Funding by the Long Life Learning Programme, EU

Project implementation period: October 2013 – September 2015

Project coordinator: Academic Medical Centre/University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam

Project Partners:

  • Stichting VU VUMC, Amsterdam
  • University of Leicester, Leicester
  • Universtiy of Antwerp, Wilrijk
  • Justus-Liebig-Universtität Gießen, Gießen
  • University of Limerick, Limerick
  • University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh
  • Hopitaux University of Genova, Genova
  • University of Sevilla, Sevilla
  • University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen
  • University of Pecs, Pecs,
  • Norwegian Centre for Minority Health
  • University of Maryland College Park School of Public Health, Maryland

Aims and Objectives of C2ME

The overall aim of the project is to develop an overarching faculty development programme for faculty staff as well as educational leaders that develops design principles to implement cultural competencies (CC) in the curriculum. To realize that, competent faculty staff is needed as well as a facilitating organization that takes care that (a) CC content is implemented effectively in curricula and (b) faculty staff is supported to optimally accomplish their tasks. To achieve this, the specific objectives of the C2ME-project are:

A. Support faculty in their tasks in order to provide the most optimal education to students by developing design principles about how to teach CC (WP2; see model below). This will be achieved by:

  • The development of a shared competence framework that defines the competencies of teaching faculty staff with regard to teaching CC
  • The development of an assessment tool to define learning needs of teaching staff of medical schools with regard to CC-teaching
  • An assessment of teaching staff to define gaps in competencies of teaching staff and to describe learning objectives
  • The development of an international virtual classroom for faculty members, including an online and interactive module for teachers according to state of the art ´excellent education of teachers (blended learning, easy accessible, use of ICT)
  • The development of 5 ´face to face´ local courses for education for teaching staff at 5 partner medical schools
  • The development of design principles for educators of teachers to address CC

B: Providing design principles to support educational leaders (e.g. education directors, curriculum developers, deans) to implement CC content effectively in curricula (WP3; see model below). This will be achieved by:

  • The development of an assessment tool in order to identify gaps and redundancies regarding CC teaching in medical curricula
  • An assessment of the curriculum to define needs of medical schools with regards to CC teaching
  • The development of design principles for sustainable integration of CC in the medical curriculum

In the model below we have described the associated strategy to achieve these objectives. Under the overall coordination, including financial and organizational management by WP1, the project is subdivided into further thematic WPs. The development of Teach the Teacher strategies will be the main task of WP2, which will work closely together with WP3, whose main task is the development of strategies for policy development. WP4 will monitor the project as well and the project´s output in order to assure high-quality of all products. WP5 will be in charge of the wide-spread dissemination of the project's output, and the products will be made available to the consortium partners and their network. Finally, WP6 will take care of the actual exploitation of the Teach the Teacher strategies, so that they can be used by all partners.

University of Pécs is responsible for the coordination of the WP4

Concept of the Quality Assurance (QA) of the C2Men project (WP 4)

General objective:

Design and implement an internal quantitative and qualitative monitoring system that - in line with the guidelines of the European network for Quality Assurance in Higher education (ENQA) – will provide a periodical feedback to the Project Management and the WP leaders. This will also provide the possibility for ‘fine tuning’ the development process around the main cornerstones of the project.

Structure and items of the QA

University of Pécs Medical School (UoP) project team will be in charge to design and implement WP4 in strong cooperation with the Quality Assurance Board (QAB) and the project management.

They will utilize those QA experiences UoP has gained when coordinating the "Design-Accreditation-Delivery of Joint Training and Development Courses assisting Sustainable Management  of Regional Healthcare Services (including  joint training and exchange of experts)” EC (IPA) co-financed  project, coordinating WP 5: “Identification, evaluation and exchange of the existing best practices in migrant immunization – development of Best practice Evaluation Tool” within the frame of EC (Public Health Programs) co-financed PROMOVAX project, and coordinating the Erasmus Lifelong Learning Program co-financed: “MSc in   Migrant Health: Addressing New Challenges in Europe – CHANCE” project.


Step 1: Establishment of the QAB: following the action of the project management, a four/five member board will be established.

Members confirmed until now:

Anders Foldspang – representing Aarhus University - Denmark/ ASPHER (TBC)

Harald Siem – representing NAKMI - Norway

Jeanine Suurmond – representing Academic Medical Centre / University of Amsterdam

Istvan Szilard – representing University of Pécs Medical School – Hungary

Step 2: Based on the concept worked out by UoP the QAB will discuss and adapt the QAB’s Terms of Reference (ToR) and QA plan, during the QAB kick-off meeting (Pécs, 27-28 January 2014).

Step 3: Consortium members will appoint contact person to the QA programs’ local implementation.

When the list of local contact persons will be completed, a virtual (Skype?) conference will be organized;

Main items / methods

During the QA program we will use the ‘Mixed Method Strategy’, and the QA proceeding will consist of quantitative and qualitative elements.


Number and type of events (in person and virtual conferences, WS etc.) in comparison with the project plan

Participation in Skype conferences

Response rates of assessments

Ratio of invitees and completed participation of the trainings

Google analytics

Network activities

Dissemination activities


Assessment tools: additional questions would be added to the end of the tool, asking, whether responders see the assessment useful, how they judge the scope of the questions, would they propose additional fields etc.

Note: naturally these questions could be articulated only when the tool itself has been completed, and they will be formulated in agreement with the responsible team leaders.


In general the efficacy of the trainings could be measured via a three dimensional pre- and post test package, where change in specific knowledge and motivation/ attitude could be tested. (Note: training designers should be responsible to compose questions regarding knowledge!) and an overall satisfaction on the way of the training and benefit gained.

Note: experience of UP team could be well utilized.

Project events: 

Following all the project related events (conference/ Skype conference, WS etc.) an online questionnaire will be circulated among the participants focusing on their general and specific satisfaction, unmet expectations etc. These surveys will provide an immediate, short term feedback to the organizers that they can consider while designing the next events. Note: first time it will already be circulated among the participants of the kick-off meeting during the coming days.

General note:

Regarding usefulness, impact and sustainability of the deliverables, would be hard to provide any feedback within the timeframe of the project (as it is stated in the WP 4 summary). This might be the task of external audit, providing a follow up after the completion of the project.