Evaluation of Project Progress and Project Meetings Selena Teeling, Aston University The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Where are we now? The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Where are we now? Stock take Thessaloniki, Yerevan, Minsk, Project progress evaluation Timeline Project started 3 months late but we were expected to keep to the original deadlines which has made this experience more stressful than it needed to be. There has been ambiguity over whether we will /can extend the project. This has became a pressing issue as we get closer towards the final outcomes. The project started late and so all actions were delayed but the timeframe was not corrected. We started three months late and everything has been delayed for at least three months. This had a knock-on effect on all activities and caused further delays. The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Communications & Management Communication has not been always good at many points. Questions asked on the intranet are not always responded to in a timely manner. Feedback with the project coordinator was difficult from time to time. communication with the financial consulting team is not satisfying, 'cause they are not consistent in their information and responses. questions on the intranet sometimes were answered with a lot of delay There were ups and downs; often there was not enough clarity and very often no decisions. The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Lack of clarity During the face to face meetings we did not use the time as wisely as we could. We should have more meaningful discussions around the WPs. Not enough discussion and action are taken during the face to face meetings. Sometimes it was hard to get comments in or to have a proper discussion on them. We have discussed problems but not decided how to resolve them. The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Strengths The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Achievements The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Improvements Events Continuous improvement on the organisation and the content of the workshops Website Improvements of the website following feedback Improved understanding of the needs of the Partner Countries Internal and External Workshops The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Going forward We need to have the opportunity to reflect and evaluate what we have done to date to see if we need to amend / update the measured outputs. When the plan was originally put together it was all hypothetical, whereas now we have more idea as to what we should be achieving. Without a proper discussion there can not be adaption of the activities The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Approaching Finishing Line Timeline – extension indicated Communications – own networks – posting on social media, eg twitter and Linkedin Updated information (all meetings & newsletters) on individual partner websites External community evaluations conducted by RAU and BSU? What is yet to be achieved? Qualitative/Quantitative indicators in forefront The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Project Evaluation Plan The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Impact Indicators Long term impact Target groups/potential beneficiaries Quantitative indicators Qualitative indicators Increased awareness &knowledge of state-of-the-art in internationalization level at higher education in EU &PCs wider public incl. Universities in EU and PCs, International academic community, Students` communities; Governmental authorities, NEOs, Professional organisations & national & international networks Analytical materials Results of research of internationalization level at higher education in the countries involved   contribution to harmonisation of Internationalization strategies in EU and PCs in the framework of HEA according to main provisions of the Bologna Process and considering national interests and traditions. wider public incl. Universities in PCs, International academic community, Students` communities; Governmental authorities, NEOs, Professional organisations & national & international networks Framework of a Comprehensive internationalization strategy Dissemination of best practice of Implementation of Pilot Internationalization Action Plans I Description of Pilot Internationalization Action Plans Implementation of Pilot Internationalization Action Plans in HEIs contribute to increasing the attractiveness of the HEA, to establishing a HEI as a centre of excellence in all the activities related to higher education, research and innovation within the global scene but in accordance with national development strategies Tool kits for harmonization of internationalization strategy in EU and Partner Countries 50 experts Expert network for internationalization in higher education Qualified staff in international relations management at PC universities 5 retraining programs Retraining programs for HEI administrative staff Support of the modernisation, accessibility and internationalisation of the higher education field in Armenia, Belarus, Russia 3 Recommendations Adaptation of recommendations for harmonization of internalisation strategies at national levels The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Project Evaluation plan Element Quality Indicators Evaluation level Items to be evaluated Methodology development In-depth analysis of the level of internationalisation in higher education, research and innovation in partner countries undertaken Questionnaire developed Internal Annex 3 of kick-off meeting Minutes of the discussions Published methodological materials Survey and document analysis Analysis of EU and national policy in education, research, innovation undertaken Surveys developed and undertaken Annex 3 of study visits Published analytical materials Results of interviews Published e-book of analytical materials Development of Framework of a Comprehensive internationalization strategy Internationalisation Action Plans developed and reviewed PC HEIs reports on piloting of the Action Plans of Internationalisation undertaken Retraining sessions for PCs HEIs undertaken Draft of Internationalisation Action Plans PC HEIs reports on piloting of the Action Plans of Internationalisation published Annex 3 of training courses Results of training courses published an integral part of the QCP. It outlines the elements of project evaluation, the set of quality indicators against which progress and quality of project outputs will be measured, as well as the evaluation mode and the evaluation instruments to be used. The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Project Evaluation plan Tool kits for harmonization of internationalization strategy in higher education, research and innovation in EU and Partner Countries Tool kits for harmonization of internationalization strategy in higher education, research and innovation in EU and Partner Countries developed Tool kits reviewed by all partners Internal Final version of “Tool kits for harmonization of internationalization strategy” published Review of tool kits submitted Programme and minutes of the methodological workshop published Annex 3 of methodological workshop Project Management Project management plan developed; Work plan with clear division of tasks and responsibilities between partners and time table produced; Approved decision- making procedures; Approved methods and tools of communication between partners; Satisfaction of Steering Committee with project management plan; Financial management; Project events (seminars, meetings, conferences); Project management reports. Internal and external Annex 1 Annex 2 Information collected from project partners SC mission & working principles produced Updated Workplan an integral part of the QCP. It outlines the elements of project evaluation, the set of quality indicators against which progress and quality of project outputs will be measured, as well as the evaluation mode and the evaluation instruments to be used. The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Project Evaluation plan Coordination and project meetings Quality of information and communication prior to and at the event; Participation and contribution at the event; Respecting the agenda & meeting the goals of the meeting; Working environment; Participants have a clear plan of upcoming activities; Accommodation, food and social element. Internal and external Annex 3 Minutes of coordinating meetings Dissemination & exploitation Development & dissemination of Project Materials, including a Project Book Development of Project Website Dissemination events organized, including the Final conference Collaboration agreements between partners signed Internal and external Annex 3 Annex 4 Annex 6 Published Project Book Project marketing package published Number of publications in the press and social media Number of visitors to the project events Number of visitors on the project website Number of collaboration agreements signed an integral part of the QCP. It outlines the elements of project evaluation, the set of quality indicators against which progress and quality of project outputs will be measured, as well as the evaluation mode and the evaluation instruments to be used. The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Project Evaluation plan Quality Control Developed and approved quality plan Evaluation by Quality Control Committee External evaluation independent experts Peer-review and consultations with the relevant Tempus & Erasmus + KA2 projects Internal and external Annex 5 Quality Control plan Quality control and management reports Mid-term evaluation and final evaluation reports External evaluation reports and recommendations an integral part of the QCP. It outlines the elements of project evaluation, the set of quality indicators against which progress and quality of project outputs will be measured, as well as the evaluation mode and the evaluation instruments to be used. The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Let’s have a meaningful discussion Hand over to the floor The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi­ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Thank you