Structure of the new Erasmus + Programme
ERASMUS +
KA1
Learning mobility
KA2
Cooperation for innovation
KA3
Support for policy reform
Sport
Jean Monnet
Youth
Table of contents
KA specific features
Award criteria
Lessons learnt from the previous call
- Applications submitted in April 2014:Overview
- Recurrent issues
- Examples of good practices
Project examples
Date: in 12 pts
Education and Culture
Knowledge Alliances
Composition Minimum 6 organisations from 3 programme countries + partner
countries if added value
Minimum 2 HEIs + 2 enterprises
Duration 2 or 3 years
Budget 2 years: up to 700.000€ 3 years: up to 1.000.000€
Management Centralised to EACEA
Special attention to Mobility: Optional
• Mobility of students/researchers/staff in so far they support /complement the other project activities + bring added value. Mobility does not constitute the main activities NB: The budget for mobility activities can not be used to finance ordinary costs for
travels and susbistence (e.g attendance costs, partnership meetings)
Partner countries: Optional
• If applicable, the involvement of an organisation from a Partner country must bring an essential added value to the project
The « ECHE charter » requirement
• HEIs established in a Programme Country must hold a valid Erasmus Charter for Higher Education
7
What are KA Alliances
• Big international cooperation projects
• Innovation
• High impact to the systems
• Sustainable cooperation
• Education and training links with business
Innovation in higher education
Impact beyond the project's lifetime
Sustainability of university-business
cooperation
ESSENTIAL FEATURES: INNOVATION/IMPACT/SUSTAINABILITY
10
Knowledge alliances
Develop innovative ways of teaching, learning and governance
Stimulate entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial competence of students, academics and company staff
Strengthen the flow and exchange of information and knowledge
Stimulate the co-creation of knowledge
Stimulate the cooperation between higher education institutions and companies
KA 2:
Cooperation for innovation (2)
Boosting innovation in
higher education,
business and in the broader
socio-economic environment
Developing entrepreneurship
mind-set and competences
Stimulating the flow and exchange of
knowledge between higher education and enterprises
Impact beyond the project's
lifetime
Sustainability of university-business
cooperation
Objectives and Impact
WHICH ACTIVITIES ARE SUPPORTED?
13
Joint development of new learning and teaching methods (like new multidisciplinary curricula, learner-centered teaching and learning);
University problem based learning in association with companies
Identification and validation of innovation skills
New leadership skills
Organisation of continuing educational programmes and activities with and within companies
University support to SME creation and growth, Etc.
4 Award criteria (E+ Programme Guide)
• Relevance of the project
• Quality of the project design and implementation
• Quality of the project team and the cooperation arrangements
• Impact and dissemination
16
Design of the proposal
• Coherent-issues, solutions, target groups, activities, budget
• Evidence-based-needs analysis, state of the art
• Clear-objectives, solutions, outputs
• Rigorous in its planning-what activities, when, for how long, and with what resources
• Explicit-no information for granted, if it is not in your proposal it cannot be taken into account
• Concise-write efficiently, respect the character limitation- more is not better
• Circumscribed-your proposal should focus on a specific issue
Selected projects
Applicant countries
Austria Cyprus France
Finland
Ireland
Italy Lithuania
2 1 1 1 1 3 1
• Most represented topic: Support to the development of entrepreneurial skills
• These projects involve entreprises, professional associations, from the food sector, textile sector, SMEs,etc.
• Partner country involved: Switzerland
Wide diversity of sectors: health, tourism, environment, engineering, transport, SME support, food sector, textile, etc.
Entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial attitude and skills in >50 % of applications
>70% of the proposals have put forward
new curricula, study programmes, courses or training modules
Among the less represented expected results:
new cooperation arrangements/funding (9,6%)
Submitted applications
Sectors and Topics
Selection outcomes
With the budget available + substantial additional funding:
10 selected projects
8,4 M€
Quality of the submitted applications: Recurrent weaknesses
Rationale-Objectives: Lack of information on how the application is meeting the KA objectives- Ideas and rationale tend to come from the HEIs perspective only
Consortium- enterprises: Too few companies actively involved and show solid commitment of setting up an alliance with the purpose of building a long lasting partnership with HEIs
Needs analysis: lack of adequate, detailed and convincing explanation
25
Recurrent weaknesses
State of the art-innovation: state of art rarely ventures beyond a superficial consideration of the lead partner's or consortium's own experience – Lack of information on innovation
Impact -sustainability: many proposals underestimated the importance of defining proper impact and sustainability strategy
Weak or undefined exploitation of results
Sustainability: limited to the reviewing of project results, updating of conclusions, maintenance of the project website
26
Good examples
• Balanced cooperation between HEIs, industry
"The consortium is large, well balanced, and has the competences needed to deliver the project. The participating organisations' commitment to the project is credibly demonstrated. The HEIs involved are well versed in entrepreneurship education and provide access to a large range of PhD students. The inclusion of a large number of companies with experience along the "innovation chain" is a key strength."
28
Good examples (continued)
• Needs analysis
"Project design is based on relevant studies about current course offerings on entrepreneurship within Europe. The project draws from a number of previous projects and initiatives. The proposal provides links to the relevant European policies and strategies. It also builds on many initiatives from individual institutions."
29
Good examples (continued)
• Project design and implementation
"The proposed methodology is clear. The work plan provides for a
logical sequencing of activities, and graphics further illustrate the
content and duration of the individual work packages. The proposed
project management structure is highly relevant for a project of this
size and duration. The project manager, work package leaders, task
leaders, and management board each have clear roles and
responsibilities. Planned collaboration mechanisms are well suited.
Management and delivery is expected to contribute to strong leadership
and active decision-making"
30
Good examples (continued)
• Impact
"The project’s target groups are defined and sufficiently quantified. The main target group will take part in the needs analysis stage and in pilot testing. Other target groups include academic and company staff involved in entrepreneurship education, incubation centres, business angel and venture capital investors, business and start-up support organisations and networks as well as national and European decision makers. The project has a potential to provide a step change in entrepreneurship support by disseminating the project to a range of academic, incubation and entrepreneurship centres, and engaging with private capital investors and business support networks."
31
Good examples (continued)
• Sustainability
"Sustainability of project results will be achieved by including the developed tools in the HEIs concerned and beyond. The objectives for sustaining the collaboration between HEIs and the private sector are very ambitious. It is not only intended to maintain and expand the existing partnership, but the aim is also to establish a global innovation competencies network"
32
A Knowledge Partnership for the definition and launch of the
European Teaching Factory Paradigm in manufacturing education
Dr. Dimitris MAVRIKIOS Dr. Lennart MALMSKÖLD
Laboratory for Manufacturing
Systems and Automation (LMS)
Director: Prof. G. Chryssolouris
Volvo Group
Trucks Technology