Evidence-based policy in Erasmus+
138
Teachers’ Short-Term Learning Mobility Abroad from the School Improvement Perspective: Estonian Best Practice Cases By Juta Jaani and Halliki Harro-Loit Juta Jaani
Abstract The aim of this article is to present four Estonian best practice case studies of Erasmus+ grant projects. Because the schools are in different phases of their improvement journey, their needs for a learning mobility abroad are different. According to the collective qualitative interviews carried out among the staff of those four schools, an efficient use of the grant starts from well-grounded knowledge about the needs of the teachers and the needs of the school – there might be different ways to gather this information. Some schools have a well-developed monitoring system while others focus on constant dialogue. It is also important to create a good system for selecting teachers.
(born 1973) is an analyst and PhD student at the University of Tartu, Institute of Social Studies. Her main research interests have been in the areas of education, curriculum development, and communication studies. Halliki Harro-Loit (born 1962) is a professor of Journalism at the University of Tartu, Institute of Social Studies. In
Introduction Since 1998, Estonia has been involved in teacher in-service training -programmes. By 2014, approximately 3.6% of teachers – the overall number of teachers being about 22,800 – had had the possibility to study abroad via the EU programmes. In 2014, the focus of the Erasmus+ programme was changed: from individual teachers’ applications to educational institutions’ applications. That change meant the necessity to synchronise the needs of individual teachers with the needs of the school. This paradigmatic change brought about different challenges. First of all, before applying for the grant, the school leaders and the teachers should find out and negotiate the exact school need which can be met via an Erasmus+ short-term mobility project. Hence, communication about mutual concerns and aims between staff members during the planning phase of the grant becomes decisive. Secondly, the question “who will go on the learning mobility?” becomes more complicated if the needs of the school improvement are taken into consideration. A dilemma needs to be solved: should the school prioritise sending abroad the “eager-to-go teachers” or the ones who are (or could become) the key persons in the school’s improvement process?
Home
addition to (comparative) journalism studies, her research interests have been in the areas of educational communication, interpersonal communication, and discourse analysis.
KEYWORDS school improvement journey, best
practice case studies, communication in the planning process, participant selection dilemmas
