1 / 22

Development Education & Awareness Raising (DEAR) in the European Union

Development Education & Awareness Raising (DEAR) in the European Union. Field Study: April-June 2010. April-June 2010. DEAR Study consultants visit all EU countries to have meetings (focus group), interviews with governmental officials major stakeholders engaged in DEAR

kevina
Télécharger la présentation

Development Education & Awareness Raising (DEAR) in the European Union

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Development Education & Awareness Raising (DEAR)in the European Union Field Study: April-June 2010

  2. April-June 2010 DEAR Study consultants visit all EU countries to have meetings (focus group), interviews with governmental officials major stakeholders engaged in DEAR current and former NSA & LA grant recipients and audiences

  3. Objective(s): to obtain information on governmental DEAR policies and practices that support related educations (such as human rights education; environmental / sustainable development education; anti-racist education; multicultural / intercultural education);)

  4. obtain feedback from NSA-LA grant recipients on the value of (and potential for improving) EC support

  5. obtain info from respondents (different stakeholders) on what they perceive to be: common practice in their country/in the EU best (or if not that, at least ‘good’) practice steps that can be taken to bridge the gap between common and good/best practice opinions and ideas on the actual and the potential role and added value of the EC (i.p. its NSA&LA grants programme) in bridging this gap

  6. Before the FV: country background paper listing: European Union current support for and interpretation of DEAR; the terminology/concept used to describe DEAR in the country; relevant ‘DE Watch’ information and overall estimated DE national budget and the percentage of it coming from EC co-financing;

  7. Key DEAR actors, including organisations and institutions; Formal education provisions, norms, curriculum related documents, bodies encouraging DE; Summary of DEAR study results: statistical data about themes, type of activities/methodologies, their geographical spread.

  8. During the field visit with Government (MFA, ME) representatives NGOs, LAs representatives Selected actors from NSA/LA grant receiving projects

  9. Can you recall the key moments/events of your DEAR work/experience (for instance of the DE project(s)/activity you participated in) and why they were important? To what extent the various actors, partners and participants where involved in planning, monitoring and evaluating the action and what could have been done differently to facilitate their involvement? Who else should have been involved and why?

  10. What were the significant sustainable achievements of the action and why? How could they be further developed in the future? What are the most significant methodological features of the action and why are they relevant in this specific context/country?

  11. To what extent was the project innovative? Through what mechanisms are different actors (project partners in other countries, further governmental and non-governmental actors) enabledto benefit and learn from the project’s experiences, outcomes and practices?

  12. How useful was the European and the North-South dimension? Why? How can the benefits be made sustainable? To what extent does the EC’s current DEAR approach and instrument support the positive outcome and practices of the project? What are its strength, what should be improved?

  13. After the field visit The responsible DEAR team member prepares a country report which revises the background paper and points at national strategies (programmes, priorities, and financing) and major initiatives that affect DEAR. It also identifies the degrees of integration of development issues and DEAR approaches in the national education curricula.

  14. The country report also provides an analysis of the actors active in the field and of the national platform of NGOs.

  15. In addition the country report contains information on how the national platform functions and potential regional (cross-countries) areas of co-operation.

  16. A separate section in each country report will summarise the project(s) that have been investigated during the fieldwork. The summary will focus on drawing attention to those characteristics of the project(s) that appear to make them particularly successful in one or more aspects.

  17. Where not interviewed as part of in-country fieldwork DEAR team member(s) will carry out additional face-to-face or telephone interviews with other major cross-European DEAR programme representatives on the above mentioned key questions.

  18. THANK YOU

More Related