welcome and - erasmus+ · etwinning operates in 26 languages and promotes school collaboration...
TRANSCRIPT
Welcome and
Introduction
o Training session based on “Model for Expert Training”, the result of
a Transnational Cooperation Activity (TCA) led by Erasmus+ National
Agencies in Iceland, Norway and Sweden.
o TCA activity - in 2014 and 2015 - centred on development of a
common expert training model to allow joint training of Erasmus+
experts, instilling common understanding across different Erasmus+
Programme countries.
o Training model updated to reflect programme goals and priorities for
2016 and adapted to reflect the time available for this training session.
Transnational Cooperation Activity
Before we
begin!
Meet
the
Room
Who
are
You?
Who
are
We?
1. Name?
2. Company or Institution?
3. Job - Role - Position?
4. Strangest food ever eaten?
Active
Participation is
Required and
Rewarded
The Erasmus+
Programme
Quiz Time
Which of these is closest tothe Programme Budget
for Erasmus+?
€ 5 Billion€ 15 Billion€ 50 Billion
1
The answer is €15 Billion
Erasmus+ budget:
€14.774 billion
1
What are the names of the7 funding programmes that
were brought togetherunder Erasmus+?
Name as many as you can!
2
brings together 7 existing
programmes in the fields of education,
training and youth under a single heading
2
How many Key Actions arethere in the Erasmus+
Programme?
What is your best guess?
Do you know which actionis which?
3
KEY ACTION 1: Learning Mobility of Individuals
KEY ACTION 2: Cooperationfor Innovation and the
Exchange of Good Practices
KEY ACTION 3: Support for Policy Reform
3
What are the 4 fields ofeducation and training
covered by theErasmus+ Programme?
Old names and new namesare accepted?
4
Focus on FIELDS (previously sectors)… namely:
- ADULT EDUCATION (AE) a.k.a. Grundtvig
- HIGHER EDUCATION (HE) a.k.a. Erasmus
- SCHOOL EDUCATION (SE) a.k.a. Comenius
- VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING (VET) a.k.a. Leonardo
… in addition to YOUTH and SPORT
4
What is ECTS?
Short description, orexplanation of the acronym?
5
The European Credit Transfer (and accumulation) System, or ECTS, is a tool that helps to design, describe and deliver study programmes and to
award higher education qualifications.
Learning is expressed in terms of credits, with a student workload ranging from 1500 to 1800 hours for one academic year, and one credit
generally corresponding to 25-30 hours of work.
5
E C T SEuropean Credit Transfer System
What is ECVET?
Short description, orexplanation of the acronym?
6
ECVET is a system for the
transfer, recognition
and accumulation of the
learning outcomes
achieved by an
individual with a view to
achieving a qualification.
6
What is eTwinning?
Short descriptionor explanation?
7
eTwinning operates in 26 languages andpromotes school collaboration through the use of ICT.
eTwinning offers a platform for staff in schools to communicate, collaborate, share and develop (including project development).
7
What is EPALE?
Short description, orexplanation of the acronym?
8
EPALE is a multilingual community, and platform, for teachers, trainers, researchers, policy makers and others with a professional role in adult learning.
EPALE targets improvedquality in adult learningprovision in Europe.
8
Which of the fieldsof education and training
finances more than one typeof Strategic Partnership?
[think back to the fields ofeducation and training that
were mentioned earlier]9
Education, Training and Youth(almost all fields)
Strategic Partnership for Innovation
Strategic Partnership for Exchange of Good Practices (not HE)
School Education:SP for Innovation
School Education Partnership(including multi-actor with schools, multi-actor with regional authorities and schools-only partnerships)
Minimum Participation in all cases = THREE PARTNERS
School Education:SP for Exchange of Good Practices
School Education Partnership(all actors, including schools)
Regional Partnership (regional / local education authorities)
School Only Partnership (different contracting model: involving only schools)
Minimum Participation in all cases = TWO PARTNERS
9
Everything has changed in 2016
10
Which field invites Strategic Partnership applications to be
submitted more thanonce a year?
Strategic Partnerships in thefield of YOUTH can be
submitted 3 times a year.10
Deadlines
2 February 201626 April 2016
4 October 2016
What are the 4 Award Criteria that are used to assess Strategic
Partnership applications under Erasmus+?
[name as many as you can]
11
11
Key Action 2: Assessment Criteria
Relevance of the Project
Quality of Project Design
Quality of Project Team
Impact and Dissemination
Which is the minimum scorethat must be achieved for an
application to be considered for Erasmus+ funding under
Key Action 2?
[we need the total score]
12
Multiple Thresholds Exist[e.g. KA and SSA have higher thresholds]
but the one you need to know is:
60 pointsfor KA2 Strategic Partnerships
plus at least half of the points availableunder each assessment criteria
12
Policy
Insight
EUROPE 2020 AND ET2020OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS
FIELD-SPECIFIC GOALS AND TARGETS
(E.G. HE MODERNISATION; RIGA 2015)
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN PARTNER
(NON-PROGRAMME) COUNTRIES
OBJECTIVES OF RENEWED
FRAMEWORK FOR YOUTH
OBJECTIVES FOR DEVELOPING A
EUROPEAN DIMENSION IN SPORT
PROMOTION OF EUROPEAN VALUES(ARTICLE 2 OF TREATY ON EU)
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE
Making Lifelong Learning and Mobility a Reality
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE
Improving Quality and Efficiency in Education and Training
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE
Promoting Equity, Social Cohesion and Active Citizenship
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE
Enhancing Creativity and Innovation (including
Entrepreneurship) at all levels of Education and Training
2020 TARGET 3% investment in Research and Development
2020 TARGET 75% Employment among 20-64 year olds
2020 TARGET Reduction of Early School Leaving to < 10%
2020 TARGET 40% completion of Tertiary Education (30-34 yr olds)
2020 TARGET 20 million fewer people at risk of Poverty
ET 2020…a new strategic framework
for European cooperation in
education and training
Europe 2020…a strategy for smarter, more
sustainable and more
inclusive growth
Erasmus+…a single programme for
education, training, youth and sport that aims to contribute
to the achievement of:
Policies, Frameworks and Erasmus+
EU Youth Strategy
OBJECTIVE: more and equal opportunities for young people in
education and the job market
OBJECTIVE: active participation of young people in society
YOUTH INITIATIVES: education and training; employment and
entrepreneurship; health and wellbeing; participation;
volunteering; social inclusion; creativity and culture;
youth and the world
CROSS SECTOR INITIATIVES: where wider policies and actions
impact on young people
Po
licie
s, F
ram
ewo
rks
and
Pri
ori
ties
Briefing Sheet: Policy Documents and Frameworks
Key Action 2 and Strategic Partnerships
Key Action 2
• Cooperation for Innovation and the Exchange of Good Practices
• Targets the development, transfer and/or implementation of innovative practices
• Targets positive and long-lasting change on the participating organisations
Centralised
• Knowledge Alliances
• Sector Skills Alliances
• Capacity-building for Higher Education
• Capacity-building for Youth
Decentralised
• Strategic Partnerships supporting Innovation
• Strategic Partnerships supporting Exchange of Good Practices
Understanding Strategic
Partnerships
1. GOALS AND AMBITIONS
Un
de
rsta
nd
ing
Stra
tegi
c P
artn
ers
hip
s
Strategic Partnerships aim to support the development, transfer and/or implementation of innovative practices as well as the implementation of joint initiatives that centre on cooperation, peer learning and exchanges of experience at European level.
Strategic Partnerships supporting Innovation: to develop innovative outputs and put in place intensive dissemination and exploitation actions associated with new/existing products and innovative ideas.
Strategic Partnerships supporting Exchange of Good Practices: to develop or reinforce networks, to increase their capacity to operate at transnational level, and to share and discuss ideas, practices and methods.
2. FUNDING AND FIELDS
Un
de
rsta
nd
ing
Stra
tegi
c P
artn
ers
hip
s
FIELD FUNDING
Higher Education Innovation only
School Education (Schools Only) Exchange of Good Practices only
School Education (Regional Cooperation) Exchange of Good Practices only
Adult Education Both types
School Education Both types
Vocational Education and Training Both types
Youth Both types
3. PARTNERS AND ACTORS
Un
de
rsta
nd
ing
Stra
tegi
c P
artn
ers
hip
s
Strategic Partnerships must normally involve at least 3 partners from 3 programme countries (for Youth and some of the SE sub-actions this is reduced to 2 partners from 2 programme countries) with no maximum set, yet with Project Management contributions paid for a maximum of 10 partners.
Strategic Partnerships are open to organisations active in any field of education, training and youth, or other socio-economic sectors, including those with a transversal remit (e .g. local and regional authorities, recognition bodies, trade organisations, chambers of commerce, guidance centres, cultural bodies).
Strategic Partnerships should involve an appropriate range of partners bringing forth complementary experience and expertisethat will enable goals and objectives to be delivered, with participation having confirmed strategic value in all cases.
4. TARGETED PRIORITIES
Un
de
rsta
nd
ing
Stra
tegi
c P
artn
ers
hip
s
Strategic Partnerships must address at least one HORIZONTAL or FIELD-SPECIFIC priority, to be eligible to be funded: this is now embedded in the application form, with at least one priority now required to be selected.
For 2016, there are 6 Horizontal Priorities
Horizontal Priorities aligned with revised list of priorities confirmed in the ET2020 mid-term stocktaking report (August 2015)
For 2016, there are confirmed priorities for each of the different fields of education, training and youth, each reflecting the different (yet often complementary) development ambitions
5. HORIZONTAL PRIORITIES
developing basic and transversal skills;
inclusive education, training and youth;
open and innovative pedagogies;
developing educators and youth workers;
transparency and recognition
investment, performance and efficiency.
Un
de
rsta
nd
ing
Stra
tegi
c P
artn
ers
hip
s
Understanding Strategic Partnerships
1Volunteer
16Priorities
5Fields
Align Fields and Priorities
10
HINT:
HE has 2 Priorities,
AE and Youth have 3,
and VET and SE
each have 4
6. FIELD-SPECIFIC PRIORITIES
Un
de
rsta
nd
ing
Stra
tegi
c P
artn
ers
hip
s
Strategic Partnership for Innovation
[all fields]
Management
Meetings IOs MEs TTLsExceptio
nalSpecial Needs
targeting the development of innovative outputsalongside intensive dissemination and exploitation
actions associated with new or existing productsand innovative ideas
7. KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE
Un
de
rsta
nd
ing
Stra
tegi
c P
artn
ers
hip
s
Strategic Partnership for Exchange of Good Practices
[not HE… not all SE sub-actions]
Management
MeetingsTTLs
(some)Exceptio
nalSpecial Needs
targeting those wishing to develop or reinforce networks,to increase their capacity to operate at transnational level, and to
share and discuss ideas, practices and methods(such partnerships might also produce tangible outputs
and are expected to disseminate the results of theiractivities albeit in a manner proportional to the aim
and scope of the project)
7. KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE
Briefing Sheet: KA2 Strategic Partnerships
Assessment Processesand People
Overview of Core Assessment and Selection Steps
Advance Circulation of Briefing Materials
AssessorTraining Session
Field-specific Communication(where needed)
Assessment of “Eligible” Applications
by Experts
Consolidated Assessment Produced
by Lead Expert
Scores and Comments uploaded to OEET
Quality Assuranceby NA Staff
Ranking ListProduced
Decision by Selection Committee
Overview of Assessment and Consolidation Steps
Ranking List
National Agency
Assessment and Upload to OEET
Expert 1
Assessment and Upload to OEET
Expert 2
Quality Checks
National Agency
Consolidation and Upload to OEET
Lead Expert
Quality Checks
National Agency
Assessment and Upload to OEET
Expert 3
Quality Checks
National Agency
Third Assessment needed only in case of significant difference
Assessment
and Scoring
Assessment and Scoring: Criteria and Ceilings
Assessment Criterion Maximum Score
Relevance 30
Quality of Project Design 20
Quality of Project Team 20
Impact and Dissemination 30
Note 1: these scores apply only to KA2 Strategic Partnerships
Note 2: to be considered for financing, projects must achieve atleast 50% under each criterion plus at least 60 points in total.
Assessment and Scoring: Use of Scoring Bands
Scoring Ceiling
VERY GOOD GOOD FAIR WEAK
…application addresses all relevant
aspects of the criterion in question
convincingly and successfully; the
answer provides all the information and
evidence needed and there are no
concerns or areas of weakness.
…application addresses the criterion well,
although some small improvements could be made; the answer
gives clear information on all, or
nearly all, of the evidence needed.
…application broadly addresses the
criterion, but there are some
weaknesses; the answer gives some
relevant information, but there are several areas where detail is
lacking or the information is
unclear.
…application fails to address the criterion or cannot be judged
due to missing or incomplete
information; the answer does not
address the question asked, or gives very
little relevant information.
30 POINTS 26 - 30 21 - 25 15 - 200 -14
[fails threshold]
20 POINTS17 - 20 14 - 16 10 - 13
0 - 9[fails threshold]
Note: additional scoring bands exist in other sub-actions
Practice
makes Perfect
Some Interaction Required!
DISAGREE
AGREE
Some Interaction Required!
DISAGREE
AGREE
Brussels is the Capitalof Belgium?
Some Interaction Required!
DISAGREE
AGREE
Toronto is the Capitalof Canada?
Mock Assessment Results
29
5
33 (out of 30)
Relevance: Average 20 (out of 30): 67%
Mock Assessment Results
45 5
25
5
Project Design: Average 13 (out of 20): 65%
Mock Assessment Results
87
87
20 20
Project Team: Average 14 (out of 20): 70%
Mock Assessment Results
27
8
Impact-Dissemination: Average 19 (out of 30): 63%
Mock Assessment Results
34
85 85
9087
38 37
88
Total Score: Average 66 (out of 100): 66%
The Panel
More Practice
makes Perfect
More Practice Makes Perfect: Group Activity
Group(s): Relevance
Group(s):Project Design
Group(s):Project Team
Group(s):Impact and
Dissemination
60
Read the Relevant Sections
• Individually
• 30 mins.
Discuss
• In Groups (A, B, C)
• 25 mins.
Comment and Score
• Rapporteur & Flipchart
• 5 mins.
More Practice Makes Perfect: Group Reporting
Groups: Relevance
Groups: Project Design
Groups: Project Team
Groups: Impact and
Dissemination
10 10 10
Consistent scores and comments?
Consistent scores and comments?
Consistent scores and comments?
Consistent scores and comments?
10
More Practice Makes Perfect: Open Feedback
OPEN FEEDBACK1. What worked well
in the groups?
2. What were the challenges?
3. Were there any surprises?
The Assessment
Form
Individual Assessment: OEET Assessment Form
Add comments for each assessment
criterion
Add comments for the Applicant (highlighting
strengths and weaknesses)
Add comments specifically for use
by the NA
Add scores for each assessment criterion
(refer to scoring bands and remember
thresholds!)
Total automatically calculated by OEET.
Remember different maximum scores exist
for different assessment criteria
Confirm whether reductions are
proposed to the original grant
Additional boxes are provided. Remember to
SAVE YOUR WORK(and keep a back up)
Creating
Comments
Assessment Overview: Comments
Each award criterion comprises several elements (see briefing sheets) which must be considered and commented on;
Experts should make a judgement on the extent to which the application meets defined criteria with judgements based solely on the information provided in the application and ensuring that applicants are not penalised more than once for the same issue;
Experts should keep in mind the project type, the scale of planned activity and the amount of funding requested and should integrate the proportionality principle into their assessment;
Comments should be provided in text format (not bullet points) and should respect the 5 Cs:
Coherent:easy to understand even for a reader that has not read the application
Comprehensive: covering each of the award criteria and incorporating most, if not all, of the composite elements
Consistent: easily aligned with the scores that have been awarded for each criterion and within the predefined scoring bands
Courteous: polite and respectful (note that comments are used to provide feedback to applicants)
Concise:whilst there will always be exceptions, comments should be of a standard size, as determined by NA staff
Activity: Rate These Comments
VERYBAD
ROOM TO IMPROVE
FAIRLY GOOD
EXCELLENT
The project has definite merit, in terms of adapting curricula to incorporate a
reflection on traditional industries, yet greater argument is needed in a number
of areas of the application [A]
The project aims to promote traditional approaches to “apple harvesting” and “crop rotation”. It is difficult to see how such basic
skills are relevant to the Erasmus+ programme and/or the targeted sector, for
me the project should not be funded [B]
Whilst there are arguments given as regards the benefits of understanding “apple harvesting” and “crop rotation”
among the targeted agriculture students, there is insufficient data provided in terms of the level and extent of learning that will
be targeted for delivery [C]
Apple Harvesting! Crop Rotation!This project is a joke: it cannot be serious that somebody would ask for money for
such activities [D]
Activity: Accept or Reject These Comments
Personal Experience is
Not Good
First Person is Not Good
Constructive is Good
Positive is Good
Arguments for the use of Facebook, and other social media platforms, needed to be more fully described, confirming distinct goals for use alongside specific target audiences.
The use of Facebook, and other social media platforms, is relevant to the broader promotional strategy of the project; the rationale for its use is both clear and convincing.
I do not see the value of using Facebook in the project, for me the rationale is not clear.
In my experience, Facebook can be a positive addition when targeting promotional activity towards younger learners.
Activity: Create Comments
PositiveLeft Side of Page
Less Positive
Right Side of Page
15
POSITIVE COMMENTS• Consider definitions of “good”
and “very good”• Use positive terms• Be judgemental (not purely
descriptive) and justify your positive position
• Target 3-4 Comments
LESS POSITIVE COMMENTS• Consider definition of “weak”• Use less positive terms
(constructive terms)• Be judgemental (not purely
descriptive) and justify your less positive position
• Target 3-4 Comments
2
A high quality FRUIT BASKET should:
• contain a balanced mix of fruits and berries;
• be presentable, portable and able to be used at a variety of events and occasions;
• include a good variety of colours and shapes.
2
A high quality BIRD HOUSE should:
• provide sufficient space for the inhabitants
• be furnished with materials from the original bird habitats;
• include a good variety of sizes, breeds and colours;
• be self-sustainable.
Briefing Sheet: KA2 Assessment Comments
Budget
Assessment
Budget Assessment for Strategic Partnerships
o For KA2 strategic partnership applications, budgets are largely based on unit costs with amounts calculated per day / per category / per meeting / per month, etc. (with only a few exceptions);
o National agencies rely on experts to judge and comment on the type and number of units being proposed ensuring that they are relevant, appropriate and realistic (i.e. not overestimated or underestimated);
o Even in projects that are scored highly, experts might judge that units are excessive or unjustified and might consequently propose reductions in the numbers of units being proposed: these recommendations can be used, by the National Agency, to determine a reduction on the proposed (or awarded) grant where a project is selected for funding;
o Management and implementation costs are automatically calculated according to the number of participants and the project duration (up to a maximum ceiling) and are not subject to reduction by experts;
o For projects not passing one or more thresholds (consolidation stage), it is not necessary to point out all areas of the budget where there are inaccuracies or excesses, focusing instead on constructive feedback and areas for change.
Activity: Interpreting the Financial Rules
Review Guidance
InterpretRules
Share Knowledge
and Thoughts
Prepare to Report
30
Different Budget Questions and Scenarios
• Return to small working groups• Appoint notetaker• Consult guides, briefing sheets and group
facilitators (NA staff)• 30 minutes allowed
Onsite Assessment: Group Reporting
Group Scenario 1
Group Scenario 2
Group Scenario 3
Core Messages Only
Core Messages Only
Core Messages Only
5 5 5
Briefing Sheet: Budget Assessment for Strategic Partnerships
Consolidation
Consolidation Overview
Consolidation is normally undertaken for ALL Strategic Partnership applications (grant requests normally > €60,000 under this funding action);
Consolidation will only ever involve 2 experts (if a third expert is involved, the 2 experts with the closest scores will be asked to consolidate);
Comments and scores are combined in a single consolidated assessment (half-scores can be used during Consolidation only; averages are not automatically used);
Only during Consolidation can you discuss a project with another assessor (initial assessments remain independent and do not change);
Lead assessors are appointed by the National Agency prior to consolidation being launched;
Comments should be provided in text format, not bullet points, and should respect the 6 Cs:
Coherent, Comprehensive, Consistent, Courteous, Conciseand…
Consolidated: comments should read as single texts (sentences or paragraphs) and should be harmonised, not contradictory.
Activity: Consolidating Scores
IndividuallyOwnScore
PairsConsolidated
Score and Comments
15
Ultimate Goal: Agree on Common Scores and Comments
1. Read comments and award individual score: 5 minutes2. Identify partner: somebody with a different set of
comments (i.e. if you are A, then look for B or C)3. Discuss and agree on a consolidated score: 5 minutes4. Highlight the assessment comments you would use to justify
this score in your feedback to the applicant: 5 minutes
Consolidation Activity: Open Feedback
OPEN FEEDBACK
1. Did you arrive at a common score and, if so, how (discussion,
average, other)?
2. Did you review the “scoring bands”
during your consolidation?
3. Did you easily identify a single set of comments that could
be used?
Briefing Sheet: Expert Assessment and Consolidation
Online Expert
Evaluation Tool
(OEET)
Questions
and Close