WP3

Analysis and Recommendations
This WP is led by P5 MENON. It has four Tasks - two initial tasks done soon after the WP starts:


 * 1) Typology of virtual school and college services, led by Sero, which will provide a classification of the various types of virtual school and virtual college Exemplars
 * 2) "Influence maps" for partners' EU countries, led by EITF - for each given country, to identify the main other countries which influence its use of ICT in school/college education;  and two main tasks:
 * 3) Recommendations  - see below
 * 4) Case studies, led by MENON - at least 8 in number but maybe 10

Recommendations - Task 3:-
This is split into four subtasks each with a subtask leader:

3.1. Potential success factors – led by Sero, with ATiT, to be fed into WP4 at end of Year 1 - drawing on the exemplars documented - from virtual schools, e-mature schools, etc 3.2. Innovative good practice for teachers - a group led by Sero but also with Aarhus, Tensta and MENON - to be fed into WP6 3.3. Recommendations for teacher training - led by Aarhus 3.4. Ministry-level policy recommendations - led by Sero (in particular by Barry Phillips of Sero, formerly at Ministry of Education in UK) with assistance of TIEKE and EITF

Case studies - Task 4:-
Each partner will do at least one case study (with the exception of EFQUEL (specialist contractor) and Leeds (evaluator).

Each case study will be developed from an Exemplar in a country/region report and must be chosen from outside the partnership (so not about any one of the partners or any pilot schools/colleges). It is important that case studies are not started too soon (otherwise a good choice is not made) yet do not run on too late (distracting project partners from project conclusions) - to guard against issues we have seen in other projects. This is why we chose the case study period in Year 2, with reporting just after the summer (to pick up any late information when autumn terms/semesters start, but not so late that it badly affects project reporting).

P5 MENON
Overall lead of workpackage 3.

Contribute to subtask 3.2: innovative good practice for teachers.

Lead Task 4 (of WP3): case studies.

Do a case study.

P7 EITF
Lead Task 2 (of WP3): influence maps - and contribute an Estonia influence map.

Contribute to subtask 3.4: Ministry-level policy recommendations.

Do a case study.

P8 Tensta
Contribute Sweden map to Task 2 (of WP3): influence maps.

Contribute to subtask 3.2: innovative good practice for teachers.

Do a case study.

P9 Aarhus
Contribute Denmark map to Task 2 (of WP3): influence maps.

Contribute to subtask 3.2: innovative good practice for teachers.

Lead subtask 3.3: recommendations for teacher training.

Do a case study.

P10 TIEKE
Contribute Finland map (or maps) to Task 2 (of WP3): influence maps.

Contribute to subtask 3.4: Ministry-level policy recommendations, with a focus on more general ICT policy issues for nation states.

Do a case study.

P1 LRF
Contribute Greece map to Task 2 (of WP3): influence maps.

Do a case study.

P2 Sero
Contribute to each of the four Tasks.

Lead Task 1: Typology (all other active partners to comment).

Contribute 4 UK maps to Task 2: influence maps.


 * Lead subtask 3.1: potential success factors.
 * Lead subtask 3.2: innovative good practice for  teachers.
 * Lead subtask 3.4: Ministry-level policy recommendations.

Contribute to subtask 3.3: recommendations for teacher training.

Do a case study.

P4 ATiT
Contribute two Belgium maps (Flanders and Wallonia) to Task 2: influence maps.

Contribute to subtask 3.1: potential success factors.

Do a case study.

Explanation of workpackage expenditures
Only staff days are allocated for this workpackage. There is no travel and subsistence element.

The task leader typically has a tariff of 15 days for this - with 10 days for a small task such as Task 1 and 20 days for the large Task 4 (Case Studies) which involves templates and quality control. Contributing partners typically have 10 days for their contribution to a Task or subtask, except for Task 2 (Influence maps) where that tariff is 5 (to create the influence map for their country) and Task 1 (Typology) and Task 3.1 (Success factors) where that tariff is 2 (essentially just for consultation).

As with workpackage 2, a detailed spreadsheet was used to calculate effort, given the structure of tasks and subtasks.

> Part F >>> Main Page