|
Select language
|
27. Work package Definitions
|
PRONETT / Financial Agreement number: - CP - - - 1 - NL- - |
| |
|
Product Number: 27 |
|
Work Package |
# 1 Literature Review and Design Rationale |
|
Responsible Organisation |
Ghent University , Department of Education
|
|
First Partner |
Independent University of Barcelona |
|
Duration |
01 11 01 – 01 11 02 |
|
Aims / Objectives |
Provide Rationalisation for the efforts of PRONETT. Base portal design on research data. Gain an understanding of previous efforts to implement ICT into teacher education curricula. Contribute to dissemination of Pronett by getting documentation of the project philosophy published in academic journal. And also by having resource materials available for local PR activities and web publication. The final product should be seen as a resource from which other publications for particular platforms, magazines and occasions can be created. For PRONETT a hypertext version needs to be developed. |
|
Activities and deadlines |
01- 03-02 Table of Contents and a large part of document prepared and ready for review by all partners
01 10 02 Concept Document completed and prepared in APA style
25 10 02 Final document approved by project team
15 11 02 Hypertext version for Webpublication operational
01 03 03 Agreement reached with editorial board of professional journal for publication of print version of the Webpublication |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
Possible Principles for Design guidelines (for WP 02)
Web publication
Conference Publication
Publication in professional magazine
A report on the activities within this WorkPackage as a contribution for the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels.
|
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
Functional design WP 02
Dissemination - WP 08
|
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Contribution and Interim feedback is expected from all projectmembers at regular intervals. All Partners deliver specific relevant, local info or from Organisational expertise fields
|
|
Costs / Budget |
€ 17.044
|
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Peer review by all partners and one outsider |
|
Work Package |
# 2 Portal Functional Design specifications |
|
Responsible Organisation |
Department of Social Sciences, Cardiff University |
|
First Partner |
Faculty of Education, Hogeschool van Utrecht |
|
Duration |
01 12 01 – 01 07 02 |
|
Aims / Objectives |
- To provide the project with (research-based) data to make an argumented choice of development platform
- To specify the functionality of the portal site
|
|
Activities and deadlines |
01 12 01 Literature study, Available technology assessment
01-02-02 – Organisation of Choice of Platform by projectteam
01-04-02 – Production of the Concept document ‘ Functional specs’
01-07-02 – Production of the final version of functional specs document
15-09-02 – Providing feedback on the technical specs document (WorkPackage 03) |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
- Document describing the functional specs of the portal
- Contribution to the design rationale as part of the webpublication WP 01
- Review of the technical specs document
- A report on the activities within this WorkPackage as a contribution for the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels.
|
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
WP 01 – Publication of research for the portal Specifications and Functions
WP 03 – Technical specifications
WP 04 – Portal development
WP 05 – Portal Update |
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Partners contribute to functional specs document by describing (local) needs and delivering feedback to intermediate versions of the document.
|
|
Costs / Budget |
€ 25.566 |
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Student-teachers and other prospect users feedback
Peer Review
Formal acceptance as input document for the production of the Technical specifications by AMAZE |
|
Work Package |
# 3 Portal Technical Design specifications |
|
Responsible Organisation |
Amaze Services |
|
First Partner |
Faculty of Education, Hogeschool van Utrecht |
|
Duration |
01 04 02 – 01 09 02 |
|
Aims / Objectives |
- To develop technical specifications for the realisation of the functional specifications in the portal design document.
- To develop technical specifications for a portal system based on a developmental model, i.e. anticipating the integration of future Zope-based (authoring) products.
|
|
Activities and deadlines |
15 05 02 Feedback Provided to get the necessary level of detail in the input document: the functional specifications document (WP 02)
05-06-02 Organisation of feedback session with programmers on Intermediate version of technical specs document
01-09-02 – Production of the final version of technical specs document |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
- Document describing the technical specs (Bobby proof) and possible implementable Zope products
- A report on the activities within this WorkPackage as a contribution for the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels.
- A Documented
Presentation design
|
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
WP 01 – Publication of research for the portal Specifications and Functions
WP 04 – Portal development
WP 05 – Portal Update |
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Partners contribute necessary additional information to functional specs document
Programmers deliver feedback to intermediate versions of the technical specs document. |
|
Costs / Budget |
Covered from Direct Costs: Consultancy fund |
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Peer Review
Formal acceptance by the programmers as input document for the production of the portal (WP 04) |
|
Work Package |
# 4 Portal Development |
|
Responsible Organisation |
Faculty of Education, Hogeschool van Utrecht |
|
First Partner |
Department of Social Sciences, Cardiff University |
|
Duration |
15 05 02 – 01 12 02 |
|
Aims / Objectives |
- To develop an operational webportal on the basis of the technical specifications of the portal design document (WP 03).
- To develop documentation to enable (other) technical assistants to take care of future management of the system.
|
|
Activities and deadlines |
15 05 02 Help to get the necessary level of detail in the input document: the functional specifications document (WP 02)
05-06-02 Participate in the delivery session of the Intermediate version of technical specs document. Provide feedback for the production of the final version
15-09-02 – Formal acceptance of the final version of technical specs document
Incremental production of portal site. 3 intermediate assessment sessions with Amaze experts
01 12 02 – Delivery of operational site |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
- Operational site
- Technical implementation and management documentation
- Specification of contents for user guides
- Documentation of specific issues for (technical) evaluation
- A report on the activities within this WorkPackage as a contribution for the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels.
|
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
WP 05 – Portal Update
WP 06 – Implementation
WP 07 – Project Evaluation |
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Partners contribute necessary additional information to functional specs document. Programmers deliver feedback to intermediate versions of the technical specs document.
Amaze offers Helpdesk services for Python and Zope specific problems
Partners develop specific language versions, where necessary |
|
Costs / Budget |
€ 34.088 |
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Project Team Review
Alpha test by Amaze (realisation of WP 03 and robustness by Zope community standards: i.e publishable as Zope Product) |
|
Work Package |
# 5 Portal update |
|
Responsible Organisation |
Faculty of Education, Hogeschool van Utrecht |
|
First Partner |
Amaze, Department of Social Sciences, Cardiff University |
|
Duration |
01 01 03 – 01 11 03 |
|
Aims / Objectives |
- To develop an operational webportal on the basis of the results of the formative evaluation data (WP 07).
- To adapt documentation to enable (other) technical assistants to take care of future management of the system.
|
|
Activities and deadlines |
01-07-03 Datacollection of user experiences in various partner locations
08 03 Translate outcomes from Evaluation (WP 07) and Try out Run (Portal Managment WP 09) into functional specs and get formal acceptance by projectteam and Amaze for the adapted original functional specifications document (WP 03)
10-09-03 Development of technical specs document. Delivery of adapted version to programming team
20-10-03 – Incremental production of portal site. 1 intermediate assessment session with Amaze experts. New version dry run-try outs
01 11 03 – Delivery of adapted operational site |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
- Portal Update: Operational site
- Adaptations to Technical implementation and management documentation.
- Specification of necessary changes to user guides
- A report on the activities within this WorkPackage as a contribution for the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels
|
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
WP 04 – Portal development
WP 06 – Implementation
WP 07 – Project Evaluation
WP 09 – Try out run |
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Partners contribute necessary additional information to functional specs document. Programmers deliver feedback to intermediate versions of the technical specs document.
Amaze offers Helpdesk services for Python and Zope specific problems.
Partners make necessary changes to the language versions and related user guides |
|
Costs / Budget |
€ 17.044 |
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Project Team Review
Beta test by Amaze (robustness by Zope community standards: i.e publishable as Zope Product) |
|
Work Package |
# 6 Implementation |
|
Responsible Organisation |
Independent University of Barcelona |
|
First Partner |
Faculty of Education, Hogeschool van Utrecht |
|
Duration |
01/06/02 – 30/09/03 |
|
Aims / Objectives |
- Provide a research based, generic implementation model for the Pronett portal within the organisations of core partners
- Coordinate the development of Pronett partners’ local implementation scenarios based on the generic Pronett implementation model
- Monitor the execution of the Pronett partners’ local implementation activity plans
- Coordinate the contribution of the Pronett partners’ evaluation of their respective implementation scenarios
- Provide interim and final reports on the implementation of the Pronett portal as a contribution to the general evaluation of the Pronett project as specified in WorkPackage 07 ‘ Evaluation’.
- Provide interim and final reports on the implementation of the Pronett for the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels
- Stimulate publications on specific implementation issues (and thus contribute to WorkPackage ‘ Dissemination’
|
|
Activities and deadlines |
31- 10- 02 – Generic Implementation model accepted by project team
01-11-02 – Local scenarios available
15-12-02 – Contribution for Brussels Interim report available
01-05-03 - Interim report available for internal Project evaluation
01-11-04 - Final report on the implementation of the Pronett portal for the formal final Report for Brussels |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
A generic Implementation model
4 Pronett partners’ local implementation scenarios
An interim and final report for inclusion in the evaluation report of the Pronett
Interim and final report |
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
WP 07 – Evaluation
WP 08 – Dissemination and Communication |
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Partners contribute pro rato of size of organisation (= number of staff, students and affiliate schools involved) to the realisation of the Pronett targets as stated in sections 2.5 and 2.6 of the Pronett Project Definition
Partners develop plans according to these targets based on the generic model accepted and suited to the local circumstances and needs.
Partners contribute to the formative and summative data collection as planned in WP 07 – Evaluation, in particular with respect to implementation issues. |
|
Costs / Budget |
€ 17.044 |
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Peer Review
Literature Review of similar projects
Outside Researcher Review |
|
Work Package |
# 7 Project Evaluation |
|
Responsible Organisation |
Faculty of Education, Hogeschool van Utrecht |
|
First Partner |
Independent University of Barcelona |
|
Duration |
01-02-02 - 01-10-04
The formative and summative processes will occur over the project’s three year period. |
|
Aims / Objectives |
- Provide evidence of PRONETT’s impact on the partner institutions involved
- Provide a valid and reliable statement of PRONETT’s impact to be given to the Minerva organization
- Provide timely formative data on the PRONETT initiative
- Support advocacy for the continuation of PRONETT after the three year grant has concluded
|
|
Activities and deadlines |
31- 03 02 – The evaluation research design completed
31 – 05–02 The evaluation research design accepted by team
01-11-02 – The evaluation research design evaluated by external researcher
01-12-02 Instruments designed and ready for testing
15-12-02 – Deliver to test participants and pilot
01-07-03 – Evaluation data available on pilot run 2002-2003
01-09-03 - Adjustments made to evaluation instruments
01-09-04 - Final Analysis available
01-10-04 - Article available |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
A report for inclusion in the interim and final report
A publishable article |
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
WP 02 – Portal Specifications and Functions
WP 06 – Implementation Strategies and Communication
WP 08 – Dissemination and Communication |
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Partners completing and returning the log sheet every three months for formative evaluation purposes
Developing and maturing relationships with practicing teachers and logging the desires of those teachers in regard to needed ICT developments in the PRONETT system
Developing faculty workshops which encourage the development of ICT related skills and student reflection logs using the coding system for dialogue
Completing the evaluation form at each PRONETT partner meeting (Appendix 4 in Socrates survival kit)
|
|
Costs / Budget |
€ 13.635 |
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Peer Review
Literature Review of similar projects
Outside Researcher Review |
|
Work Package |
# 8 Dissemination and Communication |
|
Responsible Organisation |
Faculty of Education, Hogeschool van Utrecht |
|
First Partner |
Independent University of Barcelona |
|
Duration |
01-09-02 – 01-10-04 |
|
Aims / Objectives |
- Provide and implement a strategy and generic action plan to expand the Pronett community beyond the core partners, thus realizing the quantative targets as defined in sections 2.5 and 2.6 of the Pronett Project Definition
- Coordinate the production of national localisation of this dissemination plan.
- Produce generic materials to support common local implementation and publicity activities (and thus contribute to WorkPackage 06 ‘ Implementation’ )
- Stimulate and coordinate Pronett partners’ initiatives for publications on specific project issues.
- Produce and implement a sustainability plan for continuation of the Pronett plan for at least 2 years after the subsidized period (i.e as from 01-10-04 )
- Provide a report on the activities within this WorkPackage as a contribution for the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels.
|
|
Activities and deadlines |
15-11-02 Strategy and action plan completed
15-12-02 – Localisations realised, interim report available
01-01-04 - Sustainability plan available
01-11-04 - Final report available |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
Strategy and action plan
Publicity materials (Webinfo, text, power-point documents, flyers)
Sustainability plan
A report on the activities within this WorkPackage as a contribution for the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels. |
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
WP 02 – Portal Specifications and Functions
WP 06 – Implementation Strategies and Communication
|
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Partners completing and returning the log sheet every three months for formative evaluation purposes
Developing and maturing relationships with practicing teachers and logging the desires of those teachers in regard to needed ICT developments in the PRONETT system
Developing faculty workshops which encourage the development of ICT related skills and student reflection logs using the coding system for dialogue
Completing the evaluation form at each PRONETT partner meeting (Appendix 4 in Socrates survival kit)
|
|
Costs / Budget |
€ 11.931 |
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Peer Review
Literature Review of similar projects
Outside Researcher Review |
|
Work Package |
# 09 Portal Management |
|
Responsible Organisation |
University of Cardiff |
|
First Partner |
Faculty of Education, Hogeschool van Utrecht |
|
Duration |
01 11 02 – 01 10 04 |
|
Aims / Objectives |
- To coordinate the Try out Run (01 11 02 – 01 08 03) and the collection of additional data for the related interim evaluation of the portal (WP 07)
- To allign the implementation scenarios (WP 06) of the respective partners to maximise chances for Community of Practice-development
- Management of registered user issues (communications, etc)
- To coordinate technical management of the portal (upscaling, emergency measures)
|
|
Activities and deadlines |
Coordination of the production/maintenance of general online userguides
Moderation of user communications and activities
Coordination of Pronett online Events
Coordination of the production and Editing of PronettNews
01 08 03 Contribution to portal evaluation (translation of user feedback / reactions into new or adapted functional specifications)
Development of a report on the activities within this WorkPackage as a contribution for final Report for Brussels.
01 10 04 – Contribution to the final report |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
- 8 issues of PronettNews
- Documentation of User communication / reactions to Pronett project
- A report on the activities within this WorkPackage for inclusion in the final Report for Brussels.
|
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
WPs 4, 5, 7, 8 |
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Cooperation with the coordinators of WorkPackages 06 and 08.
|
|
Costs / Budget |
€ 11.931 |
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Formative evaluation at Project Meetings (Peer Review )
User data |
|
Work Package |
# 10 Project management |
|
Responsible Organisation |
Faculty of Education, Hogeschool van Utrecht |
|
First Partner |
Coordinators of individual WPs |
|
Duration |
01 10 01 – 01 12 04 |
|
Aims / Objectives |
- To reach the project goals in an efficient and effective way
|
|
Activities and deadlines |
General Projectmanagement:
Preparation and Coordination of online and RL Meetings
Allignment of WorkPackage-activities
Production and Maintenance of information 'About Pronett' in Portal
Coordination of Production of Interim and Final Report
Brussels Contacts and attendance of Minerva coordinator meetings
Acquisition of additional, affiliate partners
Development of a report on the activities within this WorkPackage as a contribution for the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels.
01 12 01 - WorkBreakdown: Planning and definition of WPs
15 12-03 – Production of the interim report
01 11 04 – Production of the final report |
|
Outcomes / Specifications / Deliverables |
- Contract and subcontracts
- WorkPackage descriptions
- Minutes of Online and RL Meetings
- Up to date information 'About Pronett' availabe in Portal
- A report on the activities within this WorkPackage for inclusion in the formal Interim and final Reports for Brussels.
- Interim report
|
|
Boundaries and intersections with other WPs |
All WPs |
|
Resources to be used / Expected partner contributions |
Partners contribute to project goals as specified in the WP-definitions (1-9)
|
|
Costs / Budget |
€ 22.157 |
|
Evaluation Procedure |
Formative evaluation at Project Meetings (Peer Review )
Pronett project is part of internal quality control system of Archimedes Lerarenopleiding of Hogeschool van Utrecht
Yearly project presentation for Utrecht Pronett Steering Committee |
|
|
Login
Forgot your password?
Positive Evaluation of PRONETT project.
