2. 2
index
1. Introduction
2. the preparation of the seminar
(planning),
3. the seminar as a whole and its activities
(implementation),
4. the ways to address the weaknesses
(review).
5. Sum up your proposals to take steps to
improve the project
6. Conclusions
3. 3
1 – INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the
quality of our project and its activities.
Introduce key areas and indicators to help
us:
• recognize the strengths,
• identify areas that need some improvement
or further action,
• take the necessary decisions to correct
deficiencies.
4. 4
1 – INTRODUCTION
Three basic questions are at the centre of the
evaluation process:
1 - How are we doing?
• It asks us to consider how our project has
been planned and is currently performing in
relation to its aims and the work plan
• It enables partners to form their own
judgements which can then be used as the
basis for discussion
5. 5
1 – INTRODUCTION
2 - How do we know?
• It makes us identify specific examples as
evidence to back up our assessment
3 - What are we going to do now?
• It encourages to take steps towards
addressing any areas of weakness
6. 6
1 – INTRODUCTION
Three key areas are assessed (evaluation):
• the preparation of the seminar (planning):
global performance indicators as regards
planning
• the seminar as a whole and its activities
(implementation): performance indicators for
the activities during the seminar
• the ways to address the weaknesses (review):
strenghtening of the project and ways to
address weaknesses
7. 7
1 – INTRODUCTION
For each area were reported aggregated data
(frequency and average) and graphs.
The number of respondents is 8 (partner) .
Were also evaluated and reported on
comments from participants.
The level to each indicator:
4 = very good - major strengths
3 = good - strengths outweigh weaknesses
2 = fair - some important weaknesses
1 = unsatisfactory - major weaknesses
8. 8
2 – THE PREPARATION OF THE
SEMINAR (PLANNING)
4 3 2 1
1.1.a.1
Extent to which I was prepared to commit
time and resources in line with the jointly
agreed work plan
4 3 1 0 3,4
1.1.a.2
Willingness to resolve problems related to the
preparation 7 1 0 0 3,9
1.1.b
Quality of the planning by the
coordination and partnership
Clarity of the agenda Clarity of the
requirements prior to the meeting in realistic
time scale
3 5 0 0 3,4
1.2
Effective communication
amongst partners prior to the
seminar
Effectiveness and clarity of communication
Appropriate information issued to participants
prior to the meeting
4 2 2 0 3,3
1.3
Reflection on the approach of
my organisation regarding
quality assurance
Preparation of the presentation of our
approach and practices to partners 5 3 0 0 3,6
3,5
3,6
averageNo.
Commitment to the
preparation of the project by
my organisation
frequency valuePerformance
Indicators
Topic
total average
total average of Glasgow
9. 9
2 – THE PREPARATION OF THE
SEMINAR (PLANNING)
Comments:
• We have been actively involved in the delivery of this
project, however communication and information from
some partners has been very limited.
10. 10
3 – THE SEMINAR AS A WHOLE AND ITS
ACTIVITIES (IMPLEMENTATION)
4 3 2 1
2.1.a clear rationale and clarity of objectives 3 5 0 0 3,4
2.1.b realistic timescales 1 7 0 0 3,1
2.1.c
clarity and consistency of the general design of the
activities 2 6 0 0 3,3
2.2
Quality of project materials/products quality of materials/guidebook/reports/products as
envisaged in the seminar 2 6 0 0 3,3
2.3
Quality of the promotion of the European
dimension as regards Qaulity assurance
effective promotion of knowledge and understanding about
EQAVET 3 5 0 0 3,4
2.4.a
mutual understanding about project rationale, overall aims
and short-term/long-term objectives 3 3 2 0 3,1
2.4.b
clear evidence in the work plan of sharing of roles and
responsibilities amongst partners 3 4 1 0 3,3
2.4.c development of teamwork 4 2 2 0 3,3
2.5.a
evidence of a varied range of approaches by all partners
within the project 4 3 1 0 3,4
2.5.b
extent of the opportunity for partners to input their own
expertise and learn from each other 3 5 0 0 3,4
2.6
Provision and suitability of materials, resources
and equipment
relevance and quality of materials issued during the event 2 6 0 0 3,3
2.7
Effectiveness of content and appropriate range and
balance of activities
Effectiveness of work plan to identify good practices 2 4 2 0 3,0
2.8 Requirements of participants
Evidence that the needs and expectations of participants
have been taken into account according to each
participants situation as regards quality assurance
4 3 1 0 3,4
2.9
Quality and appropriateness of the domestic
arrangements and the comfort factor
Attention to practical details and catering arrangements,
suitability of working place and quality of overnight
accommodation
3 4 1 0 3,3
3,4
3,4
Structure of the activities regarding quality
assurance
total average
total average of Glasgow
No. Topic Performance Indicators
frequency value
average
Agreement amongst partners and shared
ownership of the event
Innovation and variety of approaches regarding
quality processes
11. 11
3 – THE SEMINAR AS A WHOLE AND ITS
ACTIVITIES (IMPLEMENTATION)
Comments:
• Thanks very much to the Turkish team for their very warm
(literally in this case!) welcome and hospitality.
• We gained great insight into the vocational and education
experience in Turkey.
• Up date, we progress in sharing our experiences, but we
are not yet really able to scrutinize common practices or
common standards.
• I has became evident that some partners are not so
involved in the project delivery and that the work relating to
the delivery of the project has been down to 5 of the 7
partners involved in project delivery.
12. 12
3 – THE SEMINAR AS A WHOLE AND ITS
ACTIVITIES (IMPLEMENTATION)
Strong Medium Low No
3.1
Improvement of participants’ skills on the work
topics 2 4 1 0 3,1
3.2
Appraisal of inter-cultural differences, including
overcoming of stereotypes and prejudices 6 1 0 0 3,9
3.3
Increased participants’ motivation in being more
involved at local level 1 5 1 0 3,0
3.4
Exchange of experience and know-how
6 1 0 0 3,9
3.5
Establishment or strengthening of partnerships or
stable relationships among organisations 5 2 0 0 3,7
3.6
Potentialities for further projects
5 1 1 0 3,6
3.7
Approach of innovative and new work methods
3 4 0 0 3,4
total average 3,5
3,6
No. Impact of activities
impact
average
total average of Glasgow
13. 13
3 – THE SEMINAR AS A WHOLE AND ITS
ACTIVITIES (IMPLEMENTATION)
Comments:
• Some partners are more active and interactive than other
partners working within the project delivery.
14. 14
4 – THE WAYS TO ADDRESS THE
WEAKNESSES (REVIEW)
1. Preparation of the seminar (planning)
Comments:
•Provide proposal for agenda and requirements earlier
before meetings
•More information prior to meeting.
•Anniesland was/has been committed to project delivery
and committed resources as necessary.
15. 15
4 – THE WAYS TO ADDRESS THE
WEAKNESSES (REVIEW)
2. Development of the work sessions
Comments:
• This was clear from project start.
• Timescales adequate
• Yes, we have a full understanding of the project aims.
• Difficult to gauge as some partners are more active than others.
• More so from a number of the partners, some should input more.
• Our situation with regards to quality is high, not so clear from one or
two of the other organisations.
• Working place was fine, hotel accommodated was below average.
16. 16
4 – THE WAYS TO ADDRESS THE
WEAKNESSES (REVIEW)
3. Impact of activities on the participants and organisations
Comments:
• Slight improvement due to some partner input
• Not made much if any difference to our normal input at
local level
17. 17
5 – SUM UP YOUR PROPOSALS TO TAKE
STEPS TO IMPROVE THE PROJECT
Comments:
• Since WSINF is currently undergoing internal financial
and organisational difficulties the main effort is put on
optimisation of its remaining in the partnership.
• Stronger, more pro-active and visible project
management
• Awake the project’s blog (which unfortunately is
sleeping) and use it more actively; stimulate partners
to contribute to discussions
• More input from partners, one or two of the partners
need to be more involved.
18. 18
6 – CONCLUSIONS
POSITIVE
• Got to know partners
• The preparation of the seminar (planning) is
very good.
• A lot of interest from partners to EQAVET
• Relevance and quality of materials issued
during the event is very good.
• Workshops are an important moment of the
seminar.
19. 19
6 – CONCLUSIONS
TO CLARIFY or QUESTIONS OPEN
• Comunication EQAVET very complicated?
• The time was short compared to subjects?
• Implementing EQAVET very complicated?
• More time for cultural activity (location of
hotels near city centres)?
• Should clarify the expectations from
partners.
