erasmus evaluation grid&and_descriptors
TRANSCRIPT
Erasmus+ KA2 “Steps of Citizenship” EVALUATION GRID
AREAS AND CRITERIA OF EVALUATION
EVALUATION
a. COORDINATION
1
2
3 4
5
Clear division of tasks among the partners
Clear division of tasks inside each school
Clear timetable
b. COMMUNICATION
1
2
3 4
5
Communication and exchanges
Clarity in communication
Working meetings productivity for the project
c. ACTIVITIES
1
2
3 4
5
Adherence of planned activities to objectives
Processes in terms of
1. motivation
2. operativity
Processes in terms of
1. Products/outputs
2. behaviours
d. TRANSNATIONAL MEETINGS
1
2
3 4
5
Adherence of the organized activities to the projects’ objectives
Productivity during the transnational workshops
AREAS AND CRITERIA OF EVALUATION DESCRIPTORS
a. COORDINATION
1
2
3 4
5
Clear division of tasks among the partners Tasks’ division is
not clear at all
Tasks’division is
clear in a few aspects
Tasks’ divisioni is
clear enough
Tasks’ division is
clear
Tasks division is
very clear
Clear division of tasks inside each school Tasks’ division is
not clear at all
Tasks’division is
clear in a few aspects
Tasks’ divisioni is
clear enough
Tasks’ division is
clear
Tasks division is
very clear
Clear timetable
Timetable is not
clear at all
Timetable is clear in
a few aspects
Timetable is clear
enough
Timetable is clear Timetable is
very clear
b. COMMUNICATION
1
2
3 4
5
Communication and exchanges
Communication
and exchanges
never take place
preventing the
regular
implementation of
the project
Communication and
exchanges take place
only a few times
making the
implementation of
the project difficult
Communication and
exchanges are
enough for the
regular
implementation of
the project
Communication
and exchanges
take place on
regular bases and
make the
implemetation of
the project quite
easy
Communication
and exchanges
take place on
regular bases
and the project’s
implementation
is easy
Clarity in communication
Communication is
not clear
Communication is
rarely clear Communication is
clear enough Communication is
clear Communication
is very clear Working meetings productivity for the project
Working meetings
are not productive
Working meetings
are rarelyproductive
Working meetings
are productive
enough
Working
meetings are
productive
Working
meetings are
veryproductive
c. ACTIVITIES
1
2
3 4
5
Adherence of planned activities to objectives
Planned activities
do not respond to
the project’s
objectives
Planned activities
onlu partially
respond to the
project’s objectives
Planned activities
respond quite enough
to the project’s
objectives
Planned activities
respond to the
project’s
objectives
Planned
activities totally
respond to the
project’s
objectives
Processes in terms of
3. motivation
Motivation is very
poor
Motivation is poor Motivation is
sufficient Motivation is
good Motivation is
very good 4. operativity
Operativity is very
poor
Operativity is poor Operativity is
sufficient
Operativity is
good
Operatività is
very good
Processes in terms of
3. Products/outputs
Products/outputs
are very poor and
of low quality
Most of the
products/outputs are
poor and low quality
Products/outputs are
good enough Products/outputs
are good Products/outputs
are very good
and of high
quality
4. behaviours
d. TRANSNATIONAL MEETINGS Adherence of the organized activities to the
projects’ objectives
The organized
activities are not
related to the
project’s objectives
The organized
activities are rarely
related to the
project’s objectives
The organized
activities are
sufficiently related
to the project’s
objectives
The organized
activities are well
related to the
project’s
objectives
The organized
activities are
very well related
to the project’s
objectives Productivity during the the transnational workshops
Workshops are not
productive
Workshops are only
partially productive Workshops are
sufficiently
productive
Workshops’
productivity is
good
Workshops’
productivity is
very good