This 3 sentence summary provides the key details about the document:
The document discusses the Leonardo da Vinci project called "Lang2TechSecond-language Competency for Technicians in Industry" which aims to transfer the European Certificate of Basic Skills (EUCEBS) to support second language competence for technicians, addressing an identified barrier to workforce mobility through innovative activities and risk sharing between partnership members.
3. What? Transfer European Certificate of Basic Skills (EUCEBS) to support second language competence for technicians … demonstrating basic skills through the medium of a second language is proof of successful communication in that language
4. What? Context innovation Addressing an identified barrier to workforce mobility
6. Why? Originated in response to a clear need Scope offered by the partnership Innovative activities & risk sharing Scope to make real positive impact
12. … never give up … Image by Jason Molenda: http://molenda.us/photos/brisbane-crit-2006-04-01/_DSC8961-r.html
13. … unless you have to … Image by Edmund White: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ewwhite/4893233995/
Notes de l'éditeur
Eight partners from five countries – five core partners and three associate partnersLed by the University of EdinburghOur consortium includes language-teaching units at two universities, a national agent for Leonardo Mobility placements, an association of researchers specialising in European integration, a consultant on employee competences in industry, a large multinational corporation with a technician workforce, the Scottish Lifelong Learning Directorate, and Unite the Union.Introduce myself
Its about the transfer of the EUCEBS ePortfolio tool – from basic skills assessment/ validation to workplace language So involves the transfer of an idea – demo basic skills …..And a specific tool
Context innovation – proof-of-concept in basic to occupations language skillsTo meet an identified Europe-wide issue re: labour market mobility
Started with application by METU – address language learning needs of technicians – for technology cluster development – specifically English language as needed to work in technical environmentGeneric language competence for any skilled technician = METU’s visionMETU dropped out from consortiumTransversal – praised application but felt wrong programme – recommended ToI2007 – 2013 lifelong learning programme pan-european objectives esp. vizlabour market mobility – Leonardo appeared to provide a best fit to enable us make a contribution to these objectives2010 – to national agency – provided crucial feedback but encouraged revised application for 2011 which was successful
Why LeonardoMeeting an identified needScope of activities in terms of five languages across multiple technical occupationsLearning from each other and sharing the risk – able to test it alone – probably notProof-of-concept in five countries, licensing of certification – Makes sustainability more attainable
Started with application by METU – address language learning needs of technicians – for technology cluster development – specifically English language as needed to work in technical environmentContact seminar Turkey at request UK national agency and met director higher tech edu division at METU – discussed various opportunities/ projects – followed by invite to joinUnsuccessful turkey, asked UoE to be lead applicantInherited partners from METU – via original L2T applicationCommunications – face-to-face meeting of all partnerships – hosted by us – fortunate in having budget Ecommunications thereon – but seen the whites of each others eyes
Talk about luck - but there is the case of making your ownInvolves investment – to travel and meet others - get on the agenda of others
Because the key aspects we found was a density of specific communication so what each partner contributed was understood by the other, fitted each others and built upon each othersOnce the structure is clear [enough] between all – then we could focus on the specifics…
Treat the application writing like a projectBreak into smaller 2-3 person teams to develop the specific workpackagesSome of these were fairly straightforward – project management as we already had a lot of experience between us of running projects – technical, eg, ePortfolio adaptationSome much more fraught – because they were about the fundamental purpose of the project* Would emphasise we should have got the expert language teachers involved earlier – raised a lot of questions that were not fully resolved until we got to the ToI applications – slipped the schedules**allow for slippage* Take account of the institutional needs – sign-offs etc…… - and managerial forgetfulness [signed off previously but forgot!]
But in the writing up stage be very focusedA single editorial voice is important to bring coherence is language across the separate sectionsThe evidence base evolves and new factors emerge and its important to incorporate these – may be a key issue for ours given the years and years of different bids! – ditto EU projects partners involved … changing Divide out the sections among the small team working on the previous written-up scopesEven just having a small team and single editorial voice, in terms of time – the summary took the longest to write – cf Winston ChurchillAs well as the why is it necessary – again, attempting to condense arguments and be appealing!By this point – given the length of time – it was capturing everything in a limited amount of space.One of the key benefits of the ToI route was access to the UK National Agency – getting advice was straightforward, responsive and easyMade the difference – to the point that I would avoid LLP projects that didn’t go though the national agency –
Our main experience was one of the agonies of perseverance … we got there perhaps as we lacked the imagination to stopBut if you must stop
