Evaluation of the project

Evaluation of the project

• 1.
  Comenius Multilateral Project“Dive in the sky” Final feedback questionnaire for students very poor poor not too bad good excellent Utility of sharing a European project Project awareness/involvement Knowledge of the partners’ countries Curiosity and interest about the partners Time devoted to the project Experience exchange with foreign students Task sharing inside one’s class Students’ meetings (experienced/reported) Parent’s involvement Problem solving Astronomy practice Foreign language practice Technologic device practice Enrichment from the project Attitude about a new Comenius project
• 2.
  Final feedback questionnairefor teachers very poor poor not too bad good excellent Relationship among partners Communication efficiency Teaching experience exchange Task sharing among partners Organisation of the visits Students’ meetings and workshops Headmaster’s/headmistress’s support Colleagues’ support Task sharing among colleagues Students’ participation Parents’ involvement Local authorities’ involvement Press involvement Astronomy practice Foreign language practise Technologic device practise European Union awareness Project results Attitude about further participation in the continuous project(s).
• 3.
  EVALUATION OF RESULTS Inthe project evaluation survey participated 10 teachers and 30 students from all partnership countries. The target group was chosen according the participation in mobility programs. They completed the questionnaires provided above. The answers results are shown in diagrams. STUDENTS RESULTS 1. Utility of sharing a European project. 2. Project awareness/involvement 3. Knowledge of the partners countries 1 9 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 Not to bad Good Excellent 7 23 Good Excellent 2 3 10 15 Poor Not to bad Good Excellent
• 4.
  4. Curiosity andinterest about the partners. 5. Time devoted to the project 6. Experience exchange with foreign students. 2 8 20 Not too bad Good Excellent 2 8 20 Not too bad Good Excellent 1 12 17 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 NOT too bad Good Excellent
• 5.
  7. Task sharinginside the class. 8. Students meetings (experienced/reported). 9. Parents involvement. 5 15 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Not too bad Good Excellent 2 14 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Not too bad Good Excellent 1 1 5 13 7 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Very poor Poor Not too bad Good Excellent
• 6.
  10. Problem solving 11.Astronomy practice 12. Foreign language practice. 1 20 9 0 5 10 15 20 25 Not too bad Good Excellent 1 10 19 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Not too bad Good Excellent 3 27 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Good Excellent
• 7.
  13.Technologic device practice. 14.Enrichment from the project 15. Attitude about a new Comenius project 3 1017 Not too bad Good Excellent 7 23 Good Excellent 4 26 Good Excellent
• 8.
  TEACHERS RESULTS 1. Relationshipamong partners: according to the answers of the teachers, participated in mobility programs and other project activities, all teachers named relationship among partners as an excellent. 2. Communication efficiency 3. Teaching experience exchange 4. Task sharing among partners 3 7 GOOD EXCELLENT 1 9 GOOD EXCELLENT 4 6 GOOD EXCELLENT
• 9.
  5. Organization ofthe visits: according to the answers of the teachers, participated in mobility programs and other project activities, all teachers chose evaluation- excellent, for the organization of the visits. 6. Students meetings and workshops. 7. Headmasters/headmistress support 8. Colleagues support. 1 9 GOOD EXCELLENT 8 2 GOOD EXCELLENT 9 1 GOOD EXCELLENT
• 10.
  9. Task sharingamong colleagues 10. Students participation 11. Parents involvement. 12. Local authorities involvement 9 1 GOOD EXCELLENT 1 9 0 2 4 6 8 10 GOOD EXCELLENT 2 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 NOT TOO BAD GOOD 4 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 GOOD EXCELLENT
• 11.
  13. Press involvement. 14.Astronomy practice. 15. Foreign language practice. 1 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Not to bad Good Excellent 1 9 0 2 4 6 8 10 Good Excellent 1 9 Good Excellent
• 12.
  16. Technologic devicepractice. 17. European Union awareness 18. Project results and attitude towards new Erasmus+ project. All respondents identified results and possibility for the further collaboration as excellent. 4 6 Good Excellent 2 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 Good Excellent