Socrates, Tempus and Leonardo largely living up to their aims

Citation

(2004), "Socrates, Tempus and Leonardo largely living up to their aims", Education + Training, Vol. 46 No. 5. https://doi.org/10.1108/et.2004.00446eab.010

Socrates, Tempus and Leonardo largely living up to their aims

Socrates, Tempus and Leonardo largely living up to their aims

European Commission interim evaluations show the EU Socrates, Tempus and Leonardo programmes to be largely living up to their aims.

The report on the second Socrates (education) programme highlights the closer alignment with political and operational priorities compared to the previous programme. All national reports are positive about its relevance but there is some concern about the variation in the effectiveness of some activities.

The evaluation concedes that implementation of Socrates is difficult to measure because there are too few indicators, but the programme appears to have responded well to the challenge of lifelong learning. The absence of a link between education and training is, however, considered to be a major structural weakness.

Decentralization of programme management has improved efficiency slightly, but there is more to do in this area. The profusion of actions and sub-actions discourages potential applicants.

Mobility, inter-institutional co-operation and networks are considered the most effective aspects of the programme. There is, however, scope to improve the visibility and dissemination of results.

The evaluation of the second Leonardo (vocational training) programme considers it to be easier to understand than its predecessor, because there are fewer specific objectives and implementation measures.

The programme is considered to meet the expectations of its main beneficiaries. The mobility and pilot-project measures are considered to be particularly relevant to meeting the main objective of the programme, which is to develop EU co-operation in the area of vocational training.

The programme has become slightly more efficient, but more could be done to streamline the reporting and feedback mechanisms.

The evaluation of third phase of the Tempus programme, which concentrates on higher-education co-operation with countries outside the EU, confirms the relevance of the programme, with some minor recommendations to improve its implementation.

The report states that the validity of the national-priorities approach depends on the process established to formulate them. The different types of projects have been effective in achieving the expected outcomes of the programme and its overall impact on higher-education reform. But improvements could be made by better dissemination of results and greater exchange of information.

The report acknowledges the Commission’s efforts to streamline procedures, but suggests that new financial regulations do not simplify the process.

The programme has been effective in the context of higher education, but there is now a need to bridge the gap between education and training from primary schools to colleges.