To measure the rate of success of the Specialised Course, which included Study Visits in 4 different cities located in the 4 countries of the S.T.R.E.E.T. project (London, Werfenweng, Bled and Turin) featuring different situations for a prospective mobility manager for sustainable tourism, we asked the participants (i.e., learners) to evaluate the learning activities through an Evaluation Questionnaire (EQ). It included both closed and open questions and was implemented as a Google module. To encourage genuine answers, we decided to make the questionnaire anonymous.
We collected 24 replies out of 24 participants
The evaluation questionnaire was divided in two parts following a top-down approach, starting from specific questions to get a general evaluation of the whole project.
In the first part of the EQ, we included specific questions aimed to assess the participants’ opinion on several aspects of the Specialised Course.
The organisation of the study visits was assessed in terms of:
- information provided by the sending partner about the programme of each study visit
- money allowance allocated by the sending partner for each study visit
- the way accommodation, transport and meals were organised
- support provided by the hosting partner
The contents of the study visits were assessed in terms of:
- relevance of the contents/programme of each study visit
- relevance of each study visit’s contents/programme to the project’s topics
- relevance of the contents/programme to the participant’s future career
The set of available answers ranged from “very good” to “very poor” in a 5-degree scale. As not all the participants attended every study visit and with the aim of avoiding biased results, we introduced the N/A (Not Applicable) response to be selected if the participants did not attend one of the four study visits. The results of the EQ are included in the following pages.
In the second part of the EQ, we included more general questions aimed to evaluate participants’ opinion about the whole S.T.R.E.E.T. project (both the on-line course and the study visits).
The set of available answers ranged from 1 (Not at all) to 5 (Fully). In particular, we asked them if their initial expectations were met (average value 3.92), if they learnt something new (average value 4.38) and if they would recommend this experience to other people (average value 4.33).
Finally, we asked the participants to give their opinion about the best and the worst aspect/s of the project and provide general suggestions or comments.
With regard to the best aspect of the project, many participants highlighted the intercultural networking and knowledge sharing between participants.
With regard to the worst aspect of the project they mainly focused on the wish of deepening some contents rather than others. This observation was probably due to the great heterogeneity of the participants in terms of educational background and study courses currently attended.
As general comments, many of them suggested to organise more practical lessons and group works to put into practice what they learnt during the basic course and the study visits.
The detailed results of the EQ are enclosed in the following pages.