Work pacage - Madrid
Meeting in Madrid
Work package no. 1. 
First meeting was in Madrid, 8. - 9. of December 2008. In the following attachments you will find the agenda for the first meeting, plan for the next meetings of the QUAVETS project and the first QUAVETS poem as to describe some of our main thoughts in the beginning of our work!
In the report you will find attachments to the slides and other relevant documents that was in focus during the precentations.
Notes of Meeting in Madrid - Dec 2008DAY 1: Monday 8th Dec
Present: Ólafur Jónsson, Jarl Ove Glein, Maria Marçalo , Marián de Villanueva, Raimonda Celkiene, Ausra Krupaviciene, Rasa Zygmantaite, Carla Miguéns, Peter Skinner
Apologies: Geoff Scaplehorn
1. WelcomeOlafur thanked Marian for hosting the meeting, welcomed everyone to the meeting and gave a summary of the programme for the 2 days.
2. The Journey Ahead - Ólafur
(see Powerpoint presentation for the detail linked to the headings below)
- Overview and aims of Project.
- The focus of each meeting will be on quality indicators
- Overview - next steps
- Methodology
- The platform and Web-page
Issues discussed:
Decided to have fewer meetings, but with more participants. Sector- themed meetings were discussed. One or two sectors per meeting? Advantages and disadvantages of different approaches were discussed. It was decided that project questionnaires would be progressed for all sectors on an ongoing basis, but it would be best to cover 2 sectors in each meeting. Sector-based groups within each country could be meeting in member countries between times and feedback from them brought to the partnership meetings.
Discussion about whether all four sectors are covered by each partner. Ólafur suggested that each partner should try to cover all four. Olafur demonstrated the web-site. All new content should be forwarded to Ólafur.
Meetings: The number of meetings needed was discussed. It was agreed that there would be 6 meetings plus one conference (if approved) in the following sequence and agreed dates:
1. Madrid 8-9 Dec 08
2. UK 9-10 Mar Including themes: Construction & Tourism
3. Iceland 25-26 May Including themes: Health & Food and Restaurant
4. Bilbao 21-24 Oct
5. Norway 18-19 January 2010
6. Portugal 22-23 Mar 2010
7. Lithuania 14-15 June 2010
ACTION: Peter will discuss with Geoff Scaplehorn the best venue for the UK meeting in March and let partners know. It will be decided later whether or not to repeat the themed meetings in Norway and Portugal. Discussion about attendance at the Efvet conference for dissemination etc.
Valorisation/Evaluation:
Clarification about the evaluation strategy: It was agreed that evaluation of the programme would be on-going, but culminate in a final evaluation project at the end of the project. Translation - required only for questionnaires. Expected outcome. Outcome (details in Powerpoint)
3. Presentations of participants:
Iceland:
(see Powerpoint presentation)
Norway:Two Universities involved with vocational learning.
Working with people who have been working for a while and start a 2-year part-time study programme.
The Norwegian vocational education and training is well organized. Dropouts are a big problem. Only half the students finish in the normal time. Report has been placed on the website. There are 9 vocational programmes in Norway. Enterprises receive 10,000 € per year to have an apprentice
(see Powerpoint presentation)
Lithuania:(see Powerpoint presentations, including pictures of the work at the school)
United Kingdom:(see Powerpoint presentation)
Spain:(see Powerpoint presentation on CECE)
ACTION: Each partner will send Ólafur copies of their presentations and any other relevant documentation for adding to the QUAVETS website.
4. Groups in Focus:
This part of the meeting considered the study groups for the four sectors of the project. There was also discussion about what the sub-categories should be. Significant issues were identified in identifying common subjects and levels that should be investigated as part of the project. Some nations have well-established qualification frameworks, others don’t. It was agreed that to determine the best focus members will map the qualifications from each country into a common matrix. Marian created a draft spreadsheet that could be used to map Level 2 and Level 3 qualifications and the sub-competencies required for each. It was agreed to use this to gather information from each partner, share it by email and prior to the end of January determine the detailed focus.
ACTION: Each partner will research the qualifications available at levels 2 and 3 for the four sectors (Care & Health, Construction, Tourism and Food & Restaurant) and list them on the spreadsheet - showing the competencies within each. This should be sent to Ólafur by mid January so that he can combine them and (by the end of Jan 09) suggest which sub-category of each sector the project will focus on.
5. Partners in the Project:
Ólafur displayed the Partner Matrix spreadsheet and requested that as new partners are identified they can be added to the partner matrix.
ACTION: Each national team will inform Ólafur of any additional partners supporting the project.
6. Definition of Terms:
Ólafur went through some key concepts of the project and definitions of terms.
What is quality? The group discussed different aspects of this in relation to standard -setting and whether it is possible to have a common interpretation of the term. Reference was made to presentations made at the EfVET conference in Vilnius (Oct 08). Discussions helped to clarify the definition of ‘quality’ in relation to the project. It was agreed that the main focus should be on the outcome - i.e. the quality of the ‘skilled worker’. This will be a set of competencies that are needed for working in the particular sector, together with other personal and inter-personal skills etc. The project outcomes can help people to enhance their chances of employability.
DAY 2: Tuesday 9th Dec
Present: Ólafur Jónsson, Jarl Ove Glein, Maria Marçalo , Marián de Villanueva, Raimonda Celkiene, Ausra Krupaviciene, Rasa Zygmantaite, Carla Miguéns, Peter Skinner, Andy Willcox
Apologies: Geoff Scaplehorn
1. Methodology and Findings: Jarl Ove Glein
Jarl took the group through his paper (see separate document on ‘Proposal of a research programme’). He suggested that we focus on secondary school level (which is ages 16 to 20 in Norway and Iceland). Maria requested consideration of Level 4. It was agreed that although the focus of the comparisons in the project is on Levels 2 and 3, partners are able to contribute information at level 4 if they wish. Because different partners deal with different age groups the group also agreed that the age group in focus is post-16.
Consideration was given to the 3 phases in vocational developments
-
Entry.
-
Delivery.
-
Assessment.
Discussion followed regarding the categories of positions that may be involved in answering questionnaires:
- Students
- Teachers
- Workplace Instructors/Supervisors
- Employers/Personnel Departments in companies
Rasa offered to translate a Lithuanian questionnaire and forward it to Ólafur for potential use within the project. Other partners will also forward any examples of questionnaires so that these can be compared.
ACTION: Rasa will send the translated questionnaire to Ólafur by Christmas. All other partners will also send any examples of questionnaires. Ólafur will consider all these and circulate to partners his recommendations by the end of January 09.
It was agreed that the questionnaires will have a range of four options for answer choices. Marian suggested that there could also be space for additional written comments. The questionnaires would also focus on the final phase - Assessment - the final stage. Jarl went on to present his thoughts on other aspects of individuals and abilities:
- Personal and individual development (School tasks)
- Social abilities to change in different contexts (School/enterprise tasks)
- Working contexts, developmental - and changing abilities (enterprise tasks)
Peter suggested that some of these characteristics could form part of the questionnaires. He also suggested that one or two questions could list potential answers and ask for employers etc. to identify their top three preferences in order.
Jarl summarised details of a report on the Norwegian principles of quality in vocational education and training. This stimulated some discussion about how governments might try to address potential shortages of employees in particular sectors, or the quality of them.
Number of questionnaires: Discussion about this culminated in the realisation that to set target numbers for each group was not practical. However, there was agreement that each partner would seek to gain answers from a minimum of individuals in each group. Target numbers were also set for the project as a whole:
MINIMUM numbers of questionnaire responses to be achieved for each sector:
Partner Project3 teachers 25
3 employers 25
3 workplace supervisors 25
20 students 150
Timeframe for questionnaires: The questionnaires would be distributed after the UK meeting (where the questionnaires will be finalised).
Ólafur displayed a re-drafted project plan covering all the proposed meetings. It was agreed to amend it to bring forward the approval of the questionnaires to be completed in the March 09 meeting so that distribution can start after that meeting. The Construction and Tourism specialists will have an opportunity to contribute to the discussion regarding the questions.
ACTION: Peter will make arrangements for the meeting in March and Ólafur will propose an agenda for the meeting and circulate it for comment to other partners.
Search
Control panel
Top Image
