Om het organisch afval zoveel mogelijk waarde te geven in de context van de stad wordt een scala aan lokale oplossingen ontwikkeld, zoals lokale wormenhotels of schillenboeren die het gft aan huis ophalen. Hoewel er hiermee meer gft gescheiden en apart verwerkt wordt is echter niet goed vast te stellen hoe groot de meerwaarde hiervan is voor de maatschappij. Op dit moment is er namelijk nog geen goede meetmethode beschikbaar. Om deze waarde te kunnen beoordelen wordt in Re-Store een meetmethode ontwikkeld om de impact van deze initiatieven in te kunnen schatten.De meetmethode bestaat uit drie pijlers: milieukundige impact, economische impact en sociale impact. Het model voor de milieukundige impact wordt gebaseerd op de methodiek voor een Life Cycle Assessment. Met dit model worden de CO2-equivalenten geanalyseerd van een scenario. Daaraan gelieerd wordt voor de economische impact gebruik gemaakt van principes van de methodiek voor Life Cycle Costing. Met het economische model wordt de netto financiële waarde van een scenario geanalyseerd. Beide modellen worden echter dusdanig toegesneden en vereenvoudigd zodat ze te gebruiken zijn door non-experts.Om de sociale impact te meten worden drie indicatoren gemeten: sociale cohesie, samenwerkend participeren en educatieve ontwikkeling. Om dit te kunnen meten wordt gebruik gemaakt van een perceptiemeting. De eerste test hiermee geeft aanleiding om de indicatoren deels te heroverwegen, de methode aan te scherpen en een aanvullende methode toe te gaan passen.
Why a position statement on Assessment in Physical Education? The purpose of this AIESEP Position Statement on Assessment in Physical Education (PE) is fourfold: • To advocate internationally for the importance of assessment practices as central to providing meaningful, relevant and worthwhile physical education; • To advise the field of PE about assessment-related concepts informed by research and contemporary practice; • To identify pressing research questions and avenues for new research in the area of PE assessment; • To provide a supporting rationale for colleagues who wish to apply for research funds to address questions about PE assessment or who have opportunities to work with or influence policy makers. The main target groups for this position statement are PE teachers, PE pre-service teachers, PE curriculum officers, PE teacher educators, PE researchers, PE administrators and PE policy makers. How was this position statement created? The AIESEP specialist seminar ‘Future Directions in PE Assessment’ was held from October 18-20 2018, at Fontys University of Applied Sciences in Eindhoven, the Netherlands. The seminar aimed to bring together leading scholars in the field to present and discuss ‘evidence-informed’ views on various topics around PE assessment. It brought together 71 experts from 20 countries (see appendix 2) to share research on PE assessment via keynote lectures and research presentations and to discuss assessment-related issues in interactive sessions. Input from this meeting informed a first draft version of the statement. This first draft was sent to all participants of the specialist seminar for feedback, from which a second draft was created. This draft was presented at the AIESEP International Conference 2019 in Garden City, New York, after which further feedback was collected from participants both on site and through an online survey. The main contributors to the writing of the position statement are mentioned in appendix 1. Approval was granted by the AIESEP Board on May 7th, 2020. Largely in keeping with the main themes of the AIESEP specialist seminar ‘Future Directions in PE Assessment’, this Position Statement is divided into the following sections: Assessment Literacy; Accountability & Policy; Instructional Alignment; Assessment for Learning; Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) and Continuing Professional Development; Digital Technology in PE Assessment. These sections are preceded by a brief overview of research data on PE. The statement concludes with directions for future research.
The in-depth assessment of the situation of the European textile and clothing sector is composed by six independent reports with a close focus on key aspects useful to understand the dynamics and the development of the textile and clothing industry, drivers of change – most notably the impact of the financial crisis – and identification of policy responses and best practices. This has been done in six specific tasks leading to the six reports: Task 1 Survey on the situation of the EU textile and clothing sector Task 2 Report on research and development Task 3 Report on SME situation Task 4 Report on restructuring Task 5 Report on training and Education Task 6 Report on innovation practices The objective of task 4 was to provide an assessment of past or on-going restructuring and modernisation processes in textile and clothing enterprises in the EU and their responses. This task provides an overview of drivers of restructuring and presents an anatomy of restructuring of the textile and clothing industry in the EU in terms of changes in the company business models. Case studies were carried out in five textile and clothing manufacturing regions of the EU with a particular emphasis on emerging strategies and business models and providing evidence for the impacts of restructuring processes. Another objective has been to analyse framework conditions and identify constraints and best practice measures and initiatives at company and regional/national level concerning anticipation of change and management of modernisation and restructuring processes, so that these examples may inform policy action and initiatives in other regions in Europe.
MULTIFILE
