mardi 23 août 2016



Work document

presented the project holders to supply the common reflection

August 23, 2017


deadline ( date butoir ) : Our proposals on working methods to be applied to rewrite a whole or versions of Dracula must be made , and decisions to be written down , for C3 study trip to Cluj -Napoca

(Effective implementation from 2018 ) .

Preparatory phase in the classroom (and / or distance between partners ) is planned to be done during the first quarter of this school year

 ( September to November 2017 ) .


- When terminal Festival in Spring 2018, is expected to play together at least a stage show (or extract) wrote and starred in a transnational framework. During the festival, several other performances will be presented by some national teams. In addition to these activities will also be highlighted exhibitions, conferences or possibly films, objects made by the students.

Rewrites are based on the vampire myth, studied and revisited as part of a general study of old fears developed since the project launch (September 2016) until winter 2017 (eTwinning project Ilargia) ... it is desirable that incorporate contemporary fears - that a systematic study will be conducted from this scolar year - and they can stimulate reflection on how to overcome these fears through European cooperation.

The trip to Transylvania should allow participating students to study  the myth in local context, experience the challenges to carry out effective transnational cooperation and formulate first proposals for rewrites. The feedback must be decisive in the partner countries, travelers with the responsibility to boost the local work of other learners and inspire them with a minimum of team spirit.


 Without excluding the possibility of also working on rewrites that would not be produced by the students, or doing some other shows or studies  -  locally produced (or multilateral, but reduced)....  our partnership is based on an ambition more high. Our contract wtith the EU stipulates that we will try to work together in a transnational logic associated to the five teams: rewrite all the myth and playingit (at least partially). (And also to think about how to jointly cope with fears of this). We can imagine the practical arrangements for rewriting, taking particular account of language difficulties, but also the need we have... not to limit the cooperation to mobility times. It would be useful to think about this in September or quick experiment with some strategies to measure the relevance, in order to be able to validate in November methods to follow, and to give from that moment to students indications as to the actual conditions in which they will have to make proposals and produce. The balance sheet and the possible correction of the approach will act when necessary after consulting the teachers at the seminar R3 (Riga), while the final agreement on the performance or playing together could be sealed within the C4 trip (Cesme ). 



 SCENARIO 1. Teamwork at the local level and then pooling . Regarding rewriting , there would develop a scenario ( from , for example, a synopis validated at C3) by a high school , working in their own language. The English translation would be made retrospectively , then distributed to the partners' attention . Later, there could be eventual selection of the written work or part thereof for a stage performance played by a transnational group (commercial ele choice of the logo was the subject of a vote) . The method has the advantage of simplicity ( at least apparently ) but it does not support the transnational work (and therefore EU funding ) are necessary .

SCENARIO 2. Segmented International Labour. Each country is assigned a part of the task. For example, a work produced by the five ... in fact, an institution writing the beginning of the story and the other end , a third is occcupe sets, another of the staging and the game .... the last carries a printed and illustrated presentation . One can imagine several successive works and a varied distribution , or otherwise specialization of national teams. This proposal seems relatively easy to implement but coordination can be difficult . In fact , such a move if it must concern to a rewriting work could probably be easily apply after a first preliminary phasis under scenario 1 .

SCENARIO 3. Constitution of missioned transnational teams. This would be entrusted to a transnational team of students (if possible from the five countries of the partnership members) the assignment to carry out this or that concrete task. The joint work would be primarily in English and through video conferences. In the context of implementation of such procedures should be specified an agenda providing for mutual consultation times (students to have at the same time access to the computer room in their facility). The method would improve accountability students (who would have to appoint a project manager and to meet a deadline) would encourage trade among themselves and be more "innovative" from EU perspective (learner autonomy, development of languages ​and integration of ITC). The teachers should agree to "missionner"  (give their job to them) a group of students or to assess the results, which again would be stimulating. Nevertheless, in practice, this tactic seems complicated to implement.

SCENARIO 4. Use of eTeaching. One of the teachers take over the coordination of an activity - the concrete realization of a prodution and would address (through  video posts, for example) to target students designated in the five countries; The teacher would centralize productions after having distributed the workload and students pass through it to work. This method gives less autonomy to learners but relies on a procedure referred to in the NBE+ application form  and intoduces perhaps to a more easy cooperation cause coordination is assumed by an adult.


Although the most rudimentary method first described (senario 1) is a priori most immediately understandable, and that's probably (?) As applicable, at least as regards the work of rewriting by the students, which is largely in the field of literature, coordinated by Vivienne.

The above proposals are not exclusive of each other and could be pursued simultaneously.. In particular,for historical studies (or other) intended to produce objects from an interdisciplinary and transnational logic  conducted outside or next to the rewriting of the Dracula myth, scenarios 3 and 4 seem to me to be experienced ad hoc basis, fueling the production of educational tools (to present and disseminate the very end of the partnership).

Other scenarios may also be offered.

Thank you to share your ideas on the subject!

Also, to inform colleagues of all work on the fears; developing locally and / or would like to discuss in a transnational context.

Use the blog to do this!