E. P. ERASMUS+ / KA2 – Partnerships

Project Title: “Stress-free E.U. Schools

Interim Evaluation ReportDrafted by: Yiannis Zarkadas, Project Coordinator

Partnerships

free E.U. Schools”

Interim Evaluation Report Drafted by: Yiannis Zarkadas, Project Coordinator

Executive Summary The interim evaluation of the “Stress-free E. U. Schoolsfirst year of the life cycle of the works of the project.

It has been designed in order to reflectbased on questionnaires that had been produced by the coordinating school and forwarded to partner schools where they should be filled with the responsibility of the schools coordinators after consultation with the members of the ERASMUS + Team of each School.

Apart from this, the Heads of the partner schools were asked to providate and their point of view on the project aims and objectives.

In order to provide for the Steering Group of the project a clear view of the evaluation of the project, all partners have agreed to put five axes of the project under examination:

A. The impact on its selected target groups, B. The dissemination process C. The coordination of the projectD. The implementation of the common work program, andE. The overall assessment

The implementation of the project works scores the same with the overall assessment and the coordination seems quite satisfactory for all partner institutions.

free E. U. Schools” Project has been carried out right after the end of the first year of the life cycle of the works of the project.

reflect the views of the ERASMUS+ Teams of the partner schools and it has been based on questionnaires that had been produced by the coordinating school and forwarded to partner schools

filled with the responsibility of the schools coordinators after consultation with the of the ERASMUS + Team of each School.

of the partner schools were asked to provide their comments on the project works to date and their point of view on the project aims and objectives.

In order to provide for the Steering Group of the project a clear view of the evaluation of the project, all partners f the project under examination:

The impact on its selected target groups,

The coordination of the project The implementation of the common work program, and

The graph indicates how the ERASMUS + Teams evaluated the project works for the first year of its life cycle.

One can easily observe that main issue of the project is tdissemination procedure.

All schools evaluate with their highest scores the impact of the project internal impact on their pupils, teaching staff and parents and care givers.

ementation of the project works scores the same with the overall assessment and the coordination ory for all partner institutions.

Project has been carried out right after the end of the

partner schools and it has been based on questionnaires that had been produced by the coordinating school and forwarded to partner schools

filled with the responsibility of the schools coordinators after consultation with the

de their comments on the project works to

In order to provide for the Steering Group of the project a clear view of the evaluation of the project, all partners

The graph indicates how the ERASMUS + Teams evaluated the project works for the first year of its life cycle.

One can easily observe that main issue of the project is the dissemination procedure.

All schools evaluate with their highest scores the impact of the project focusing mainly in the internal impact on their pupils, teaching staff and parents and care givers.

ementation of the project works scores the same with the overall assessment and the coordination

Presentation of the findings Impact of the project

the average of the individual scores of each category: AVERAGE (95, 95, 85)

The internal impact achieved one of the highest that all partner schools have done quite a remarkable work internally, in relation with the objectives of the project.

Dissemination of the project

fully operational during the first year of the project due to technical it. All partners had agreed that all languages of the project should be represented to the should a site with five different language profiles. Pauto-translation between languages since

Regarding the dissemination events, more effort should be given to increase the participation of audiences from selected target groups.

The overall score is the average of the individual sco

Coordination

The coordination of the project is an attempt to evaluate the coordinating institution as a body and the coordinator of the partnership as an individual.

For this purpose, the following aspects

Clearly defined project work plan

During the first year of the project works the impact of the project focused to the pupils and the staff and at a secondary level to the parents and care givers.

The project seems to achieve significant impact on the pupils and the teachers of the partner institutions.

The overall score for the impact of the project is he average of the individual scores of each category: AVERAGE (95, 95, 85) = 91,67

one of the highest scores of the interim evaluation, which can lead to the conclusion uite a remarkable work internally, in relation with the objectives of the

Dissemination of the project seems to be the only aspect that faces problems. It achieved the lowest score above the points of examination of this evaluation report.

Both the implementation events and the project website seem to fall low on the evaluation of the ERASMUS +

Regarding the website of the project, it was not first year of the project due to technical difficulties about the multilingual character of

that all languages of the project should be represented to the should a site with five different language profiles. Partners had also agreed that they should avoid

between languages since the out coming result is not always acceptable.

Regarding the dissemination events, more effort should be given to increase the participation of audiences from

average of the individual scores of each category: AVERAGE (65, 75

The coordination of the project is an attempt to evaluate the coordinating institution as a body and the coordinator of the partnership as an individual.

lowing aspects have been put under examination:

lan

During the first year of the project works the of the project focused mostly internally,

to the pupils and the staff and at a secondary level to the parents and care givers.

to achieve significant impact on the pupils and the teachers of the partner

The overall score for the impact of the project is

scores of the interim evaluation, which can lead to the conclusion uite a remarkable work internally, in relation with the objectives of the

Dissemination of the project seems to be the only aspect that faces problems. It achieved the lowest score above the points of examination of this evaluation report.

implementation of the dissemination and the project website seem to fall low

the evaluation of the ERASMUS + teams.

Regarding the website of the project, it was not about the multilingual character of

that all languages of the project should be represented to the website; therefore there had also agreed that they should avoid the option of

not always acceptable.

Regarding the dissemination events, more effort should be given to increase the participation of audiences from

65, 75) = 70,00.

The coordination of the project is an attempt to evaluate the coordinating institution as a body and the

On time delivery of project management docs (meeting agendas and Training Events draft program

On time delivery of project reports Quality of project management

documents Quality of project reports Communication with the coordinator Communication and collaboration

among partners

In all the above mentioned categories it that the coordinating institution complies fully with its role since it achieves quite high scores in any one of them.

Some more effort could be given to the communication with the coordinator, since there is some room for improvement in this category, and the delivery of the project reports.

The overall score is the average of the individual sco93,57.

Implementation

by this task. During the first year of the project there have been implemented, with the inclusion of the Meeting, three (3) Transnational Meetings, which indeed have been organized and implemented quite well.

The organization of the Short-Term Joint Staff Training Eventsexpected to score higher (remark from the project coordinator). been organized two (2) STJSTE, the first one in Italy, hostedsecond one in the UK, hosted by St. Lukeinfrastructure and for each one there had been a clearly defined Training Program, whicclose cooperation with the project coordinator and the schools coordinators, and to which all partners have agreed upon with no comments on them. Anyway, there arises a need for more in depth examination on the partners’ opinions about this result.

The deliverables of the project to date under development it seems that all partner school have high expectations on the final results.

(meeting agendas and Training Events draft programs) On time delivery of project reports Quality of project management

he coordinator ommunication and collaboration

it seems that the coordinating institution complies fully with its role since it achieves quite high scores in any one of them.

Some more effort could be given to the communication with the coordinator, since there is some room for improvement in this category, and the delivery of the project reports.

average of the individual scores of each category: AVERAGE (95,

The implementation of the project reflects the individual partners’ contribution to it as well as their point of view on the work that has been carried out during the first year of the project life cycle.

Four aspects have been put under examination and starting with the organization of the Transnational Meetings it seems that all partners have obtained quite good experiences

e first year of the project there have been implemented, with the inclusion of the Transnational Meetings, which indeed have been organized and implemented quite well.

Term Joint Staff Training Events - STJSTE achieved quite a good score, although it expected to score higher (remark from the project coordinator). During the period under examination there havbeen organized two (2) STJSTE, the first one in Italy, hosted by the Istituto Comprensivo di Alba Adriatica and the second one in the UK, hosted by St. Luke’s School of Redbourn. Host institutions provided with all the necessary infrastructure and for each one there had been a clearly defined Training Program, whicclose cooperation with the project coordinator and the schools coordinators, and to which all partners have agreed upon with no comments on them. Anyway, there arises a need for more in depth examination on the

date have achieved quite an acceptable score (85%) and since they are still under development it seems that all partner school have high expectations on the final results.

Some more effort could be given to the communication with the coordinator, since there is some room for

5, 100, 90, 95, 95, 90 , 90) =

The implementation of the project reflects the contribution to it as well as

their point of view on the work that has been ried out during the first year of the project

Four aspects have been put under examination and starting with the organization of the Transnational Meetings it seems that all partners have obtained quite good experiences

e first year of the project there have been implemented, with the inclusion of the Kick-off Transnational Meetings, which indeed have been organized and implemented quite well.

achieved quite a good score, although it During the period under examination there have

by the Istituto Comprensivo di Alba Adriatica and the Host institutions provided with all the necessary

infrastructure and for each one there had been a clearly defined Training Program, which has been designed in close cooperation with the project coordinator and the schools coordinators, and to which all partners have agreed upon with no comments on them. Anyway, there arises a need for more in depth examination on the

achieved quite an acceptable score (85%) and since they are still under development it seems that all partner school have high expectations on the final results.

Finally, the implementation of the parallel activities (visits to sites of cultural interest, etc) have achieved a quite acceptable score (80%), although (remark from the project coordinatorhigher one, since the partners who hostedheritage and the history of their regions.

The overall score is the average of the individual sco

Overall assessment

School coordinators were asked to discuss with all the members of the ERASMUS+ Teams of tto incorporate the opinion of their head teacher in their final assessment.

It seems that the score that the project implementation has achieved in this indicator is quite high, taking into consideration that the more essential work of the project will or has just started by entering the second year of its life cycle.

on of the parallel activities (visits to sites of cultural interest, etc) have achieved a quite remark from the project coordinator) they were expected to achieve a

the partners who hosted transnational activities have made their best to heritage and the history of their regions.

average of the individual scores of each category: AVERAGE (90

The overall assessment represents an indicator through which the members of the partnership can express their view about the way the project works proceed.

School coordinators were asked to discuss with all the members of the ERASMUS+ Teams of tto incorporate the opinion of their head teacher in their final assessment.

the score that the project implementation has achieved in this indicator is quite high, taking into consideration that the more essential work of the project will or has just started by entering the second year of its

on of the parallel activities (visits to sites of cultural interest, etc) have achieved a quite ) they were expected to achieve a much

r best to present the cultural

90, 85, 85, 80) = 85,00.

The overall assessment represents an indicator through which the members of the partnership can express their

about the way the project works

School coordinators were asked to discuss with all the members of the ERASMUS+ Teams of their Schools and try

the score that the project implementation has achieved in this indicator is quite high, taking into consideration that the more essential work of the project will or has just started by entering the second year of its