in the project.
    Motivation and concentration on the project work sometimes decreases because of the general
     work load, but the project activities themselves are interesting and useful, the response from the
     student teachers and mentors involved has been very positive, which tend to boost willingness to
     continue the work.
    The project is really worthwhile on the level of European analysis and especially on the level of
     student mobility.

ORGANIZATION
Division of roles and      Very clear and effective 11111= 5
responsibilities           Quite clear 111111 =6
                           Vague
                           Completely unclear

                           Detailed comments
                                This has improved considerably and the delegation of specific tasks to
                                    specific partners has meant that everyone has felt more involved in the
                                    project. The work done on the student mobility modules is an example of
                                    this collaboration
                                Both within our institution and among the international project partners.
Scheduling of tasks        Excellent 1111 = 4
and deadlines              Good 1111111 = 7
                           Satisfactory
                           Poor


1
  The partner institutions abroad have sent one questionnaire which in most cases expresses the opinions and the
feelings of the whole team, while the coordinator has asked the Italian people working in the project to write their
own individual feedback.
                       Detailed comments
                            This has been generally appropriate – occasionally there have been a few
                                deadlines which have come together and proved difficult to meet given
                                other commitments and constraints. But overall, these have been
                                reasonable and we have become much better as a team in planning
                                ahead and identifying priorities and working backwards from these.
                            We manage to complete the agreed tasks in time almost all the time. The
                                coordinator of the project does good work reminding us of the deadlines.
                                Thank you!
                            Excellent from the point of view of the co-ordinator. Unfortunately, we are
                                under horrible pressure at the PHT following restructuring and cannot
                                always keep to the deadlines.
Adherence to project   Excellent 11 = 2
protocol               Good 111111111 = 9
                       Satisfactory
                       Poor

                       Detailed comments
                            Good – much better communications between partners. Wiki working well
                                for sharing ideas for portfolio. Partners responding promptly to e-mails
                                and to tasks. Also meeting deadlines
                            During the meetings, we manage to stick to the agenda, but some tasks in
                                between them (e.g. dissemination of the project and informing the
                                coordinator about the dissemination events) sometimes are carried out
                                later than agreed.
Coordination           Excellent 11111 = 5
                       Good 111111 = 6
                       Satisfactory
                       Poor

                       Detailed comments
                            This has become much smoother and more effective since the delegation
                                of responsibilities and tasks to other members of the project. The way we
                                work in meetings is symptomatic of this.
                            Both within our institution and among and among the international
                                project partners. Enough flexibility and efficient democracy.
Organisation of        Excellent 111111 = 6
international          Good 1111 = 4
meetings               Satisfactory 1 = 1
                       Poor

                       Detailed comments
                           These have worked very well and have run very smoothly for the most
                               part. There are still issues of running out of time but the ways of working,
                               of discussing things in groups, of delegating responsibilities to partners
                               etc has worked really well and has made the meetings much more
                               productive and satisfying.
                           Clear, relevant agenda. Enough information before the meetings. Flexible
                               coordination of the meetings. All the hosts have been very hospitable and
                               provided unforgettable cultural experiences!
Comments
    There is still a tendency to spend time on presentations which we could have received in advance. In
     Vilnius we needed more time to discuss the actual exchange
    Fine to have group work
    Fine to split the whole group into groups depending on mentors or coordinators/tutors when not
     everything is relevant for everybody
    It is during international meetings that the organizational framework of the project is confirmed
     and the teamwork spirit the strongest. The personal contacts re-established on those occasions
     contribute much towards cooperation at a distance.
    The scheduling of tasks and deadlines has been very clear. Unfortunately, for different reasons, it
     has not always been possible to respect the deadlines. The reason for this difficulty mainly lies in the
     fact that the undergoing changes at our institution have produced a vast quantity of extra work
     (elaboration of a master degree for education, extra meetings, collaborative work with the local
     universities, etc.).

PRODUCTS
Quality                  Excellent 111 = 3
of the products          Good 11111111 = 8
                         Satisfactory
                         Poor

                         Detailed comments
                              The student mobility modules are detailed and thorough and provide a
                                  sound basis for future development. Feedback from students and mentors
                                  alike was positive – the tasks just need pruning a bit and refining.
                              Everyone involved has been very happy with the first student mobility,
                                  which I personally consider to be the main strength of this project. The
                                  modules and the ning as well.
                              We are still piloting the products and they have improved
                              I think Good so far – we have not yet finished.
Completeness             Excellent 1 = 1
and clarity              Good 11111111 = 7
                         Satisfactory 11 = 2
                         Poor

                         Detailed comments
                              The module handbook is very clear and complete – probably too complete
                                  and needs refining and pruning in the light of the experienced we had
                                  during the first mobility phase. However the tasks were very useful, the
                                  student mobility experience very productive and rewarding and we learnt
                                  a lot from this. We will be using this to inform changes and amendments
                                  to this year’s mobility period.
                              We still need to make sure the ning is used more efficiently to help
                                  mentors and exchange students communicate before the mobility.
                                  Hopefully, we’ll find ways to make the portfolio we’re still working on a
                                  helpful tool for the student teachers and others involved in initial teacher
                                  education in our institutions.
                              A bit unclear in the beginning but this has also improved greatly.
Transferability          Excellent
                         Good 1111111111 = 10
                         Satisfactory 1 = 1
                         Poor
                         Detailed comments
                             I would have thought that it would be relatively easy to transfer the tasks
                                 and ideas included in the modules to other contexts and subjects. Indeed
                                 we have already used many of the ideas when working with other groups
                                 of students who are either going to spend a period of time in another
                                 country or with visiting international students. On both counts they have
                                 proved very valuable and useful.
                             The most important thing, in my opinion, is to make sure the modules, the
                                 mobility structure and the portfolio work well within the limits of our
                                 project. There are so many new products available (portfolios, student
                                 exchanges…) that EUROPROF products are bound to change, integrate etc
                                 afterwards.
                             Products very often make more sense and are more useful to those who
                                 have worked on them. It is the process that is important.

Comments
    The good quality of the products is due to the fact that the eight partner institutions staff have well
     worked together mixing and harmonising their competences and experiences in ITT. But the
     refinement of the materials should need more time and also the exploitation and the transferability
     of them has to be verified in the near future.
    Despite a certain initial uncertainty as to the ultimate product relevance, it now seems to become
     more and more obvious as the sub-products (such as parts of the portfolio) are beginning to take
     shape.

COMMUNICATION
Effectiveness            Excellent 111 = 3
                         Good 1111111 = 7
                         Satisfactory 1 = 1
                         Poor

                         Detailed comments
                             The partners have established effective ways to communicate. Some
                                 difficulties and initial misunderstandings may arise to different cultures
                                 we come from. Yet the fact that we manage to reach agreements and
                                 stay flexible is most important!

Effectiveness            Excellent 11= 2
of the means of          Good 1111111= 7
communication            Satisfactory 11= 2
(e-mail, wiki,           Poor
online “europrof
community”,              Detailed comments
telephone, post)             The various means of communication work well for us.
                             The ning is excellent as a communicative tool. However, important
                                 information tends to get overlooked.

Comments
    Communication has been much improved – partners are much better at responding promptly to e-
     mails and to meeting deadlines. The wiki site has been very useful in sharing ideas about the
     portfolio.
    A certain specialization of particular means of communication can be observed: the e-mail remains
     the most effective way of daily contact for coordinators, while the ning a suitable platform for
      exchange students, especially directly before their departure. The wiki and online “europrof
      community” seem to have taken a back position. It is as yet uncertain what role the moodle
      platform, just launched, will come to play.
     It’s still difficult to cope with all the existing websites and platforms. For the French group, it seems
      unreasonable to use the new ning platform at this point: too many resources have been already put
      on the old one and all the mentors have been registered on the old one.

INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS
                    Strong 111111 = 6
                    Good 11111 = 5
                    Weak 
                    Poor 

                         Detailed comments
                             These are particularly strong between partners – there is a real identify in
                                 terms of the project group as well as between individual partners within
                                 the project.
                             It is quite easy and pleasant to cooperate with all the partners!


STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
From the above mentioned areas (motivation, productivity, etc...) identify the ones which are strong or
weak in the project

Strengths                                              Weaknesses
     Interpersonal relationships; motivation;             None
        quality of the products; organisation and          Wasting” time on presentations at
        delegation of tasks and responsibilities and         meetings; we should remember to split the
        partners meeting deadlines                           group into smaller groups of mentors and
     Motivation; group work at meetings                     coordinators – so that the mentors can
     Flexibility; positive atmosphere; successful           spend time on what is relevant for them
        communication and cooperation; relevant,           Sticking to deadlines (sometimes).
        useful products of the project; great              Communication
        opportunity to get to know the host                Communication; effectiveness of the means
        countries during meetings; coordination.             of communication (wiki, online “europrof
     Transferability of products                            community”)
     Ongoing motivation; scheduling of tasks and          Respect of deadlines; a few delays in
        deadlines; Coordination; Organization of             communication
        International Meetings; quality of the             Productivity – clarity - as yet- transferability
        products and their transferability                 Multiplicity of websites and platforms
     Desire to research and work together;                Heavy workload within limited periods, lack
        ability to understand and respect each               of clarity in the beginning – some part will
        other;      openness     to      intercultural       be more useful and more transferable than
        experiences such as student teachers’                others due to cultural diversity
        mobility
     Interpersonal relationships, communication,
        motivation
     Productivity
     Motivation, the importance of the project in
        particular the student exchange
     Motivation
OTHER COMMENTS
    I think we have made significant progress in the way we work as a project team since the first year.
      We have learnt from our experience and we are communicating and collaborating more effectively.
      In addition the student mobility period was without a doubt, a huge success and has proved
      something that we all want to build on. I think the project is now going from strength to strength.
    When we have moved from a more technical and specific task (like the one of creating and writing
      the ITT mapping) to more didactic and intercultural work (like the one on the modules and then on
      the Portfolio), the project team has cooperated better and got better results. Also the new
      communication media (wiki and online europrof community) have greatly contributed to changing
      attitudes and increasing effectiveness. The experience of students’ mobility has come out as
      essential and in some way as the core of the project: through it it has been possible to trial and
      verify the quality of the materials and build teachers’ professionalism on practical bases.
    Despite some misgivings mentioned above, probably mostly due to the stage of the project (our final
      goal is quite specific and fairly ambitious, and it is only beginning to take shape against the
      approaching deadline), the project is on course and we stand a good chance of bringing it to a
      satisfactory completion. The required confidence level appears to be sufficient and partners
      prepared to put in their part for all their current duties.

								
To top