_
  [ZAWiW] [gemeinsamlernen] [LiLL]
_ _ _
  Dreieck nach obenGemeinsamLernen  
_ _ _
  Dreieck nach obenSelf-organised Learning Groups in Europe
_ _
  _Experience Reports
_ _ _
_
_ < Page 9 of 11 >
_
_ home
_ _
_ _
_ _
_ _ Introduction
_ _
_ _ Arnhem Group
_ _
_ _ Budejovice Group
_ _
_ _ Granada Group
_ _
_ _ Lyon Group
_ _
_ _ Ulm Group
_ _
_ _ Vicenza Group
_ _
_ _
_ _
_ Summary of Results
_ _
_ _
_ _

Summary of Results

Stand:


print print

8. How did you experience the co-operation with the project partners in other countries?

8.1. The communication was generally
The overall reply is medium to bad. Arnhem reports only limited exchanges to some of the partner groups. Budejovice and Vicenza refer to lack of language skills as hindering factor. The Ulm group sees as the decisive hindering factor the lack of personal contact between the participating seniors from the various countries, improvement could be felt after the SoLiLL conference.

8.2. It was important inspiration and information from the partners
There are great differences in the answers to this question. While partners in Lyon and Granada do not feel that they got important inspiration and information from the partners, Budejovice is content with the information received. Vicenza did not find all information from the partners applicable to their own research, similar is reported by Ulm.

8.3. I have used the possibility of communication over e-mail/Internet for contact with partners abroad
All partners replied with the lowest score to the question of e-mail exchange with their partners abroad. The reasons given were: frequent use of e-mail, but only on one to one basis (Granada), the Budejovice group reported that the seniors were ashamed to communicate with their bad knowledge of the English language, Vicenza reports lack of confidence and familiarity in using these media. In Ulm, only a few group members have used this possibility for communication, international communication went mainly via the co-ordinator.

8.4. The co-operation with the partners abroad was important for our work
While Lyon did not see the co-operation with the partners as having been important to their work, Vicenza, Budejovice and Ulm report the opposite, with co-operation being essential and fruitful (Vicenza), worthwhile learning (Budejovice), important for the work (Ulm). Arnhem and Granada experienced this co-operation as confirmation of their results (Arnhem) and general reference (background) value (Granada).