evalution feedback of the project partners

Every Trainee Matters / 2010-1-ROI-LE004-0677111

Evaluation Feedback

Prague 21th – 22th June 2012Leonardo Da Vinci – Partnership

Every Trainee Matters

George StefasStrategic Management Unit

Evaluation Feedback

Every Trainee Matters | 2010-1-ROI-LE004-0677111

Project Management

Leadership

Communication

Training Approach

Organisations

Units of the project evaluation results:

• Improve capacity – Staff – Organication’s operation

• Better implementation of future projects• Improve managers capacity in project management• Lessons learned, deal with problems or obstacles• Assist the final report • Provide added value to the project

Purpose Internal Evaluation process

Project Management

• Were the language competencies of your organisation taken into account?

• Did you find all topics relevant during the project meetings?

• Did you agree with the initial strategy developed and proposed?

• Did the LP provided efficient support and expertise so as to ensure quality implementation of the training tasks and consequently improvement of the participating institutions?

Project Management


100%

Yes

Were you able to contribute to the same extent as the other project partners?

Project Management


83%

17%

yes no

Were all relevant information available in due time?

Project Management


71%

29%

Availability of relevant information

yes no

Were all the Coordinators in the different partner institutions authorized to take decisions?

Project Management


57%

43%

Decision making

yes no

Do you agree with the dissemination actions of the project results?

Project Management


71%

29%

Dissemination actions

yes no

• Some wanted less dissemination• Some did not make any dissemination

Please rate the quality of the portfolio made.

Project Management


1 2 3 4 5 6

4

3

4

3

4

5Rating of the quality of the portfolio made

• Average: 3.8

How would you rate the motivational accelerator applied by the project coordinator.

Project Management


1 2 3 4 5 6

5

3

4

5 5 5Rating of the motivational accelator applied by project coordinator

• Average: 4.5

Leadership

• Did you find clear the division of tasks between the project partners?

• Would you describe the workplan and timetable clear?

• Was there a clear distribution of responsibilities among the project partners?

• Did you believe you had your saying in the decision-making procedure?

• Did you find the contribution of your organisation to be valued?

• Would you choose to cooperate again with the Project coordinator?

Leadership


100%

Yes

Do you have a clear view of the main goals and results being aimed at?

Leadership


83%

17%

View of the goals & results

yes no

• More explanation required

Communication

• Did the project coordinator respected the deadlines?

• Were the technical communication levels of all project partners taken into account?

Communication


100%

Yes

During the project implementation did you have in your possession a timetable?

Communication


67%

33%

Possession of a timetable

yes no

Please rate the clearness timetable of activities for your organisation in the context of the project.

Communication


1 2 3 4 5 6

5

23

5

4 4

Clearness of timetable

• Average: 3.8

Please rate the means and frequency of communication among the partnership?

Communication


1

2

3

4

5

6

4

3

3

4

4

5

Rating of the means and frequency of communication among the part-nership

• Average: 3.8

Training Approach

How do you rate the overall professional development impact through the training approach?

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

5

3

4

3

5 5Overall professional development impact

• Average: 4.2

To what extent were you able to contribute to the online training course according to your strategic goals as an organisation?

Training Approach


• Average: 4.0 1 2 3 4 5 6

5

3

5

3

4 4

Contribution to the training course

In what level were you able to develop skills team work for the activity of the training approach?

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

4

3

4

3

5 5Level of team work skills developed

• Average: 4.0

In what level were you able to develop communication skills in English through the training courses?

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

4

3

4 4

5 5Level of English communication skills developed

• Average: 4.2

Please rate the communication between the participants and trainers during the lifetime of the testing period?

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

3

4

3

4 4 4Rating of the communication among the participants and trainers

• Average: 3.7

How would you rate the quality of the produced training material in comparison to the initial aim?

Training Approach


1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

4

2

4

5

5

5

Rating of the quality of the training material

• Average: 4.2

In what level is the training material appropriate for the participants of the testing (meeting the needs of the testers)?

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

5

2 2

4

5 5

Meeting the needs of the testers

• Average: 3.8

In what level would you rate the valorisation and use of ICT in the training approach?

Training Approach


1

2

3

4

5

6

4

3

3

5

5

4

Rating of the valorisation and the use of ICT

• Average: 4.0

Please rate the level of digital literacy promoted through the training methodology

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

3

2

3

4 4

5

Rating of the level of digital literacy promoted in this training approach

• Average: 3.5

Did your organisation reach the targeted number of testers?

Training Approach


83%

17%

Did the targeted number of testers were reached?

yes no

Based on the grade reports of your participants, what was the level of achievement?

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

3

2

4 4

3

4Level of achievement

• Average: 3.3

Please rate the level of participation of your trainees?

Training Approach


1

2

3

4

5

6

3

2

3

3

2

5

Level of trainees' participation

In what level did the functions of the e-platform meet your expectations (effectiveness)?

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

4

2

3

5 5 5Effectiveness of the platform's functions

Did the training program provide the necessary motivation to the participants to complete the courses?

Training Approach


83%

17%

Did the programme provide enough motivation to participants to complete the courses?

yes no

What impact did the partnership had on the pupils/learners/trainees? (1/2)

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5

3 3 3

5 5Linguistic skills

1 2 3 4 5

4

2

3

5 5Increased ICT skills

1

2

3

4

5

3

2

3

5

5

Increased vocational skills

1 2 3 4 5

3

2

3

2

4Increased social skills

What impact did the partnership had on the pupils/learners/trainees? (2/2)

Training Approach


1

2

3

4

5

4

3

3

3

4

Increased motivation

1 2 3 4 5

4

3 3

2

4Increased self-confidence

1 2 3 4 5

3

4

3

2

5

Increased knowledge about the partner countries and cultures

1

2

3

3

3

3

Other (Pupil-Other)

• Did the overall training approach gave motivation to the participants to engage in lifelong learning activities, according to your knowledge?

• Would you valorise again the same e-platform for training purposes?

Training Approach


100%

Yes

Based on the communication with your participants, do you think the training program increased or decreased their self-confidence?

Training Approach


83%

17%

Self confidence of participants

yes no

In what level do you find the e-platform effective?

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

4

3 3

5 5 5

Level of platform's effectiveness

Please evaluate the correlation (value) between resources provided for the production of the training material and the final quality portfolio

(set of online training courses)

Training Approach


1

2

3

4

5

6

5

3

3

4

4

4

Correlation between resourses and quality portfolio

Please rate the visibility of the institution and training program created in the partnership?

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

5

3

4

2

4

5Visibility of institution and training programme

Organisation

To what extent were results/products/outcomes previously identified at application stage achieved?

Organisations


1 2 3 4 5 6

4

2

4 4

5 5

Extent of achievement of results/products/outcomes/ previously identified in application form

To what extent were the aims/objectives previously stated at application stage achieved?

Organisations


1

2

3

4

5

6

5

3

4

3

5

5

Extent of achievement of aims /goals previously stated in application form

To what extent were the planned activities previously stated at application stage achieved?

Organisations


1 2 3 4 5 6

4

3

4 4

5 5Extent of achievement of planned activities

What impact did the partnership have on the teachers/staff? (1/2)

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

2 2

3

4

5 5Increased language skills

1 2 3 4 5 6

3

2

3

5

4 4

Increased ICT skills

1

2

3

4

5

6

5

2

3

2

4

5

Increased motivation

1 2 3 4 5

4

3 3

5

4

Increased training skills

What impact did the partnership have on the teachers/staff? (2/2)

Training Approach


1 2 3 4 5 6

4

3 3

4

5

4

Increased project management skills

1

2

3

4

5

6

4

2

3

4

5

5

Increased knowledge about partner countries and cultures

1 2

3 3Other-Staff

Do you believe you have informed your organisation / other organisations / the local community of the results of the partnership?

Organisations


83%

17%

Notification of other organization/local community about the results of this partnership

yes no

Do you think that the outcomes of the partnership could be used by others?

Organisations


100%

Yes

evalution feedback of the project partners

Documents