• Home

• Aims

• Activities

• Documents

• Partners

• Meetings

• Pictures

• Exploitation

• Contact

• Forum

Once the project is over, we described it in this document:

The ICT project, Cultural Integration and Tolerance, addresses two distinct issues which act simultaneously throughout the entire process; on the one hand, intercultural dialogue and social integration of immigrant populations and on the other, the development of ICT tools in the educational field and as a means of improving basic skills of our students  

DEVELOPMENT: The initiative starts from the growing presence of foreign students in our schools and after finding some behaviors of rejection or lack of understanding among native and immigrant students. Locally, we wanted to know in detail what was the vision the immigrant population in the host society and vice versa, ie how we view immigrants.  

Once revealed, at least in part, the vision that each group has of the other (usually stereotyped, simplified) we sought to improve knowledge about we / they have on each other.  

Within the European framework, we were very interested in hearing experiences of other countries on adaptation and integration of immigrant populations:

·        Belgium as a country that historically has hosted a large number of immigrants, in particular, the Catholic University of Limburgvoor that has a long experience in this field

·        Turkey as a country with millions of migrants worldwide and in turn with a very strong internal problem: the participation of the Kurdish minority in society. Our Turkish partner is an association with a long working experience in marginal areas of Kurdish population .

·        Within our country, the Valencia Region has hosted for many years a good number of foreigners. The adult education center (EPA) of Beniassent , Alicante, attends students from different nationalities and diverse social backgrounds. In our Institution, although timidly, is also gradually receiving immigrant students who come to improve their chances in the process of economic and social integration. As a collaborating institution in this project, FORSICA, is a local enterprise with extensive experience in training and the applications of new technologies in education.  

From the beginning and during the two year duration of the project, we decided to work together continuously, as if it were a local group that meets one or twice a week, distributes tasks and met again to assess the work. To do this, we put into operation a Moodle platform that served as our common space for work and interaction. Product of this process was the training of all partners in the use of these tools as a collaborative work environment, which has ever since been used locally in each institution. Within our center in particular, it has changed the way people work in a substantial manner, as a result of the use of educational platforms. Keep in mind that our institution is really a network of seven small educational centers scattered in a mountainous rural area, where communication is really a limiting factor for the development of teaching. 

Today, we do not understand our work dynamics, at both the teacher and student level, without the use of a virtual platform: many activities related to managing the center at all locations are performed efficiently, the educational materials flow, they are collaboratively developed, and it is available for students and faculty. Synchronous and asynchronous communication is permanent within the faculty members, and although timidly, it is taking its first steps among students. Instruments such as questionnaires or educational plans student satisfaction give us a valuable feedback...active forums, quizzes, collaborative databases, wikis, tasks ... they are now everyday tools that have been a positive change in the working methods and certainly in the quality of service.  

The project, with respect to students, was developed in four phases:

a.     The first part focused on the collection of information through two surveys aimed at students from the four institutions. We designed a survey for native students and another different one for the immigrants. Both surveys were offered in paper and digital format so that students could complete them according to their computer skills. The whole process of design and development of the surveys were done using a Moodle platform as a work environment at European level.  

b.     Once the data was tallied, we pooled and analyzed the results. At the level of our European partners, we analyze the process and the results of both surveys at each of the four institutions and then at a general, European level. All this, once again, using new technologies to interact with partners on a permanent and fluid manner.  

c.      Once conclusions were extracted, we came to the stage of disseminating the results among students in the four institutions. To present how they / we see the "other side" (native population versus immigrants). This was a key step to improve understanding.  

d.     The end result, the impact of this whole process of research, analysis and dissemination of results should be translated into the improvement of intercultural dialogue. However, following the observed results, the institutions set up activities to enhance both, mutual understanding and the acceptance and interaction between both parties. In our case, these results were transmitted to the Center’s Internal Council, which decided to present as an objective of the Center’s Annual Plan a set of activities for the next academic course, targeted at improving intercultural dialogue within the educational community.  

But it would be dishonest to deny it: we have also had to face difficulties. If we have learned something so far, is that for a project to be successful, all partners must be active, the tasks should be allocated taking into account the peculiarities of each team member and respecting each of their circumstances. Keeping alive a working project at different corners of Europe requires commitment, persistence, and systematization of procedures. It is there, where the coordinating institution takes the brunt, as its catalyst role is essential.  

CONCLUSION: It has been an enriching experience for teachers involved in the project. It has served to expose prejudices and stereotypes that we did not foresee to be so widespread. In the process, we have seen how the lack of knowledge of "the other side", together with general misinformation, generate mistrust and ultimately lead to rejection.

The project has had a direct impact on the educational community, which has seen the need to at least sit and review its position on the issue of cultural integration. This experience has been a shock for our center and has given us a warning sign about an issue that we had not dealt with significantly until we started this project.

Following this, the project has had a direct effect on the curriculum of our Center, in the revision of the Plan of Coexistence, educational goals and the Annual Plan of our Center.

In the context of the use of new technologies – a fundamental aspect of the development of this process- the work dynamics of teachers has changed substantially. We have discovered the useful applications of  Web 2.0 tools in education and especially for schools like ours in which bridging geographical barriers is a priority to maintain the level of diversity and quality within the educational offer.