2CN-CLab 2017


2CN–CLab aims to promote critical and constructive discussion on cultural cooperation networks and, thereby, to sensibilize and qualify stakeholders to participate in this kind of organizations. The project started on an experimental basis in 2016.

Considering the evaluation that was made to the first 10 actions of 2CN-CLab 2016, we are currently preparing 2CN-CLab 2017 and 2CN-CLab 2018.

Notwithstanding the positive evaluation, we will operate three fundamental changes in 2CN-CLab 2017.

The first change is related to entities that, with us, will organize the actions: if in 2016 were mainly higher education institutions, in 2017 we want, essentially, organizations, public or private, operating in the cultural and creative sector.

The second change is related to the theme: if in 2016 the theme was chosen by the host entity independent the themes of the other actions, in 2017 we want, if possible, some coordination and complementarity in the subject of the several actions.

The third change is related to the duration: if in 2016 we had actions with a maximum duration of one day, in 2017 we think that the duration of some of the actions can be longer if the typology or the theme justifies it.

Regarding to the year 2017, we emphasize that, despite being organized some actions in other contexts, it is consider that the most appropriate is to continue promoting the 2CN-CLab mainly in Portugal and Spain.

If you want to participate in the organization of any action of the 2CN-CLab, please don’t hesitate to contact us by email.



2CN-CLab visa promover a discussão crítica e construtiva sobre as redes de cooperação cultural e, desta forma, sensibilizar e capacitar os envolvidos para a participação em organizações desta natureza. O projeto iniciou-se, de forma experimental, no ano de 2016.

Tendo em consideração a avaliação que foi efetuada às 10 primeiras ações do 2CN-CLab 2016 estamos neste momento a preparar o 2CN-CLab 2017 e o 2CN-CLab 2018.

Não obstante a avaliação positiva, vamos operar três alterações fundamentais no 2CN-CLab 2017.

A primeira alteração está relacionada com as entidades que, juntamente connosco, organizarão as ações: se em 2016 foram essencialmente instituições de ensino superior, em 2017 queremos que sejam, essencialmente, organizações, públicas ou privadas, que operam no setor cultural e criativo.

A segunda está relacionada com a temática: se em 2016 a temática era escolhida pela entidade acolhedora independentemente dos temas das outras ações, em 2017 pretendemos que, se possível, haja alguma articulação e complementaridade na temática das diversas ações.

A terceira alteração está relacionada com a duração: se em 2016 foram ações com a duração máxima de um dia, em 2017 pensamos que poderão ser feitas ações com uma duração superior, desde que a tipologia a temática o justifiquem.

No que se refere ao ano de 2017, sublinhamos que, apesar de estarem a ser organizadas algumas ações pontuais noutros contextos, consideramos que o mais adequado será continuar a promover o 2CN-CLab, essencialmente, em Portugal e Espanha.

Se quiser participar na organização de alguma ação do 2CN-CLab não hesite em contactar-nos por email.

Advertisements

2CN-CLab 2016: Mid-term Evaluation

Evaluation summary of the first ten actions of 2CN-CLab 2016: Viana do Castelo; Oporto; Seville; Santiago de Compostela; Mirandela; Valencia; Madrid; Faro; Leiria; Oporto.


Rooms Capacity: 476 participants

Number of participants: 341 (71,6%)

Number of submitted surveys: 224 (65,7%) [9 incomplete and 3 with the free option answered]

  • Student: 59,8%
  • Teacher: 13,4%
  • Researcher: 10,3%
  • Cultural and Creative Sector Professional: 6,2%
  • Other: 10,3%

Overall Satisfaction

  • Excellent: 44,6%
  • Good: 46,8%
  • Sufficient: 7,7%
  • Insufficient: 0,9%
  • Bad: 0%
  • Very Bad: 0%

Organization

  • Excellent: 48%
  • Good: 47%
  • Sufficient: 5%
  • Insufficient: 0%
  • Bad: 0%
  • Very Bad: 0%

Logistics

  • Excellent: 40,9%
  • Good: 48,9%
  • Sufficient: 10,2%
  • Insufficient: 0%
  • Bad: 0%
  • Very Bad: 0%

Disclosure

  • Excellent: 27,3%
  • Good: 39,1%
  • Sufficient: 23,6%
  • Insufficient: 9,5%
  • Bad: 0,5%
  • Very Bad: 0%

Thematic Relevance

  • Excellent: 56,7%
  • Good: 33,8%
  • Sufficient: 9,0%
  • Insufficient: 0%
  • Bad: 0,5%
  • Very Bad: 0%

Methodology

  • Excellent: 44,8%
  • Good: 47%
  • Sufficient: 7,7%
  • Insufficient: 0,5%
  • Bad: 0%
  • Very Bad: 0%

Quality of Speakers

  • Excellent: 61,1%
  • Good: 35,7%
  • Sufficient: 3,2%
  • Insufficient: 0%
  • Bad: 0%
  • Very Bad: 0%

Empathy in the room [free option where respondents can put what they consider relevant]

  • Excellent: 100%
  • Good: 0%
  • Sufficient: 0%
  • Insufficient: 0%
  • Bad: 0%
  • Very Bad: 0%

Debate [free option where respondents can put what they consider relevant]

  • Excellent: 0%
  • Good: 0%
  • Sufficient: 100%
  • Insufficient: 0%
  • Bad: 0%
  • Very Bad: 0%

Action Surprise [free option where respondents can put what they consider relevant]

  • Excellent: 100%
  • Good: 0%
  • Sufficient: 0%
  • Insufficient: 0%
  • Bad: 0%
  • Very Bad: 0%