Southwark, UK/ Järfälla, SE Regio Project 2013 – 2015

Project meeting (10 – 12 November 2014)

External evaluation

Ray Kirtley

R.Kirtley@hull.ac.uk

- Independent global learning consultant

- Faculty of Education, University of Hull

- Global Learning Association

The role of the external evaluator

For the meetings (London and Sweden):

To give objective and impartial feedback that will support the wider development of the project

For the project as a whole:

To suggest evaluation tools appropriate to the project’s internal evaluation processes To suggest how feedback might be managed and how evaluative data might be presented at the final project meeting

External Evaluation of Meeting 2 (London)Highlights and challenges

• Mixed format appreciated

• Whole group discussions enjoyable for some, more of a challenge for others

• Thought provoking presentations but more time needed to reflect and discuss in national groups

• The partner schools are well understood by all and we know more about the other education system – but not always about what other schools hope to gain from the project

• The goals and expectations of the project clearer to some than to others – the aims need to refer to developing school leaders but some discussion was about school development more generally

External Evaluation of Meeting 3 Quality indicators

• The overall aims of the meeting were met

• Sufficient information was sent before the meeting and communication was efficient

• Project partners were given time for introductions (or re-introductions)

• The agenda was respected and any changes negotiated

• Everyone contributed to the meeting

• The working environment was adequate

• Planned activities have taken place

• Everyone has a clear idea of their next steps

• Any others?

Aims of Meeting 3

• Sharing and evaluating what has been done so far in pilot schools through individual reports from pairs of schools

• Good practice? Challenges?

• Sharing plans for further action research between now and the final project meeting:

- Job shadowing and CPD- Embedding practice into school system- Learning from each other – schools and Local Authorities- Dissemination workshops- Writing up and publication?

Evaluation (formative and summative)

What did we do? (Record)

How did it go? (Review)

How do we know? (Evaluate)

What should we change (if anything)?

What do we do next?

Evaluation of outputs (or results):

•Was the output produced? (on time and to plan?)

•How were any changes rationalised

•Is there existing evaluative information?

•Any additional impressions from the evaluator

What do these include (deliverables)

•Events – local meetings and workshops

•Pilot activities in schools

•In-service training including job shadowing

•Website

•Local and wider dissemination

•Reports – internal and external, publication?

Evaluation of outcomes:

•Stronger partnership between the two regions

•Profile of school leadership raised

•Continued sharing of good practice (both locally and between the regions)

•Any other significant outcomes

Evaluation of the process:

•Work of the project team

•Feedback from schools

•Transnational elements and added value

•Effective communications