2. INTRODUCTION
The evaluation was carried out with the help of questionnaires
in Google forms.
The target groups of the evaluation were:
• 6 guest teachers.
• 2 Greek teachers.
The respondents worked for the 7th Transnational Meeting.
3. INTRODUCTION
The 2nd transnational meeting was held in Greece, at the 1st Primary School of Peania, in
June 2017.
In this meeting only the school coordinators of the program, who constituted the
Commission of the Project participated, just as it happened in the 1st and the 4th
transnational meetings, which took place in Spain, at the school of the coordinating
country.
The aim of the 7th Transnational meeting was:
• The completion of the ERASMUS program between 2015 – 2017.
• The writing of the Final Report and the way that it would be displayed in the Mobility
Tool.
• The implementation of the unanimous decisions which were taken about:
The Impact of the program and the activities which would follow.
The Evaluation of the Success of the program.
The Sustainability of the program and the activities that would strengthen it.
4. INTRODUCTION
The final connection and presentation of the program through E-twinning.
The ultimate improvement of our newspaper's website as this would be the strongest
“image” of the project.
Also, this was the last opportunity that was given to our school to host its visitors for the
second time. The other goals of this short-term visit were:
• to secure the appropriate logistical infrastructure and the necessary supervisory tools
which were needed (room with air conditioning adapted to the particular meeting,
computers, interactive board) for the fulfillment of the obligations,
• to create a pleasant work environment,
• to combine work and relaxation by planning visits to various city sights,
• to demonstrate the traditional Greek hospitality through dinners and visits organized and
undertaken by the teachers of the educational team of the program.
5. OFFICIAL DAILY PROGRAMME
18 - 20 JUNE
ΚΑ2 - (ΚΑ219) - 2015-1-ES01-KA219-
015927_2
SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY
09.00: Pick up from the Metro
station.
09.00: Pick up from the Metro
station.
09.00: Pick up from the Metro station.
09.30 – 9.45: Welcome to our
school – coffee.
09.30 – 9.45: Coffee time. 09.30 – 9.45: Coffee time.
09.45 – 12.00: TRANSNATIONAL
MEETING 1
09.45 – 12.00: TRANSNATIONAL
MEETING 1
09.45 – 12.00: TRANSNATIONAL MEETING 1
12.00 – 12.30: Break. 12.00 – 12.30: Break. 12.00 – 12.30: Break.
12.30 – 14.30: TRANSNATIONAL
MEETING 2
12.30 – 14.30: TRANSNATIONAL
MEETING 2
12.30 – 14.00: TRANSNATIONAL MEETING 2
14.30 – 16.00: Lunch time in the
school.
14.30 – 16.00: Lunch time in the
school.
14.00 – 15.30: Lunch time in the school.
16.00 – 18.00: TRANSNATIONAL
MEETING 3
16.00 – 18.00: TRANSNATIONAL
MEETING 3
15.30 – 17.30: TRANSNATIONAL MEETING 4
18.00 – 20.00: Visit the Centre of
Athens
18.00 – 20.00: Visit the ship yard of
Flisvos
17.30 – 20.00: FREE TIME
20.00: FREE TIME 20.00: FREE TIME 20.00: Farewell dinner
6.
7. *The 7th Transnational Meeting lasted 3 days (18/6/2017 -
21/6/2017).
*It should be noted that this encounter took place in a very
intense period for all four schools because - of the end of the
year - annual obligations , (meetings with the Teachers'
Association, meetings with teachers of the educational team of
the program , meetings with Parents, delivery of student grades,
attendance at meetings by the School Advisor) and as it is
understandable there was enough accumulated fatigue among
all participants.
*The daily program included three meetings of 2 hours or two
meetings of 3 hours.
8. The 1st day included:
1. Two Transnational meetings between the coordinators of the
program. They were divided into 2 parts of 3 hours each during which
were discussed the obligations defined under the program agenda.
2. Welcoming by the Teachers' Association and lunch at school.
3. Afternoon visit to the historic archaeological triangle in the center of
Athens. This visit included Monastiraki, Plaka, the Acropolis hill, the
theater of Herodes Atticus, Thissio.
9. The 2nd day included:
1. Three Transnational meetings between the coordinators of
the program which lasted 2 hours each working with the
agenda of the program.
2. Lunch made by teachers.
3. Visit to the Marina of Flisvos.
10. The 3rd day included:
1. Two Transnational meetings between the coordinators of
the program which lasted 3 hours each working with the
program agenda.
2. Lunch cooked by the teachers.
3. Presentation of souvenirs.
4. Visit to the beach of Porto Rafti for entertainment and
5. Last night's dinner at the Technopolis area.
11. - The evaluation followed the end of the program.
Questionnaires (GOOGLE FORMS) were given to:
2 teachers of our school's educational team (to the Principal and the Coordinator).
6 teachers from the foreign countries (2 from each school).
23. ANALYSIS OF THE TEACHER’S QUESTIONNAIRE
*As it emerged from:
*The 1st question of the questionnaire concerning the nationality of the participating
teachers:
*2 teachers were from Greece (25%),
*2 teachers were from Spain (25%),
*2 teachers were from Slovakia (25%),
*2 teachers were from Lithuania (25%).
*The 2nd question of the questionnaire concerning the frequency of the meetings:
*All 8 teachers agreed that the frequency of the meetings was flawless (100%).
*The 3rd question of the questionnaire concerning the collaboration and cooperation
among the members of the meetings:
*2 teachers felt that the cooperation between the members was very good (25%) and
*the remaining 6 felt that the cooperation was flawless (75%).
*The 4th question of the questionnaire concerning the quality and fidelity of the
minutes as far as the content and the agreements go:
*2 teachers considered that the quality and fidelity of the minutes was very good
(25%) and
*The remaining 6 felt that the quality and fidelity was flawless (75%).
24. ANALYSIS OF THE TEACHER’S QUESTIONNAIRE
* As it emerged from:
* The 5th question of the questionnaire concerning the level of achievement that was the outcome
of the agreements during the meetings:
* 2 teachers (25%) considered that the level of achievement that was the outcome of the
agreements during the meetings was very good, and
* The remaining 6 (75%) felt that the level of achievement that was the outcome of the
agreements during the meetings was flawless.
* The 6th question of the questionnaire concerning the teachers’ level of satisfaction with the work
which had been done:
* 1 teacher (12,5%) considered that the level of satisfaction with the work was good,
* 4 teachers (50%) considered it was very good and
* 3 teachers (37,5%), considered it was flawless.
* The 7th question of the questionnaire concerning the level of efficiency of collaboration and
coordination during the meetings:
* 1 teacher (12,5%) considered that the level of efficiency of collaboration and coordination
during the meetings was good,
* 1 teacher (12,5%) considered it was very good and
* 6 teachers (75%), considered it was flawless.
25. *ANALYSIS OF THE TEACHER’S QUESTIONNAIRE
*As it emerged from:
*The 8th question of the questionnaire concerning the evaluation of the
Coordinator of the 1st Primary School of Peania Nikos Linoxylakis:
*1 teacher (12,5%) considered that the work which was done by the Coordinator
was very good, and
*The remaining 7 (87,5%) considered that it was excellent.
*The 9th question of the questionnaire concerning the distribution of the tasks
during the meetings:
*All 8 teachers (100%) considered that the distribution of the tasks during the
meetings was flawless.
26. *ANALYSIS OF THE TEACHER’S QUESTIONNAIRE
As it emerged from:
*The 10th question of the questionnaire for teachers concerning the comments
which had been written for the improvement of this last Transnational
meeting:
*Two teachers (25%) did not give any answer, considering that there is no need
to comment on the latter, since there will be no further meetings.
*Two teachers (25%) felt that they needed more time to complete the work of
the project during the last meeting.
*One teacher (12,5%) felt that if there was working groups, they would have had
better results.
*One teacher (12,5%) felt that the preparation of the scheduled meeting was
insufficient.
*Two teachers (25%) felt that the last meeting was completed in the best
possible way, bringing in mind many touching memories of the last two years of
the program.
27. QUESTIONNAIRE CONCLUSIONS FOR TEACHERS
*The conclusions that emerged after the last 7th Transnational Meeting in June 2017 at the
1st Primary School of Peania in Greece were considered absolutely positive according the
specific questionnaire which was completed by the participating teachers.
*8 teachers - 2 from each school in Greece, Spain, Slovakia and Lithuania, Coordinators of the
ERASMUS program, considered that:
The frequency of the meetings was flawless.
The cooperation between the members was very good to excellent.
The quality and fidelity of the content and agreements was very good to excellent.
The level of achievement of the agreements that was the outcome of the meetings was very
good to excellent.
The level of teachers’ satisfaction with the work which had been done was good to excellent.
28. QUESTIONNAIRE CONCLUSIONS FOR TEACHERS
The level of efficiency of collaboration and coordination during the meetings was good to
excellent.
The work which was done from the Coordinator of the 1st Primary School of Peania Nikos
Linoxylakis was very good to excellent.
The distribution of the tasks during the meetings was flawless.
The comments and suggestions which were written to improve this last Transnational
meeting were varied and had to do with: a better preparation for this meeting, the
organization of the participants into groups during the work and the need for more time
in order to achieve greater efficiency and finally, with the satisfaction they felt in Greece
during the discussion of the conclusions and the closure of the Final Report of the Project.
The curtain of the ERASMUS program opened and closed in Greece in a unique way
showing all these elements that signaled the importance of participating in a great and
successful effort made by the small communities of the four participating schools.
The final conclusion and wish of all participants – educational teams of teachers and
pupils from the 4 schools, non participating teachers and pupils, parents, local authorities
etc. was:
