NOTE TO THE CONSORTIUM: The feedback received during the national piloting and synthetized in this report, would be further analysed by the L2W Consortium, in order to decide which suggestions and recommendations we can take on board or adapt to suit the needs of our end users, and how this can be done from a work-load point of view. We need to take into consideration what we have promised to deliver in the approved application, and keep in mind that first the original outcomes and activities should be delivered and only then, the additional outcomes.
The partners already devoted hard work to improve key outcomes, and the Toolbox that is at this stage much larger than we originally promised.
The partners will decide which would be the most “necessary” changes to take on board and will pay attention not to develop “too many” additional features. We need to ensure that we do not overdo this as well in terms of content but targeting the quality of the existing content.
In this chapter we present a compilation of feedback derived from all partners surrounding the development of the pilot courses as well as associated aspects that are not reflected in the evaluation form. The reflections also included the aspect related to the development of the Pilot courses (perspective of partners as trainers) and also their identification of improvements needed on the materials tested
From the Czech Republic, and Portugal, it became clear to us, that many aspects of positive psychology are already being used very actively, hence many of ideas behind the tools are not new to them in this sense. We also learned that social workers in the Czech Rep. and Portugal are very careful about using tools that have a “psychological” aspect. They expressed concerns, that the use of some of the tools might create some sort of psychological reaction, that they as professionals are not equipped to deal with. The Czech pilot course participants suggested narrowing the scope of the tools in order to avoid possible psychological trauma which they are not qualified to handle. An example of this could be using the “Circle of happiness” to analyse work opportunities rather than one’s whole life. Adaptations to the tools, to cater for these needs have been discussed in the consortium.
During the workshops, the following observations were collected by the workshop facilitators whilst testing the tools/during the workshops:
Individual and group contract
- OK (minor changes and suggestions)
- Important to start each session with clarification of what will happen during the session. Where are we now, and which steps will we take, and where will we end up.
- the perception of pictures is dependent on cultural background; we can use it, but we risk that a person with different cultural background will understand it quite different; it is nevertheless possible to explain in discussions, not a grave problem
- Do not mirror when a person is explaining their values – just listen and let them speak.
- more detailed instructions; need to clarify more to have the real perception on the goals;
Values by Self- Assessment
- Wheel: choose a coherent numeric value range for the Wheel, so that the scheme matches the values 1-10 of the participants.
- In tested version the current Wheel’s values are from 0 to 10, whilst the participants had to use the values from 1 to 10; Divide this activity in present form in two: Part I and Part II.
- Part I – questions from 1 to 4 and the definition of the goals;
- Part II – some of the persons that tested the activity believe that in most cases it is too soon to explore the part on HOW, WHEN, WHAT…. This being one of the first activities in the Toolbox, they suggested that Part II should be explored according to the different groups and timing.
- Regarding the values group discussions: trainer must not mirror what the participants are saying. Let them say what they associate with the image. But do not repeat or try to analyse/copy what is being said. Just listen.
- The group activity is a good activity, as the sharing in the group inspires the others to think about their own associations to what is being said, get insight into other’s values in order to work on the development of their own future goals and values.
- Using the word VALUE/S: Everyone can talk about values, not difficult to find words to describe them. There are no right answers. Perhaps the use of the word “values” should be re-evaluated, perhaps expand to talk about a good experience/memory from your (participant) past/present.
- Sensitive ISSUE: Groups of young adults who are socially vulnerable may have difficulties sharing with others for fear of “losing face”. it is important that the person leading this activity has won their trust, or that they feel comfortable in the group.
- Talking about those experiences that are positive in your life can help you get an insight in your future plans.
- a useful tool to clarify conditions and possibilities of future growth; we can recommend especially in case the client does not have any concrete idea about his/her future occupation (No. 3 Solitaire)
- They would like to test with clients from Arabic environment – is it possible to translate cards in Arabic?
- Difficult to play solitaire, the participants felt discomfort in having to “rank” their strengths. Perhaps we need to rethink the name of the character strengths game “solitaire”. Participants felt very/quite uncomfortable having to sort their strengths from best to less good they found it difficult, too complex, and felt like they had to leave something out.
- They felt more comfortable in choosing only 5-7 cards, and explaining why they felt they represented them best, then choose 3 more, as a supplement to their strengths.
- More detailed instructions needed;
- Need very detailed and specific instructions for printing the cards;
- Include a technical guide for printing; You must find advanced settings for printing. When printing the pages, ensure that you print on both sides and choose the option; flip over the shorter edge.
- Review and correct the text on the cards. Some of them are not correct and are different from the VIA questionnaire – at the basis of strength identification, which is an American version, and may happen that when translating from English to Portuguese that sme of the meaning changes. But we need to keep in mind here, that it is not supposed to be the same text on the cards and the VIA activity. We have made our own version of the strengths in the strength cards.
- Some of the participants believed that the words and explanations should be similar; this cannot be achieved, it is not possible to copy the text from the VIA text. (copyright etc)
- Size of the DK cards are not the same as the CZ versions.
- Make the image larger, with smaller margin. (same size as before)
- The larger sizes of the cards should all be available for all languages, in identical sizes and layout. Important as the images will be too small with the smaller versions of the cards.
Strength cards images (blind test)
A blind test was carried out on the images for the strength cards, and we received the following reactions (only images that need changing are included here, the rest are ok):
- Perspective; “Two people talking” image: doesn’t reflect a strength –suggest replacing it with the image of two people looking out over a landscape. Mette is finding a suitable image.
- Curiosity; testing persons guessed that this image was for the perspective strength, needs to be changed.
- Forgiveness; looks nice but identified as love
- Love of learning; change to two boys reading books
- Self-regulation: don’t understand the image, inner regulation (the one with dogs and cat better) – the picture is contradicting itself
- Spirituality; should not reflect religiousness
- Hope; can’t see it, too dark, can’t see water and snow – new suggestion plant growing. Is also optimism.
- Leadership; the coach needs to be more in focus
- Appreciation of beauty; too dark, comment was made: maybe he is thinking he will commit suicide?
- Gratitude; it’s “cold” looks like praying.. suggestion to replace with an image of someone giving a gift or a glass of water (possible to use the image from humility here instead)
- Perseverance; not very clear what this represents, perhaps find an image with a marathon runner close to the finish line – masculine and sport.
- Zest; Good – but would rather see a child on a trampoline or something along those lines
- Love; don’t see the heart – didn’t like it (it looked like blood)- suggestion to replace with two persons, in relation with each other. (not man and woman)
- Humility – perhaps a Tibetan monk instead?
- Prudence; perhaps something fragile – (in Danish, change the text on the back to “fornuft og omtanke”)
- Honesty; Add “troværdighed” to the Danish version
- More detailed instructions would be needed
- Review the questions. Some of the questions are quite similar and very/quite hard to distinguish among them and to thus what to answer. Coneqt and MYO suggest removing the questions and describe the activity; explain the strength and place the card corresponding to the strength on the table.
VIA Character Strengths Test
- more detailed instructions; more detailed suggestions about how to explore/combine this VIA test with the Solitaire; We need to make it clearer, that the strength cards and the VIA test are 2 different self-assessment methods, which cater to 2 different learning styles, hence they are not the same and should not be exactly the same. Suggest, if possible, that the test is taken first.
- Regarding; a comment that there is no need to register the Top 5 strengths – The test is on line and the participants will get the result (on paper or pdf file) For the online version: if it’s not possible to print, the hand out can be used to register the order of the strengths, or the order of the strength cards. This will help clients to remember the order in which they placed their strengths.
Wheel of Life
- Maybe not suitable to (analyse) the whole life of clients especially refugees; they do not have many reasons to perceive dimensions of their lives positively at the moment, so the graphics will most probably put them in depression. We will have to refer to the description of the activity, where it is explained ow to use this activity. Perhaps we need to underline, that it is not an activity which places focus on 9 being better than 3 etc, rather an activity which focuses on visualising where the individual is right now and where he or she would like to go.
- Possible solution: the same as before – in some cases, to use it only to analyse a certain segment of life, use it as a motivational tool (e. g. work, living, language learning, etc.)
- Otherwise, it is possible to use it more widely – e. g. when choosing school or kindergarten for children, etc. (factors: distance, language used at school, happiness of children, etc.) This could correspond to pros and cons list making.
Assessment for options for future jobs
- It is good in case the client does not have a clear professional specialization; it can help to clarify the type of personality in the process of looking for future occupation (indsæt I purpose of exercise)
- When tested on unemployed youths (18 years): They did not feel it changed that much for them, and their perception of future career paths, although it may have confirmed what they already thought.
- 1: Suggestion: the trainer reads the content, and the activity is completed in plenum. Whilst testing in small groups, we received the following feedback:
- Difficult to understand what needed to be done. Took a while to understand the TOL acronym was for tools… not all the acronym make sense, also see People-PER.
- Change some of the text in instructions; give more simple instructions; e.g. replace Professions dreams and write only Professions desired
- We need to include guiding Qs to each step: why should they do this activity? How do we talk about the activity?
- Change some of the professions in the table – Step 3;
- There is no such thing as a meat cutter in English, perhaps we mean a butcher?
- Improve the instructions along the activity – it is very long and complex. For example: at the end of step 4 give the instruction to check the professions according to the Code. Instead of a code, perhaps write the whole word, eg instead of TOL – TOOLS and in smaller font
- Step 2: score chart to be completed directly after to make it less confusing in the end. One step at a time, followed by sum up activity after each step. The score is calculated for step 2 directly after filling out step 2.
- Result profile: Transfer results from step 2 (line 2) to the last activity (step 4).
- Something needs to be explained on the sum up activity of step 4.
- After the 3 highest values at the end of activity; we need to create a link between professions dreams and results profile. Do they see a connection, or what is it we want them to realise here?
- Title of activity: 4 steps to identify future career paths (remove “4 steps to identify future” from the title) – new title; Future career paths
- Do not understand observations/suggestions text on p 47 – the information is divergent. Please elaborate?
- Info text: connect “interest” to working with “values”.
- In the dk version we can link to the online tool: job compass
- Thicker border lines around the job categories – visually confusing.
- Well-known, the trainers have used it for years
- This tool is used already by the technicians, we propose to replace it/complete it/ give the possibility to use another analysis that explores Skills – Tree of Skills HOWEVER: the SWOT works, and it can be used, even if we already know it, it is not unnecessary as a tool.
Learning Positive Emotions:
- replace the word Teacher;
- improve the instructions/give more details;
- 4.1.1. is too complex. There are different emotions/theories presented – Paul Ekman and Barbara Fredrikson, and there is no explanation about them, only the definition of some of them (quite confusing); PT suggest keeping only Barbara Fredrikson. add another Handout with suggestions of positive sentences to use in the activity;
- Some participants in the training think that this would not appear suitable to recommend for work with refugees and migrants as, for instance, they risk to only strengthen their dependency on the ethnic community and weaken their capacity for being independent and the ability to become integrate into the society
- May need to be explained how to use in particular with refugees, to find out who can help them OUTSIDE their familiar network.
- More detailed and specific instructions, for other issues?
- Replace the diagram, very hard to fill and it does not appear very relevant;
- Change some of the questions
- Lots of questions regarding the ABC Model and its relationship with the activity; this activity really needs to be discussed with the partners. When the activity was tried in Denmark it was quite different
- Where to describe the situations – positive and negative? How will the participants explore these situations? There is no place to register any reflections or conclusions;
- there are a lot of handouts in this activity but it’s quite hard to understand how and when they can be used and related to the diamond;
Tolerance to the Differences
- The images presented are well known to participants from Portugal and used in many contexts; to maintain this activity we should really change the pictures; UCP and SCML have some activities to propose
- A helpful activity, and can be combined with other activities
- Minor adjustments to the text are needed.
- This activity is still missing in Toolbox and we really believe there should be one concerning this important issue; SCML and UCP have some activities to propose.
- Replace or complement this activity with the one we experienced in Denmark (the diagram that sums up all the explored values, strengths, goals, strategies, timings, etc.). With this, the participants can have all the information accessible and in the same place (much more visual).
- Sum-up activities should be added to Toolbox for each respective dimension and a Final sum-up activity for the end of the entire session. (total 4 sum up activities). Mette has created these documents and can be added to the toolbox.
- SCML and UCP suggested to add one more dimension: Decision making. With this dimension we would like to introduce the SMARTE Model activity and the Action Plan
- The introduction to Toolbox is now in the Conceptual Framework. But in DK participants noted that it belongs to the Toolbox and should be moved to there.
- All partners need to do a read-through of all materials, to ensure that the formulation is concrete and easy to understand.
- The header for the technical sheets is missing in the Toolbox, needs to be added, so it’s clear what these sheets are categorised as. We cannot refer to technical sheets, if it is not clearly and visibly stated that they are technical sheets.
- In Denmark, we received a remark about negative words associations. The wording along the lines of “ready to join the labour market” = , means that ‘you are not ready NOW’, which tells the individuals that at this point, they are not good enough.
- Can we find a new way of describing this which gives a more positive word association?
- Review all the questionnaires (for example: in Question 5, the scale is wrong and not following the questions; also, some of the questions are not relevant);
- We evaluate the Toolbox and the Manual always as a whole, we should evaluate them separately, at least once?
The course guide was evaluated with participants at the DK pilot workshops, we received the following feedback/suggestions:
- For Workshops, it would be good to have a collection of cases we can start with, to give grounds for reflection, setting the scene, and opening the theme for the day.
- Start the Workshops with expectations of the participants to these events.
- Cases should be handed out in an envelope, this makes the activity seem special and different, ensuring participants focus on the task.
- Introduce relevant games to the Workshop, we can start the day with. Good for creating motivation and energy. Games help you become a good Workshop facilitator.
- For the Course Guide, visuals are needed to highlight the entire process from start to finish (3 dimensions), perhaps an interactive diagram, can show the process, with fold-out topics for each dimension. – this is probably not possible to achieve in a pdf version, but suggested to perhaps find a way of creating this for the Moodle course version, as this would be online, or in the pdf version, link to the interactive diagram, which is placed on the website? Any suggestions how we can do something like this, if it’s even realistic?
- Create a visual of the journey that learners are going to undertake.
- We need to find out what will motivate the participants to L2W Workshops and how we (and future course facilitators) can demonstrate to future course participants, that L2W Workshops will change / improve their praxis and make their work easier and more efficient.
- Work from a concept of creating a visualisation of a Management dilemma –> deputy management dilemma -> employee dilemma.
- For the Genie, be more precise. Use the Can- Shall- Will triangle
- Make tips and practical info stand out with thought-bubbles, in the Course Guide, to make the practical info visual and easy to spot.
- Include in the theory part, Knud Illeris concept of lifelong learning, three dimensions of adult learning and competence development, learning styles, cooperative learning, mentoring for better learning, the learning triangle (use visuals to illustrate as much as possible)
- Include advice on how to motivate your colleagues to attend the workshop too
- How to prepare the Trainers to using the Toolbox
- Suggestion for ensuring the availability of continuous support and mentoring: online Forum with volunteers/ create a L2W Ambassadors Body who have attended our workshops (in the start guided by the L2W team), to provide assistance and guidance to trainers that attended a Workshop and need specific feedback, i.e. reference to CPD Continuous Professional Learning, and mentoring for successful learning. Also, this support would represent a BIG ++++ for the assurance of the continuation and sustainability of the results Live2Work project, after the funded period has ended.
The workshops were delivered to a total of 31 participants. Out of this number, a total of 30 attendees responded to the questionnaires.
The Danish team ran a 2-day workshop, supplemented by a 1-day blind test session. The blind test session was committed to testing strength and value cards as well as feedback sessions for the toolbox, course guide and the theories presented in the conceptual framework. In Denmark the workshop was organised by MYO and Coneqt, with a total of 9 participants; 2 days practical workshop: 25/11/17-26/11/17 and 1-day blind testing of image-based materials with MYO.
In Denmark the workshops were announced with an advert on Coneqt’s company social media page, and by contacting professional networks to invite them to attend the workshop. Upon the receipt of participants’ interest in attending the workshop, a date was arranged with participants to ensure their availability. It was agreed with participants, that the workshop would be held over a weekend, so as not to interfere with work hours of participants.
Czech and Portuguese teams ran a 3-day workshop, organised by Pelican with a total of 8 participants and a duration of 3 days: 19/10/17-23/10/17. The Czech workshop was advertised through networks and email, and participants registered to attend the workshop directly to Pelican.
In Portugal the workshop was run by SCML, IPAV, and UCP, with a total of 13 participants with a duration of 3 days: 22/09/2017-24/09/17. The workshops were advertised by contacting professional networks and sending invitations by e-mail to the respective networks.
Intellectual Outputs covered during the workshops:
- IO1: Development of life projects for psychosocial disadvantaged young adults and refugees: a theoretical manual
- IO2: Toolbox
- IO3: Course guide
- IO5: On-line audio-visual learning scenarios
The repartition of workshop participants per country is shown below:
|Diagram 1 – No. of participants in each Pilot test country|
Each partner got in touch with organisations and professionals working with Live2Work target groups and informed them of the project from the very beginning of the project funded period. Participants were invited by e-mail, or through advertisement on social media and through professional networks. Participants who attended, registered to attend the workshop through a contact person from the partner organisations.
Participants then attended a workshop introducing the Intellectual Outputs as mentioned above.
Profile of participants
The participation to the pilot workshop was predominantly feminine (29 women), with two male participants.
Their academic background has been fairly equally divided between the graduate’s, Bachelor’s, and master’s degrees.
Experience with professional vulnerable young adults
The total number of participants was 31, and a majority of these, have worked with professionally vulnerable young adults. We were pleased to attract a broad public and be able to also receive feedback from the professionals working with refugees and/or migrants.
The tables below show the characteristics and profile of the participants to L2W Pilot Workshops:
|Diagram 2 – Gender of participants|
Diagram 3 – Age of participants
Diagram 4 – Academic degree of participants
Diagram 5 – Academic area of participants
Diagram 6 – Target groups of participants
Diagram 7 – Years of experience of participants
The graphs reveal a diverse group of participants in all variables, besides gender. The participants were predominantly female and going ahead it would be beneficial to gain more feedback from the male demographic in order to detect possible differences in attitude. Despite this,
The participants gathered to take part in the pilot courses have been very satisfactory due to their wide variation in background.
We can observe that respondents were generally quite satisfied with the workshop. However, we received a fair deal of constructive feedback during the workshops in the three countries, which have been carefully noted by the L2W trainers that delivered the workshops.
The satisfaction rate was measured on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is ‘Not satisfied’ and 5 is ‘Very satisfied’.
As shown below, the majority of respondents generally appeared to find the course ‘Very satisfying’ or ‘Satisfying’. One respondent found it to be semi-satisfying, rating the satisfaction a 3. According to the respondents’ feedback, the structure and description of the activities could be improved.
The organization of the workshops and the communication during the course were also generally considered a positive experience for the respondents. As shown below, all the participants rated these as 4 or 5, satisfied to very satisfied.
Diagram 8 – Overall satisfaction of participants
Viewing the above graph, it is visible that satisfaction with the pilot courses rated very well globally. The variables; Time to complete the activities; Activities related to self-knowledge and ;Activities related to world-knowledge, scored the highest rating of not satisfied or unsatisfied, giving cause for improvement. All of the respondents’ feedback will be taken into consideration to aid the fine-tuning of the courses and project Outputs.
Satisfaction with the dimensions
Looking into the dimensions; Self-knowledge, World knowledge and Transition skills the results for Self-Knowledge, as perceived through the data, show that respondents are generally satisfied or very satisfied with the dimension. Although a great deal of feedback with suggestions for improvements and adjustments will be taken into consideration, we can see that the overall idea of working with this dimension seems to be accepted as suitable by all respondents.
The data reflecting satisfaction with the dimension World-Knowledge revealed a high score from the majority of respondents. However, two respondents rated their satisfaction with the activities as a 3. The feedback that reflect this result will be studied, to find out how this can be adapted to better suit the needs of end-users.
Diagram 9 – Satisfaction with activities related to self-knowledge
Diagram 10 – Satisfaction with activities related to world-knowledge
In relation to Transversal SKILLS activities, a majority of respondents gave high and very high satisfaction ratings, with only a small portion of respondents rating the activities as a 3.
Diagram 11 – Satisfaction with activities related to transition Transversal Skills
Feedback from the workshops will be taken into consideration during the adaptation phase. However, a clear majority of respondents have related the activities as very satisfying, showing that for the broad majority of end users, these activities are of good quality.
Usefulness of the tools for daily work with end-beneficiaries
A large portion of respondents worked with refugees and/or migrants, and due to language and/or other barriers, the toolbox may not be entirely transferrable without adaptations. Seeing that some respondents may not have been able to transfer the L2W tools directly into their work, it may be reflected in the feedback on how useful the tools are for the respondents. Some respondents also informed us, that they already used these methods in their everyday work, and thus these were not new to them. 50% of the respondents, however, did find the contents relevant to their work, and not all respondents were familiar with the tools.
Diagram 12 – Relevance and helpfulness to job of participants
23% of respondents did not think that they would be able to use all the tools, although they informed us, that some tools could be used with adjustments and adaptations. 36% rated that they would likely use the tools, and 40% more than likely would use the tools upon return to their work. This is a good sign in regards to the probability for exploitation.
Further dissemination and exploitation of L2W tools also shows a positive outlook, with over 50% of respondents claiming, that they would be more than likely to share their learnings from the workshop with their colleagues.
A collection of feedback from the surveys
General comments collected from participant feedback forms:
Feedback on possible improvements
- Activities for “model identification could be improved”
- I emphasize the management of Self-knowledge. It is a very unstructured public, with little criticism and with little self-analysis. This thought may help to characterize them for your focus (this is an unclear part of the comment). SMARTE – I also considered it very important in the structuring of Being
- I liked less: Role Model identification”
- To improve: swot analysis, final Framework, Network relationships and Role Model identification
- More positive activities: values
- Less positive activities: SWOT analysis, Diamond
- I would have liked to have time to try all the exercises, but that would probably take very long time. I will be happy to test these materials in my work
- I highlight positively the Solitary activity and the Diamond
- activities that I liked more: exploration and clarification of Values; Solitaire game
- In general, the instruments are well organized. The improvements / critics were extensively debated in the 3 sessions
- I liked the fact of relating the activities in each theme being always optional to your choice
- Activities that I highlight: 4 Steps to identify career possibilities; Solitary game; SMARTE goals.
- Positive: Bring together a set of instruments which would be otherwise more dispersed
- To be able to use them in a non- watertight way (separately , not all together)
- I have no (specific) comments, course was really interesting and great. Thank you!
- I was impressed by ideas related with our field of work
- Thank you, it was really nice afternoon full of discussion and great ideas.
- It was a long trip to Copenhagen, but the course was very interesting. Would love to attend the next event! Working only with refugees, I would not be able to use all the tools, unless we have access to an interpreter, the visual tools and the options and suggestions on how to use the tools with people with less language abilities were good for me. So at least some of the tools we can use.
Feedback deeming tools useful
- encourages reflection
- consolidates reflection
- clarify and gives a perspective of the future to those who are discredited”
- will be very useful and will make possible a more systematic and guiding work for the trainee
- according to the public with which you are working, you can adapt these tools, possibly complementing with existing ones
- I think it will help in the internship in personal and social development classes
- the intervention program implemented in its entirety, I think it can effectively promote some change in the trainees
- it is always good to have a model that already has a theoretical and tested component in which it is possible to be accessible to any technician with good development skills to perform
- these tools can be very useful in improving the soft skills of the trainees with whom I work, in their preparation to integrate or reintegrate the labour market
- All of them can be helpful for our work with refugees.
- They will certainly be helpful because they have expanded our awareness of the possibilities of working with the target group. new ways and approaches, breaking the border, it was a training course!
- Some of the tools might not be useful in regards to my target group, as they are in detention centres, but the tools can be used and be adapted to their needs. We might need to use different methods, when they are in the situation they are in.
- These tools would be very relevant to introduce to my employees and would be interested in attending the next event.
- If we have an interpreter, I think we can use all the tools.
- It will be relevant to share with the employees that I work with in job centres
Feedback deeming tools as familiar yet useful
- The course was very beneficial. Showed us the tools we already know, but also introduced new methods that we can use. We have confirmed the importance of accessing the group we work with.
- A lot of knowledge was not new for us – we are already using these methods when working with our target group. Still, we have seen a lot of new approaches. In particular, the work of cognitive and positive psychology was very interesting. Also ways to analyze or work with strengths and weaknesses. Everything was very helpful!
- For the most part, psychological approaches are already known from other projects; in the context of Czech social work, this is nothing new, but still very helpful and useful.
- In the Czech Republic, the procedures of positive and cognitive psychology have been used for a long time, but there are still new methods and interesting ideas.
- The course has shifted our knowledge to the next level. He gave us the chance to see the things we already know, another way. Now we can use the new approaches in practice, talk to them with colleagues, and move the goals of our work together.
- Some of the tools I already know, but it was nice to see how they have been set up in dimensions and with the detailed explanation for using these is very helpful for trying out the new tools
Feedback deeming tools not useful
- I do not know how useful I can be, since I have not yet had the opportunity to explore the professional environment in which I will be working not useful
Comments on key take-away from the course
- personal knowledge
- investment at the personal level
- organization of a course with a view to something concrete”
- willingness to try the tools that I did not know
- access to theoretical reference (gives me greater security and support in the use of tools)
- Greater knowledge of oneself
- Provide adults with knowledge and skills to be more autonomous and competent in the future
- Allowing people to have a positive image of themselves
- Helping to cope with unpredictability”
- having a good knowledge about ourselves implies knowing of the ways, forces, competences and attitudes and knowing how to exploit them in the scope of achieving objectives
- want to try out the tools and share them with other colleagues. Further learning of other intervention models
- ideas / creativity, personal training, sharing
- how to see things from a different perspective (using materials to help this population see things differently and positively)
- on the whole, I think the key message is that change is possible: we can change things in our life, in the environment around us, as long as it is achievable, if we make a planning and if it is perseverance when putting it into practice. To use these tools in context of diagnosis and guidance, I think that it will be necessary to rethink the way this stage is currently structured (in my work) and what possible goals to achieve
- have a methodology already done and be possible to adapt to the new public. The fact that it is theoretically tested and supported is fundamental
- new ideas to work on the skills of the target population with whom work can impact not only on their professional integration, but also on improving their self-esteem, self-perception and other dimensions of their life, definition of life project in general
- theoretical anchor, psychological procedures at work
- Value cards, strength cards, wheel, positive emotions.
- new methods, cognitive psychology, positive psychology, theoretical and practical work
- Support network, goal setting, SWOT analysis, assessment for optional future jobs.
- positive emotions, future job, value cards, strength cards
- new methods, support methods, importance of the practical work, positive psychology
- value cards, strength cards, wheel, positive emotions, assessment for optional future jobs, analysis, support network, goal setting
- importance of psychology, procedures at work, refugees, migrant, problems and solutions
- The strength and value tools were very interesting, and the visual aspects were especially useful, I also found it inspiring to attend the workshop, as it gave me insight into the professional reality of others and have time to share.
- I like the positive outlook that the tools create
- The focus on the positive and finding strengths is interesting to me
Feedback reflecting considerations regarding the tools
- I believe that these instruments can be effective if they involve mediation and articulation with other dynamics (related to training activities
- This training could have a continuity to measure whether the participants after paling the instruments continue to feel the same or the difficulties experienced
- taking into account the target public I have some fear that these tools are not applicable and perceptible by all of them. However, although with the proper support of the technicians may be applicable. Have some care with graphical aspects, use simple and direct language. Adapt these tools to existing ones that may be complementary. Give congratulations to the whole team for investing in the project and for the results presented
- We should have the opportunity to apply the tools and after some time we can evaluate with the project team the advantages and difficulties of their applicability, thus contributing to a well-founded experimentation and refining of tools before their dissemination
- I found the structure and activities better (previous version) however I don´t consider them innovative or creative. The possibility of adapting and combining them with another resource is an asset. The ones I find most interesting I will use them in my sessions to realize their potential
- It would be interesting to test the entire program
The aim of the piloting workshops has been to perform quality testing and ensuring validity of the project’s methodologies, materials and tools, which are based on cognitive, social and behavioural theory, and the assumption that people can control their own thought processes, motivation and action. With the testing phase, the consortium intends to ensure that the materials produced correspond to the needs of end users; trainers, mentors, and advisors, working directly with the target groups; Unemployed young adults in situations of professional vulnerability, between the ages of 18 and 30, including migrants and refugees, of which the unemployment situation is due to a gap between qualifications and skills, and labour market requirements. It is therefore crucial that both human self-knowledge and social learning, are covered in order to be able to master the challenges encountered through life, work, and career. The concept of self-efficacy is thus also based on the idea, that one can change oneself and one’s situation.
The workshops have been run for a selection of end users from the three partner countries; Portugal, Czech Republic, and Denmark, with a total of 31 participants. The testing in each country have been implemented to ensure validity and suitability for working with the target groups in the three countries.
The project methodology applies different strategies to enhance self-efficacy and coach the target group in the following areas:
- mastery experience
- identify social role models
- identify and address surrounding social perversions
- develop the participants’ cognitive skills
The end user’s role, when training and educating the target group, is that of the guiding coach, supporting the participant and aiding him or her to focus on developing self-efficacy and help the participant to mobilise and structure future plans. In addition to working with the cognitive skills, the intervention also works with the participant’s motivational processes, and regulation of emotional and selection processes. The purpose of the pilot workshops has been to find out, to what extent the tools and materials live up to these goals and to ensure that we are meeting the needs of end users, in order to provide professional and effective assistance to their target groups.
Moreover, the testing of the workshop itself, has provided the consortium with an opportunity to validate the structure of the workshop, and provided us with relevant input towards providing future workshop facilitators with the best possible methodology and content for the running of Live2Work workshops.
During each pilot workshop, each organisation involved collected input from workshop participants as follows:
- through observation of workshop participants during the workshop, noted and added to the report
- through post workshop evaluation forms
- based on verbal feedback from discussions and talks with workshop participants
- the Danish team also covered an extra aspect of quality assurance through blind testing of visual image-based materials (i.e. strength cards) to assure images provide the intended associations with the strengths they represent.
- in addition to the official pilot workshops, the materials have been spot checked, by professionals working in the fields of our end-users, throughout the development phase, to ensure validity and that we are on track regarding end-user needs and relevance.
Of the received input and feedback, the results were analysed by the consortium, and used to compile this report. The results of this analysis have been the basis for further adaptations to the final versions of the Intellectual Outputs;
- IO1: the conceptual framework
- IO2: the toolbox
- IO3: the workshop facilitator’s guide and appertaining materials (i.e. Course PowerPoints)
- IO5: the audio-visual learning scenarios
All outputs were at different stages tested in all countries.
Each partner has been responsible for compiling a report, based on the feedback they received, to be used for further evaluation of materials and presentation of tools and theories, including a focus on adaptation due to national differences and needs. These differences, if noted, can be further adapted to specific national needs, during the translation phases of the final versions.