Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide


  1. 1. ADHER Partner Meeting DRAFT MINUTES Milos, 25-28 June 2010In attendance: Apologies from:Yvonne von Beck, MEWCAT, GR Barbara Vogrinec, CPZ, SIMarc Pillich-Wright, BLSH, RO Fabrizio Boldrini, VM, ITMerve Duygulu, AHEM, TRNerute Kligiene, MII, LTAgenda items:1. Curricula, Leaflet to be produced, work divisionThis item was not actually discussed at the meeting. But to clarify its inclusion in minutes, it refers to; i) A global learning plan for the participants – over the course of the mobility visits, we should have an outline of a learning plan that all participants can say they have followed, in part or in full. ii) The leaflet (or newsletter, as it is referred to in other documents) is to be produced to accompany the formal report written by each HOST partner after each mobility visit. The leaflet should be produced in English (for global dissemination) and the host partner’s own language (for local dissemination). iii) Work division, refers to the Work Package documents distributed by AHEM.2. Exchange of good practices and methodologies among countriesMarc showed the participant feedback form written and used by BLSH for the mobility visit to Italy. It was agreed that the formwould be distributed for adaptation and use by all partners.3. Defining the responsibilities for every partner for the next 2 monthsIt was decided that in addition to the Work Package 2 responsibilities of each partner organisation; the only additions would beMEWCAT’s evaluation report for the Milos Mobility Visit and MII’s preparations for the Vilnius Mobility Visit which will be heldduring 17-20 September 2010.4. Expressing ideas about promotion measures to increase civil society involvementEach of the partner countries has varying methods of encouraging civil involvement in cultural events and education – eachequally justified. It was decided that these different methods would be indicated and evaluated by the host partners in their ownindividual evaluation reports after each mobility visit.5. Analysis of problems about cultural heritages at local levelAs with the methods mentioned in Item 4, each of the partner countries has different ways of dealing with the threats to theirown cultural heritage. It was decided that these threats would be identified and evaluated by the host partners in their ownindividual evaluation reports after each mobility visit.6. Making studies on “ADOPT YOUR HERITAGE” bookletIt was decided that the final evaluation document for the project would take the form of a brochure/catalogue. The final sizeformat of the brochure will need to be confirmed at a later date.However, the layout of the information within was decided upon; i) A summarised introduction, written in ‘layman’s terms’ to the global objectives of the project. ii) Chronological description of each mobility visit (organisation, location, chosen heritages, reasons for choosing, participant feedback, and photos. iii) Testimonials and contacts page.To ensure that each partners’ contribution is in the same/similar format, Marc will generate a ‘form-type’ model for each partnerto complete.7. Evaluating the workshop and the meeting by the participantsThe overall consensus from the group was that the workshop and meeting hosted by Yvonne and MEWCAT was a greatsuccess.The workshop itself at the Milos Conference Centre was very informative, in particular the very comprehensive presentation byGina, the curator of the Milos Folk Museum.Leonidas’ wonderfully enthusiastic tour of Milos’ focal points and of course the freshly made cheese pies and Baklava at Stella’sbakery will stay in mind for some time to come!