Indicator
|
60% of children with and whit ought disabilities can use the application to communicate effectively in a foreign language.
|
Definition
|
Percentage of children and other people with and without disabilities, who can use the application to communicate effectively in a foreign language.
|
Purpose
|
To assess whether the application serves its accessibility concept and to provide evidence on whether the usage component of the EPCL and the EPCL Translator is effective.
|
Baseline
|
0%
|
Target
|
60%
|
Data Collection
|
The team members will test the application with children with and without disabilities with a check list that aims to register the results of success and failure in usage of the application with children.
|
Tool
|
Checklist
|
Frequency
|
Once, covered by all institutions in the project.
|
Responsible
|
Schools and ONGs institutions: test children from different backgrounds (disabled, refugees, children with good and bad school performance).
|
Reporting
|
The reporting will be made by all participants in the activities by sending the results collected to the coordinating institution, that will compare the results and make an analysis report that will be publicized.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the checklist and how to submit the results.
Information will be given to all partners during the training activities.
|
Indicator
|
60% of young and older people with disabilities manage to use most of the pictograms without prior knowledge of their meaning.
|
Definition
|
Percentage of young and old people and people with disabilities, -who manage to use most of the pictograms without prior knowledge of their meaning
|
Purpose
|
To assess whether the application serves its universal concept and to provide evidence on whether the universal component of the EPCL and the EPCL Translator is effective.
|
Baseline
|
0%
|
Target
|
60%
|
Data Collection
|
The team members will test the application with children with and without disabilities and with old people with a check list that aims to register the results of success and failure in correct usage of the EPCL.
|
Tool
|
Checklist
Analysis software SPSS – Statistical Data Analysis
|
Frequency
|
Once, at the verification part of the project, covered by all institutions in the project.
|
Responsible
|
School institutions will collect data from students; University Institutions Will collect data from their students; ONGs will collect data from other target groups (refugees, older people).
|
Reporting
|
The reporting will be made by all participants in the activities by sending the results collected to the coordinating institution, that will compare the results and make an analysis report that will be publicized.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the checklist and how to submit the results.
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution.
Information will be given to all partners during the training activities.
|
Indicator
|
Number of young people with and without disabilities, who manage to use most of the pictograms without prior knowledge of their meaning in a patronized conversation.
|
Definition
|
Percentage of young people with and without disabilities, who manage to use most of the pictograms without prior knowledge of their meaning.
|
Purpose
|
To assess whether the application serves its intuitive concept and to provide evidence on whether the intuitive component of the EPCL is effective in the target group outlined.
|
Baseline
|
0%
|
Target
|
70%
|
Data Collection
|
The team members will test the application with children with and without disabilities and with old people with a check list that aims to register the results of success and failure in correct usage of the EPCL.
|
Tool
|
Checklist
Analysis software SPSS – Statistical Data Analysis
|
Frequency
|
Once, at the verification part of the project, covered by all institutions in the project.
|
Responsible
|
All partners institutions.
|
Reporting
|
The reporting will be made by all participants in the activities which will send the results collected to the coordinating institution, that will compare the results and make an analysis report to be publicized.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the checklist and how to submit the results.
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution.
Information will be given to all partners during the training activities.
|
Indicator
|
275 participants in the multiplier events actions considers the subjects presented relevant.
|
Definition
|
Percentage of the sum of people that reveals interest in the subjects given during the Multiplier Events and quality of the presentation prepared for it.
|
Purpose
|
To assess if the educators and teachers will consider to use ICT and EPCL and EPCL Translator in curricular context, and to access if other groups that work with refugees, with migrant people and students abroad (for example in ERASMUS+ programs) find meaning in the use of these tools.
|
Baseline
|
10%
|
Target
|
90%
|
Data Collection
|
At the end of multiplier events an evaluation will be made by all the participants to verify the opinion and interest gain of people to consider the tool presented to be practical and usable in the different areas of context.
|
Tool
|
Questionnaires;
Attendance lists.
|
Frequency
|
Once, in each multiplier event.
|
Responsible
|
All partners institutions.
|
Reporting
|
The reporting will be made by all participants in the activities which will send the results collected to the coordinating institution, that will compare the results and make an analysis report to be publicized.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the checklist and how to submit the results.
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution.
Information will be given to all partners during the training activities.
|
Indicator
|
Answers of foreign language teachers/technicians to the improvement of participation after inclusion of EPCL and EPCL Translator in the initial activities with children.
|
Definition
|
Percentage of teachers/technicians that consider that the use of EPCL and EPCL translator improves the first contact with foreign language outside school and/or in school context.
|
Purpose
|
Improvement of the participation of communication between children and people in different languages outside school;
Improvement of the first contact with a foreign language in school context.
Make the learning of basic language skills easier and intuitive. Make possible the communication between different people.
|
Baseline
|
10%
|
Target
|
70%
|
Data Collection
|
Questionnaires made to teachers and technicians that work with children’s and people that speak in foreign language after using the EPCL Translator with them.
|
Tool
|
Questionnaires.
|
Frequency
|
Once, after the
|
Responsible
|
School institutions will collect data from students; University Institutions Will collect data from their students; ONGs will collect data from other target groups (refugees, older people, older people).
|
Reporting
|
The reporting will be made by all participants in the activities by sending the results collected to the coordinating institution, that will compare the results and make an analysis report that will be publicized.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the checklist and how to submit the results.
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution.
Information will be given to all partners during the training activities.
|
Indicator
|
Shared information between the different teams. Quality of shared information.
|
Definition
|
The sum of the information sent and received between partners.
|
Purpose
|
Evaluate the trade of information between institutions, making sure that all are committed to the objectives outlined and that all partners will take objective participation in the outputs and outcomes predicted by the common planning.
The information shared between the different teams will be a good indicator of quality of involvement form every institution and quality of engage in the activities taking place in order to achieve the objectives outlined.
|
Baseline
|
24 messages/institution (in the two years project)
|
Target
|
200 messages/ institution (in the two years project)
|
Data Collection
|
Counting of emails sent and received by all institutions.
|
Tool
|
Report sheet
|
Frequency
|
Once every six months.
|
Responsible
|
The coordinator will send the report of messages sent and revived.
|
Reporting
|
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution for analysis.
|
Quality Control
|
The comparison between sent and received messages are directly proportional in all institutions’ reports.
|
Indicator
|
Number of persons presents in the dissemination presentations; Number likes in social media.
|
Definition
|
Sum of persons that are present in the multiplier events plus sum of likes in social media.
|
Purpose
|
The sustainability of the project depends on its divulgation to target groups and to the continuous growth in terms of multicultural content produced by new engaged stakeholders.
|
Baseline
|
1500
|
Target
|
5000
|
Data Collection
|
The organizations will collect data of messages sent, likes in articles produced, shared material in the web, local newspapers and national magazines.
|
Tool
|
Report sheet
|
Frequency
|
Once every six month.
|
Responsible
|
The local coordinator will send the report of messages sent and revived.
|
Reporting
|
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution for analysis.
|
Quality Control
|
The number of articles produced by every partner team and the compliance to the subject of the project.
|
Indicator
|
Percentage of students with disabilities, who are able to use the application in their mother tongue and in a foreign language.
|
Definition
|
60% of children and students with disabilities that are able to use the application in mother and foreign language.
|
Purpose
|
Verify the accessibility factor of the product EPCL and EPCL Translator with disable children in different contexts.
|
Baseline
|
0%
|
Target
|
60%
|
Data Collection
|
All the partners will make patronized exercises to disable students in order to verify the EPCL and the EPCL Translator capability of usage in different contexts.
|
Tool
|
Checklist
|
Frequency
|
Once, after the first version of the EPCL Translator is concluded.
|
Responsible
|
School institutions will collect data from students; University Institutions Will collect data from their students; ONGs will collect data from other target groups (refugees, social excluded groups, etc).
|
Reporting
|
The reporting will be made by all participants in the activities by sending the results collected to the coordinating institution, that will compare the results and make an analysis report that will be publicized.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the checklist and how to submit the results.
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution.
Information will be given to all partners during the training activities.
|
Indicator
|
Percentage of people with disabilities, who are able to use the application in their mother tongue and in a foreign language.
|
Definition
|
Percentage adults with disabilities that are able to use the application in mother and foreign language.
|
Purpose
|
Verify the accessibility factor of the product EPCL and EPCL Translator with disable children in different contexts.
|
Baseline
|
0%
|
Target
|
60%
|
Data Collection
|
All the partners will make patronized exercises to disable children and students in order to verify the EPCL and the EPCL Translator capability of usage in different contexts.
|
Tool
|
Checklist
|
Frequency
|
Once, after the first version of the EPCL Translator is concluded.
|
Responsible
|
School institutions will collect data from students; University Institutions Will collect data from their students; ONGs will collect data from other target groups (refugees, older people, others).
|
Reporting
|
The reporting will be made by all participants in the activities by sending the results collected to the coordinating institution, that will compare the results and make an analysis report that will be publicized.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the checklist and how to submit the results.
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution.
Information will be given to all partners during the training activities.
|
Indicator
|
Number of teachers and educational responsible that are present in the Multiplier Events.
|
Definition
|
Sum of teachers and educational responsible that are present in the Multiplier Events.
|
Purpose
|
Teachers and responsible for educational policy are excellent disseminator agents for the project goals. They can influence the learning methodology and the expected outcomes.
|
Baseline
|
30 teacher/educational responsible
|
Target
|
150 teacher/educational responsible
|
Data Collection
|
The team will collect data about professional occupation during the attendance list signatures, before the Multiplier Events start.
|
Tool
|
Attendance List;
Control sheet.
|
Frequency
|
Once, at the start of every Multiplier Event.
|
Responsible
|
The local coordinator is responsible to collect all the data.
|
Reporting
|
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution for analysis.
|
Quality Control
|
Invitations will be sent to school institutions (public and private) to maximize the possibility of interest on the subject addressed. The local coordinator will archive the attendance list of the Multiplier Events.
|
Indicator
|
Pictograms success after tests with target groups and focus groups.
|
Definition
|
Percentage of pictograms understood by children with and without disabilities in an intuitive way
|
Purpose
|
Evaluate the rate of success of each pictogram with target groups to improve them or to substitute them.
|
Baseline
|
0% success rate
|
Target
|
80% success rate
|
Data Collection
|
Focus groups will be addressed by all institutions to verify the sustainability of each pictogram with different kinds of children/ students/ people.
|
Tool
|
Check list
|
Frequency
|
Once after the first set of pictograms are concluded;
Once, if needed, after the pictograms are redesigned.
|
Responsible
|
School institutions will collect data from students; University Institutions Will collect data from their students; ONGs will collect data from other target groups (refugees, older people, older people).
|
Reporting
|
The reporting will be made by all participants in the activities, sending the results collected to the coordinating institution, that will compare the results and make an analysis report that will be publicized and debated among all partners during one of the ordinary online meetings.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the checklist, how to test the pictograms and how to submit the results.
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution.
Information will be given to all partners during the training activities and online meetings.
|
Indicator
|
Application rate of success after used with target groups in each institution.
|
Definition
|
Percentage of children/students/others to consider that can successfully use the application after experimenting it and after having explanation of how it works.
|
Purpose
|
Verify the adaptability of the application to every user after it is experimented and explained as a tool to achieve language knowledge and skills.
|
Baseline
|
0%
|
Target
|
90%
|
Data Collection
|
All partners will test with focus groups the capabilities of the EPCL and EPCL Translator in order to evaluate its compliance to the proposed objectives.
|
Tool
|
Check list;
Table sheet.
|
Frequency
|
Once, at the end of the firs version of the EPCL Translator.
|
Responsible
|
School institutions will collect data from students; University Institutions Will collect data from their students; ONGs will collect data from other target groups (refugees, older people, older people).
|
Reporting
|
The reporting will be made by all participants in the activities, sending the results collected to the coordinating institution, that will compare the results and make an analysis report that will be publicized and debated among all partners during one of the ordinary online meetings.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the checklist, how to test the application and how to submit the results.
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution.
Information will be given to all partners during the training activities and online meetings.
|
Indicator
|
Quality of the learning skills during the training event.
|
Definition
|
Analysis of percentage responses given in the evaluation activity form in terms of improvement of knowledge obtained after every training event.
|
Purpose
|
It’s inherent to the project that all team members will end with an eclectic know-how of all the process and skills to make possible the EPCL and the EPCL Translator. It’s imperative that all team members be committed to understand the difficulty every step represents in terms of programming, designing, investigating, accessibility, content production, etc. In order to comply with this objective every member will acquire skills in all those areas so that they can coordinate and update themselves the EPCL and the EPCL translator, according to the sustainability plan of the project, after the two years attend training events and online meetings.
|
Baseline
|
10%
|
Target
|
100%
|
Data Collection
|
After all training events an evaluation will be made by all partners team members and a certificate will be given that certify skills acquired during the events.
|
Tool
|
- Evaluation form;
- Euro pass.
|
Frequency
|
Once, at the end of each training event.
|
Responsible
|
Each local team will be responsible for addressing a subject of interest to the project, which are already agreed, being themselves responsible to elaborate and apply the inquiry, coordinating all the evaluation with one member designated from the coordinating institution.
|
Reporting
|
The local coordinator will send report of skills compliance acquisition during training activities.
|
Quality Control
|
All the partners will attend an online meeting in order to get training on how to use the make the inquiries, how to apply to euro pass and how to submit the results.
The coordinator of each institution is responsible to organize the recollection of information and to send it to the coordinating institution.
Information will be given to all partners during the online meetings.
|