C3 Irish Mobility Transfer

 

I’ve got a resign email from Donal O’Reilly , our Irish partner. Unfortunately, due to personal reasons he wasn’t willing to share, he was unable to join our project; and the person who was supposed to replace him, will take a school break this year. He stated that this decision wasn’t taken lightly, it was discussed with his NA who were, in fact, supportive of it, as my NA agency has now officially confirmed me.

Therefore Irish products and responsibilities must be transferred to contribute to the ongoing process of the project and the eagerness I feel to work together with you. I must confess that Mustafa and me have been working hard in this project for it to become OUR project. So in this line, I strongly believe this resign can’t interfere with the success we expect from it.
Our Irish partner’s responsabilities were:

1) A Training Manual-Writing Strategies
2) C3 Mobility
3) E-twinning project

 

During our 1st TPM:

    Our Turkish partner has offered himself to be the ICT coordinador and implement the Twinspace of our project. We’ve been discussing this, and we’ll work together in the manual of Writing Strategies. (Turkey and Spain)

 

Regarding C3 Mobility (Short Term Joint Staff Training Mobility) programmed in October 2018, where 4 participant teachers must attend, I’ve got a proposal that I’d like to share with you and we may discuss during our 1st transnational meeting in October/November in Barcelona. Since I consider it convenient for all of us to squeeze the most out of our project, C3 mobility may be transferred to:

Estonia:

 

• Pros: our Estonian partner is the strongest one regarding literacy average levels according to PISA results 2015. It’s a new and strong educational system that we can get to know deeper in this mobility, quite relevant to our project objectives. Estonian moblity C4 (Short term exchanges of groups of pupils) takes places in 2019.

• Cons: Estonian partner is dealing now with other European projects so this mobility could mean an overdose of work and responsibility.

France

• Pros: our French partner is also a strong collaboration in our partnership. French government educational policies have been aimed to improve reading and writing skills, and our French school can be a good example of how they deal with these two skills. Multilingual context:they teach 4 different foreign languages apart from their L1 that is French.

• Cons: French mobility C2 (Short term exchanges of groups of pupils) is programmed to take place in May 2018, maybe too close to the next mobility which is the Irish one to be replaced.

Germany:

• Pros: Our German partner represents a vocational school and this can also give us a different perspective when dealing with methods and teaching practices in order to improve literacy levels.

• Cons: a previous C1 mobility (short-term joint staff training event) is programmed here. (same typology to C3 mobility).

 

 

Thanks a lot for your collaboration.

 

 

Project coordinator

Raquel Abad