1. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 1 Grundtvig NA meeting Malta 26–27 April, 2002 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips Eija Wilén

2. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 2 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips What do Learning Partnerships seek to achieve? Learning Patnership is a framework for small-scaled cooperation activities focuses more on process aims to broaden the participation of smaller organisation (Socrates Guidelines, p. 101)

3. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 3 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips Learning in Learning Partnership All the participants are learners in LP in spite of their status in their institution High level of learners’ activity Empowerment of the learning situation by the learners Learning from each other Partnership as a social environment supports individual learning processes Reflective learning, to learn from one’s own learning, how to learn and how to make it visible to the others

4. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 4 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips To learn from each other’s experiences requires an efficient and continuous communication regular face-to-face meetings enough time and space for building the team face-to-face meetings cannot be replaced by virtual meetings

5. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 5 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips To learn from each other’s experiences requires partnership has an agreed thematic area for the joint work as a starting point: a problem, need for development, need for new ideas.. partners have already knowledge and experiences on the thematic area the level of expertise can be variable, without any experiences the exchange of ideas is not possible

6. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 6 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips To reach and maintain the motivation for project work: Instead of focusing on products or on some external events more focus on the starting situation How to choose the partners? How to create a balanced partnership? Do they have same interest areas? Are they motivated to work together? Do they have same ideas of joint project work?

7. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 7 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips In GR 2 application form is asked: “The summary of the organisation’s expertise in terms in main activities…” and “Provide information on the nature and expertise of the organisations..” More description of partners’ real capacities and interests to work together is needed to assess the preconditions of the partnership to work jointly with the theme.

8. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 8 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips Planning in LP Goal and objectives: intentions and direction of the joint work on a large scale Milestones: the main lines of the activities, cover the whole project period, divide the time available into certain parts Short-term planning: a rough plan which can be modified during the learning process Instead of concentrating too much on detailed planning more attention should be paid to reporting in renewals and activity reports

9. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 9 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips Evaluation Self-evaluation is a natural choice for evaluation method in LP learning environment Evaluation on two levels: 1)observation of one’s own learning process (learning diary), 2)sharing individual learning experiences with other learners in the partnership

10. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 10 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips Dissemination of joint results and products of LP collective learning process of the partnership

11. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 11 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips Role of application and report forms for the applicants: Tools to guide learning process of the partnerships Tools to make the plans and ideas of the applicants visible to others “The answer depends on the question”

12. GRUNDTVIG 4/2002 | 12 Process-based Learning in Learning Partnerhips Urgent questions to be solved How to create a clear profile for LP? What are the basic features of LP approved by the NA s and the Commission? Is the difference between the average grant of LP and GR1 justified? Does this mean that process-oriented learning is less demanding than product-oriented?