IN2IT

WP7: QUALITY ASSURANCE

STATUS REVIEW F. CASONI (UM)

3rd Consortium Meeting – Tel Aviv, ISRAEL

5-7 September 2017

Outline

The role of the UM in the IN2IT project

WP 7 leader: the Quality Assurance of the project

Tasks status

T 7.1 Quality Policy Document + Quality Work Plan

T 7.2 WP quality evaluation

T 7.3 Product quality measurement reports

T 7.4 Project progress assessments reports

Lessons learnt

Next year activities

2

The role of the UM

in the IN2IT project

WP1: Development of the framework for internationalization capability maturity assessment of Israeli Colleges

WP1 Workshop1 in Warsaw (20-22/1/2016)

WP1 Workshop 2 in Montpellier (8-10/3/2016)

WP2: Formation of international multidisciplinary team partnerships

WP2 Workshop 1 in Tel Hai (17-19/5/2016)

WP2 Workshop 2 in Ludwigsburg (11-13/7/2016)

WP3: Development and delivery of international online curriculum

WP3 Workshop 1in Israel (13-15/12/2016)

WP3 Workshop 2 in Milan (6-8/2/2017)

WP3 Workshop 3 In Warsaw (13-15/3/2017)

WP3 Global Entrepreneurship Team Meeting (15-17/8/2017)

WP4: Development and delivery of international Communities of Practice for knowledge-sharing

WP4 Workshop 1 in Milan (6-8/2/2017)

WP5: Development and exploitation of academy-industry/community cooperation

WP5 training session on Academy-Industry/Community Cooperation in UK (12-14 /9/2016)

WP6: Development of the technological platform to support the varied online international academic activities

WP8: Dissemination efforts in France and in Europe

3

The role of the UM

in the IN2IT project

In particular, concerning WP3: Development and delivery of international online curriculum,

the University of Montpellier is involved in the "global entrepreneurship team” through the participation of Prof. Christine Marsal

4

The role of the UM

in the IN2IT project

WP 7: the Quality Assurance of the project

Goal: to ensure that the project is executed following

the project plan

4 tasks:

T 7.1 Quality Policy Document + Quality Work Plan

T 7.2 WP quality evaluation reports

T 7.3 Product quality measurement reports

T 7.4 Project progress assessments reports

5

WP7 leader : QA

IN2IT quality assurance methodology follow the PLAN-DO-

CHECK-ACT iterative four step management method

6

Task 7.1: Quality Policy Document +

Quality Work Plan

Two objectives:

Common guidelines all partner adhere to => Quality Policy Document

Plan the Quality tasks and resources => Quality Work Plan

7

2 objectives met:

The quality policy document – signed in early 2016

The quality Work Plan – established in march 2016

Task 7.2: Workshop and Meeting

quality evaluation reports

Two objectives:

BEFORE / AFTER surveys (for the moment the UM has prepared 18 surveys)

Analysis and report (for the moment the UM has prepared 9 evaluation reports)

8

Objectives met:

- 1st Consortium Meeting in Karmiel => Report” 1ST CONSORTIUM MEETING EVALUATION - NOVEMBER 2015”

- WP1 WS1 in Warsaw => Report “WP1 WORKSHOP 1 IN WARSAW EVALUATION - JANUARY 2016”

- WP1 WS2 in Montpellier => Report “WP1 WORKSHOP 2 IN MONTPELLIER EVALUATION - MARCH 2016”

- WP2 WS2 in Tel-Hai => Report “WP2 WORKSHOP 2 IN TEL HAI EVALUATION - MAY 2016”

- WP2 WS2 and the 2nd Consortium Meeting in Ludwigsburg => Report “WP2 WS2 and 2nd Consortium Meeting IN LUDWIGSBURG

EVALUATION - JULY 2016”

- WP3 WS1 in Israel => Report “WP3 WORKSHOP 1 IN ISRAEL EVALUATION - DECEMBER 2016”

- WP3 WS2 in Milan => Report “WP3 WORKSHOP 2 IN MILAN EVALUATION - FEBRUARY 2017”

- WP3 WS3 In Warsaw => Report “WP3 WORKSHOP 3 IN WARSAW EVALUATION - MARCH 2017”

- WP3 Global Entrepreneurship Team Meeting => Report “WP3 Global Entrepreneurship Team Meeting in Israel EVALUATION – AUGUST

2017”

Task 7.2: Workshop and Meeting

quality evaluation reports

Two objectives:

BEFORE / AFTER surveys (for the moment the UM has prepared 18 surveys)

Analysis and report (for the moment the UM has prepared 9 meeting evaluation report)

9

WP5 Training Session (TS) on Academy-

Industry/community Cooperation - London 10

=> It appears that it could be good to allocate more time for teamwork.

Then, it could be interesting to clearly detail how to reach the meeting venue by public transportation.

WP3 WS1- Israel 11

=> Less than half of the total number of attendees to IN2IT WP3 WS1 participated to the QA surveys. Participation in the questionnaires should be increased.

It appears that it could be good to share common goals among the partners (i.e. how to structure the pilot).

WP3 WS2 and WP4 WS1 - Milan 12

It appears that it could be good to increase the international relations practitioners from the participating institutions involved in the project.

Concerning WP4 activities, it could be useful to define a clear focus and instructions, for example, to let each institution prepare one sheet with the most crucial information. The networking and roundtable discussion was not always clear, may be an external moderation could be helpful.

Whenever possible, it appears interesting to allocate more time for bilateral discussions and exchange of opinions. WP4 activities need to be developed in further meetings and activities (study visits…).

WP3 WS3 - Warsaw 13

=> It appears that it could be good to organize technical training in small groups.

Then, there is a suggestion for reducing the duration of the workshop two days.

WP3 Global Entrepreneurship Team

Meeting – Tel Hai 14

=>In order to be able to produce reliable data it is important to collect a representative number of responses to the surveys: we have to think about solutions to obtain the widest possible participation in the surveys.

Concerning WP3 Global Entrepreneurship Team Meeting, it seems that the participation of an external moderator in the working group could be useful in order to control and manage the discussion properly.

T 7.2 Planning 15

Workshop Evaluation

Task 7.3

Two objectives:

Expectation / Satisfaction surveys

Analysis and report

16

Objectives not yet met:

Expectation surveys in progress

Task will start : Year 3

Product Quality Evaluation

T 7.3 Planning 17

Product Quality Evaluation

Task in line with product delivery => Year 3

Task 7.4

Two objectives:

Completion of task – punctuality of deliverable

Achievement of project objectives

18

Objective met:

First year evaluation report

- Sept 2017

- Sept 2018 x 2

Project progress assessment reports

T 7.4 Planning 19

Lesson learnt

In order to be able to produce reliable data it is important to collect a representative number of responses to

the surveys: we have to think about solutions to obtain the widest possible participation in the surveys.

- It could be good to allocate more time for teamwork

- It could be good to share common goals among the partners (i.e. how to structure the pilot).

- It could be good to increase the number of the international relations practitioners from the

participating institutions involved in the project.

- Concerning WP4 activities, it could be useful to define a clear focus and instructions, for example, to let

each institution prepare one sheet with the most crucial information. The networking and roundtable

discussion was not always clear, may be an external moderation could be helpful.

- Whenever possible, it appears interesting to allocate more time for bilateral discussions and exchange

of opinions. WP4 activities need to be developed in further meetings and activities (study visits…).

- Concerning WP3 Global Entrepreneurship Team Meeting, it seems that the participation of an external

moderator in the working group could be useful in order to control and manage the discussion

properly.

20

Next year activities 21

Conclusion

The role of the UM in the IN2IT project:

the UM team is actively involved in the project activities

Leading WP 7: the Quality assurance of the project

Tasks

T 7.1 Quality Policy Document + Quality Work Plan

T 7.2 WP quality evaluation

T 7.3 Products quality measurement reports

T 7.4 Project progress assessments reports

22