Compleap steering committee meeting

Date: 18 November 2019

Time: 12-14 (Finnish time)

Location: virtually in Zoom:  https://cscfi.zoom.us/j/274295236


Steering committee:

  • Stina Westman, Director, CSC – IT Center for Science (Chair)
  • Raakel Tiihonen, Director, Finnish National Agency for Education
  • Susanna Pirttikangas, Professor, University of Oulu
  • Dik Van Der Wal, Manager International Services, Dienst Uitvoering Onderwijs
  • Rauni Gylden, Student service manager, Gradia Jyväskylä
  • Tomi Kytölä, Senior officer, Ministry of Education and Culture
  • Antti Laitinen, Project manager, CSC – IT Center for Science (Secretary)


Visitor:

  • Anu Märkälä, CSC – IT Center for Science (assistant)


Agenda

  1. Welcome and opening
    1. Meeting was opened by the chair at 12:06.
    2. Meetings was held this time in Finnish.
  2. Greetings and presence
    1. Dik was not able to participate the meeting.  
  3. Approval of the agenda
    1. The agenda was approved. 
    2. The steering committee set the target to close the meeting in one hour because of conflicting timetables.
    3. The main focus of the meeting was in the deliverables due in November, the final reporting and review process as well as FINEEC´s external review.
  4. Approval of the previous meeting memo 
    1. No comments received via e-mail. 
    2. The memo was approved.
  5. Management update
    1. Remote review status
      1. Feedback and action points
    2. Steering committee decision log review
      1. No new decisions were made in the previous meeting on October 24th.
    3. Financial matters
      1. Finance reports
        1. Financial figures until the end of October are not ready yet because this meeting took place earlier due to the reporting schedule. 
        2. The information to be sent to Antti by e-mail as soon as possible and the material  linked to Eduuni
  6. Current issues
    1. State of the art of the project activities for information
      1. Road map - It was noted that mainly reporting activities are now underway.
        1. It was decided that Antti will take activities from sustainability plan to be seen and in WP leaders meeting today.
        2. Framework architecture design
        3. Analytics prototype
        4. Learner plan prototype and modules
        5. Europass case study
        6. Engaging communications
        7. Effective project management
          1. External evaluation: Draft version of the report to be fact checked between November 15th-19th
            • Deadline for comments to steering group mailing list by end of business on Tuesday.
            • CSC will then deliver the comments to FINEEC on Wednesday.
            • Yellow markings will be still updated by FINEEC.
            • Evaluation area number 4 will require extra time.
            • There will be an external language audit done for the text before the final version is delivered.
              • p.14 need to split the chapter 4 in two sections? One for future development of similar projects and one for wider audience scope and policy issues?
              • Evaluation area 1
                • key findings p.15 + good practices
                  • Delayed funding decision caused challenges.
                  • Project organization was perceived complex and ownership of the results unclear in some cases.
                    • Steering committee noted that complex organization (meaning partners from many different levels e.g. national and regional) was necessary for the project.
                    • Stina noted that changes in the project staff, roles and responsibilities among the project partners and the complex entirety that they formed were relevant causes for the perceived uncertainty. 
                  • unrealistic expectations among some stakeholders
                  • p.17 table EDUFI and UOulu figures still missing
                  • Importance of the mid-term review - budget issues etc.
                  • good practices: regular meetings and open documentation
                • Evaluation area 2
                  • key findings p.22
                    • Usefulness of the mid-term review
                    • enhancing the monitoring practices throughout the project
                    • too many ways of monitoring?
                    • good practices: mid-term review, local evaluation meetings (EDUFI), systematic feedback collection from webinars
                  • Evaluation area 3
                    • key findings p.24
                      • framework architecture was described as a mature outcome and the prototypes as a raw outcome.
                      • impact among original target groups immigrants and NEETs rather low
                      • learner-centeredsness succesfull
                        • Comment about maturity levels of outcomes. Is duration of an activity the scale for maturity?
                          • Architecture needed to be done first.
                        • These project outcomes should be compared to the starting place and the objectives of the project. 

                        • Comment about prototype development lasting only a relative short time - We need to make sure that timeline is known.

                    • Evaluation area 4
                      • key findings p.32
                        • international dimension low but Finland works as an good example for other countries
                        • seeds in other countries - next steps?
                        • Europass case study positive
                    • Evaluation area 5
                      • key findings p.35
                        • wide stakeholder collaboration good
                        • may ways to reach stakeholders
                        • managing expectations
                    • Summary conclusions p.38-
                      • goals achieved
                      • boost given to the wide stakeholder network
                      • overall impact strongest in Finland
                      • further work e.g. counseling staff role and ethical questions
                    • It was noted that WP leaders will discuss fact checking on Monday 14-16 and add their comments to the Word document (linked above) to be distributed  to steering group
                      • it was agreed to deliver comments to CSC to a Word file by end of business on Tuesday
      2. Deliverables reporting - timeline for reporting
    2. Upcoming events and activities
      1. Dissemination events 
      2. Final review 23.1.2020
  7. Steering committee meetings
    1. Next meetings
      • Virtual meeting early January to approve the final reports - see above
      • Any member can ask to convene steering group if necessary in the mean time.
  8. Any other business
    1. none
  9. Closing the meeting
    1. The meeting was closed at 13:15.
      1. Raakel and Susanna left earlier at 13:00.
  • No labels