National Needs Assessment Reports · and then contacted for the submission of questionnaire. The...

1 MIGRA-TED: Migrations and human rights enhanced though Technology in Education

Agreement number 2017-3008/001-001 Project number 592168-EPP-1-2017-1-IT-EPPKA3-IPI-SOC-IN

National Needs Assessment Reports

Analysis of the Questionnaire:“Migrations and human rights

enhanced through technology in Education”



Credits

Coordination

Giorgia Bailo

Texts

Neva Cocchi, Mirca Ognisanti, Simona Bruni, Sandra Oliveira, Marta Branquinho, Fernando

Catarino, Dimitra Ntirogianni, Dora Heracleous, Helene Josephides, Adriana Aralica.



Contents

Needs Assessment Report of Italy ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Overview ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5

The research ................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Results of the needs assessment .................................................................................................................................... 6

Summary of needs and gaps and recommendations ..................................................................................................... 9

Appendix ....................................................................................................................................................................... 11

Needs Assessment Report Portugal ................................................................................................................................ 15

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................................... 15

Results of the needs assessment .................................................................................................................................. 15

Summary of needs and gaps, recommendations ......................................................................................................... 33

Needs Assessment Report of Greece .............................................................................................................................. 35

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................................... 35


III. Digital and multimedia tools for education ............................................................................................................. 47


Appendix ........................................................................................................................................................................... 58

Annex 1 - Examples of projects and activities implemented in the institutions mentioned by the responders .......... 58

Annex 2- Specificities of training, projects, activities implemented ............................................................................. 64

Annex 3. Expectations on the training and subjects that the respondents would prefer to analyse ........................... 67

Needs Assessment Report of Slovenia ............................................................................................................................ 75

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................................... 75



Needs Assessment Report of Cyprus ............................................................................................................................... 95

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................................... 95


Summary of needs and gaps, recommendations ....................................................................................................... 115



Needs Assessment Report of Italy

Overview

GCE and ICT in the official curriculum

Following UNESCO guidelines, the introduction of Global Citizenship Education in formal education has been prompted

out by the National Council for Cooperation and Development, a permanent body composed by Ministries, Regions,

Local Authorities, Italian Agency for Development, main networks of CSOs and Universities. The National Council for

Cooperation and Development has suggested the creation of a transversal National Desk leading the development of

the National Strategy for the Education to Global Citizenship. As a direct response, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and

International Cooperation (MAECI) has nominated a multi-actors work-group appointed to elaborate such Strategy.

The final document has been developed thanks to the involvement of relevant stakeholders, such as the Ministry of the

Environment, the Ministry of Education and Research (MIUR), Ministry for Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation

National, Agency of Italian Local Authorities, Youth National Agency, National Conference of Regions and

Autonomous Provinces, that have involved hundreds of civil societies organisations in the discussion and in the

research process.

The output is a document which provides for the premises for a coordinated development of a National Plan of Action

to promote actions of European Citizenship Education in the formal and non-formal education as well as in awareness-

rising campaigns which identifies goals, targets, actors and criteria to reach the agreed objectives of the International

Community on GCE.

Within this framework, Global Citizenship Education in Italian Secondary Schools is yet to become an existing practice

in day-to-day teaching, though many improvements have been made. The actual stage of implementation of the

National Plan of Action varies a great deal from a school context to the other, making the scenario of GCE in the Italian

school scenario diverse and fragmented, with thousands of good practices existing here and there yet to being included

in an organic system.

MIUR Ministry has actually defined several measures to promote specific actions for Diversity Respect and against Hate

Speech, allocating 6 million euro on 2014-2020, nevertheless the current education system is based on the autonomy

of schools, leaving choice to apply and implement such actions to each institutes’ autonomy.

The same applies for information communication technologies, identified by Law 107/2015 as a pivot of the reform

process named as “The Good School”. In the daily reality, most secondary Institutes do have a curricular class of ITC and

strive for including them in didactic. Nevertheless, the scenario is once again different from one Institute to the other,

changing also in accordance with the course of study.

The research

This analysis has been carried out from April to July 2018 in a two-steps process: a mapping phase and a survey phase.

On the first stage, secondary schools and organisations responsible for non-formal education of the area of Bologna

have been mapped and contacted. This process has been supported by local partners CSAPSA 2 and Cd/LEI, whose

networks have been provided for organisations to be contacted and involved in MigratED project.



More than fifty organisations have been filed by MigratED, informed about the project objectives and foreseen activities

and then contacted for the submission of questionnaire.

The on-line questionnaire has been translated in Italian; 60 persons filled it, 55 professionals of formal and non-formal

education accurately completed it.

Results of the needs assessment Experience and work of the respondents

A slight majority (52,7%) of the respondents work in in the field of formal education, as teachers of secondary school. In a kind of analogy, we should add to this data the 3,6% of those working as teachers in the CPIA system, that is to say the formal education system for adults. All respondents work in the town of Bologna.

The rest of respondents (45%) is split among a variety of roles belonging to the field of non-formal education (which we

could identify somehow as “social education”):

30,9% of respondents are “educators in informal education contexts”, a category where education projects in

reception centres for unaccompanied asylum seeking and refugees minors is the most represented (18,2%).

Public centres for professional training of youth and public youth centres, with same percentage of 5,5%,

followed by the context of social cooperatives providing services for youth at various levels, of youth centres

in urban and suburban contexts, unaccompanied minors' communities, projects to contrast early school

leaving, social marginalisation etc.

With a total of 55 respondents involved, the desired target of professionals dealing with the education of youngsters has been reached in its different characteristics, including a variety of working positions going from teachers to project managers to social workers and social workers with intercultural skills.

A big part of the teachers that took part in this survey (44%) specialise in humanities disciplines, the rest in foreign languages, informatics and technical sciences. The majority (85,5%) of the respondents are working on a fixed-term contract. The majority of the respondents that completed the questionnaire are women (74%), 31-40 years old with 10 to 20 years of experience in the field (36%). In general the respondents have a relevant number of year of experience, 27,3% has 4 to 10 years of experience while 16,4% more than 20 years of experience. Eleven respondents have less than 3 years of experience, counting as 15%.

Global Citizenship Education: migrations, human rights and sustainable development

Majority of respondents are familiar with the concept of global citizenship education, their vast majority (81,8% of the respondents) say that they are aware of what Global Citizenship Education is. We observe that global citizenship education activities are implemented mostly by “internal staff” (60%), by “external collaborators” at 43,6% (though it is not possible to know more about external staff, i.e. trainers, CSOs...), 11% by partners organisations. In general, we notice that responders declare low-average experience in implementing global citizenship education in all fields, with a high number of them who answer “No Experience” (lev 1) on International Cooperation (28 answers), Education to Global Citizenship (22 answers) and Peace Education (20 answers). “Poor experience” (lev 2) is declared on Human Rights (18 answers), Education to Global Citizenship (16 answers) but also Migrations (13 answers). Some experience is assessed in Migrations (17 answers), in 16 cases on Peace Education and Intercultural Dialogue. Good Experience is reached only by nine answers on Intercultural Dialogue. Considering that in all subjects very good or good experience is hardly declared, it seems that the general level of experience felt by professionals needs to be further improved in all subjects, especially as far as International Cooperation, Education to Global Citizenship and Peace Education are concerned. Examples of projects and activities on GCE implemented



When asked to indicate examples of projects and activities implemented in their institution focused on these subjects, all 55 respondents provide some examples. Answers are not always detailed; they reflect the variety of respondents of the questionnaire. Concerning formal education, answers list activities such as European Programs (i.e. Amitié Code, Erasmus Plus, Europe Direct, EduChange); exchange programs abroad; internal workshops implemented by groups of teachers on intercultural dialogue, migrations, human rights, peace education through documentaries, open discussions, thematic lessons; initiatives in partnership with CD/LEI and Centre Riesco and relevant CSOs (ie Scuola di Pace di Montesole); but also a variety of not specifically defined activities on gender education, active citizenship, workers' rights, intercultural programs. As far as informal education is concerned, respondents list activities such as trainings of trainers on unaccompanied asylum-seeking minors, psychology, social aspects connected to migrations; activities addressed to beneficiaries such as intercultural events (football tournaments, drama workshops, festivals). To be mentioned, a total of 13 answers declare either they do not know any activity or that no activity has been implemented. 60% respondents have already participated in some activity on above-mentioned issues, but a considerable 40% have not. Only 27 of them provide an answer, though. Open-responses collected list different kind of activities, not always sufficiently detailed, falling under these main categories:

Masters or teaching programs promoted by Universities

European programs (i.e. Amitié Code, Grundig)

Programs that are promoted from organisations managing centres and communities for asylum seekers and refugees where social workers are employed

Programs implemented in collaboration with NGOs According to answers given, respondents' experience of activities on global education varies a lot. Some have implemented important study programs within the context of the school curriculum on their own initiative, such as post degree-studies and masters. Some responders have implemented activities within the context of European Programs such as Amitié Code and Grundig, while some others mentioned training moments promoted by the social cooperative where they are employed. Some answers mentioned one-day meeting with relevant actors of the field (CSOs, NGOs, UNHCR). The majority of respondents feel comfortable addressing complex contemporary issues, and believe these issues are important, nevertheless 37 respondents believe they dont' possess the adequate tools to deal with them.

The majority of respondents understand the purpose and importance of integrating these complex issues in the classroom curriculum. A large number of them believes there are tools available to use.

Evaluation of involvement of students in implementing modules on above-mentioned issues (QII.8)

9%

29%

42%

14%6%

Students'involvement in modules of GCE

Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent



Among respondents who have implemented modules on above-mentioned issues with young people, 41,8% evaluate involvement of young people as good, and 14,8% as very good. Nevertheless, 9,1% evaluated involvement of young people in these modules as poor.

The majority of the respondents believe that young people are influenced by media and by public discourse. Most of the respondents believe that students can be encouraged to show interest in topics that are out of the school curriculum. 31 respondents declare to have knowledge on these subjects, while 24 do not. The majority of respondents believe they need to be exposed to innovative methodologies and tools in order to further develop their abilities in implementing them in the classroom. Methods used when implementing modules on above-mentioned issues with young people

When implementing activities on above-mentioned issues with young people, 69,1% of respondents used the method of open discussion; 54,5% participatory methods, 50,9% teamwork or working in small groups, 40% digital and multimedia tools. 9 respondents used frontal lessons method. More than one answers were possible.

Identified need for training by respondents (QII.11):

Most respondents recognize the need to strengthen their capacities in ICT and media literacy as tools for addressing above-mentioned themes (75,5%), followed by the field of Education on Global Citizenship (69,1%), Intercultural Dialogue (60%) and International Cooperation and Development.

More than half (50,9%) of the respondents are very interested in participation in a training on above-mentioned issues, followed by 21,8% interested in taking part in the training, and 20% respondents moderately interested in the training. Hence, respondents are interested in participating in the training on above-mentioned issues.

Digital and multimedia tools for education

Among tools most often used by respondents, there are videos, multimedia presentations, web documentaries. Among tools not used by respondents are videogames and QR code readers, and also e-books and cloud services. Applications are also among tools rarely used by respondents, when working with young people.

Respondents believe that use of digital/multimedia tools when working with young people increase interest and motivation of young people, can complement regular lesson, provide opportunity for dialogue, assist in addressing such issues, and are not to challenging to work with.

As far as implementation of digital tools in the work context, 38,2% of respondents assess use of digital tools in their school/organisation as good, followed by 30,9% assessing it as fair; 27,3% respondents evaluate it as poor.



Majority (69%) of respondents believe that their organizations’ leadership assesses use of digital/multimedia tools as other tools, while 21% believe that it is considered very important.

Trainings on digital tools for education

47,3% of respondents declare they never attended a course on digital tools for education, 30,9% have more than once or once attended a course on digital tools for education. As far as examples provided, open-responses provide with very different answers, difficult to sum up in just one portrait (See Appendix 2)

As far as existing training opportunities on digital/multimedia tools, on a local/national level, 43% of the respondents assess them as fair, followed by 29% who assess the training opportunities as poor and only 27,3% assessing them as good. Difficulties faced by teachers/youth workers/education practitioners in getting specific training on digital/multimedia tools

Respondents recognize time availability as the key challenge in participating in specific training on digital/multimedia tools, and majority of respondents do not consider poor interest in these topics in educational context or low personal interest in these issues, but a considerable number 37 declares poor equipment and connectivity as well as poor opportunities to use them.

36% of respondents is very interested in participation in a free training on ICT and media literacy as didactic tools, and 20% respondents interested. A 32,7% moderately interested. Hence, a big number of respondents are interested in participating in the training on digital/media tools as didactic tools.

Preferences for the training course

38,2% of respondents prefer the training as meetings distributed within a long period of time, while 23,6% prefers lectures by experts with didactical programme for self-study, followed by 21,8% preferring intensive short training. With regards to duration of the training, 45,5% believe that the training, including preparations and research, should take 12-24 hours, while 27,3% of the respondents prefer a duration of 24-32 hours

In case the training is not professionally recognized a 27,3% declare they would not take part to it.

Respondents’ expectations on the training and preferred subjects are listed in open-response. Answers mention all topics, mostly migrations and interculture, global citizenship education, peace education, international cooperation. Respondents point out expectations in learning new methods, new tools for education (i.e. up-dated databases, cartographies, video-docs, web-sources), digital tools and multimedia to deal with these issues and to enhance active critical thinking among youngsters, new strategies to involve youngsters, not only multimedia but also information by experts on these subjects, up-dated and in-depth information on contemporary phenomenon to promote involvement.

The wide majority of respondents left their contacts to take part to project MigraTED

Summary of needs and gaps and recommendations

Our main public is quite balanced between formal educators and non-formal educators, with a slight majority of the former category. They are mainly women, aged about 31-40 with lengthy experience of work in the sector.

When asked, they declare non-existent or poor experience in all subjects of Citizenship Education, especially on International Cooperation, Education to Global Citizenship, Peace Education, Human Rights, although more than a half of them did some kind of experience to get in touch with these subjects through curricular or extra-curricular activity. They consider these issues very important and say they are not uneasy to deal with them, though a considerable number don't feel to possess the adequate tools to do it and wish to strengthen his/her ability through innovative methodologies. On the other side, when these issues happened to be addressed, the youngsters' reaction was positive.



A lack of familiarity is also declared when coming to the use of media and ICT, with nearly half of respondents having never took part in a training on media and digital education, above all for lack of time, and seldom using them.

Nevertheless, they are keen to take advantage of digital tools to tackle Citizenship Education, as they believe these tools can support traditional lesson-methods, facilitate dialogue opportunities, and arise youngsters' interest and involvement. For these reasons, respondents are interested in taking part to a training on the use of media and digital tools.

The expectations expressed are high, as they look for new teaching methodologies and approaches to deal with contemporary issues, in the framework of social, economic and political fast changes. Hence, the training in the use of digital tools and ITC is useful if it can provide for tools for addressing above-mentioned themes, enhance active critical thinking among youngsters and provide for up-dated knowledge of migrations.

Actually, migration is not the subject most addressed in direct questions, as respondents declare needs for training mostly in Global Citizenship Education and Intercultural Dialogue but in open-response where expectations are expressed, most answers point out migrations as the topic to develop further.

Recommendations for trainings

Training needs to develop methodologies also for non-formal education context, as nearly half of respondents don't work in a classroom

Training should provide for knowledge and tools to understand and investigate controversial issues of the contemporary society

Training should focus both on contents of Global Citizenship Education (all subjects) as well as on methodologies and tools

Training should try to provide for methodologies of didactic and education through media and ITC to be used to deal with Global Citizenship Education

Training should develop familiarity with the use for educational purpose of common digital tools and media, which are available and easy to access but are little used

Training should provide examples for practical use in daily contexts where equipment and connectivity are rated as poor



Appendix

ANNEX I

Answers by respondents: examples of projects and activities on GCE issues in your work-place

Nessuno

Non so

Progetto Amitie Code a.s. 2016/17; collaborazione con i progetti del centro Riesco e Cdlei

?

Non li ho realizzati nella scuola in cui lavoro ora

Diritti umani: lezioni curricolari nella materia di diritto. Dialogo interculturale: lezioni interdisciplinari storia-diritto su

Cristianesimo e Islam; lezioni interdisciplinari scienze umane-diritto su aspetti socio-economico contemporanei di alcuni

paesi musulmani

Non li conosco direttamente.

Approfondimenti didattici durante le ore curricolari di storia\scienze umane

collaborazione con Europe Direct (progetto Coloritura Europea); progetto extracurricolare pomeridiano di Intercultura.

Educazione alla pace in Bosnia - Progetti ASL in centri di accoglienza per migranti - Laboratori su questioni di genere con

migranti - Visite di centri di accoglienza e SPRAR - Attività di volontariato

Educhange, scambi, esperienza all'estero

Attività laboratoriali per approfondire le varie culture di provenienza dei ragazzi attraverso racconti immagini e oggetti e

così fatto anche nelle scuole

Lezioni tematiche, visioni film

Progetto "Oltre le Frontiere"

Progetti di sensibilizzazione e informazione sui e temi delle migrazioni e dell'accoglienza

Scuola di italiano per richiedenti asilo. Progetto concluso nel 2017

accoglienza msna

Immigrazione, educazione alla pace, alla cittadinanza globale,dialogo interculturale

NESSUNA

ASL in collaborazione con SPRAR del territorio; accoglienza in una classe di alunno NAI; Attività svolete in passato con la

Scuola di Pace di Monte Sole...

progetti di inclusione sulla diversità

Tornei sportivi e eventi interculturali

Presso l'ente in cui lavoro sono stati attivati progetti di alternanza scuola-lavoro finalizzati all'incontro e scambio tra e fra

culture agevolando il dialogo interculturale; è istituito un tavolo intercultura e accoglienza per attività nelle scuole.

non ne conosco

Laboratorio sui diritti umani, Laboratorio sulla Costituzione, Laboratorio sulle emozioni (in chiave di educazione alla

pace), approfondimento e analisi di alcuni periodi storici particolari (Guerre nelle ex Jugoslavia, Questione israelo-

palestinese, Argentina e Desaparecidos, mafie italiane), interviste e sondaggi sul tema delle migrazioni e partecipazione

a concorsi

Didattica improntata sull'inclusione e diversi progetti che mirano al dialogo interculturale

Attività di conoscenza e integrazione fra cittadini italiani e migranti (entrambi minorenni); Teatro "Cantieri Meticci"

Diritti e lavoro.Diritti alla cittadinanza attiva. educazione di genere

Laboratori Amitie Code A.S. 2016/17

Progetti di intercultura

Progetto ITALSTUDIO presso l'IIS Serpieri di Bologna (in cui ho lavorato nell'a.s. 2016/17): gli studenti immigrati in Italia

da meno di 2 anni, oltre al corso L2, seguivano un corso specifico per l'apprendimento delle discipline scientifiche e

tecnologiche.

Amitie Code

insieme ad un piccolo gruppo di colleghe abbiamo organizzato una giornata interculturale sul tema della musica dei

paesi di origine di alcuni studenti: Romania, Filippine, Marocco e Cina. Abbiamo ascoltato e commentato alcune canzoni

in un gruppo di circa 30 alunni; poi abbiamo messo a confronto i testi delle canzoni con canzoni italiane. Inoltre abbiamo



letto alcuni piccoli brani tratti dal "Piccolo Principe" di Saint Exupery in varie lingue, in particolare i testi che facevano

riferimento all'amicizia. A conclusione della giornata abbiamo organizzato un bellissimo pranzo con pietanze

multietniche.

nessuno

Attività del centro riesco: progetti di Summer school

non so

Accoglienza classi prime, educazione alla legalità.

Abbiamo partecipato a diversi scambi europei, all'interno dei quali sono state affrontate diverse tematiche: traffico di

esseri umani, diritti umani, situazioni che hanno permesso di conoscere migranti parlando con loro della condizione di

vita e del percorso affrontato. Gli scambi si sono dimostrati un'ottimo contesto interculturale.

Corsi di alfabetizzazione, diritto allo studiopercorsi sportivi volti all'inclusione sociale.

Parlez voiz global, sei piu'', amitie

documentari incentrati sui diritti umani e sulle autobiografie dei ragazzi/e; attività sportive basate sull'integrazione;

percorsi interculturali informali organizzati all'interno di interventi di educativa di strada; laboratori nelle scuole

Corsi di alfabetizzazione di italiano L2 e avviamento alle altre materie; percorsi di integrazione

Erasmus plus

Rispetto dell’ambiente, tolleranza per le religioni, integrazione sociale

-

Non ne sono a conoscenza

Ultimo incontro sul tema, 15 giugno: Cooperazione sociale nella accoglienza e inclusione degli ultimi

Formazione su MSNA, focus su viaggio e approdo/adattamento, ripercussioni psicologiche post traumatiche ecc..

progetti di scambio attraverso l'organizzazione del tempo libero degli ospiti della comunità con altri coetanei (uscite sul

territorio, gite, cinema, tornei di calcio, pizzeria, etc...) percorsi di gruppo con una counselor specializzati in cooperazione

internazionale

Progetto scambio europeo adolescenti "Another point of view to Europe“ a Neuroppin (Germania), gennaio 2016

Progetti di inclusione sociale con minori di diverse nazionalità

"#Cittadine alla conquista del voto" per citarne uno ma anche altri che non riesco a indicare adesso



ANNEX II

Answers by respondents: examples of trainings attended on GCE

Master organizzato da Amitie Code per insegnanti autunno 2016 presso Golinelli, Bologna

Dipende, dal ciclo di seminari su più mesi, ai convegni, all'incontro di due ore con personalità di vario tipo

Master in Organizzazione e gestione delle istituzioni scolastiche in contesti multiculturali (60 CF- UNIBO)

Global Citizenship Education (Alma Mater Studiorum, MIUR) 2 giorni

Save the children (4 ore a incontro) Unhcr (4 ore a incontro) OIM (4 ore a incontro)

Non riesco a ricostruire

16 ore, organizzazione non profit , programma interculturale

Organizzatori interni all'ente - 12 ore divise in tre incontri strutturati

Università di Firenze, Associazione Giovanni Paolo II, Ufficio Scolastico Regionale, Istituto Storico della Resistenza in

Toscana, Società italiana delle Storiche; i corsi vanno da 12 a 40 ore. I programmi sono vari e numerosi

Laboratorio neoassunti, 4 ore

Medici senza frontiere

Migrazione sviluppo e diritti umani-Opificio Gilinelli-Amitie Code

Master in Contesti Scolastici Multiculturali

Corso presso Fondazione Golinelli settembre 2016 (Progetto AMITIE CODE)

Migrazioni 3 giorni

Corsi presso il CDLei molti anni fa (non ricordo il numero di ore) - Seminari di Intercultura - Incontri con Servas e Amnesty

International

Non ricordo in dettaglio, formazione su fenomeno immigrazione e anche diritti umani tenuto dall'università di <Bologna

docente antropologo, una decina di anni fa

Corso di formazione permanente “Migrazione, sviluppo, e diritti umani tra scienze umane e scienze naturali. 45 h Golinelli

corso annuale di specializzazione post laurea in psicologia dell'emergenza ; Grundtvig 2 - Actiz 2008: “Cittadinanza attiva

attraverso l’apprendimento interculturale attivo”

45 ore Opificio Golinelli

Percorso "W l'amore" sulla educazione all'affettività. Formazione interna alla cooperativa sui disturbi da stress post

traumatico.

8 ore, organizzata da ANCI

Sono state alcune ore all'interno della formazione generale del Servizio Civile Nazionale, proposto da ARCI.

Organizzato da Csapsa, 12ore, oratori Psicologi ed operatori della NeuroPsichiatria Infantile di Bologna, ricercatori sul

tema migrazioni

incontri organizzati da Camelot Csapsa Asp della durata di un giorno (solitamente 4 ore mattutine) con scambi e

riflessioni condivise con altri attori, quali cittadini accoglienti, colleghi, utenti, formatori.

Corso di promozione educativa: "UNIVERSIDAD Y COOPERACION AL DESARROLLO" 40 ore totali (dal 5 al 16 marzo anno

2017. Università di Murcia (Spagna).PROGRAMMA (in spagnolo): 1. La cooperaciòn al desarollo (1,5 ore) 2. Economìa

del desarrollo (1,5 ore) 3. Economìa de la igualdad y la redistribuciòn (1,5 ore) 4. Geografìa del desarrollo (1,5 ore) 5. La

cooperaciòn agropecuaria (1,5 ore) 6. Antropologìa del desarrollo (1,5 ore) 7. Cooperaciòn en salud (1,5 ore) 8.

Educaciòn y cooperaciòn al desarrollo (1,5 ore) 9. Trabajo social y cooperaciòn al desarrollo (1,5 ore) 10. Etica del

desarrollo (1,5 ore) 11. Derecho Internacional humanitario (1,5 ore) 12. Ecologìa y cooperaciòn al desarrollo (1,5 ore) 13.

Cooperaciòn econòmica (1,5 ore) 14. Elaboraciòn, ejecuciòn y evaluaciòn de proyectos de desarrollo (3 ore) 15.

Pràcticas extracurriculares en Iberoamèrica (1,5 ore) 16. Pràctica del curso (16 ore)



ANNEX III

Examples of trainings attended on ICT applied to education

Ho fatto parte dei formatori pon per la la didattica digitale e ho dovuto seguire decine di ore di formazione, che sarebbe

troppo lungo elencare

Usp Bologna 4 h (uso qrcode in didattica - tecnologie inclusive) Istituto Bentegodi (VR), 10 h (la Lim)

Aule digitali; 2 ore; Spaggiari/Alatin; 2 ore; Maieuticalab

US 4 ore e-twinning; MIUR+IC n. 2-Bologna 25 ore "Ambienti di Apprendimento e didattica Innovativa"

Mai

20 ore su e-learning sulle app usate per la didattica

Corso di Formazione "Ambienti di apprendimento e didattica innovativa" Ambito territoriale ER001 - Bologna rivolto a

docenti degli Istituti di scuola primaria, secondaria di I grado e biennio della scuola secondaria di II grado della Città di

Bologna. Informazioni di dettaglio Direttrice del corso: dirigente scolastica Giovanna Cantile Sede del corso: scuola

secondaria Il Guercino Formatrici e formatori: Agostini, Berardi, Marcato, Leone, Pezzi,Valentini,Vignola Ore complessive

del corso: 25 (comprensive di attività in presenza e attività in Istituto)

autoaggiornamento interno sull'uso di LIM e ambiente CLASSROOM; formazioni di istituto sull'uso di registro elettronico,

aule virtuali, ecc; credo altro ma non ricordo con precisione

Youthwork associanimazione di Parma convegno di due giorni

Tavolo Intercultura e accoglienza per attività nelle scuole - 12 ore

Corso tenuto dall'Indire di un pomeriggio a Firenze, credo di 4 ore

Laboratorio neoassunti, 4 ore

didattica a distanza 10 ore. piattaforma moodle 3 ore

Utilizzo della LIM - Unipegaso - almeno 4 ore

3 giorni

Corso su google apps di circa 20 ore

G suite for education: Metodo per la condivisione 9 h Utilizzare la suite Google nella didattica 3 h

6 ore corso piattaforma

Scuola (10 ore circa), Indire (10 ore circa), altri corsi molti anni fa (100 ore)

2 ore, organizzato da Csapsadue, presentazione, discussione e lavoro di gruppo.

Convegno Internazionale "Supereroi Fragili", Palacongressi di Rimini, 5 e 6 Maggio 2017. Programma:

https://eventi.erickson.it/supereroi2017/Programma?miu38l.icp100l=pcu6f&miu38l.icp101l=Il+programma&nav=page1

7l.15&var68l=Il+programma&link=oln459l.redirect&cbck=wrReq9923

Non possibile ricostruire



Needs Assessment Report Portugal

Overview

The research

The launch of the Needs Assessment took place in May 2018 through the network of contacts and relationships of

4Change and U. Lusófona/COFAC. The approach used to involve relevant stakeholders in the research process envisaged

bilateral meetings with schools or civil society organisations already cooperating with the two organisations.

The questionnaire completely filled-in were 43 complete answers, with a biggest slice of respondents belonging to

formal education system teachers (44.2% from basic and secondary education and 23.3% from university), mainly

coming from educational institutions with which the Portuguese partners maintain closer or even direct relations (I.e.

ULHT, AERestelo, EB2+3 de Paula Vicente).

The direct approach paid off and more involvement from some teachers towards the next phase of the project was

achieved - supporting the agenda of the Training of Trainers. On the other hand, direct contact with some teachers

made it possible to acknowledge a few important issues: namely related with the timeline, to support the direct work

with students and make possible to accompany the groups of students for two years (I.e. in Paula Vicente and

Secundária do Restelo). Another important issue the team acknowledged was that the project generates expectations

among the teachers and educators regarding the multimedia tools and skills to be acquired with the training; as well as

new ideas for working these themes in other channels eg. TEDtalks produced by students & teachers and targeting the

whole school community.

The dissemination of the project also led us to establish partnerships with other institutions working directly with

migrants and refugees (I.e HOPEN) that can enrich local work with students and teacher training, as well as give voice

to the MigratED campaign on its platforms.

Another issue arose during these months - with other applications approved (Erasmus+ and national funds) it will be

possible to create synergies with MigratED project, enriching the implementation and making it possible to reach more

schools and more associations without increased expenses of the project.

Results of the needs assessment

The majority of the participants in our survey questionnaire are Portuguese women, living in Portugal, with more than

41 years old (72,1%), working in formal education (58,2% from basic/secondary schools and university) with a

permanent contract (65,1%) and a large experience of working with young people (69,8% have more than 11 years).

The majority of respondents have already some knowledge of “Global Citizenship Education” concepts (86%) and have

experience on working with its approaches (30 out of the total 43 responses) - although the most commonly worked

concepts are “Human Rights” themes and approaches, that gathers more experiences (34 responses), followed by the

theme “Intercultural Dialogue” (29 of the respondents).

Curiously, the educators have the least experience in the “Migration” thematics (13 respondents don’t have any

experience on this theme) - although when asked about their willingness to learn about new thematics, “Migration” is

also one of the least interesting. We can find among the educators a broad range experiences of work/training with

these thematics: some of the teachers work these issues with their students on the “Citizenship Education” classes; on

the experiences concerning Migration, we can find experiences with student host families or migrant entrepreneurship,

https://www.facebook.com/hopenorg/



as well as campaign and advocacy work/activism with Amnesty International or the High Commission for Migration,

among others institutions.

55,8% of the respondents never had any training on these themes and there is a demonstration of interest on receiving

it (62,8% are “very interested” and 23,3% are “interested”) - the majority is interested in ”Intercultural Dialogue”

(72,1%); followed by “Global Citizenship Education”, “International cooperation and development” and “Peace

education” (62,8% each); “Migration” and “TIC and Media Literacy” present the lowest interest rate (46,5 each), but

when the same direct question was addressed (“Would you be interested in participating to a free course on ICT and

media literacy as didactic tools?“) 51,2% of the responders affirm to be very interested and 23,3% are interested.

Regarding the resources to work these thematics, 74,4% of the respondents are used to work with internal resources -

and this percentage includes 23 respondents that only work with internal staff and other 9 respondents that occasionally

work with the internal plus external partners.

Working on these themes with young people is something that almost all respondents consider important (93%, 40

responders). Circa 69% of the respondents feel comfortable or very comfortable working with the thematics - and the

two more popular methods or approaches are “Debate and discussions” (93%) and “Working in small groups /

cooperative methods” (74,5%). “Participatory methodologies” were already used by half of the educators (48,8%) but

less than these (44,2%) are already used to employ “Digital and multimedia tools”.

From the educators' experiences, there seems to be a good engagement of young people with these thematics - 48,8%

of the respondents find the involvement reasonable and 44,2% find these thematics provoke a very good or excellent

involvement.

Concerning the educators' analysis about the role of mainstream media and public discourse, 72% agree these have

quite a big influence on young people. 53,48% of the educators do not feel it’s difficult to get young people’s interest in

a topic that is not evaluated by the school formal evaluation system.

More than half of the respondents (55,81%) agree there is a need to improve their ability to use innovative

methodologies and tools. On the digital and multimedia tools for education, more than 70% never used QR Code Reader,

Virtual reality or Video games to work with young people. The e-learning, e-books, and APP are also tools that educators

rarely use. The respondents seem more familiar with Videos & Online and multimedia presentations, followed by web

documentaries as well as blogs/sites.

When asked about any training with digital tools for education, 51% never attended - and among those who had at least

one training, some do not remember which type or identify (Microsoft) “Word” as a digital tool - and a few had only

training on specific software for teachers/educators. 53.5% consider the existent training opportunities on these topics

on a local level to be quite poor and the kind of difficulties that teachers face in receiving specific training on these

topics are linked to a few different reasons but time availability (90,7%) and lack of equipment (83%) are the most

common.

Educators consider these tools to be very important to elicit the curiosity and interest of young people (55,8%); to

establish debates (53,48%) and enrich classes (48,8%), but for almost 70% the use of these tools in their institution is

not good - two thirds consider it less than sufficient (37,2% poor and 32,6% only reasonable). Nevertheless, the head

Teacher or Director of 44,2% of the respondents' institutions consider these activities as important as other school

activities...

Regarding the MigratED training courses, 37,2% consider the most adequate format would be an Intensive short training

and only 9,3% agree with meetings distributed over a long period of time. For 27,9% it could be done with Lectures

from experts with the didactical programme for self-study, or, for 25,6%, in a Online training, with periodical meetings.

Regarding the length, 46,5% of respondents consider the adequate length around 24-32 hours - and 32,6% agree on

circa 16-24 hours. Timing: during September-December (55,8%) or January – March (41,9%) not after April. In terms of

scheduled time, after working hours (33,3%) or between 16-19h (21,4%) receives the majority of votes.



One positive aspect is that even if the training course is not certified and has no professional recognition - and to achieve

this is quite a bureaucratic process in Portugal - 88,1% of the respondents consider attending.

Regarding MigratED training, there are some common preferences and expectations: to receive new tools and to

broaden the pedagogical approaches to work these themes with young people, using multimedia/new

technologies/social networks and non-formal tools for this (“Improve interaction with young centennials. Answer this

generation’s need for an instant response at the same time as developing critical thinking and reflexion using digital

tools, creating for eg. interactive games that "compel" them to think intuitively on the answer”).

The importance of media influence is also mentioned as a motivation for these preferences and expectations - eg.

“Knowing how to read the media is fundamental and still more so to transmit this skills to young people, that are

dominated by their [media] culture”.

The 43 responses to the survey are summarised below - with the numbered questions, the graphic of the whole set of

answers and a brief, clear description of the main results.

I - Your experience and work

1. You are working in:

Graphics description: 44,2% Basic/Secondary school; 23,3% University

2. Name and complete address of the institution you are working in:

Graphics description: 11 respondents from Agrupamento Escolas do Restelo (EB 23 Paula Vicente Basic School and

Restelo Secondary School); 7 from ULHT (Lusófona University); 4 from Colégio São João de Brito - and surprisingly 2

respondents from an evangelical church outside of Lisbon area.



3. Your Role

Graphics description: 44,2%Teacher Basic/Secondary school; 18,6% Educator/mediator on a non-formal context; 14% University Teacher

4. Area of education work

Graphics description/notes:

Portuguese,

Artistic,

Gender Equality,

Religion,

Human rights

Geography

Sociology

Creation and implementation of community intervention programs using participatory video methodology

Philosophy



Mathematics and natural sciences

Social service

Ecology, Communication Studies, Society, Culture and Technology

Management

Social Area

Local Development and Coordination Projects

Educational and social psychology

Personal and community development

Cultural mediation

Tourism

Physical education

Mathematics

Biology

Philosophy, Psychology, and CLIL

5. You have a degree in:

Graphics

description/notes:

Arts ( Plastic arts, Theatre, Music, Dance, Design, Cinema),

Management (2)

History (4),

Psychology (3)

Human rights (2),

Philosophy (3),

Religion (Psychology of Religion; Philosophy of Religion, Science of Religions),

Sociology (2),

Geography (2)



Mathematics (2)

Architecture and professionalization as a teacher, Lyrics - Portuguese/Spanish Studies on Women, Portuguese/Social Sciences Education sciences Interculturality Community Mediation, Human Ecology, Religion, Communication social Sciences International Relations / Development Cooperation Human Resource Management Modern Languages and Literatures Portuguese Studies Social service Graduate in Project Management and Economics and Social Investment Law Physical education Modern Languages and Literatures Cultural Sciences, Arts Education, Theater in Education Anthropology and Teaching of Portuguese Teaching of Biology and Geology Post-graduation in School Administration Management Information Systems Natural Sciences Teaching of Physics and Chemistry Social and cultural communication

6. You have a:

Graphics description: 65,1 % long term contract; 34,9% short term contract

7. Years of professional experience in the sector where you work with young people



8. Age

9. Gender

Graphics description: 74,4% female; 23,3% male;

10. Country of origin



Graphics description: some of the respondents wrote Portugal or Portuguese in different ways, so the graphics system assumed different nationalities, although 40 respondents are Portuguese and only 3 have Portuguese/Brazilian dual nationality.

11. Country of current residency (as of June 2018):

Graphics description: same issue before, although 100% of the 43 respondents live in Portugal.



II - Global Citizenship Education: migrations, human rights and development

1. Have you already heard about Global citizenship education?

Graphics description: 86% yes ; 14% no

2. In the institution you are working with, activities focused on global citizenship education, migrations, human rights, international cooperation, peace education, interculturality, are implemented by:

Graphics description: 74,4% Internal staff; 30,2% Partner organisations; 20,9% External collaborators; 14% either do not work these themes at all or do not have such categorisation. Nevertheless, the 74% includes 23 respondents that only work with internal staff, and the other 9 respondents work with internal but also with external staff or partners.



3. Do you have experience on working with these themes?

(From 1: no experience to 5: very experienced)

Graphics description: Global Citizenship Education; Migrations; Human rights; International cooperation; Peace education; Intercultural Dialogue.

Graphics overview: the most commonly worked concept are “Human Rights” themes and approaches, that gathers

more experiences (34 responses), followed by the theme “Intercultural Dialogue” (29 of the respondents). The

educators have the least experience in the “Migration” thematics (13 respondents don’t have any experience with this

theme).

4. Please indicate examples of activities you have participated in:

- “Faz-se Luz” project using participatory video, Neighbour Day celebrations, diverse community work in the

neighbourhood, CLS Project - Together We Are More - holiday camps and youth sessions”.

- “Educational project for Equality between 2008 and 2015 in the framework of the IGC, POPH-NSRF, and ESF.

Trainer/educator for equality in intercultural contexts, with immigrant communities in Greater Lisbon. Since

2016, she has been a programmer for “Flirting with Flair Play”(a gender violence prevention programme).

- “Child Friendly Cities”

- “Awareness-raising and advocacy campaigns on human rights and development and, more recently, on

migration; non-formal education actions in educational institutions (development education)”

- “World Interfaith Harmony Week”

- “International Partner / Workshop Meeting”

- “Class Project on Human Rights”

- “Themes developed in Education for Citizenship”

- “Organization of events with students, within the scope of these themes”

- “In the three subjects that I teach these are themes that I always develop and work with students. In the

projects in which I am involved (National Cinema Plan and Erasmus+), the subjects in question are developed

in cycles of cinema and celebrations of important dates (eg. Peace, racism, wars, discrimination)

Last year the students' work focused on discrimination, Human rights and racism with the celebration of the

50th anniversary of Martin Luther King's speech, plus works on the scourge of war and the memory of the

100th anniversary of the end of World War I - always using films, documentaries and TED talks. With

documentaries about Helen Keller, Stephen Hawkings, in the previous year celebrating the liberation of

Auschwitz with exhibitions, lectures, and remembrance of the pro-refugee action of Aristides de Sousa Mendes

and using films and documentaries on the various tolerance figures. During one year I was a member of the



Foreign Exchange Center at Restelo High School, which took dozens of students abroad for several years, so I

have experience in this area”.

- “Entrepreneurship project with migrants - FAMI and ACM (science of religions and OLAE)”.

5. Have you ever attended a course on the above-mentioned issues?

Graphics description: 55,8% no ; 44,2% yes

6. If yes, please specify (number of hours, organisers, program):

- MOOC To Accept, Form and Include Refugees in Portugal (School of Education Santarém - (10 October to 20

November 2016); Elearning Course on Asylum and Refugees (Portuguese Council for Refugees, 30h / 2009);

- 80 hours, Amnesty International and Political Observatory, Human Rights.

7. As a professional, what are your feelings about dealing these issues with students/young people? (totally disagree; disagree a little; agree a little, agree; totally agree; I’m not sure)

Graphics description: I don’t feel comfortable discussing these complex themes of the day with young people; I would

like to do it, but I have no tools to use; feel comfortable with these issues; I do not think these topics are important.

Graphics overview: Working these themes with young people is something that almost all respondents consider

important (93%, 40 responders). Circa 69% of the respondents feel comfortable or very comfortable working with the

thematics.



8. If you have already tried modules on the above-mentioned issues in your work with young people, how do you evaluate the involvement of students? (poor, reasonable, very good, excellent)

9. Please describe how much do you agree with these sentences

(totally disagree; disagree a little; agree a little, agree; totally agree; I’m not sure)

Graphics Description: Youngsters are conditioned by mainstream media and public discourse; It is very difficult to get

their interest for a topic that is not assessed at school; I have little knowledge of these subjects; I would need to improve

my ability to use innovative methodologies and tools.

Graphics overview: Concerning the educators analysis about the role of mainstream media and public discourse, 72%

agree these have quite a big influence on young people. 53,48% of the educators do not feel it’s difficult to get young

people’s interest into a topic that is not evaluated by the school formal evaluation system.

More than half of the respondents (55,81%) agree there is a need to improve their ability to use innovative

methodologies and tools.

10. If you have already tried modules on the above-mentioned issues in your work with young people, which methods did you use?



Graphic description:

93% debate, open discussion; 74,4% Working in small groups, cooperative methods; 48,8% participative methods;

44,2% Digital and multimedia tools; 34,9% Expositive and interrogative methods in the classroom/training;

2,3% for cinema/ Dynamics such as role-playing, theatre forum and other activities in collaboration with other entities

such as the creation of graffiti, music, etc. / sharing of expert testimony /we are planning to launch creative contests on

the topic of Migration and Development, which we intend to culminate in an exhibition and a session of discussion on

the theme; we also have an awareness campaign on social networks/ none.

11. In which of the following subjects you would like to receive training?

Graphics description:

72,1% Intercultural dialogue; 62,8% Global Citizenship Education /International cooperation and development/Peace

education; 55,8% Human rights; 46,5% Migrations/ ICT and Media literacy.

12. How much are you interest in having training on these themes?

(nothing interested, not very interested, a little interested, interested, very interested)



III - Digital and multimedia tools for education

1. What kind of digital/multimedia tools do you use in your work with young people and how often? (From 1: never to 5: always)

Graphics description 1: Online platforms and blogs; Social networks; E-books; E-learning; App; Cloud services; Online

and multimedia presentations;

Graphics description 2: Videos; Web documentaries; Audio and video editing; QR Code reader; Virtual reality; Video

Games; Others.

Graphics overview: On the digital and multimedia tools for education, more than 70% never used QR Code Reader,

Virtual reality or Video games to work with young people. The e-learning, e-books, and APP are also tools that educators

rarely use. The respondents seem more familiar with Videos & Online and multimedia presentations, followed by web

documentaries as well as blogs/sites.

2. According to your experience, these tools are important (1: not important; 5: very important)



Graphics Description: To motivate and arouse interest in young people; Can complement a class; provide opportunities

for dialogue/debate; Very difficult to work; Doesn't help to approach these issues.

Graphics overview: Educators consider these tools to be very important to elicit the curiosity and interest of young

people (55,8%); to establish debates (53,48%) and enrich classes (48,8%);

3. How do you evaluate the use of these tools in your school/institution? (poor, reasonable, good, very good,

excellent)

4. How does the Head Teacher or Director see the use of these tools in educational activities?

Graphics description: 46,5% As other ones; 44,2% Very important; 9,3% Less important than other tools



5. Have you ever attended a course on digital tools for education?

Graphics description: 51,2% never; 27,9% Yes, once; 20,9% yes, more than one.

6. If yes, please specify (number of hours, organisers, program):

-Working in Word (hours?);

- I do not know at the moment to give this indication;

- 25 hours;

- Undetermined number of hours in I.P.D.J.(Portuguese Youth Institute) in Santarém on using Office Tools Windows;

- Moodle.

7. How do you consider the existent training opportunities on these topics on a local level? (poor, reasonable, good, very good, excellent)

8. What kind of difficulties do teachers face in getting specific training on these topics? (from 1 not relevant; to 5 very important)



Graphics Description: Time availability; Poor consideration within school context; Low personal interest in these topics;

Lack of equipment; Few opportunities to implement.

Graphics Overview: the kind of difficulties that teachers face in receiving specific training on these topics are linked to

a few different reasons but time availability (90,7%) and lack of equipment (83%) are the most common.

9. Would you be interested in participating in a free course on ICT and media literacy as didactic tools? (nothing

interested, not very interested, a little interested, interested, very interested)



IV - Your preferences for the training course

1. Please indicate a preferred schedule for the foreseen training course within the project:

Graphics description: 37,2% Intensive short training; 27,9% Lectures from experts with a didactical programme for self-study; 25,6% Online training, with periodical meetings; 9,3% Meetings distributed during a long period of time.

Graphics description: 88,1% yes; 11,9% no

6. Expectations on the training and subjects that you would prefer to analyse, among the above-mentioned ones:

- “Improve interaction with young centennials. Answer this generation’s need for an instant response at the same time

as developing critical thinking and reflexion using digital tools, creating for eg. interactive games that "compel" them to

think intuitively on the answer”.

- “Knowing how to read the media is fundamental and still more so to transmit this skills to young people, that are

dominated by their [media] culture”.



Summary of needs and gaps, recommendations

One previous note to the following list of recommendations deriving from the survey/Needs assessment questionnaire:

a few of the respondents, with whom we have direct contact and who are very keen on being selected to participate in

the project, feel the need to start involving their students already this year (2019/2020) in the thematics with some

practical component, some degree of our guidance and input. Namely, because a few of these teachers already include

such themes in their classes, because directly linked to the curricula (eg. on “ Citizenship and Development” classes).

The re-planning and anticipation of activities are being considered at this moment (September) when schools and other

organisations are starting their activities.

● Design, time and application of questionnaire - As referred before, the questionnaire was launched on a bad

timing for Portuguese stakeholders - and this was a public communication, so required some sort of image and

institutional project information ready.

have at least the logo ready in the first months of a project, especially before any public

communication as a survey.

take in account the dates of the school year if one of the main stakeholders are

teachers/students/schools - the adequate timing is October to April, at most - and this is supported

by questionnaire results regarding the best period chosen for the training - also for answering

questionnaires, May is not a good option.

the last slot of questions, regarding preferences for the training: the questions about time and

availability should be more clear, and not mix two subjects in one (eg. number of hours and modalities)

as with the data received is not possible to distinguish which are the preferences of the educators.

● Time constraints - ‘Lack of time’ was already mentioned by some of these teachers in the questionnaire - this

lack of time is sometimes linked with the lack of time for preparation of classes and special sessions - and from

our experience and knowledge of school processes, is also linked with lack of time to work the thematics along

with the mandatory curricula and imperative students’ results. Surprisingly, although affirming the best training

approach would be an intensive and short course (37,2%), there are a majority of respondents (46,5%) that

consider a course of 24 to 32 hours the most adequate length but including online training/research. The

format of these questions, joining both number of hours and modalities of learning, makes it impossible to

determine what is in reality the adequate duration for the training.

Thus, there will be a need to assess again with the educators participating in the project, the adequate

length and format of the training

regarding lack of time of teachers, starting the cooperation already in this school year, with the

possibility (in some cases) of accompany these students for two years, can be a good solution for

better MigratED project results.

the direct contacts with schools done so far have recommended other possibilities - to delivering of

training during the teacher vacations - this was a possibility we could have included in the

questionnaire.

● Thematics: Migration - In terms of the themes, it was surprising to find that “Migrations” was not only one of

the least addressed themes, but also that in their willingness to learn about new thematics, “Migrations” is one

of the least interesting. This can be because there is a saturation of information about the subject in the media;

also because this thematic has already been approached by educators; and also because this thematic can be

included in other themes presented, being more specific.

continue to include the thematic into broader thematics, as global citizenship education and human

rights.

diagnose this specificity with the schools and organisations we are going to work with.



● Migration stakeholders - There were very few respondents related to associations /institutions working

directly with migrant communities or with refugees. Though there are not so many organisations in Portugal,

still it is important for MigratED objectives

to reinforce these contacts and partnerships, to have the previewed exchange of know-how among

institutions dealing with migration and a diverse input into the project, and not relying only on the

migrant and ethnic constituency of our target group (young people and students in institutions and

schools).

there is the need to further reach out and not stick only to 4Change/Lusófona partnerships and

manifestations of interest received through the questionnaire.

● Technology - Concerning the tools, we need to be aware that there is a lack of technology means and

equipment in most of the public schools in Portugal. The main tools used are presentations and videos.

there is the need to design and adapt the training (ToT and National Trainings) to the reality of

educators and students. This is also one of the reasons why 83% of respondents identify as one of the

main difficulties the lack of equipment - and 37,2% feel there is a poor utilization of technology tools

in their institutions.

The second important recommendation is the need to diagnosis the existing equipment and find

alternatives in the schools and institutions with whom we are going to work directly.

The third recommendation is the need to articulate and complement - even to cooperate - with ICT

classes/teacher: Portuguese basics schools have already ICT classes, even if sometimes the equipment

is not sufficient. MigratED training must bring new approaches, be an update of the already existing

tools for both educators and young people use.

one last recommendation derives from the title and the part of the questionnaire that insists on the

wording ‘use of technologies’: in Portuguese and from our experience of the target groups, the use of

the word ‘technologies’ creates expectations in the teachers and educators regarding the multimedia

tools and skills to be acquired with the training. Teachers can expect that in the training we will give

then technical training (eg. in code programming for blog building or in ‘premiére’ software for video

editing) and somehow we must be aware not to raise their expectations as this type of technological

training it is not included in MigratED objectives and actions.

● Approaches and methods - Teachers and educators that have answered the questionnaire and are interested

in participating in the project are comfortable in discussing complex thematics and difficult subjects.

so the recommendation is not to avoid the difficult issues but use them to trigger more interest of

young people.

as the main tools that educators normally use are videos and presentations, the approach should not

only be to introduce and propose innovative tools, other tools - but also to provide innovative uses

for both videos (online and offline) and for multimedia presentations, adequate to reality

● Synergies - The questionnaire brings us potential new partnerships and contacts, also out of our area of work

- Lisbon’s area. But in our experience, we can also draw synergies with 4Change/lusófona new projects. These

are the final recommendations:

reinforce practical / non-formal classes or sessions with young people with other perspectives from

other partners - in this case, we have the eg. of HOPEN, an NGO working with refugees, with whom

4Change will work already this school year. Other examples are a new Erasmus project and Mobility

that 4Change will be implementing with youth workers and young people, in mapping their territories

and needs.

https://www.facebook.com/hopenorg/



Needs Assessment Report of Greece

Overview

GCE and ICT in the official curriculum

In Greece formal secondary education curriculum includes a mandatory ICT lesson in all Secondary School grades. In

addition during the 1st grade of High School ICT is an option. However, in the other lessons, following a thorough

research on the secondary school curriculum and books, ICTs are only referred once: photocomic “Camera, Video,

Computer / Digital Multimedia Image” are mentioned once in the Art class curriculum.

(http://www.pi-schools.gr/programs/depps/6deppsaps_Eikastikon.pdf)

ICTs are poorly used in Greek education, even when there are good conditions for their exploitation (equipment, library,

teachers training, etc). What usually seems to be the problem is the one-sided orientation of teaching, that mainly aims

to equip students for succeeding in the entrance exams for university. Another reason is the predominance of the

teacher-centered teaching model, that does not allow students to collect, process and publish data on joint activities,

and last but not least, the absence of clearly defined pedagogical framework in which ICT would fit. (http://www.pi-

schools.gr/paideia_dialogos/analitika-programata.pdf )

Human rights and immigration are confronted in the same manner. Although they are referred often due to the

immigration background in Greek history, the approach is similar. In the Greek formal secondary education curriculum,

lessons on human rights are included in the subject of Social and Civic Education which is taught only in the 3rd grade

of Gymnasium (14 - 15 years old). This subject is divided in thematic units that are proposed to be taught in 51 didactic

hours within the school year and can be supplemented by suggested projects on various themes. In general, human

rights, immigration and other global issues that fall under GCE, are usually superficially touched within the main subjects

(languages, history) and are usually developed as separate projects that teachers incorporate voluntarily. In addition,

the main focus of the last three grades of secondary education curriculum is the preparation for the exams to enter the

universities and less time is allowed for projects that are implemented up to 2 hours a week and many after school.

Although the Greek context in education has been significantly affected by globalization and the migration crisis, and

the Ministry of Education encourages schools to adapt their curricula to respond to current global issues, the

development of such projects lies on the initiative of teachers. There is also insufficient teacher training and lack of

experience on how to teach these issues and on the methodology. Secondary school teachers are trained on their

subjects of discipline and have less experience on pedagogical and methodological approaches and also how to develop

and implement a project.

The research

This analysis has been made thanks to a close collaboration of the two Greek partners of the project MigratED, which

combined their respective expertise:

KARPOS is a Center of Education and Intercultural Communication that develops local and European projects

encouraging expression and the exchange of views and creative ideas through the use of media. They specialize on how

media, image and sound can develop narratives and how they can be introduced in educational environments. Karpos

was founded in Athens, Greece in 2008 to gather competencies and ideas in the field of Media and Education. This non-

profit organization is developing activities where media are a tool for self-expression, experience sharing, creativity and

professional development.

http://www.pi-schools.gr/programs/depps/6deppsaps_Eikastikon.pdf

http://www.pi-schools.gr/paideia_dialogos/analitika-programata.pdf

http://www.pi-schools.gr/paideia_dialogos/analitika-programata.pdf



ActionAid is an independent, international organization that has been working since 1972, with over 15 million people

in 45 countries for a world free from poverty and injustice.

Through education, collective action and solidarity, ActionAid brings real change to the lives of the most marginalized

people. It supports people to rely on their own power to claim a life of dignity. It helps local communities take action to

hold their governments accountable, and joins forces together with local organizations to advocate against policies and

practices that perpetuate poverty and social injustice.

In Greece, ActionAid Hellas was founded in 1998 and is celebrating its 20th anniversary this year.

• To date, ActionAid Hellas has supported 83 communities around the world, thanks to more than 100,000

Child Sponsors from Greece and Cyprus. Today it continues by supporting 55 communities in 20 countries.

• In Greece, it supports children, teenagers and adults that are financially challenged, through a local

community center called Epikentro. This community center is located in the Municipality of Athens and supports

vulnerable families through programs against social and economic exclusion.

• Actionaid Hellas has established Action Finance Initiative, the first microcredit organization in Greece that

offers opportunities to new small entrepreneurs by further contributing to the reduction of unemployment.

• Actionaid Hellas also promotes active citizenship through educational programs in schools with the

participation of thousands of students each year.

• Actionaid Hellas raises public awareness on issues related to global poverty, racism and social exclusion while

promoting active citizenship and volunteerism.

The data were collected in a 25 days period (15/5/18 until 9/06/18). The participants were contacts from the mailing

lists and the Facebook pages of both Greek NGOs that take part in the MigraTED project, KARPOS and ActionAid Hellas.

The questionnaire was sent via email to 695 educators from the network of ActionAid Hellas and via the Newsletter of

KARPOS (1.811 recipients). The results were analysed by both NGOs and each focused on their field of expertise. The

online questionnaire used for the collection of the data was the same among all the participants of the MigraTED project

and was translated in Greek. It was fulfilled by 120 persons, and accurately completed by 108 professionals in education.

Almost all of them have a Greek nationality and work in Greece, all are professionals in education.


Experience and work of the respondents

The following development gives us some information about the personal and professional profile of the respondents.

Considering the important number of participants in this research and the long experience of our organisations on these

issues, we can say that the public reached during the needs assessment phase is representative of the public target of

the project MigratED in Greece. This strengthens the validity of the results of this research.



71% of the respondents are teachers in secondary schools (pie I.1), in the field of formal education.

At this point it's necessary to explain that in Greece the concept of ‘youth worker’ is not well known and the term not

often used. The common notion is usually that someone is working as a non formal educator. Several trainers/educators

work with young people as theater pedagogues, filmmakers, youth workers in NGO’s, scouts, consultants, but they are

not really familiar with the term and therefore, do not identify themselves as “youth worker”. Only 14 of the

respondents recognised themselves as ”Educator/youth worker in informal education setting” and only one referred to

himself as “youth worker” when asked. This fact also needs to be taken under consideration when analyzing the answers

to question 3 - Your role in your organisation, where 17% of the respondents chose “Other” (pie I.3).



A big part of the teachers that took part in this survey (44%) specialise in humanities disciplines while 15% teach foreign

languages.

76% of the respondents are working on a fixed-term contract (pie: I.6), and that is the reason why most of them had

the opportunity to attend “Education on ICT level B”, a public training program (analysed below) and improve their

knowledge on ICT.

The majority of the educators that completed the questionnaire are women from 40 to over 50 years of age (pie: I.8,I.9),

from theoretical disciplines with more than 20 years of teaching experience.



To sum up, the public who answered to the MigratED questionnaire are majoritarly composed of women teaching in

secondary schools, with good or very good experience in teaching. They are mainly teaching humanities and foreign

languages, disciplines in which ICT are not a priority. This may explain their interest in the project MigratED.

Usually in the educational/pedagogy departments of the university, the issue is not stressed enough or at all, creating

a workforce that has adequate education in humanities disciplines but which is almost illiterate in new technologies.

This could be a disadvantage as it creates a big gap with young people that are considered “digital natives”.

Global Citizenship Education: migrations, human rights and sustainable development

We can see that the vast majority (79% of the responders) say that they are aware of what Global Citizenship

Education is.

II.2.In the institution you are working in, activities focused on global citizenship education, migrations, human rights,

international cooperation, peace education, intercultural dialogue are implemented by:



Comments on II.2

We observe that global citizenship education activities are implemented mostly by the teachers themselves

“voluntarily” since those subjects are not mandatory, as we mentioned earlier in the official curriculum. Teachers are

proactive and create activities to include these issues, usually through synergies with external collaborators and

organizations. The 20,18% mentioned that they don’t have such programs in their school. The percentage of educators

working only with external collaborators of partner organizations is very low.

II.3. Do you have direct experience in implementing education activities on these issues?



Comments on II.3

Generally we notice that responders have experience in all thematic issues on an average level. There is more experience

in Human Rights Εducation (69 answers “good” and “very good”). The answer with the less responses is International

Cooperation (48 answered “poor” and “very poor”), which is understandable, since the level of awareness in Greece on

International Cooperation is very low, especially in schools. We also believe that the term International Cooperation is

unclear and misleading.

II.4. Please indicate examples of projects and activities implemented in your institution focused on these subjects:

This question was open and was answered by all responders. In their answers, they mentioned various programs,

initiatives, synergies and methodologies implemented.

Their answers can be categorized in the following categories:

• Νo programs implemented in my school.



• European programs.

• Programs that are organized from the teachers themselves within the context of one or more school subjects.

• Programs implemented in collaboration with non-profit organizations.

We notice that most educators have implemented programs within the context of the school curriculum on their own

initiative. Many of them have collaborated with CSOs from which they have used educational materials or have

participated in their actions and campaigns. Some responders implement activities within the context of European

Programs. Erasmus plus, etwinning, teachers4europe, ASPet Schools, are the European programs mentioned the most.

Finally 14 responders mentioned there are no programs at all implemented in their school/organization.

From the answers to this question we can clearly see that the majority (94 out of 108) of the responders have already

experience with projects on the issues, mainly through activities they incorporate in their curriculum and projects in

collaboration with the Ministry of Education and the various Directorates of Education of the different Greek regions.

However, the collaboration with the non-profit sector is also obvious. Finally, we can see that the european projects

have started to gain ground both in formal and non-formal education.

Please find in the Annexes the table with all the answers of the educators. (Annex 1)

II.5.Have you ever attended a course on the above-mentioned issues?

The majority of the responders seem to have done some sort of training on one or more of the thematic issues.



This was an open-ended question. Above is a categorization for those who wrote exactly the hours of the course they

followed. We can see that the majority have attended either a short course (up to 20 hours) or a very prolonged one

(100+). There were also answers responders that didn’t mention specific hours, but answered that they have

participated in a variety of programs.

Regarding the organisers of these trainings, we can find various sources where the educators attend the courses.

In the Annex 2 you can find a list of those that responded promptly answered.

The majority of programs are implemented by nonprofit organizations and universities. A noticeable percentage are

European projects and programs coordinated by the Ministry of Education.

II. 7. Please describe how you agree with the following statements about addressing these issues to young students:



On evaluating this section, we draw the conclusion that the wording of questions 1 and 3 (in relation to the scale

provided), misled the responders whose answers led to ambiguous conclusions. Taking this under consideration, we

cannot draw conclusions on whether they feel comfortable or not addressing these issues.

However, the majority of respondents understand the purpose and importance of integrating these complex issues in

the classroom curriculum. A large number of them believes there are tools available to use.

II.8 Involvement of students



It is clear from the above table that half of the respondents consider that they have used modules on issues such as

global citizen etc and that young people’s involvement was considered to be very good. However, “involvement” is a

highly subjective term and it’s important to be further defined and evaluated. Understanding the term will be a great

tool to plan how we can better approach the situation to make a positive impact on those young people's minds and

attitude towards the above examined issues.

III.9 Possibility for youth involvement improvement

The majority of the respondents believe that young people are influenced by media and public discourse.

Most of the respondents believe that students can be encouraged to show interest in topics that are out of the school

curriculum.

The majority of the respondents have knowledge on these subjects, but believe they need to be exposed to innovative

methodologies and tools in order to further develop their abilities in implementing them in the classroom.

So we can say that respondents need more practical trainings rather than informative or theoretical sessions.

II.10 Methods used



There were the exact same number of answers for 3 methods: Participatory methods, teamwork and open discussion.

Digital and multimedia tools also received a high response. Regular lessons in the form of lectures received a medium

response. We can also say that the vast majority of educators (94 out of 108) use a mix of methods (blended learning)

when trying to approach these issues (respondents in this answer could choose more than one answer). We observe

that teachers try to move away from the more traditional teaching methods and seek more experiential and student

centered approaches. Also, they combine different methodologies in order to address these issues.

II.11 Needs in additional training

The choice of training that prevails is on ICT and media literacy tools, showing that they need training mostly on the

medium rather than on the themes.



We believe that the high response at the answer International cooperation and development is explained because in

Greece people are less familiar with these terms and they can be misinterpreted. We feel from the answers, that many

would like to be informed on how to build international cooperations (with other schools, organizations etc).

II.12 Interest in taking part to free training

It is clear form the above scheme that the great majority of the respondents (93%) are either very interested or

interested for a free training on the issues.

III. Digital and multimedia tools for education

III.1 Kind of digital/multimedia tools mainly used



After thorough examination of the results and the context of “Education on ICT level B” that was available to the public,

we result that most of the reasons that educators don’t use ICT in education is because there are not enough modules

or good practices that they can copy or modify to use in their everyday teaching. For that reason they mainly use ready

made materials, video (35,19%), web documentaries (30%) and other audio works. One more reason for choosing

existing materials is also the lack of time to create a new lesson from the start as well as the increased demand on the

curriculum that doesn't allow more creative approaches.

III.2 Interest of using digital/multimedia tools



In the experience of teachers and educators, the use of digital/multimedia tools in education activities

● Can complement regular lesson 57,41%

● Increase interest and motivation of young people-46,30%

● Provide opportunity for dialogue 41,67%

and are considered to be very important.

III.3 Use of digital tools in the respondents school/organisation



From the above charts we derive that, in Greek reality, digital and multimedia tools are considered to be important and

most of the participants try to include them somehow in their practice.

In addition, most of them have their principals’ support and evaluate the use of digital tools in their school/organisation

as “Good”.



70% of the respondents have more than once or once attended a course on digital tools for education and most of them

declare having an experience of over 69 hours minimum (pie:III.5).

That is mainly due to their attendance to the official educational program on ICT of the Ministry of Education, titled

“Education on ICT level B”. The question “How do you consider the existing training opportunities on digital/multimedia

tools on a local/national level?” (pie:III.7) was answered by 45% as “Good” which is average in the Likert scale.

III.8 Difficulties to get specific training on digital/multimedia tools

The answer to this question gives us an overview of what the participants consider to be the most important difficulty

that they face in training themselves in ICT in education.

Time availability and Lack of technical equipment, connectivity etc. are considered as very important (respectively 37

% and 39%).

Few opportunities to apply them is another difficulty (important for 25%).



Whereas, poor interest in this topics within school context or Low personal interest in this topics are not considered

like important obstacle.

Time availability and lack of technical equipment are considered to be the most important difficulties. This in a way

contradicts with the results of their training, since most of them declare to have followed over 69 hours of training.

III.9 Interest in participating in free training

What we can see from question 9, confirms that they are willing to spend more hours in educating themselves on ICTs.

The 65% of the participants are interested in participating in a free training on ICT and media literacy as didactic tools.

IV. Preferences for the training course

IV.1. Please indicate a preferred schedule for the foreseen training course within the project:

Intensive short training (17 answers)

Meetings distributed within a long period of time (23 answers)

Online training, with periodical meetings (55 answers)

Lectures by experts with didactical programme for self-study (13 answers)

IV.2. How many hours do you think the training should take, considering also online training and research?



IV. 3. In which period would you prefer to attend the training course?

I.V.4. At what time would you prefer to attend the training course? (multiple choices)



IV.5. In case the training course in not professionally recognised, would you attend it?

This unit of the questionnaire tried to investigate the preferences of the educators for the future trainings. We can sum

up the findings in the following elements: Half of the educators (51%) prefer an online training with periodical meetings,

or meetings distributed within a long period of time (21%). We can assume that the physical meetings are very important

for the educators, however they would prefer to have shorter meetings throughout the year rather than a very intensive

course that would happen once. These meetings would be supported by on-line trainings, and more than half of the

respondents seem to feel comfortable with this option. This method could probably help overcoming the lack of time

they mentioned (see III.8).

As far as the duration of the trainings are concerned, we can see that the majority of the educators would prefer to

have a long period training rather than a short one. 57.06% (if we count 50.46% +6.6% other that they all say 24 hours+)

prefer the training to last at least 24 hours, with 3 educators answering 50+ and even 1 answering 100+).

The most prefered period for the training to take place would be either the 1st trimester of the school year (October-

December), either the 2nd (January-March). We can confirm this finding with our own experience since educators in

greek Secondary schools after March are very busy with the school exams.

It is interesting that the vast majority of the respondents prefer to have the training post working time. Only 22,15%

prefer to have the training in the morning. The majority, 43.31%, prefer to have the training during Weekends. Finally,

80% of the respondents would be interested in participating in a course even if it was not professionally recognized.

From the answers in this questions we can say that a great amount of the educators that participated in the survey are

highly motivated professionals that are very interested in deepening their knowledge in both sectors (Global citizenship

education and ICT) for their personal development. They seem willing to participate in trainings after working hours, be



committed for many hours, even if this training is not officially recognized. This conclusion is supported by the fact that

102 out of 108 respondents gave us their full contacts details as they are interested to know more about MigratED.

IV.6. 6. Expectations on the training and subjects that you would prefer to analyze, among the above-mentioned ones:

Please find in Annex 3 all the answers given

Bellow is a word cloud with the most promptly answered words. We can see the words mentioned more are:

We can see that the word that comes up the most is rights and interestingly enough ICT is among the less mentioned

although in previous questions their interest in ICT is clear. One explanation can be that this has to do with the term ICT

and not the content of ICT, which can be supplemented by multimedia, digital and education in general.




Our main public is composed by experienced educators (more than 70% from formal education), mainly women, more

than 40 years old. They have developed programs/activities on our topics mainly on their own, since the curriculum in

secondary education does not foresee enough material and educational tools. They are familiar with ICT and have

followed several kinds of training in media and ICT.

However, they are interested in new trainings, mostly on ‘how to use ITC in activities/lessons with youth’. It seems that

they are missing methods and examples of good practices and not theory or new skills on digital tools.

They are open to non-formal activities.

In both formal and non-formal education, although in the later the sample is small, we may conclude that the majority

is interested in finding a way to include ICT in their practice and particularly in a manner that would be something more

complex and creative, than simple web browsing or a video presentation. It would be helpful to provide the educators

with the kind of knowledge to include ICT into their practice through easy and effective creative projects which also

consider both the curriculum and time constraints.

Suggestions

further investigate how educators perceive the term involvement when young people participate in an activity.

develop examples of good practices (description of activities) using ITC and oriented to GCE.

We observe that teachers try to move away from the more traditional teaching methods and seek more

experiential and student centered approaches. Also, they need guidance on how to combine different

methodologies in order to address these issues. So we can say that respondents need more practical trainings

rather than informative or theoretical sessions.

training that prevails is on ICT and media literacy tools, showing that they need training mostly on the medium

rather than on the themes. We need to help them clearly identify the objectives, principles and goals pursued

from the procedures/modules that are required for the implementation of such tools.

We could also try to catch future teachers/youth workers (e.g. add as objective of WP3 Advocacy)

It is interesting that from the large number of educators to whom we sent the questionnaire, the majority that answered

had more than 20 years of experience in teaching. These educators are more mature pedagogically and as proved with

less familiarity and experience with global citizenship education concepts and digital media (this is probably why they

have asked for more training on these issues). Another reason that proves their need for training is the fact that most

of them teach language arts, a discipline where at least in Greece educators are less familiar with digital tools.

The majority of them answered they are familiar with the term Global Education, we would probably further investigate

in our trainings how exactly they understand the term since it is very broad. Another term that was misinterpreted is

International Cooperation which was often understood as synergies between their schools and schools abroad.

From the respondents’ expectations from the program, the preference that prevails is the training on new technology

and digital media tools that could be used to teach global issues. The themes that come up the most in their answers

are human rights, global citizenship, intercultural education and migration. However, they seem to be mostly interested

in investigating ways to motivate their students’ interest in these issues and how to encourage them to think critically

as active citizens.

What seems to concern them the most in dealing these issues in teaching is how to gain knowledge themselves, how to

link theory with practice and in general how to practically integrate these tools and knowledge in the formal curriculum.



In addition, they are open to collaborations and synergies with greek colleagues and educators from other european

countries, as well as NGO’s since most of them have already participated in various actions of organizations. Also, most

of the respondents have experience from European programs.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that almost all of them gave us their personal contacts in the non mandatory question,

showing their trust and interest in the MigratED project.



Appendix

Annex 1 - Examples of projects and activities implemented in the institutions mentioned by the responders

ActionAid's Action Week 2012

ActionAid's Action Week 2013

Books on Wheels, Cinema Education

Collaboration of the Attiki Lyceums of the UNESCO Network Schools with the creation of symposia, Cultural

programs and Environmental with student groups

Tributes on days specified by the Ministry of Education

"Human Rights Education. Intercultural Education. Immigration."

"I care and I Act", Erasmus, etwinning

"Journey to ourselves & to the world"

"Schools-Ambassadors of the European Parliament"

"Multilingualism"

A training seminar on human rights and the rights of the child addressed to children and adolescents

ActionAid,UNICEF,Erasmus+

Activities related to the issues with various opportunities, especially if they are related to programs of the Ministry

of Education

Amnesty International

Analysis and discussion of the terms in the course of language of the Lyceum

ASPNet UNESCO



ASPnet UNESCO Greece, Model United Nations Conferences, Speak Truth to Power/ Human Rights Programme

(Marianna v. Vardinoyannis Foundation/ Robert F. Kennedy Foundation), No Project Campaign, ActionAid, ELIAMEP

Programmes for Schools/ Simulations, Inclusive Education, European Citizenship Programme for Schools, IncludU

(2017) in cooperation with the Department of International Relations of the University of Piraeus

Child Sponsorship, Collection of food and clothes

Compass Education and Human Rights

Cultural Programs (Cinema)

Cultural projects, experiential workshops, participation in actions of ActionAid

Diagnosis and psychotherapy in psychological and psychiatric issues of migrant children or adolescents mainly

referred to by relevant NGO structures

Discussion on the teaching of the rights and obligations of student refugees in society.

Discussion, lessons and projects within Social and Political Education course, implementation of Actionaid

educational programs

Diversity was a matter of Project implementation. Also, a cultural program (Video museums) was implemented,

focusing on the issue of migration.

Education for vulnerable social groups, anti-racism and human rights events, exhibitions and projections,

educational programs aimed at empowering young people to protect the environment, animals and human rights

(Roots & Shoots methodology), training of trainers in the implementation of relevant activities

Educational scenarios and exploitation of Transformational Learning

Emergency training, non-formal education

Environmental programs

Erasmus Projects(App, Emels, MigratED, Silence hate)

Erasmus

Erasmus



Erasmus +

Erasmus+

Erasmus Projects, Ε-twinning, European Schoolradio

Erasmus(KA1-KA2), ETWINNING

Erasmus+ "MIGRANT", Compass from Arsis

Erasmus+ KA1,"Building bridges, not walls!", Extra-curricular cultural program, theater group "Babylonia", invitation-

presentation of NGO "Heart Doctors", participation of students in the international contest of poetry "Castello di

Duino" of the High Commissioner for Refugees on "We are together"

E-twinning program and Projects of Health Procurement

European Action Programs Etwinning / Volunteering Programs / Participation in the program "I care and i act" /

Recycling Programs and environmental education programs

European Project Ersamus+ KA2: 2015-1-EL01-KA201-013930 - Demokleos" Rethinking Democratic Awareness and

Collective Responsibility for a whole-school approach"

Experiential Human Rights Program,

Respect for Diversity (project by team "Synkinisis")

Experimental workshops, workshops and theater Forum on Human Rights, Migration and Active Citizens

Forum Theater, adult education, awareness programs

Greek migrants in Germany, Mediation in school life

Group /cooperative actions within the lesson, speeches, visits

Group work only within the course

Health education project about volunteerism, workshops about human rights within the curriculum or after external

Invitation, eg. Antigone, participation in the Parliament of Adolescents, participation in Action Aid program



Health procurement programs- cultural activities programs(by the Ministry of Education)

Human Rights

Human Rights

I am mainly engaged in COMPASS for the lessons I teach (sociology, political education and basic principles of social

sciences).

I don't know any programs

I know that colleagues are visiting places where refugees are staying as well as in schools of study and there has

been interaction with our own students. (But I do not know details, you have mandatory answers to an evaluation of

activities that I have not done)

If the world was a small village (ActionAid program)

In the context of the Social Education course

Under the Erasmus program

IncludU, I Care and I Act, EPAS

Informative actions in schools, workshops for teenagers - beneficiaries of the organization

Intercultural activities (eg train passengers, etc.) - human rights activities (agree / disagree, etc.)

Intercultural education, Volunteering, Communication and Language

Interdisciplinary teaching

Learning Greek to immigrant children

Make the rights a picture.

Many

Material used for these themes comes from Unicef and Compassito.



Member of the Council of Europe Youth department Trainers' Pool

Network of schools of Eastern Attica: Human Rights and Theatrical Techniques

Participate in the action 'What if you were?' from theater to education, participation in ActionAid programs

Participation in MUN Thessaloniki, Asp Net School UNESCO, training for integration of refugees, training for ROMA

reception, participation in the ActionAid Global Action Week

Participation in simulations of EU bodies on migration, participation in ActionAid "Global Action Weeks"

Participation in the Conseil des jeunes citoyens organized by Thessaloniki's Delassal College. The topics were human

rights, nature protection, diversity, unemployment and development.

Participation in the following educational programs

1."We Say The Truth to Power" by the Foundation Marianna Vardinogianni

2. Unicef-"Schools protecting Children" program

3.DIAZOMA. "Adoption of Ancient Theaters: Students Guided Students in Ancient Theaters" in collaboration with

citizens movement

4. ActionAid "Global Action Week"

Performing experiential activities of compass, Actionaid, Unicef, Human Rights, etc.

Presentations from various organizations such as Hope spot, Arsis, Antigone, Smile of the Child.

Educational visits to various institutions such as SOS Children's Villages, School of the Blind, School of Deaf, Rural

Cases of Kassandra etc.

Partnership program of democratic schools, organization of a pan-European conference on democratic education

Program of social solidarity and volunteering, environmental program for recycling and reuse, reduction of plastic

bag and waste of food.

Project Digital Resistance Council of Europe

Project Erasmus+ , Projects

Racism, Chidren Rights,Women's rights, rights of minorities

Research papers based on the above thematic units, theatrical group



Rights of the Child,Gender identity, Democracy in school,

Same World, EuroAsian Network ASEF, ASPnet Schools Unesco, Action Aid, Foundation of the Parliament

Seminars of various institutions and trainings

SENJA , GESEE (ΓΕΣΕΕ), MUNICIPALITY, BRITISH COUNCIL, LIFE SKILLS ,SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Teacher's training for teaching refugees' groups

Techers4Europe, Actionaid, ποικίλα άλλα προγράμματα

The Children's Museum at the Open Schools held summer activities on the collection of rubbish and recycling, the

protection of stray animals, the care and cleanliness of communal public spaces through visual and theatrical

workshops.

Internship at theatrical play in intercultural primary schools through the 3-year "School of Play" pedagogical theater

workshop in collaboration with the Pan-Hellenic Education Network for the "Attempts to Approach the Other"

program.

Karpos, in collaboration with the British Council, made audiovisual workshops to teenage refugees in the camp of

Skaramanga.

Thematic Week

Thematic Week - Equality of the two sexes

Through theatre

Training of pupils of F1sth class of Lyceum in first aid with the KIDS SAVE LIVES program

UNESCO ASPnet Schools, ActionAid campaign every year

UNESCO Collaborative Schools Program "Global Active Citizen"

UNESCO Network

Unesco Working group, Synergies with NGOs, Fundraising for various non profit organizations, philanagnosis

program

Volunteering - Social Action



Volunteering and solidarity program: "I Care and i Act", Program INCLUDE University of Piraeus, ActionAid program,

Teachers4Europe

Working with the Ombudsman for child protection, participating in the 6th Multilingual Festival, participating in the

Learning to Disagree program by Euroclio

World Days and Awareness on Individual Social Issues, Participatory research action on a microscale with school

children on issues/problems facing at the hotspot, cultivating social skills with objectives employing empowerment,

and gaining conflict management tools at school level.

World Days, Questionnaires, Action Week for Education

wWe don't have any project on the above issues

ΑctionAid Program/ Erasmus KA1

Annex 2- Specificities of training, projects, activities implemented See question lI.6. If yes, please specify (number of hours, organisers, program):

Body implementing courses and name of course

● App Your School (Erasmus +) - KARPOS

● Center for Environmental Education- "Human rights and Environment"

● BRIGHTS MOOC (Erasmus + project on Global Citizenship and digital storytelling)

● Hellenic Theatre/ Drama and Education Network

● University of Piraeus, 6 ECTS,

● ELPPO (Free University of Citizens) -Intercultural Education and Teaching Greek to Foreigners

● Civis Plus

● Service Learning by Jane Goodall's Roots & Shoots and University of Colorado Boulder

● Sende Organization

● United Societies of Balkans

● Greek Guiding Association

● Greek Trade Union (ΓΕΣΕΕ)

● Ministry of Education

● British Council (Life Skills)

● Council of Europe Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education

● Osmosis (NGO)

● University of Aegean

● Amnesty International

● Euroclio (European Association of History Educators) "Learning to disagree"

● UNCHR

● M.Vardinogianni Foundation

● University of Athens

● University of Thessaloniki

● Ministry of Education- European Citizenship Programme for Schools

● Greek Council for Refugees- Refugees and Cinematography



● ActionAid

● Athens Public International Law Center- University of Athens (30 hours training about Immigrants and Refugees Law)

● Aeiforum (NGO) Inclusion of Immigrants 5 hours session

● ETWINNING- Webbinars

● State Scholarships Foundation (IKY)

● Prevention and Treatment of Bullying and School Violence phenomena Network - training

● World Class Scholars International Partner Schools” South Carolina Department of Education and Envision South Carolina

(On line)

● Teachers4europe

● EPAS "School Ambassadors" project, European Commission

● Erasmus+ KA1 "Educating without exclusions the citizens of the world

● Municipality of Athens (Training session on non-discrimination, tolerance and integration of refugee and migrant children

in mainstream education')

● Diapolis (under the University of Thessaloniki) -Education for Foreign Students

● Includu (Erasmus+, Jean Monnet Project)

● Hellenic Theatre/ Drama and Education Network and UNHCR "If it was you? 22 Hours training about Human Rights and

refugees

● Desmos- Project "I care and I Act " (Νοιάζομαι και Δρώ) 8 hours training

● 2o Gymnasium of Thessaloniki- 1 day Conference "Citizenship Education and Modern Reality"

● Ministry of Education Health Department (Thessaloniki) - 1 day Conference 8. "Schools Network for Participation and

Democracy",

● Ministry of Education Environmental Department (Thessaloniki Region) -1day Conference 10. " Social Environment -

Fundamental Rights for All"

● Ministry of Education Health Department (Thessaloniki)-1 day conference " Babel's Backyard: Co-operating in a

multicultural school",

● Youth Counseling Station "You see something? Do Something" 20 ώρες training

● Ministry of Education- Department of Health Education "Let's' talk about violence" 8 hours training

● "Antigone: Information and Documentation Center on Racism, Ecology, Peace and Non Violence 12 hours training

● Hellenic Observatory for Intercultural Education (EPADIPE) "Schools and Human Rights" 2 months training

● Hellenic Theatre/ Drama and Education Network and UNHCR "If it was you? 40 Hours training about Human Rights and

refugees "

● Coordinators of Environment and Culture Education- seminars and trainings

● Hellenic Open University -On line Training "Views of Refugees"

● Erasmus+(Italy/Cercosino Artemide) 1 week experiential seminar about refugees

● Hellenic Open University - E learning Platform "Views on the Refugees"

● ERASMUS + BREAKING THE CYCLE

● National University of Athens -1 year seminar on Human Rights Education

● DEMOKLEOS-15 hours training-

● Directorate of Secondary education Piraeus

● Directorate of Secondary Education East Attica -training of intercultural education

● Harokopio University (250 hours training) «Intercultural Education: Refugee Education and Integration»

● Ministry of Education-Secondary Education Directorate of Peiraias-42 hours training "Human Rights in action and

Democratic Citizenship"

● Seminars in the University of Thessaloniki

● E.E.P.E.K-Scientific Association for the promotion of educational innovation -50 hours training on Language Teaching in

Bilingual Students with Migration / Refugee Background

● Ministry of Education 4 Hours Training "We are all equal"

● University of Thessaloniki: 1 day Conference "Cultural diversity in the greek high school"

● Antigone- 4 hours training- "Your right, my right"

● Faculty of Social and Educational Policy of the University of the Peloponnese (UoP) and the Association of German

Educational Organization (AdB) Gr.A.C.E.: Greek German matchmaking for Active Citizenship Education in Youth Work“, -

32 hours

● British Council-12 hours training



● UNICEF-18 hours "Education for Inclusion"

● Greek Trade Union (GESEE)- 1 day conference- "Human Rights and Intercultural Education" Volos

● University of Thessaloniki - in school training "Inclusion of Roma"

● Masters Program (MA) Education Leadership-European University of Cyprus

● Demokleos Learning/Teacher/Training activities for teachers and students

● Council of Europe, Workshop on the project "Descriptive Indicators of Skills for Democratic Education" for the schools in

Attica Region

● UNHCR- training about refugees

● IfeL-Institute Hamburg Seminar (Porto, Portugal, 19-24/10/2014) "Project Management for European School

Enhancement through Intercultural Programs"

● Erasmus+ KA1 Teacher Training με θέμα "Projektmanagement für interkulturelle Austauschprojekte in Europa" (Project

management for cross-cultural exchange projects in Europe) (The teacher was the coordinator)

● Ministry of Education, 1 day Conference, "Intercultural Education: education, teaching, learning" (Αθήνα, 15/2/2007)

● University of Thessaloniki, 3 days seminar, "Intercultural Education: goals and teaching applications" Athens, 15, 16,

22/1/2008)

● Ministry of Education-1 day Conference, "Students and educators in a multicultural school" Athens, 12/5/2008)

● University of Athens & University of London - 2 days Conference as part of the Masters "Education and Human Rights"

● Education and Rights in Social Crisis" Athens 23, 24/9/2011)

● University of Athens & University of Thessaly, 1 day Conference,

● Adaptation of Immigrants and Resettlement Students: Needs Investigation and Intervention Plan"

● University of Aegean, Thessaly & Ioannina, 1 day Conference, Ημερίδα των Α.Π.Θ., Πανεπιστημίων Αιγαίου, Θεσσαλίας-

Ιωαννίνων με θέμα "

● Greek school and interculturalism: the dynamics and benefits for students and teachers"

● Ministry of Interior- 1 day Conference "Organization of services for the integration, monitoring and evaluation of equality

policies throughout the scope of public action"

● University of Athens- Center of Excellence Jean Monnet- "Learning about European values and citizens' rights in

multicultural schools"

● KAICID and Scouts of Greece (SEP) -3 days training in Vienna

● Council of Europe (Many days, several short-term and long-term trainings mostly with the CoE)

● Hellenic Theatre/ Drama and Education Network (if it was you)

● Municipality of Athens (Human Rights and Child's Right, ways of interventions in case of abuse) 10 hours

● Diapolis-50 hours training (University of Thessaloniki)

● General Secretariat for Lifelong Learning-50 hours training

● Save the Children

● ELIX-3 days training ''Creative Facilitation 1-Using the arts in working with groups''

● Hellenic Theatre/ Drama and Education Network-10 hours training ''Faced with the new challenges of 2017: tracing the

role of the citizen'',

● ELIX-3 days training "Introduction to Education in Emergencies-Quality Education in Humanitarian Response"

● University of Thessaly -2 days training "Education and refugee identity"

● Hellenic Open University - E learning Platform "Views on the Refugees" 50 hours

● University of Piraeus (70 hours training) "Intercultural Education- Educational Methodology of learning and inclusion"

● British Council ''Living Together Training for NGO staff working with refugee children'' 1 day workshop

● British Council

● Save the Children

● UNICEF

● UNHCR

● Chain Foundation (European heritage education.)

● Chain Foundation: Erasmus+ KA1 «Las otras orillas (The other shores) – Sevilla and other places» 80 hours seminar

● Chain Foundation: Erasmus+ KA1 «In Search of the Occident: the Azores»80 ώρες seminar

● Hellenic Theatre/Drama and Education Network (30 ώρες Workshop about Refugees "If it was you?")

● Youth Advisory Station of Peiraias -4 hours training "Understanding Puberty"

● General Secretariat for Lifelong Learning-20 hours training

● University of Thessalia - 30 hours training



● Arsis

● University of London

● University of Thessaloniki ("Education of foreign students 35 hours seminar)

Annex 3. Expectations on the training and subjects that the respondents would prefer to analyse

6. Expectations on the training and subjects that you would prefer to analyse, among the above-mentioned ones:

Ways of attracting young people's interest, which is very demanding and difficult.

Intercultural Education

NO ANSWER

Better interconnection of the teaching subject with these issues

human Rights

To acquire knowledge and experience on the mentioned topics (human Rights, European Cooperation, Intercultural

Education, digital instrumentation tools and Their Use in Didactic Practice). In addition, I will be able to get in touch with

colleagues from other countries and exchange experiences and material.

Intercultural education, Greek as a second foreign language, Education and support for refugees

How these issues can be used in practice

Intercultural education

Education and digital media.

I am interested in all the educational objects mentioned

To acquire knowledge / skills / ideas for a more competent approach to the subject.

Interpersonal relationships



Use of New Technologies in human rights

Techniques and methods of motivation in the subject

human rights

Material and practical guidance

The workshops to offer both technical training and training for experiential workshops with students.

Developing Skills and action on human rights, Peace issues, Refugee.

Examples of (free) apps

To improve my knowledge of digital literacy and the possibilities of communicating with my students in the themes of

migration, human rights, the role of the active citizen

Education in New Technologies in education in relation to human rights, migration, intercultural education

Can know the use of knowledge in practice

I am interested mainly in topics that will help me to challenge my students to contribute even to a minimum to become

thinking and active citizens

What you have already mentioned is sufficient

Intercultural education, collaboration with teachers and pupils from other countries, emphasis on ICT provided that they

lead to realistic possibilities of implementing educational activities within the Greek school

Subject coverage, acquaintance with digital tools, simulation and / or practical application.

Self-growth



Using online tools

ICT

Personal information and implementation in the classroom.

Use of new technologies in teaching immigration and human rights issues

Everything

Better communication and interaction with students

Active Citizenship, Democratic School, Inclusive School, Experiential Learning in Intercultural Environment

Immediate practical application to my job

Familiarize with 21st Century training tools, use of New Technologies, cultivation of knowledge and skills in the topics of

MigratED. Working with other teachers, disseminating best practices, changing attitudes to school education culture, etc

NO ANSWER

Active Citizen, Migration, human rights, Sustainable Development, digital media Literacy and digital tools

If I could contribute due to specialty and relevance to interculturalism, I would be glad to attend a program as the need

becomes urgent and I am available

How to communicate advantageously with people who have different codes of communication in Greece. eg.. Muslims

Student awareness, dialogue, action

NO ANSWER



I have no preference, I would like to know as much as possible about the above issues

Using ICT in education

Something that I can use in the classroom

Training for the use of knowledge within the educational process

New collaborations and enthusiasm for stimulation in international programs

NO ANSWER

Increase opportunities

digital tools and multimedia

To be informed and trained so as to reflect as active citizens in contemporary issues

Interculturalism, inequalities, rights through the use of digital media.

Active citizenship, human rights

human rights, Sustainable Development

High

Active Citizenship Education, Intercultural Education

I believe that I have knowledge gap of the use of digital tools / multimedia, so I think my participation in such an

educational workshop would help me very much. With regard to the issues I would prefer to analyze are the Active

Citizen, human rights, Sustainable Development, Peace.

Digital media and digital tools literacy



NO ANSWER

to learn how to use multimedia tools in teaching human rights

acquiring knowledge, techniques and self-confidence to use the new media

International cooperation, Intercultural education

teaching scenarios

Active Citizen, human rights, Refugee and Migration, Intercultural Dialogue, Peace

What is to be done, to be done in depth and not careless.

Whether all of the above can be integrated into formal education.

Active citizenship and human rights

The ability to transfer the knowledge acquired to my students

International Cooperation and Peace Education

multimedia applications, web platforms and blogs, virtual reality

To improve my skills and use them for my teaching

To upgrade and update of my skills and knowledge

New teaching methods, sensitization and motivation of learning

Improve my ability to use multimedia and applications and learn about the potential for international cooperation

IMMIGRATION, human rights, INTERCULTURAL EMPLOYMENT



Immigration and human rights issues to be discussed in schools and there should be organized actions in order to

protect them. And also how these issues could be promoted through digital tools

Familiarization with new digital tools

Use of technology, International partnerships, human rights

Active citizenship and human rights issues

Linking literacy to digital media on issues of civic education and human rights with emphasis on the rights of minors and

vulnerable groups from immigration and refugee populations

enhancing knowledge and practice of educational "behavior" and teaching

To acquire skills

Active Citizenship, Sustainable Development, human rights, Migration, Intercultural Education

Specialization and increase motivation

In depth information so as we can adopt the in our teaching practice

Μigration, peace education, cultural diversity

More skills in ICT use, Approach to comparative education of refugees

Acquire more experience related to the implementation of the above thematic units in education

Many

Acquiring new tools in educational practice

Non formal education and techniques of training and teaching adults



Peace Education, Dialogue

Digital tools

Use of technology in non-formal education for social awareness issues

To get more knowledge and tools to make a more effective and accessible work for my students.

digital tools to raise awareness of teachers about immigration issues; Networking tools that can be used by teachers to

get in touch with peers, share material, good practices, and the results of their interventions

It would be very important to gain experience in teaching such issues in conjunction with new technologies. In

particular, now where technology is a very important tool for the future and its use can bring very beautiful results.

the use of ICT in education

Teaching methods using technology.

High

I would like to enrich my knowledge on the better (and more effective) use of ICT in the educational process, to

promote cultural diversity.

A discussion on how to use digital tools while always focusing on the student.

Tools, knowledge, dialogue

Practical ways of integrating digital education into day-to-day teaching to integrate refugees and migrants into the

classroom for integration.

Creative use of multimedia



Developing literacy skills in the use of digital tools and multimedia to raise pupils' awareness of immigration, human

rights and sustainable development issues. Linking theory to practice, mainly through the demonstration of good,

already applied, practices and examples and familiarity with digital environments and tools.

The use of educational tools to inform our students to such interesting topics



Needs Assessment Report of Slovenia

Overview

In Slovenia, so-called global issues, i.e. human rights, development (cooperation), intercultural dialogue, tolerance,

migration, are usually perceived within the scope of global education1. On Government level, the field overlaps between

the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport.

Within the scope of foreign policy, the Resolution on the International Development Cooperation and Humanitarian

Aid of the Republic of Slovenia2 (2017) recognises global education and its role in eliminating poverty and implementing

sustainable development (Article 27). Global education encourages participants to understand world events, its causes

and consequences, and the interconnectedness of the local and global dimension. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs

regularly supports projects of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in this field (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2018)3.

Although the Ministry of Foreign Affairs could be identified as one of the most prominent institutional supporters of

Global Education in Slovenia, an overview of their activities in various years indicates that the support of the Ministry

of Foreign Affairs is not consistent and geared toward achieving long-term goals (Suša, 2015)4.

Already in 2007, the Ministry of Education developed Guidelines for Upbringing and Education for Sustainable

Development5. The Guidelines define key areas of sustainable development, emphasising that addressing versatile

issues requires comprehensive approach. The document defines key aims and principles of sustainable development

education, and provides practical guidelines on implementation in kindergartens, schools, the line Ministry, NGOs, and

local communities. It encompasses a set of recommended measures to be introduced by each stakeholder with the

purpose of implementing the Guidelines. While the Guidelines refer to interconnected environmental, economic and

social issues on declaratory level, in practice they mostly refer to environmental dimension of sustainable development

(Gobbo, 2011)6.

The national review report on implementation of the Education for All Agenda (2015)7 recognizes that “Slovenia

strongly supports the view that education is a fundamental human right and a catalyst for social justice and

development”. Among main goals in Slovenian education, the report states “educate for sustainable development and

active participation in a democratic society, including in-depth knowledge of, and a responsible attitude to, oneself,

one’s health, other people, one’s own and other cultures, natural and social environments, and to future generations.”

The terminological divide between Global Education and Education for Sustainable Development results in the term

Global Education being primarily used within the NGO sector, while the term Education for Sustainable Development is

more present among teachers (Skinner, 2012)8. Nevertheless, Global Education is included within in-service teacher

1 Often also referred to as Global Citizenship Education, but the concept of Global Education is used on national level. 2 Resolution on the International Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid of the Republic of Slovenia (2017), Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, Nr. 54/17. 3 Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2018): Globalno učenje. Accessible at: http://www.mzz.gov.si/zunanja_politika_in_mednarodno_pravo/mednarodno_razvojno_sodelovanje_in_humanitarna_pomoc/politike_mrs/globalno_ucenje/. 4 Suša, R. (2015): Globalno učenje v Sloveniji; Pregled obdobja 2008–2014. Ljubljana: SLOGA. Accessible at: http://www.humanitas.si/data/useruploads/files/1446063111.pdf. 5 Ministry of Education (2007): Guidelines for Upbringing and Education for Sustainable Development. Accessible at: http://www.mizs.gov.si/fileadmin/mizs.gov.si/pageuploads/podrocje/razvoj_solstva/trajnostni_razvoj/trajnostni_smernice_VITR.doc. 6 Gobbo, Ž. (2011): Izobraževanje za trajnostni razvoj – Slovenija. Ljubljana: Focus, društvo za sonaraven razvoj. Accessible at: http://focus.si/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Slo_slo_esd-1.pdf. 7 Ministry of Education, Science and Sport (2015): Slovenia – Education for All 2015 National Review. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002316/231638e.pdf. 8 Skinner, A. (2012): How is global education perceived and implemented within two secondary schools in Slovenia? University of London, Institute of Education. Available at: http://www.pef.uni-lj.si/ceps/dejavnosti/sp/2013-04-10/06%202%20Skiner_Global%20education%20in%20Slovenia.pdf.



training (CONCORD, 2018)9. The Guidelines on Education for Sustainable Development, considered as the first official

global education document in Slovenia, "designate /education for sustainable development/ as a focal point for the

development of the education system in Slovenia. /.../ Attempts have been made to formalise and operationalise these

guidelines through the development of a National GE Strategy but to little avail and Slovenia still remains without any

binding guidelines for the inclusion of GE within the formal school curriculum” (Skinner, 2012)10.

In the civil society sector active in various aspects of Education for Sustainable Development, the concept of Global

Education is often referred to with similar understanding (Gobbo, 2011) 11. Definition of Global Education, used in

Slovenian national context, has been developed by the Working Group on Global Education, coordinated by SLOGA, in

2008: Global Education is “a learning process, with the focus on interdependence and involvement of every individual

in global challenges”. The approach to Global Education highlights the need to develop both “formal and non-formal

education and learning programs” (CONCORD, 2018) 12 . Global education focuses on skills and values. Issues are

presented as interconnected and interdependent (e.g. development cooperation, peace studies, human rights,

environmental education, climate change). It also includes modern teaching techniques, such as Open Space

Methodology, learning by doing, less strict division between learners and knowledge providers, participatory learning,

and development of critical thinking. However, Global Education is still practiced as extra-curricular activity, often

implemented by NGOs (Gobbo, 2011)13.

When the field of Global Education began developing in Slovenia (NGO Working Group on Global Education was

established in 2008), the process was marked by transfer of ideas, methodologies and didactic materials from Western

European countries. Yet the national context is significantly different: the country does not have extensive development

cooperation programs, a relatively small share of GNI is allocated to official development assistance, only a small

number of NGOs are part of larger international networks, and many of them do not engage in development projects

outside Slovenia. Unlike in many other countries, Global Education is not an insignificant field of the NGO sector, even

more, it is at its core, as many educational and public awareness campaigns represent the bulk of NGOs’ work (Suša,

2015)14.

As global education activities significantly lie within the NGO sphere, it is not surprising that the study conducted

by CONCORD (2018)15 recognizes various projects (implemented by NGOs and public institutes) as key methods of

delivering global education. Strongly connected to project-based implementation of global education is the fact that

funding for global education is characterized by high level of fluctuation year-on-year. Within funding for global

education, in the period between 2011-2017 most funding has been allocated to informal education activities focused

on global education (outside a structured curriculum), followed by teacher training activities, awareness raising activities

about the importance of global education, and lastly, development of teaching materials and publishing in global

education. Furthermore, the study establishes “a mixed level of NGO involvement in GCE policy processes, and weak

coordination between the two organisations. According to both /i.e. Government and NGO stakeholders/, NGOs have

very limited involvement in agenda setting and policy evaluation. By contrast, they agree that NGOs are highly involved

in policy implementation since, according to the MFA, they are the only entities receiving funding for implementing

“GE” projects”.

9 CONCORD (2018): Global Citizenship Education in Europe: How Much Do We Care? Accessible at: https://concordeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CONCORD_GCE_FundingReport_2018_online.pdf?7c2b17&7c2b17. 10 Skinner, A. (2012): How is global education perceived and implemented within two secondary schools in Slovenia? University of London, Institute of Education. Available at: http://www.pef.uni-lj.si/ceps/dejavnosti/sp/2013-04-10/06%202%20Skiner_Global%20education%20in%20Slovenia.pdf. 11 Gobbo, Ž. (2011): Izobraževanje za trajnostni razvoj – Slovenija. Ljubljana: Focus, društvo za sonaraven razvoj. Accessible at: http://focus.si/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Slo_slo_esd-1.pdf. 12 CONCORD (2018): Global Citizenship Education in Europe: How Much Do We Care? Accessible at: https://concordeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CONCORD_GCE_FundingReport_2018_online.pdf?7c2b17&7c2b17. 13 Gobbo, Ž. (2011): Izobraževanje za trajnostni razvoj – Slovenija. Ljubljana: Focus, društvo za sonaraven razvoj. Accessible at: http://focus.si/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Slo_slo_esd-1.pdf. 14 Suša, R. (2015): Globalno učenje v Sloveniji; Pregled obdobja 2008–2014. Ljubljana: SLOGA. Accessible at: http://www.humanitas.si/data/useruploads/files/1446063111.pdf. 15 CONCORD (2018): Global Citizenship Education in Europe: How Much Do We Care? Accessible at: https://concordeurope.org/wp-

content/uploads/2018/03/CONCORD_GCE_FundingReport_2018_online.pdf?7c2b17&7c2b17.



The Research

The questionnaire on use of digital tools in education on human rights and migration has been translated to

Slovenian language and published in May, with data collection period ending in mid-August 2018. Online questionnaire

has been used for data collection, with invitation for stakeholders to participate in the needs assessment exercise

published on thematic SLOGA website on Global Education16. The invitation has also been published in SLOGA’s weekly

e-news, SLOGA website and social media channels.

Prior to the launch of the online questionnaire, main target groups of the needs assessment exercise have been

identified:

a) teachers;

b) NGOs;

c) youth organizations and youth workers.

In order to reach the main target groups, following reach-out channels and targets have been defined:

a) Additionally to directly contacting teachers we were in contact with through our regular activities (e.g. Global

Education Week), invite them to participate in the needs assessment survey through our monthly e-newsletter

for teachers. The invitation was disseminated through Slovenian National Commission for UNESCO, and we

disseminated the invitation through the National Education Institute Slovenia.

b) We reach out to ten NGOs working with youth directly (mainly referring to our member organizations and

partner organizations), including through the Working Group on Global Education that SLOGA is coordinating,

and disseminate the invitation through our partner networks, but specifically targeting NGOs working with

youth. In addition to directly reaching out to youth workers and youth organizations, we engaged them through

their umbrella organization, i.e. National Youth Council of Slovenia, and the competent Government body, i.e.

the Office of the Republic of Slovenia for Youth.

We also used other opportunities to promote the project and invite relevant actors to participate in the needs

assessment survey.

In May, a national forum on Global Education and Sustainable Development Education has been organized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Education, and Global Education Network (GENE), in partnership with SLOGA Platform and two other NGOs (one of them is SLOGA member organization, the other is a partner organization). MigratED project has been promoted among teachers during the forum. Among conclusions of the conference, lack of a national coordination structure and a systematic and continuous approach, with monitoring in the field of Global Education have been identified as key challenges. It is necessary to link stakeholders at all levels, both between sectors and fields, as well as with the economy and the profession. Cooperation will enable strengthened knowledge, sharing of good practices and knowledge, and active participation. Among key challenges identified is also supporting educators in the field of Global Education and Education for Sustainable Development, including systematic incorporation of Global Education and Education for Sustainable Development contents into curriculum, and the empowerment of teachers for the implementation of Global Education and Education for Sustainable Development. The introduction of Global Education and Education for Sustainable Development is linked to changing values and assuming responsibility in society, and is faced with resistance towards changes and a lack of critical thinking, which is also a major challenge in this field. Among skills needed for implementation of Global Education and Education for Sustainable Development, ICT, i.e. “wise use” of new technologies, have been identified.

In June, we organized a training for teachers (ToT) within a project implemented in partnership with the University

of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences, on the Sustainable Development Goals through the prism of migration. Teachers who participated in the training were invited to fill in the needs assessment survey, and express their interest in further MigratED activities.

Upon closure of the questionnaire, 32 individuals participated in the survey.

Target group Target Realization

16 Available at: http://tuditi.si/anketa-o-uporabi-multimedijskih-orodij-pri-izobrazevanju-o-clovekovih-pravicah-in-migracijah/.

http://tuditi.si/anketa-o-uporabi-multimedijskih-orodij-pri-izobrazevanju-o-clovekovih-pravicah-in-migracijah/



Teachers 25 10

- secondary school: 6

- university: 1

- primary school: 1

- adult education

institution: 2

NGOs 10 13

- NGO: 12

- humanitarian

organization: 1

Youth organizations and youth

workers

10 5

- youth centre: 3

- youth organization: 1

- youth delegate: 1

Other N/A 4

- reception/

accommodation centre

for asylum-seekers or

refugees: 1

- research institute: 1

- development

cooperation institute: 1

- private sector: 1

Total 45 32

While more NGO representatives participated in the survey as foreseen, other two targets have not been reached.

According to feedback from participants, the time frame for schools has not been the best due to end of school year,

and school holidays. Similarly, the feedback from youth sector has stayed below foreseen target. While the National

Council of Youth Organizations has promised to support dissemination of the survey within their pool of youth trainers,

Office of the Republic of Slovenia for Youth has not responded to our request.

In addition to publishing the questionnaire online and promoting it through SLOGA communication channels

(websites, weekly e-news, social media), we have sent an invitation to participate in the survey to all primary and

secondary schools (and a reminder later), and published it in the monthly e-news for teachers (including the reminder).

We have also requested our member organizations working with teachers to distribute the survey through their

channels.

Based on low participation of schools, we will draft a list of schools with extra-curricular programs in human rights

and migration, and digital/multimedia tools, and schedule introductory meetings with them.

Nevertheless, as the field of global education, including number of actors involved, is still developing and

strengthening, we believe the needs assessment survey outlines key features of this field in Slovenia.




I. Work and experience of respondents

Respondents work in following institutions (QI.1):

40% respondents work in NGO sphere, followed by less than 20% respondents from secondary schools, and youth

centres/organizations, respectively. Other respondents work in adult education, primary school, at university, in a

research institute, development cooperation institute, reception/accommodation centre for refugees and asylum-

seekers, and private sector – one respondent per institution/sector, respectively.

Functions/responsibilities of respondents (QI.3):

13

65

21 1 1 1 1 1

00

2

4

6

8

10

12

14



More than 40% respondents are educators or youth workers in informal education, which corresponds with the global

education characteristics in Slovenia. More than 20% respondents are teachers (in primary, secondary school, and at

university), 18,7% respondents are project/program managers or project associates. A bit less than 10% respondents

assume leadership roles in their respective organizations.

Respondents’ areas of expertise (multiple answers) (QI.4):

Areas of expertise N=

Global education/Education for (sustainable) development, informal education, elementary

education, pedagogy

7

Human rights, (anti)discrimination, gender equality, prevention of corruption 5

(Sustainable) development, natural resources 5

Youth work(er) (including street youth work) 5

Development cooperation and humanitarian assistance 4

International relations, European Union 3

Migration, integration of underage refugees 3

Mobility coordinator, Erasmus+ program, international cooperation 3

Project coordination/project management (including “Let’s liven up the school” (Popestrimo

šolo) project multiplier)

3

Sociology of culture, history, law 3

Active citizenship, intercultural dialogue 2

Natural sciences, chemistry 2

Volunteerism 2

Entrepreneurship 1

Gymnasium graduate 1

14

54

32

1 1 1 1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16



Respondents’ areas of education obtained (multiple answers) (QI.5):

Education obtained N=

Political science/International relations 8

Economics 4

Law 3

Pedagogy 3

Sociology, including sociology of culture 3

Andragogy 2

English/French language 2

Arts 1

Chemistry 1

Elementary education 1

English/French language 2

Gymnasium 1

History 1

Journalism 1

Migration 1

Psychology 1

Social sciences 1

Social work 1

Textiles 1

Not provided/practice 3

Respondents’ type of contract (QI.6):



While 47% respondents are employed in the organization on a long-term contract, a bit more than half work with the

organization based on a short-term contract, including short-term employment contract, agreement on voluntary work,

and student work.

Years of professional experience in the sector of respondents' work (QI.7):

Majority of respondents have been active in current sector 2-3 years, followed by less than third active in the sector for

more than a decade. Only one respondent has been active in the sector for less than a year.

Respondents’ age (QI.8):

Majority of respondents are younger than 30, followed by respondents between 31 and 40 years old.

17

15

Long-term contract

Short-term contract (including volunteering and student work)



Respondents' gender (QI.9):

Gender representation of respondents is very unequal: a great majority of respondents, above 80%, are women.

Respondents’ country of origin and country of residence (QI.10 and QI.11):

Almost 97% respondents (31 of 32) originate from Slovenia, while one respondent originates from Bosnia and

Herzegovina. All respondents (100%) live in Slovenia.

II. Global Citizenship Education: migrations, human rights and sustainable development

Majority of respondents are familiar with the concept of global citizenship education, which is not surprising due to the

fact that we have targeted actors in the field of global education (in addition to distributing the survey among all primary

and secondary schools, and youth centres).

Implementation of global /citizenship/ education activities (QII.2)

In respondents’ institutions, majority of activities focused on global citizenship education, migration, human rights,

international cooperation, peace education, intercultural dialogue are implemented by internal staff, followed by

external collaborators and partner organisations.

Respondents’ direct experience in implementing educational activities on these issues (QII.3):

(ranking from1 – no experience to 5 – high experience)



Majority of respondents have some experience with global education, followed by high experience in implementing

global education activities. Level of experience in human rights issues is a bit lower, while level of experience in

international cooperation is the highest among chosen issues. With educational activities in the field of migration,

majority of respondents have some experience, but in lesser extent than with global education activities in general.

Same applies to experience with activities in the field of intercultural dialogue, and peace education as the field where

respondents have the least experience.

Examples of projects and activities implemented in your institution focused on these subjects (QII.4):

Respondents provided examples of global education workshops within informal education (including on issues of health,

migration, sustainable development, water pollution, climate change and migration, environmental and social justice),

international exchange projects, preparing volunteers for international volunteering, workshops on prevention of

corruption, cultural activities, preparing materials for teachers.

Participation in courses on above-mentioned issues and which (QII.5 and QII.6):

Nearly 72% of respondents have already participated in a course on above-mentioned issues. Respondents have

participated in courses/trainings organized by Slovenian and European NGOs and NGO networks (SLOGA, Amnesty

International, Humanitas Association (Slovenian NGO), CONCORD, Anna Lindh Foundation, Voluntariat Association

(Slovenian youth organization/NGO)), but also international organizations, i.e. North-South Centre, European

institutions, and the United Nations. Respondents have usually not provided topics covered, or duration of the courses.

Respondents’ positions on addressing these issues with students/young people (QII.7):



Majority of respondents feel comfortable addressing complex contemporary issues, believe they have the tools

available, and believe these issues are important.

Evaluation of involvement of students in implementing modules on above-mentioned issues (QII.8):

Among respondents who have implemented modules on above-mentioned issues with young people, more than half

evaluate involvement of young people as good, and quarter of them as very good. No respondent evaluated

involvement of young people in these modules as poor.

Respondents’ positions on addressing these issues with students/young people (QII.9):



Respondents partially agree that young people are mostly influenced by mainstream media and public discourse,

disagree on them, i.e. the respondents, having insufficient knowledge on these issues, while recognizing the need to

improve their capacity in utilizing innovative methodologies and tools.

Methods used when implementing modules on above-mentioned issues with young people (QII.10):

When implementing activities on above-mentioned issues with young people, majority of respondents used the method

of teamwork or working in small groups (93,8%), followed by open discussion (78,1%), participatory methods (65,6%),

and digital and multimedia tools used by more than half respondents (56,3%).

Identified need for training by respondents (QII.11):



Most respondents recognize the need to strengthen their capacities in ICT and media literacy as tools for addressing

above-mentioned themes (almost 60%), followed by the field of international cooperation and development (56,3%),

and migration (53,1%). Half of respondents identified peace education as the issue to strengthen their knowledge, and

around 40% of respondents believe they should strengthen their knowledge in global education, human rights, and

intercultural dialogue.

Respondents’ interest in participation in a free training about above-mentioned issues (QII.12):

Almost half (46,9%) of the respondents are interested in participation in a training on above-mentioned issues, followed

by more than a third of participants (34,4%) very interested in taking part in the training, and 18,8% respondents

moderately interested in the training. Hence, all participants are interested in participating in the training on above-

mentioned issues.

III. Digital and multimedia tools for education

Respondents’ utilization of digital/multimedia tools in working with young people, and frequency (QIII.1):

(ranking from 1 – never to 5 – always)



Among tools most often used by respondents, are videos, social networks and multimedia presentations. Among tool

not utilized by respondents are videogames and QR code readers, and also e-books and cloud services. Applications are

also among tools rarely used by respondents, when working with young people.

Respondents’ position on use of digital/multimedia tools in education activities (QIII.2):



Respondents believe that use of digital/multimedia tools when working with young people increase interest and

motivation of young people, can complement regular lesson, provide opportunity for dialogue, assist in addressing such

issues, and are not to challenging to work with.

Respondents’ evaluation of use of digital tools in their school/organisation (QIII.3):

Majority of respondents assess use of digital tools in their school/organisation as good (40,6%), followed by 34,4%

assessing it as fair. 12,5% respondents evaluate it as poor.



Majority (59,9%) of respondents believe that their organizations’ leadership assesses use of digital/multimedia tools as

other tools, while 40% consider it as very important.

Respondents’ participation in courses on digital tools for education (QIII.5 and QIII.6):

Majority of respondents (78,1%) have never attended a course on digital tools for education, while 12,5% attended

more courses on respective issue. Respondents mentioned professional development workshops, workshops on use of

online classes, including Moodle, but have not provided details on these workshops.

Respondents’ assessment of existent training opportunities on digital/multimedia tools on a local/national level (QIII.7):

Almost half of the respondents assess existing training opportunities on digital/multimedia tools on a local/national

level as fair, followed by a third assessing them as good. 21,9% assess the training opportunities as poor.



Difficulties faced by teachers/youth workers/education practitioners in getting specific training on digital/multimedia

tools (QIII.8):

(ranking from 1 – not important to 5 – very important):

Time availability is recognized by respondents as the key challenge in participating in specific training on

digital/multimedia tools, and majority of respondents to not consider poor interest in these topics in educational

context, low personal interest in these issues, nor few opportunities to apply them, as key challenges. Hence,

respondents have the possibility to apply these skills, they are interested in the issues and have the technical capacity

to utilize the tools, but time constraint represents the main challenge.

Respondents’ interest in participation in a free training on ICT and media literacy as didactic tools (QIII.9):

Majority of respondents (37,5%) is interested in participation in a free training on ICT and media literacy as didactic

tools, followed by 34,4% moderately interested, and 28,1% respondents very interested. Hence, all respondents are

interested in participating in the training on digital/media tools as didactic tools.

IV. Respondents’ preferences for the training course

Respondents’ preferred schedule for the foreseen training course within the project (QIV.1):



More than half of respondents (56,3%) prefer intensive short training, followed by 21,9% who prefer meetings

distributed within a longer period of time. Around 10% respondents prefer online training with periodical meetings, or

lectures by experts with didactical program for self-study, respectively.

Duration of the training, considering also online training and research (QIV.2):

Equal share of respondents, i.e. 37,5%, believe that the training, including preparations and research, should take 6-12

hours, or 12-24 hours. Two respondents emphasized that the training could be longer, while mentioning time

constraints.

Almost 60% respondents consider January-March as best period to implement the training, while April-June fits the

least respondents.

Almost half of respondents prefer training to be implemented in the morning (46,9%), closely followed by those who

prefer afternoon training (43,8%). Post-working time is of least preference for the respondents.

Participation in the training in case it is not professionally recognized (QIV.5):

All respondents would participate in the training, even if it were not professionally recognized.

Respondents’ expectations on the training and preferred subjects (multiple answers) (QIV.6):

Expectations/subjects N=



Meaningful, practical, providing concrete solutions for concrete questions, with

experiential learning, project tasks

5

ICT tools; after the training, participants are empowered for implementation of

workshops on these issues by using ICT tools.

5

Global education (in-depth knowledge), new methods of transferring knowledge within

the scope of global education, potentially useful databases

4

New knowledge, useful tools, methodologies 3

All subjects are important, but the training has to be implemented in an interactive way,

and quickly put into practice

2

Sustainable development 1

Media literacy 1

Migration 1

In case of a more lengthy training, only interested individuals will decide to participate.

In case of a shorter training, the participation could be higher, which is also positive since

more people will learn about importance of the topics discussed. Each country

participating in the project could prepare its own program, methods and good practices,

and host other countries. More emphasis should be put on intercultural dialogue, human

rights and the use of ICT.

1

Application of digital tools to various topics (migration, global education, human rights)

- for example, implementing a quiz with a web application, games or "treasure hunting",

creating with video or audio content, searching for ways to integrate these tools into any

topic that would interest individual participants.

1

Respondents comments and contacts in case interested in participating in the project (QIV.7):

Among comments received was too lengthy questionnaire and not best timing due to school ending and school holidays,

which could result in low participation in the survey. One respondent emphasized that for teachers, it is crucial that the

training content is related to school curriculum. 12 respondents provided contact information.




The needs assessment survey confirms the findings of the literature review, i.e. that issues understood within

the scope of global education, mostly lie in the NGO sphere, as 75% respondents are active in the field of informal

education. In line with the characteristics of global education in Slovenia, most respondents are educators or youth

workers in informal education, followed by teachers (in primary, secondary school, and at university) and

project/program managers or project associates.

Though majority of respondents are younger than 30 (followed by respondents between 31 and 40 years old,

the share of ‘newcomers’ in the global education field is insignificant, with majority active in current sector 2–3 years

(followed by less than third active in the sector for more than a decade). This proves that though the global education

sector in Slovenia is limited in its scope, the actors are well equipped for the task. Concluding from gender

representation of respondents, global education in Slovenia is a very female domain – which could be linked that

teaching profession is still considered as women’ profession.

Due to targeted dissemination of the survey, it is not surprising that great majority of respondents are familiar with

the concept of global education. Global education activities are usually implemented by internal staff, in some

organizations also by partner organisations or external collaborators. Most respondents have experience in

international cooperation, and majority of respondents have some experience in implementing global education

activities. Since more than 70% respondents have already participated in a course on above-mentioned issues, it is

reasonable that majority of respondents feel comfortable and well-equipped for addressing complex contemporary

issues with young people, whereby they consider these issues as important. Respondents implementing activities on

above-mentioned issues with young people most often use the method of teamwork or working in small groups, open

discussion, and participatory methods, with digital and multimedia tools used by more than half respondents. More

than 75% respondents assess involvement of young people in modules on above-mentioned issues as (very) good.

While respondents believe their knowledge of these issues is sufficient, they recognize the need to improve their

capacity in utilizing innovative methodologies and tools. Most respondents recognize the need to strengthen their

capacities in ICT and media literacy as tools for addressing above-mentioned themes, followed by the field of

international cooperation and development and migration. All participants are interested in participating in the training

on above-mentioned issues, and in the training on digital/media tools as didactic tools.

While respondents do not consider use of digital/multimedia tools as challenging to work with when working

with young people, they believe that digital/multimedia tools increase interest and motivation of young people, can

complement regular lesson, provide opportunity for dialogue, and assist in addressing complex issues. Majority of

respondents assess use of digital tools in their school/organisation as good, which is supported by their majority

perception of their organizations’ leadership assessing use of digital/multimedia tools as other tools, while 40% consider

it as very important.

Almost half of the respondents assess existing training opportunities on digital/multimedia tools on a

local/national level as fair. However, almost 80% respondents have never attended a course on digital tools for

education. Results of the needs assessment survey identify time constraints as the key challenge in participating in

specific training on digital/multimedia tools, while respondents have the possibility to apply these skills, they are

interested in the issues and have the technical capacity to utilize the tools.

Recommendations

Training should be interactive and very practically oriented, focusing on digital/multimedia tools for sharing knowledge

on complex issues, while also deepening the knowledge on global education.

1. Training should be tailored to national context, while facilitation of international exchange is encouraged.

Training content should be embedded with school curriculum.

2. Professional recognition of the training does not affect respondents’ interest in participation in the training.



3. Training should be short and intensive, up to 24 hours. Training should be taking place in the morning or in the

afternoon, but definitely within working hours. It should be implemented between January and March.

Needs Assessment Report of Cyprus

Overview

The Research

Following the guidelines, Future Worlds Center (FWC) translated the online questionnaire into Greek. The questionnaire

was then disseminated to both formal and non-formal education professionals. Concerning formal education, FWC

coordinated with the Ministry of Education and Culture to send the questionnaire to all teachers of Secondary

Education, accompanied by a circular (Annex 1). As to non-formal educators, FWC sent the questionnaire to its network

of non-formal educators in Cyprus. The link to the questionnaire and an invitation to fill it was also published on FWC

social media. The questionnaire was published on 24 May 2018 and was open to submissions until 31 July 2018.

There were in total 35 entries almost all of them from different institutions/schools. 25 individuals are teachers in

Secondary Education:17 24 out of 25 work in the public sector and 1 out of 25 in the private sector. There are as well 2

individuals who are primary education teachers and 2 who are university professors. The rest of 6 individuals are non-

formal educators working in different settings, namely 3 people in 2 different Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs),

3 Freelancers and 1 in the Cyprus Youth Council. Geographically, individuals working in 4 different districts of Cyprus

responded (districts of Nicosia, Limassol, Larnaca and Paphos).18

23 out of 35 are women and 12 are men and they are professionals from all age categories suggested. 30 have a

permanent contract and 5 a temporary one. An absolute majority has more than 10 years of working experience while

no one has less than 1 year of experience. A vast majority of 30 declare to know what Education for Global Citizenship

is. Many have no previous training on the addressed subjects but they are all interested to a certain degree to receive

training. There is also a general interest in using digital tools and multimedia in the classroom. Preferences according to

the logistics of future trainings vary a lot.

17 In Cyprus, Secondary Education starts after 6 years of Primary Education and lasts for 6 years in the public sector and 6 or 7 for schools in the private sector. Children's age in secondary schools is from around 12 to around 18 years old. Secondary Education is divided between “Gymnasio” and “Lykeio”, i.e. junior high school (from 12 to 15) and high school/ lyceum (from 15 to 18). Secondary Education teachers can teach interchangeably in any of the two or even have a divided schedule between junior high and high schools during the same year. 18 Cyprus has 6 administrative districts. One of them (Kyrenia) is not under the effective control of the Republic of Cyprus (Turkish army occupation since 1974); Nicosia and Famagusta are only partly under effective control of the Republic.




As mentioned above, the first part of the questionnaire is designed to find out more details about our informants’

background. The second part mainly focuses on the main concepts used in the project, that is Global Citizenship

Education, migrations, human rights, sustainable development etc, as well as the level of the educators’ familiarity with

those concepts.

The first question is a simple YES/NO question regarding the educators’ knowledge of what Global Citizenship Education

is. A vast majority of 30 declare to know what Education for Global Citizenship is with 5 answering that they do not.

The results of the second question show the implementing bodies of activities related to Global Citizenship Education,

Migrations, Human Rights, International Cooperation, Peace Education, Intercultural Dialogue etc in the institutions of

our respondents. As indicated in the graph below, some of the educators checked more than one implementing bodies

resulting in an array of answers. In a nutshell, 19 educators state that internal staff is responsible for the implementation

of aforementioned activities, 8 educators name external collaborators as the implementing bodies, 8 educators state

partner organizations as the ones responsible for the implementation of activities of the sort, while 6 indicate that these

activities are not applicable in the institution they are working in. It is interesting that 3 educators decided to choose

“other” rather than the options given naming the Ministry of Education and Culture, the Pedagogical Institute, and

herself/himself as the ones responsible for the implementation of those activities in their institution.

The third question explores the level of our educators’ experience in implementing education activities on 6 issues of

particular concern - that is to say Global Citizenship Education, Migrations, Human Rights, International Cooperation,

Peace Education, and Intercultural Dialogue. In order to measure educators’ level of experience, the questionnaire uses

a five-point Likert Scale for each one of the issues above offering a range of response anchors - from 1 that equals to

“no experience” to 5 that equals to “high experience.” The graph below summarizes all responses for all 6 issues, but

let’s break it down to explore its constituent parts.



● The first set of columns measures the educators’ experience on Global Citizenship Education activities. 8

educators chose point 1 that equals to “no experience” on GCE, 7 chose point 2 that equals to “little

experience”, 11 educators chose point 3 that equals to “some experience”, 6 educators, out of whom 3 are

non-formal educators, chose point 4 that equals to “quite some/lots of experience”, and merely 3 educators,

out of whom 2 are non-formal educators, chose point 5 indicating that they have “high experience.”19

● The results of the second set of columns for the educators’ experience on Migrations activities do not

differentiate a lot from the results of GCE activities. For that matter, 8 educators choose point 1 that equals to

“no experience” on Migrations; it is interesting that 1 of those 8 educators is a non-formal educator. A number

of 7 educators measure their experience as “little experience” choosing point 2; again, 1 of those 7 is a non-

formal educator. A number of 10 educators indicate that they have “some experience” choosing point 3 and

7 educators, out of whom 3 are non-formal educators, choose point 4 that reads to “quite some/lots of

experience.” Lastly, only 3 educators, out of whom 2 are non-formal educators, state that they have “high

experience” on Migrations activities choosing point 5.

● A slight shift in the results is noticed in the third set of columns, in which the educators self-assess their

experience on the implementation of Human Rights education activities. Thus, 6 formal educators measure

their experience as non existent by choosing point 1 and 2 educators, out of whom 1 is non-formal, choose

point 2 that equals to “little experience.” A number of 9 educators (all of them teaching in formal education

settings) indicate that they have “some experience” in the matter choosing point 3, while an significant number

of 11 educators, out of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, indicate that they have “quite some/lots of

experience” choosing points 4. Finally, a number of 7 educators, the vast majority of whom (namely 5

individuals) are non-formal educators, choose point 5 (“high experience”).

● The fourth set of columns represents the educators’ experience on the implementation of International

Cooperation education activities. As indicated in the graph above, 9 educators (all of them teaching in formal

education settings) believe that they have “no experience” on the matter choosing point 1, while 2 educators,

out of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, choose point 2 that equals to “little experience.” Almost half of the

respondents, that is 14 individuals, indicate that they have “some experience” on International Cooperation

choosing point 3; only 2 of those 14 respondents are non-formal educators. A number of 6 respondents, out

19 The translation of the 1 to 5 scale in English is a free translation from our side since there was no translation suggested by GVC on this point.



of whom 2 are non-formal educators, choose point 4 that equals to “quite some/lots of experience” and 4

educators, out of whom 2 are non-formal, have measured their experience as “high experience” choosing point

5.

● In the fifth set of columns, the educators self-assess their experience regarding the implementation of Peace

Education activities. As the results demonstrate, 9 respondents all of them being formal educators have “no

experience” on the matter so they choose point 1 and 5 formal educators indicate that they have “little

experience” choosing point 2. A number of 7 educators, out of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, choose point

3 that equals to “some experience,” while 9 respondents, out of whom 2 are non-formal educators, indicate

that they have “quite some/lots of experience” in implementing education activities on Peace Education. Lastly,

5 respondents, out of whom 4 are non-formal educators, state that they have “high experience” on

aforementioned education activities.

● Lastly, the sixth set of columns measures the educators’ experience on the implementation of education

activities regarding Intercultural Dialogue. Out of 35 respondents, 7 indicate that they have “no experience” in

implementing activities that foster Intercultural Dialogue choosing, thus, point 1; again, those 7 respondents

teach in formal education settings. A number of 5 educators, out of whom 1 is non-formal, find that they have

“little experience” and they choose point 2, while 8 formal educators believe that they have “some experience”

choosing point 3. A number of 8 respondents, out of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, believe that they have

“quite lot of experience” (point 4), while 7 educators, out of whom 5 are non-formal educators, state that they

have “high experience” choosing point 5.

The fourth question asks from the respondents to indicate examples of projects and activities implemented in their

institution/organization focused on the above subjects. We have received a multitude of answers that could roughly

go under three (3) main categories:

a) Projects and activities as part of the formal curriculum:

At least 9 clusters of activities are listed by our respondents as part of the formal education curriculum. These are:

i) Each year, the Ministry of Education and Culture runs national school contests on topics pertinent to European Union;

ii) Formal school curriculum includes courses which focus on human rights and/or teaching of human rights. For

example, there is a course called Personal, social, health, citizenship education [in the formal curriculum, it is called

Health Education20 - Ed. Note]during which activities related to say human rights or active citizenship are implemented;

iii) Different events, contests, and school plays which focus on the issues of human rights, migration, tolerance,

acceptance, and diversity are implemented every year;

iv) University courses focus on these issues, for example one respondent indicated that s/he offers Cultural Intelligence

and Equality and Diversity Training to Medical School students and staff;

v) Latest news updates offered by the Ministry regarding relevant lectures and/or workshops, in which all educators can

attend to;

vi) Activities during school hours, which promote the elimination of racism and the perpetuation of a culture of non-

violence;

vii) Using homeroom teacher’s hour for discussing relevant subjects with students;

viii) Organizing conferences and/or meetings with external organizations for promoting these issues.

ix) Within the framework of Strategic Planning for Education, special intensive classes for learning the Greek language

for students from ‘third countries’ and for applicants of political asylum are implemented in schools/universities.

b) Projects and activities initiated on a european level:

Two (2) main clusters of projects and activities are listed by the respondents. These are:

20 http://www.moec.gov.cy/dme/en/health_education.html

http://www.moec.gov.cy/dme/en/health_education.html



i) European Projects and Erasmus Plus projects. The respondents mention among others the following

projects/activities: European Parliament Ambassador Programme; Training of teachers on how to teach the history of

Europe particularly with regards to the migrant crisis and the consequences of european trade on developing countries;

International collaborations with various schools located abroad (under Erasmus+ School Partnership Projects);

Participation in Restart.eu, a project on migration and education issues; International trainings under Eplus and activities

in Shelters and the Kofinou Reception Centre for Asylum Seekers; Training of Trainers for various EU projects; Local

workshops for EU projects e.g. Global Education Goes Local; Participation in different training courses; Participation in

ViSC Social Competence Program.

ii) European and Local fora: Participation in European Youth Forum Network on "Migration and Human Rights";

Participation in Structured Dialogues between young people and decision-makers.

c) Projects and activities as a result of the collaboration between different bodies/institutions:

The respondents have listed 2 main projects which are the result of the collaboration between different bodies

institutions. These are:

i) Imagine Educational Programme, a bi-communal project that runs under the auspices of the Technical Committee on

Education and implemented by the Association for Historical Dialogue and Research (AHDR) and the Home for

Cooperation (H4C) with the support of the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus and the Federal Foreign Office of Germany.

As it is mentioned by 3 of our respondents “as part of our peace building efforts and our mission to facilitate contact

between different communities in Cyprus, the Association for Historical Dialogue and Research (AHDR) and the Home

for Cooperation, designed and developed ‘Imagine’, an educational program on Anti-racism Education, in the context

of our holistic understanding of a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the children of Cyprus and the world”;

ii) Programmes for unaccompanied minors seeking asylum as implemented by local NGOs and UNHCR Cyprus and

Experiential workshops related to migrations issues, e.g. The boat that would not sink, an experiential workshop based

on Christoforos Christoforou children’s book.

For reporting reasons, it is elemental to mention that 4 out of 35 educators could not indicate and/or have not

participated in any projects or activities implemented in the institutions they are currently working.

The fifth question of part II is a simple YES/NO question showing whether our respondents have ever attended a course

on the aforementioned issues. Nearly the two-thirds of the educators (23 individuals) replied that they have, while the

remaining 12, who all are formal educators, have not, as indicated in the graph below.

The following question, that is the sixth question, asks from the respondents whose answer was affirmative, to specify

the educational course they have attended to. 19 out of 23 educators indicated a number of courses. These are:

● Training of Trainers on Peace Education and Human Rights Education at the Association for Historical Dialogue

and Research (10 hours)

● Pestallogi project in Bulgaria (20 school periods)

● Two (2) seminars of 5 hours each on issues pertaining to EU in the context of a contest organized by the

Representation of the European Commission in Cyprus in collaboration with the Ministry of Education and

Culture.

● Training of Greek language teachers who teach in the “Greek as a Second Language for Children with Migrant

Background Learning Program” organized by the Ministry of Education and Culture.

● Training of secondary education teachers called “Building healthy relationships between the sexes” organized

by Mediterranean Institute of Gender Studies.

● Training of teachers on Greek as a Second Language for Children with Migrant Background (methods of

structuring the curriculum, functions, and facilities for schools) organized by the Pedagogical Institute.

● Seminar on methods of teaching Greek organized by the School of Modern Green of the University of Cyprus.



● Trainings in schools on migration issues organized by the Pedagogical Institute

● One-day workshop called “Humans in movement: Pedagogical tools for raising awareness and empathy for

refugee and migrant children”

● Educational programme “Away from home and fear” organized by UNHCR in collaboration with the Pedagogical

Institute.

● Certificate of Completion, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Minority Health

commissioned e-learning program “A Physician’s Practical Guide to Culturally Competent Care.” Online

enduring activity in (i) Fundamentals of Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (ii) Ensuring

Communication and Language Assistance (iii) Engagement, Continuous Improvement, and Accountability.

Think Cultural Health, Continuing Medical Education, Ciné-Med Inc., U.S.A., May 6, 2016.

● Certificate of Completion, “The use of visual sources: arts, films, videos, cartoons. Training interpretation skills

when teaching and learning history.” Council of Europe workshop, Home for Cooperation, Nicosia, Cyprus,

March 13-14, 2015.

● Educating the ‘Other’: Intercultural Education at a Crossroads, The 2nd Forum of Intercultural Dialogue and

Learning, University of Patras, Patras, Greece, October 7-8, 2016.

● The Role of Education in a Multicultural Cyprus, Co-organizer, Planning Committee Member and Scientific

Committee Member, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus, November 25-30, 2013.

● Intercultural Dialogue and Cultural Diplomacy in Practice, Inaugural Conference of the Cyprus Center for

Intercultural Studies, Organizer, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus, January 15, 2013.

● Four one-day workshops facilitated by the Association for Historical Dialogue and Research

● 8-hour training on relevant issues.

● 50 hours of specific trainings on Citizenship Education organized by the school unit.

● 21 days of participation in different projects on relevant issues

● CARDET (Center for the Advancement of Research & Development in Educational Technology) trainings

● One week Erasmus+ training course run by Development Perspectives, an Ireland-based NGO

The seventh question investigates the degree of the respondents’ agreement/disagreement with a number of

statements about addressing these issues with students/young people. Particularly, there are four (4) statements21

which are measured using a six-point Likert Scale with the following response anchors: strongly disagree (blue), disagree

(red), slightly agree (orange), agree (green), strongly agree (purple), and uncertain (light blue). The graph below

summarizes all responses for all 4 statements, but let’s break it down to explore its constituent parts.

21 The four statements are as follow: a) I do not feel comfortable addressing complex contemporary issues; b) I would like to do it, but I have no tools to use; c) I feel comfortable with these issues; d) I do not think these topics are important.



● The first set of columns represents all responses for Statement 1: “I do not feel comfortable addressing complex

contemporary issues.” It is obvious from the graph above that the vast majority of educators do not experience

discomfort when discussing complex contemporary issues with students/youth. Against this backdrop, 15

respondents, out of whom 6 are non-formal educators, indicate that they “strongly disagree” with statement

1, while 16 respondents, out of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, say that they “disagree.” 1 respondent states

that s/he “slightly agrees” and another 1 that s/he “agrees”, while 2 respondents indicate that they “strongly

agree” with the particular statement suggesting that they do feel really uncomfortable addressing complex

contemporary issues in their educational settings; it is important to note that these educators teach in formal

education settings. Lastly, no person feels uncertain about statement 1.

● The second set of columns represents all responses for Statement 2: “I would like to do it, but I have no tools

to use.” The graph above shows that 5 respondents, out of whom 2 are non-formal educators, “strongly

disagree” with statement 2 suggesting that there are available tools for them to use when addressing those

issues. Also, 10 respondents, out of whom 3 are non-formal educators, “disagree” with statement 2 but it is

interesting that an equivalent number of 10 respondents, out of whom 2 are non-formal educators, “slightly

agrees” insinuating that it possibly takes some effort for educators to find the most appropriate tools to

address these issues. A number of 7 respondents, all of whom are formal educators, indicate that they “agree”

and 3 respondents, who teach again in formal educational settings, indicate that they “strongly agree” with

statement 2 suggesting that there is a need for more and easily accessible tools that they will back up the work

of educators on addressing these issues. No respondent feels uncertain about statement 2.

● The third set of columns represents all responses for Statement 3: “I feel comfortable with these issues.” As

indicated in the graph above, no respondent “strongly disagrees” with statement 3, while 2 formal educators

“disagree” as they probably do not feel comfortable at all when these issues come to the fore. Now, 4

respondents, all of whom are formal educators, indicate that they “slightly agree” with statement 3, while the

majority of the respondents tend to feel comfortable with these issues as the numbers suggest, namely 10

respondents “agree” and 16 respondents, out of whom 6 are non-formal educators, “strongly agree” with

statement 3. Lastly, 3 respondents, out of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, feel uncertain regarding their level

of comfort when addressing these issues.

● The fourth and last set of columns represents all responses for Statement 4: “I do not think these topics are

important.” The results of the graph above are representative of the importance of these issues in general and

in particular addressing these issues with students/youth. Thus, the vast majority of respondents (25 educators



out of whom 6 are non-formal educators) state that they “strongly disagree” with statement 4, while 7 more

indicate that they “disagree”. A number of 2 educators say that they “slightly agree” with these topics being of

minor importance and no one indicates that s/he “agrees”, while there is 1 respondent who “strongly agrees;”

it is interesting that this 1 respondent is a non-formal educator, suggesting that there was a misconception in

relation to the question asked. Again, no person feels uncertain about statement 4.

The eighth question concerns the level of students’ involvement with the aforementioned issues given that the

educators have already tried modules on these issues in their work with young people. As the following graph indicates,

3 respondents, all of whom are formal educators, evaluate young people’s involvement as “Poor” (blue) and 9 formal

educators evaluate it as “Fair” (red), while 12 respondents, out of whom 3 are non-formal educators, indicate that it is

“Good” (orange). A number of 9 respondents, out of whom 3 are non-formal educators, indicate that students’

involvement is “Very good” (green) and 2, out of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, mention that it is “Excellent”

(purple).

The ninth question of part II investigates the degree of the respondents’ agreement/disagreement with a number of

statements. Particularly, there are 4 statements22 which are measured using a six-point Likert Scale with the following

response anchors: strongly disagree (blue), disagree (red), slightly agree (orange), agree (green), strongly agree (purple),

and uncertain (light blue). The graph below summarizes all 35 responses for all 4 statements, but let’s break it down to

explore its constituent parts.

22 The four statements are as follow: a) Youngsters are mostly influenced by mainstream media and public discourse; b) It is very difficult to encourage their interest for a topic that is not assessed at school; c) I have few knowledge of these subjects; d) I would need to improve my ability to use innovative methodologies and tools.



● The first set of columns represents all responses for Statement 1: “Youngsters are mostly influenced by

mainstream media and public discourse.” As indicated above, there is not a single respondent who either

“Strongly disagrees” or “Disagrees,” while 8 educators, all of them teaching in formal educational settings,

“Slightly agree” with statement 1. It is really interesting that the vast majority of our sample, that is 20

educators, of whom 6 are non-formal educators, have indicated that they “Agree”, while 6 respondents, of

whom 1 is a non-formal educator, “Strongly agree”. Lastly, 1 individual feels uncertain about statement 1. The

results of the first set of columns are indicative of mainstream media’s influence on the youth.

● The second set of columns represents all responses for Statement 2: “It is very difficult to encourage their

interest for a topic that is not assessed at school.” There are merely 4 respondents, out of whom 3 are non-

formal educators, who “Strongly disagree” with that statement, while one-third of our sample, that is 12

individuals, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, indicate that they “Disagree.” A number of 7 respondents

“Slightly agree” with the statement, while 9 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, “Agree” and 2

respondents indicate that they “Strongly agree.” There is 1 respondent who feels uncertain about statement

2.

● The third set of columns represents all responses for Statement 3: “I have little knowledge of these subjects.”

As the graph indicates, 5 respondents, of whom 3 are non-formal educators, “Strongly disagree” and 10

respondents, of whom 4 are non-formal educators, “Disagree” with statement 3 pointing out that more than

one-third of our sample feels knowledgeable around issues of migrations, human rights, global citizenship etc,

results that can be also verified by question 3. A number of 12 respondents, indicate that they “Slightly agree”

with statement 3, while 5 “Agree” and only 1 individual “Strongly agrees.” Finally, 2 respondents feel uncertain

about the level of their knowledge around these subjects. It is worth mentioning that the respondents who

have indicated a level of agreement with statement 3 are all educators in formal school units.

● The fourth set of columns represents all responses for Statement 4: “I would need to improve my ability to use

innovative methodologies and tools.” The results of this statement are indicative of the importance of

introducing new technologies, methodologies, and tools to educators for increasing youngsters’ active

participation. Against this backdrop, only 3 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, “Strongly

disagree” while no one “Disagrees” with statement 4. Also, 8 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator,

indicate that they “Slightly agree”with statement 4, while a considerable number of 13 respondents, of whom

4 are non-formal educators, “Agree.” A number of 11 only-formal educators “Strongly agree” with statement

4 suggesting the need for improving their abilities. Lastly, no one seems to feel uncertain about statement 4.



The tenth question focuses on the educational methods the educators use when they try modules on the

aforementioned issues in their work with young people. This question gives the possibility of checking one or more

boxes out of 6 options, which are: a) Lecture/regular lesson, b) Teamwork/working in small groups, c) Participatory

methods, d) Open discussion e) Digital and multimedia tools, and f) Other. As indicated in the graph below, 8

respondents, of whom only 2 are non-formal educators, use lectures and/or regular lessons when approaching these

issues, while 20 educators choose teamwork/working in small groups and 17 choose participatory methods. Option D

(open discussion) is selected by nearly two-thirds of our sample, that is 22 individuals, while 15 choose digital and

multimedia tools as their method when they try modules on these subjects. Lastly, 4 participants, of whom 3 are non-

formal educators, indicate “Other” as their method of choice suggesting the following approaches: i) workshop type of

lessons as they suggested by the Council of Europe; ii) non-formal education methods; iii) experiential learning, and iv)

theatre activities, while one (1) respondent of formal educational setting indicates that s/he has never tried any modules

on these issues with her/his students.

The eleventh question openly asks the educators in which subjects they think they need to receive training, providing a

list of 8 options, from which one or more should be checked. These are: i) Global Citizenship Education; ii) Migrations;

iii) Human rights; iv) International cooperation and development; v) Peace education; vi) Intercultural dialogue; vii) ICT

and Media literacy as a tool for addressing these themes; and viii) Other. As indicated in the graph below, 22

respondents indicated that they need training on Global Citizenship Education, 17 on Migrations, 14 on Human rights,

20 on International cooperation and development, 20 on Peace education, and 15 on Intercultural dialogue. Most of

the respondents, that is 26 individuals, indicated that they need to receive training on ICT and Media literacy suggesting

the importance of that tool to approach young people nowadays. Lastly, 2 non-formal educators indicate “other”

pointing out ‘new research’ and ‘any subject’ as their subject of choice.



The twelfth and last question of part II explores the respondents’ preliminary interest in participating in a free training

about the above-mentioned issues. The questionnaire permits one option out of the following response anchors: Not

at all interested (blue), Not very interested (red), Moderately interested (orange), Interested (green), and Very

interested (purple). As indicated in the graph below, it is really important that not a single respondent chooses either

“Not at all interested” or “Not very interested” pointing out the need for a relevant training. Also, there are merely 4

respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, who choose “Moderately interested”, while the vast majority of the

sample take an interest in participating in a free training about these issues, as 12 respondents, of whom 2 are non-

formal educators, indicate that they are “Interested” and 19 respondents, of whom 4 are non-formal educators, indicate

that they are “Very interested.”

The third part of the questionnaire mainly focuses on digital and multimedia tools for education purposes. The first

question explores what kind of digital/multimedia tools the respondents use in their work with young people and how



often they use them using a five-point Likert Scale for each of the listed tools with response anchors from 1 that equals

to “never” to 5 that equals to “always.” The digital/multimedia tools suggested are the following: i) Online platforms

and blogs; ii) Social networks; iii) E-books; iv) E-learning; v) App; vi) Cloud services; vii) Online or offline multimedia

presentations; viii) Video; ix) Web documentaries; x) Audio and audio editing; xi) QR Code Reader; xii) Virtual Reality;

xiii) Videogames; and xiv) Other.

● The first set of columns measures the frequency of online platforms and blogs usage. 2 respondents, who are

formal educators, indicate that they “never” (point 1) use online platforms and blogs in their work with young

people and 3 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, indicate that they “rarely” use them (point 2).

A number of 7 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, choose point 3 that equals to “sometimes,”

while 15 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, indicate that they use online platforms and blogs

“very often” choosing point 4. A considerable number of respondents, that is 8 out of 35, indicate that they

“always” (point 5) use online platforms and blogs in their work with young people (2 of them are non-formal

educators). 23

● The second set of columns measures the frequency of social networks usage. A number of 4 respondents, who

are all formal educators, indicate that they “never” (point 1) use social networks in their work, while 8 formal

educators “rarely” use them (point 2). A number of 4 respondents, who teach in formal educational settings,

choose point 3 that translates to “sometimes,” while the majority of the sample responds affirmative regarding

social networks usage, as 9 individuals, of whom 3 are non-formal educators, use them “very often” (point 4)

and 10 individuals, of whom 4 are non-formal educators, “always” (point 5) use them.

● The third set of columns measures the frequency of e-books usage. 4 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal

educators, “never” (point 1) use e-books in their work with young people and 2 respondents, of whom 1 is a

non-formal educator, use them “rarely” (point 2). The majority of respondents, 12 individuals of whom 2 are

non-formal educators, indicate that they “sometimes” (point 3) use e-books, while 11 respondents, of whom

2 are non-formal educators, seems to use them “very often” (point 4) and 6 formal educators “always” use

them (point 5).

● The fourth set of columns measures the frequency of e-learning usage. A number of 5 respondents, of whom

1 is a non-formal educator, “never” (point 1) use e-learning activities in their work with young people and 3

formal-only educators “rarely” use them (point 2). The majority of respondents, 13 individuals of whom 1 is a

non-formal educator, indicate that they “sometimes” (point 3) use e-learning, while 11 respondents, of whom

4 are non-formal educators, use them “very often” (point 4). Lastly, only 3 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-

formal educator, use them “always” (point 5).

● The fifth set of columns measures the frequency of applications usage. A number of 7 respondents, of whom

1 is a non-formal educator, “never” (point 1) use apps in their work with young people, while 3 respondents,

of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, use them “rarely” (point 2). A considerable number of 9 individuals, of

whom 3 are non-formal educators, indicate that they “sometimes” (point 3) use apps, while the majority of

23 The translation of the Never to Always points is also a free translation from Greek (see note 3 above).



the sample, 13 respondents of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, seems to use them “very often” (point 4).

Lastly, 3 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, “always” (point 5) use apps in their work with youth.

● The sixth set of columns measures the frequency of cloud services usage. The vast majority of the sample, that

is 17 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, “never” (point 1) use cloud services in their work with

young people, while 9 individuals, of whom 3 are non-formal educators, “rarely” use them (point 2). A small

number of 5 individual, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, indicate that they “sometimes” (point 3) use cloud

services, while 2 respondents seem to use them “very often” (point 4) and 2 more - with a non-formal educator

being one of them - “always” (point 5) use cloud services.

● The seventh set of columns measures the frequency of online or offline multimedia presentations usage. A

number of 8 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, “never” (point 1) use online or offline

multimedia presentations in their work with young people and 4 individuals, of whom 1 is a non-formal

educator, use them “rarely” (point 2). A considerable number of 11 individuals, of whom 2 are non-formal

educators, indicate that they “sometimes” (point 3) use online or offline multimedia presentations, while 10

respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, seem to use them “very often” (point 4). Lastly, only 2

respondents, who work in formal educational settings, “always” (point 5) use online or offline multimedia

presentations in their work with young people.

● The eighth set of columns measures the frequency of video usage. A number of 0 respondents indicate that

they “never” (point 1) use videos in their work with young people, while 3 formal educators “rarely” use them

(point 2). A number of 3 respondents, who work in formal educational settings, “sometimes” (point 3) use

videos, but the vast majority of the sample responds in an affirmative way regarding video usage, as 12

individuals, of whom 3 are non-formal educators, use videos “very often” (point 4) and a significant number of

17 individuals, of whom 4 are non-formal educators, “always” (point 5) use them.

● The ninth set of columns measures the frequency of web documentaries usage. A number of 2 respondents,

who both work in formal educational settings, indicate that they “never” (point 1) use web documentaries in

their work with young people, while 1 individual in formal education “rarely” uses them (point 2). A number of

8 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, “sometimes” (point 3) use web documentaries, but the

vast majority of the sample responds in an affirmative way regarding web documentaries usage. As the graph

indicates 12 individuals, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, use them “very often” (point 4) and 12

respondents, of whom 3 are non-formal educators, indicate that they “always” (point 5) use web

documentaries.

● The tenth set of columns measures the frequency of audio and audio editing usage. A number of 9 respondents,

of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, “never” (point 1) use audio and audio editing in their work and 4

individuals, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, “rarely” (point 2) use them. A number of 6 respondents, of

whom 2 are non-formal educators, “sometimes” (point 3) use them, while most of the respondents, namely 9

individuals, of whom 1 only is a non-formal educator, use video and video editing “very often” (point 4). Lastly,

7 respondents, of whom again 1 only is a non-formal educator, “always” (point 5) use audio and audio editing.

● The eleventh set of columns measures the frequency of QR code reader usage. The vast majority of the sample,

that is 22 individuals of whom 3 are non-formal educators, indicates that they “never” (point 1) use QR code

reader, while 5 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, “rarely” (point 2) use it. A number of 6

respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, “sometimes” (point 3) use QR code reader, while no one

chooses point 4 that equals to “very often.” Lastly, only 2 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator,

“always” (point 5) use QR code reader in their work with young people.

● The twelfth set of columns measures the frequency of virtual reality usage. Again, the vast majority of the

sample, that is 22 individuals, of whom 4 are non-formal educators, indicates that they “never” (point 1) use

virtual reality in their work with young people, while 4 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator,

“rarely” (point 2) use it. A number of 6 respondents, of whom is a non-formal educator, use virtual reality

“sometimes” (point 3), while only 2 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, use it “very often” (point



4) and merely 1 respondent, who is teaching in a formal educational setting, “always” (point 5) uses virtual

reality in her/his work with young people.

● The thirteenth set of columns measures the frequency of videogames usage. Again, the vast majority of the

sample, that is 20 individuals, of whom 4 are non-formal educators, indicate that they “never” (point 1) use

videogames, while 10 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, indicate that they “rarely” (point 2)

use them. A number of 3 respondents, who all work in formal education, use them “sometimes” (point 3),

while only 2 individuals, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, indicate that they use videogames “very often”

(point 4). Lastly, no one chooses point 5 that translates to “always.”

● The fourteenth set of columns measures how often the respondents use other digital/multimedia tools in their

work with young people. Almost the absolute majority of the sample, which corresponds to 28 respondents,

of whom 6 are non-formal educators, indicates that “never” (point 1) uses other than the listed

digital/multimedia tools, while 2 “rarely” (point 2) use other tools. Only 1 formal educator “sometimes” (point

3) uses other digital/multimedia tools, while 2 formal educators indicate that they use other tools “very often.”

Lastly, 2 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, “always” (point 5) use other digital/ multimedia

tools in their work with young people.

Taking as a starting point the experience of our respondents, the second question investigates the level of importance

of using digital/multimedia tools in education activities. Particularly, there are five (5) statements24 which are measured

using a five-point Likert Scale with the following response anchors: not important (point 1), slightly important (point 2),

moderately important (point 3), important (point 4), and very important (point 5). The graph below summarizes all

responses for all five statements, but let’s break it down to explore its constituent parts.

● The first set of columns indicates whether digital/multimedia tools in education activities increase young

people’s interest and motivation. No respondent believes that this is not important (point 1) and 2

respondents, who work in formal educational settings, suggest that it is slightly important (point 2). There are

4 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, who suggest that digital/multimedia tools in education

activities are moderately important (point 3) for increasing young people’s interest and motivation, but the

vast majority of the sample highlights their importance. For that matter, a number of 12 respondents, of whom

4 are non-formal educators, believe that digital/multimedia tools in education are important (point 4) and half

24 The five statements are as follow: a) Increase interest and motivation of young people; b) Can complement regular lesson; c) Provide opportunity for dialogue; d) Are too difficult to work with; e) Do not help to address such issues.



of the respondents, that is 17 individuals of whom 2 are non-formal educators, believe that they are very

important (point 5) for increasing young people’s interest and motivation.

● The second set of columns indicates whether using digital/multimedia tools in education activities, can

complement regular lesson. No respondent believes that this is not important (point 1) and 3 respondents,

who work in school units, suggest that it is slightly important (point 2). There are 3 additional respondents, of

whom 1 is a non-formal educator, who suggest that digital/multimedia tools usage in education activities is

moderately important (point 3) for complementing regular lessons, yet 11 respondents, of whom 3 are non-

formal educators, indicate that they are important (point 4). Again, the majority of individuals, that is 18

respondents, 3 of whom are non-formal educators, believe that using digital/multimedia tools in education

activities is very important (point 5) for complementing regular lessons.

● The third set of columns indicates whether digital/multimedia tools in education activities provide opportunity

for dialogue. No respondent believes that this is not important (point 1) and 5 respondents, of whom 1 is a

non-formal educator, suggest that it is slightly important (point 2). There is 1 formal educator who suggests

that digital/multimedia tools usage in education activities is moderately important (point 3) for providing

opportunities for dialogue, yet 14 respondents, of whom 3 are non-formal educators, indicate that

digital/multimedia tools are important (point 4) for fostering opportunities for dialogue. Again, the majority of

the respondents, that is 15 individuals of whom 3 are non-formal educators, believes that digital/multimedia

tools in education activities are very important (point 5) for providing opportunities for dialogue.

● The fourth set of columns indicates whether digital/multimedia tools in education activities are too difficult to

work with. A number of 11 respondents, of whom 3 are non-formal educators, believe that this is not important

(point 1) and 12 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, suggest that it is slightly important (point

2). There are 8 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, who find the statement moderately

important (point 3) and only 1 respondent indicates that it is important (point 4). Lastly, a number of 3 formal

educators believe that the statement is very important (point 5).

● The fifth set of columns indicates whether digital/multimedia tools in education activities do not help to

address such issues. The majority of our respondents, 17 individuals of whom 2 are non-formal educators,

suggest that this statement is not important (point 1) and 11 respondents, of whom 4 are non-formal

educators, suggest that it is slightly important (point 2) pointing out the importance of including

digital/multimedia tools in education activities when trying to address such issues. There are 4 respondents, of

whom 1 is a non-formal educator, who find the statement moderately important (point 3) and 2 respondents,

who work in formal school units, indicate that it is important (point 4). Lastly, only 1 formal educator believes

that the statement is very important (point 5) pointing out that digital/multimedia tools do not help to address

such issues in education activities.

The third question asks from the respondents to evaluate the use of digital tools in their school/organisation. A number

of 2 respondents, who work in formal educational settings, indicate that in their school, digital tools usage is poor (blue),

while 4 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, believe it is fair (red). Over half of the respondents, that is 18

individuals of whom 4 are non-formal educators, indicate that digital tools usage in their school/organization is good

(orange), while 9 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, indicate that it is very good (green). Lastly, only 2

individuals, who work in formal educational settings, evaluate the use of digital tools in their school as excellent (purple).



The fourth question asks from the respondents to indicate how important does the Head Teacher/ Director consider the

use of digital/multimedia tools in education activities is. A number of 11 respondents, who work only in formal

educational settings, indicate that the head teacher/director considers the use of digital tools very important (blue),

while the vast majority of the sample, 21 individuals of whom 5 are non-formal educators, indicate that the head

teacher/director considers the use of digital tools as important as other tools (red). Lastly, only 3 respondents, of whom

2 are non-formal educators, believe that the head teacher/director considers the use of digital tools less important than

other tools (orange).

The fifth question of part III asks from the respondents to indicate whether they have ever attended a course on digital

tools for education. Over one-third of the respondents, namely 13 individuals of whom only 1 is a non-formal educator,

answer that they have attended more than one (blue) courses on digital tools for education. A number of 6 respondents,

of whom only 1 is a non-formal educator, indicate that they have attended once (red) this kind of course, while a

significant number of 16 respondents, of whom 5 are non-formal educators, indicate that they have never (orange)

attended a course on digital tools for education, suggesting the importance of providing both formal and non-formal

educators with this kind of courses.



The following question, that is the sixth question, asks from the respondents whose answer was affirmative, to specify

the educational course they have attended to. The responses we have received are the following:

● PEDAGOGICAL INSTITUTE IN CYPRUS, CyTEA conference

● ECDL Certification & Attending most of the specific trainings on technology literacy organized by the

Pedagogical Institute.

● Webinars organized by the Ionian University in collaboration with the Cyprus Pedagogical Institute.

● Attending non-compulsory seminars on technology in education organized by the Pedagogical Institute.

● Certificate of Completion, “Flipped Classroom and the 21st Century Skills.” Seminar Series, University of

Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus, November and December, 2014.

● Certificate of Completion, “Distance Learning/E-Learning Training & Course Development Workshop”, Distance

Learning Unit, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus, September 24, 2014.

● Certificate of Completion, “Effective Use of the Internet in Language Teaching: What and How.” In-Service

Training Activity, SOCRATES Comenius 2, The Amsterdam Maastricht Summer University, Amsterdam,

Netherlands, August 2005.

● Participant, TEAMS and STREAM Microsoft Office 365 Training: Microsoft Teams with Classroom Experiences

and OneNote Class Notebook + Microsoft Stream; PowerPoint Recording Add-in; PowerPoint Translator, Office

365, Technology Enhanced Learning Center, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus, November 14, 2017.

● Master’s Degree on Technology in Education

● Six (6) days of Erasmus+ KS1

● A 6-hour long training facilitated by IT teachers within school unit.

The seventh question indicates the respondents’ opinion about the existent training opportunities on digital/multimedia

tools on a local/national level. As indicated in the chart below, a number of 6 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal

educator, consider the existent training opportunities poor (blue), while 11 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal

educators, consider them fair (red). A number of 12 respondents, of whom 4 are non-formal educators, think of the

existent training opportunities on digital/multimedia tools as good (orange) and 5 respondents, who work only in formal

educational settings, believe they are very good (green). Only 1 formal educator considers excellent (purple) the

existent training opportunities on digital/multimedia tools on a local/national level.



In the eighth question, the respondents are asked to answer what kind of difficulties do teachers/youth

workers/education practitioners face in getting specific training on digital/multimedia tools. A number of five (5)

difficulties 25 are listed, whose importance is evaluated using a five-point Likert scale with the following response

anchors: not important (point 1), slightly important (point 2), moderately important (point 3), important (point 4), and

very important (point 5).26 The graph below summarizes all responses for all five statements, but let’s break it down to

explore its constituent parts.

● The first set of columns measures the importance of time availability/time constraints for educators to get

specific training on digital/multimedia tools. A number of 1 respondent, who works in formal educational

settings, indicates that time availability is not important (point 1) and 4 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal

educator, indicate that it is slightly important (point 2). A number of 8 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal

educators, point out that time availability is moderately important (point 3) in order to get specific training on

25 The five difficulties are as follow: a)Time availability; b) Poor interest in these topics within school context; c) Low personal interest in these topics; d) Lack of technical equipment, connectivity etc; e) Few opportunities to apply them. 26 See notes 3 and 7 above, concerning translation



digital/multimedia tools, while the majority of our respondents, namely 14 individuals of whom 3 are non-

formal educators, consider time availability important (point 4). Lastly, 8 respondents, of whom only 1 is a non-

formal educator, find time availability very important (point 5) for training purposes.

● The second set of columns indicates whether there is poor interest in these topics within school context. The

first point (not important) was checked by 0 respondents, while 6 of them, who all work in formal school units,

indicate that poor interest within school context is slightly important (point 2) difficulty. A number of 14

respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, believe that poor interest in these topics within school

context is moderately important (point 3), while 13 individuals, of whom 5 are non-formal educators, believe

that it is important (point 4), suggesting that each school/organization unit has to put more effort in achieving

trainings on digital/multimedia tools. Finally, 2 respondents, who work in formal educational settings, indicate

poor interest as very important (point 5) difficulty for getting specific trainings.

● The third set of columns evaluates whether low personal interest in these topics affects educators in getting

specific trainings on digital/multimedia tools. A number of 7 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator,

evaluate this difficulty as not important (point 1) pointing out their willingness to be trained in

digital/multimedia tools, while 6 respondents, who all work in formal educational settings, believe low personal

interest is slightly important (point 2). A number of 9 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, indicate

that low personal interest is moderately important (point 3) and 9 more individuals, of whom 4 are non-formal

educators, indicate that it is important (point 4), possibly suggesting that educators need motivation and

incentives to attend this kind of trainings. Lastly, 4 respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, find low

personal interest in these topics very important (point 5).

● The fourth set of columns evaluates whether the lack of technical equipment, connectivity etc. affects

educators in getting specific training on digital/multimedia tools. A number of 2 respondents, of whom is a

non-formal educator, believe that this difficulty is not important (point 1) and 2 more respondents, who both

are formal educators, believe that it is slightly important (point 2). The majority of the sample, namely 14

respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, indicate that the lack of technical equipment, connectivity

etc is moderately important (point 3) for educators to get a specific training on digital/multimedia tools. A

number of 7 respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, indicate that this particular lack is important

(point 4), while 10 individuals, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, believe that it is very important (point 5)

pointing out the importance of maintaining good technical equipment and connectivity.

● The fifth set of columns evaluates whether there are few opportunities to apply the trainings. A number of 5

respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, believe that this difficulty is not important (point 1) and 8

respondents, of whom 1 is a non-formal educator, believe that it is slightly important (point 2). Also, a number

of 7 respondents, who all work in formal educational settings, indicate that the difficulty of having few

opportunities to apply these specific trainings is moderately important (point 3). The majority of the sample,

namely 9 respondents, of whom 3 are non-formal educators, indicate that this particular difficulty is important

(point 4) suggesting the importance of more opportunities for them to grasp in relation to specific trainings on

digital/multimedia tools in order to apply them, while 6 individuals, of whom 2 are non-formal educators,

believe that it is very important (point 5).

The ninth and last question of part III examines the extent to which the respondents are interested in participating in a

free training on ICT and media literacy as didactic tools. As the graph below indicates, there is no respondent who is not

at all interested (blue) in participating in a free training, while only 1 respondent, who works in formal education, is not

very interested (red). Moreover, a number of 7 respondents, of whom only 1 is a non-formal educator, indicate that

they are moderately interested (orange) in a free training on ICT and media literacy as didactic tools. A number of 14

respondents, of whom 4 are non-formal educators, indicate that they are interested (green) in a free training, while 13

respondents, of whom 2 are non-formal educators, are very interested (purple) suggesting the importance of organizing

this kind of trainings and most educators’ willingness to participate in.



In the fourth part, the respondents give their preferences about the educational trainings. Questions 1 to 4 are merely

about logistics. Nevertheless, it is important to report on the answers to questions 5 and 6.

In the fifth question, 21 teachers (6 of them non formal educators) declare their interest in attending a workshop/

training regardless of a professional recognition for said training while 13 teachers (all of them formal educators) declare

that they would not be interested in participating if that is the case.

In the sixth question, teachers were invited to express their expectations from a future training and the subjects they

would like to be included. The answers vary:

i) Global Citizenship Education

ii) Media Literacy, Digital Tools and Multimedia, including Social Media

iii) Migrations, Human Rights of Refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants and educational practices promoting inclusive

societies

iv) Peace Education

v) Intercultural Dialogue

vi) Methodology for the use of technology in spaces without the adequate equipment, teaching in alternative teaching

environments (eg. museums, public spaces)

vii) To gain readiness for a correct management of sociocultural and educational needs of the students with a migrant

background in secondary education, and for responding to serious issues that arise.

viii) Information about latest developments and the exchange of good practices.

ix) Development of lesson plans and of an online material platform.

The fifth part includes only personal details of the respondents. An analysis of this part is therefore unnecessary and

will not be undertaken.




Various important needs arise mainly from Parts II and III, and partly from Part IV.

1. Primary need for ICT and Media Literacy

According to the results there is a clear gap primarily in ICT and Media Literacy, and then, mainly for formal

educators, in Education for Global Citizenship, Migrations, Intercultural Dialogue, International Cooperation and Peace

Education. There is some more experience for both formal and non formal educators on Human Rights education.

More specifically, this gap creates a need for both formal and non-formal educators to receive training on ICT

and Media Literacy since 26 out of 35 educators indicated that they need a training on ICT. The second most prominent

subject on which the respondents need training is Global Citizenship Education (22 of of 35), while the third is Peace

Education along with International Cooperation and Development (20 each) (Q.11). It is interesting that this particular

need is reflected on the way formal educators self-assess their level of knowledge and experience regarding the main

topics discussed throughout the questionnaire and the project at large. Having this in mind, a number of 18 out of 28

formal educators slightly agree/agree/strongly agree that they have little knowledge on these issues (Q.9). Particularly,

the majority of formal educators, that is 26 out of 28, indicated that they have no/little/some experience on the concept

of Global Citizenship Education. The same goes for the concept of Migrations as 23 out of 28 formal educators indicate

that they have no/little/some experience on it. Moreover, a number of 22 and 20 formal educators indicate that they

have no/little/some experience on International Cooperation and Peace Education respectively. Having these numbers

in mind, a gap is pointed out in the level of formal educators’ experience and expertise on the issues at hand (Q.3).

Although the Cyprus Ministry of Education and Culture throughout its Action Plan for the past three or four academic

years emphasize the need of raising awareness on the issues of racism and interculturality and promoting equality and

respect, the respondents of our questionnaire, who teach in a formal education setting, indicate that there is a greater

need for them to enhance their knowledge about these issues.

It becomes apparent from Part III that generally, formal educators use ICT less than non formal educators (Q.1)

although there is generally a recognition by the schools’ Directors and the respondents themselves of the importance

of the digital tools and multimedia), not only for boosting the interest of the students but also as a complement for the

regular lessons and as a very good channel to promote dialogue on the topics addressed. Furthermore, the digital tools

and multimedia more widely used are online platforms, blogs, social networks, videos and web documentaries, while

there is a very little use of QR codes, virtual reality and videogames.

2. Need for long-term training opportunities

There is a need for more and long-term training opportunities, particularly for formal educators.

Interestingly, nearly one-third of formal educators (12 out of 28) have never attended a course on the issues

pertinent to the project (Q.5), while of those who attended a course, very few had had the opportunity to attend long-

lasting training courses (Q.6). This particular gap regarding training opportunities is reflected on both formal and non-

formal educators’ interest to participate in a free training about these issues (Q.12).

Concerning specifically ICT and Media Literacy (Part III), there is a clear lack of training opportunities. 16 of the

respondents have never received relevant training and 6 have only received training once. This gap is apparent for both

formal and non formal educators. For those who have received training at least once (19 out of 35), they mention

different sources of training; one of them was the Pedagogical Institute of Cyprus.27 However, there seems to be a need

for long-term and updating training available to teachers.

27 The Pedagogical Institute is the formal body responsible for the continuous education and training of teachers in Cyprus.



Difficulties in following a training come from lack of time but also a poor interest at school. However, the

majority of the participants (21 teachers, 6 of them in non formal education) would still participate to a training course

even if it is not professionally recognised, fact that proves the importance they give to the topics and their relevance to

their work. However, we must not ignore the 13 answers, all of them from formal educators, that declares a lack of

interest to participate in a training course if this is not professionally recognised; this shows the importance of a

professional recognition for a course and the weight of the difficulties mentioned by the teachers, including lack of time

and lack of interest in the school context.

3. Need for more accessibility of available tools

There is an obvious need for the use of more tools when addressing issues pertinent to human rights,

migrations, global citizenship education, intercultural dialogue, peace education etc in formal education settings.

The majority of formal educators (18 out of 28) slightly agree/agree/strongly agree that this gap exists,

suggesting that there is a need for more and easily accessible tools that they will help formal educators to address these

complex issues (Q.7). This goes hand in hand with the fact that only 15 educators chose multimedia as a way to work

on the topics addressed in the framework of the project (Q.10).

4. Need for increasing students’ interest

An important number of educators considers students’ involvement poor or fair, while only one as excellent,

pointing out a need for a greater students’ involvement and interest on the issues at hand. A number of 16 formal

educators slightly agree/agree/strongly agree that it is very difficult to encourage students’ interest for a topic that is

not assessed at school (Q.9). At the same time, educators find it often difficult to encourage learning on topics not

addressed at school. The results show a great need to improve educators’ abilities to use innovative methodologies and

tools as 5 out of 7 non-formal educators and 27 out of 28 formal educators indicate a need for improving their abilities;

this indicates that there is a gap in new methodological tools for them to use in their educational settings in order to

increase youngsters’ participation and for them to experiment with new methodologies and attract students’ interest

(Q.9).

Recommendations

1. Create more training opportunities for both formal and non formal education professionals on the use of digital

tools and multimedia for educational purposes.

2. Create more training opportunities for teachers, both short-term and long-term, on the issues at hand for them

to feel more comfortable with the knowledge they need to acquire given the fact that they have to engage and

initiate discussions about these issues with their students. Focus on the topics addressed by MigratED (Global

Citizenship Education, Migrations, Human Rights, Peace Education, International Cooperation, Intercultural

Dialogue).

3. Broaden the use of available innovative tools to teachers to use for approaching their students and engaging

in detailed discussions with them on issues related to Human Rights, GCE, Peace Education etc. Make these

tools more accessible to teachers, especially in a formal education setting.

4. Create an online platform or disseminate existing platforms with useful resources, e-learning courses and

material for classroom use.

5. Give incentives to students in order to attract their interest.



6. Secure a professional recognition for the training courses to secure more relevance and interest for formal

education professionals to participate.

National Needs Assessment Reports · and then contacted for the submission of questionnaire. The...

Documents

Transcript of National Needs Assessment Reports · and then contacted for the submission of questionnaire. The...