Draft minutes of the Working Group Judicial Training Methods Meeting January 2015, EJTN, Rue du Commerce 123, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium

Transcription

1 Draft minutes of the Working Group Judicial Training Methods Meeting January 2015, EJTN, Rue du Commerce 123, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium PARTICIPANTS EJTN Secretary General EJTN Secretariat POSTULSKI Wojciech VERMIGLIO Benedetta MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE The Netherlands SSR Croatia JANSEN Rosa VAN DE MEENE Ineke MARINOVIC Višnja Ministry of Justice Denmark National Court Administration ERA AGERVIG TARP Maria BRANDI Tina RAGEADE Jean Philippe RIEHLE Cornelia France MALET Nathalie Ecole Nationale de la Magistrature 1

2 Germany HORNUNG Rainer German Judicial Academy Italy SABATO Raffaele School for the Judiciary Latvia KALNINA-CAUNE Solvita Judicial Training Center Portugal PERQUILHAS Maria Centro de Estudos Judiciarios Romania PACURARI Otilia National Institute for the Magistracy Spain DE LA O SILVA FERNANDEZ Maria Centro de Estudos Juridicos United Kingdom/ England and Wales KORNER Joanna Judicial College OBSERVERS Norway BERGET Kari National Court Administration EXCUSED MEMBERS Slovenia STOVICEJ Gaja Ministry of Justice 2

3 1. Welcome and opening The meeting opens at 9.40 and Ms. Rosa JANSEN welcomes the WG Judicial Training Methods (JTM) members and thanks EJTN for the hosting. She considers that, since its creation, the WG has already carried out a lot of work and that gives great impulsion to the planning of the next activities. 2. Apologises for absence Ms. Rosa JANSEN informs the WG members that Ms. Gaja STOVICEJ, representative of the Ministry of Justice of Slovenia, is unable to attend this meeting. Then she leaves the floor to the EJTN Secretary General (SG), Mr. Wojciech POSTULSKI. 3. Report of the EJTN Secretary General Mr. POSTULSKI welcomes the WG JTM members at EJTN and anticipates that a lot of work needs to be done in view of preparing the future actions and finalizing the structure of the WG itself. However, before starting with the debate, he wishes to inform the members on the following: a) Financial state of play: The Secretary General Wojciech POSTULSKI recalls the attention on the necessity to proceed to draft the 2016 budget. In this framework, he is very glad to announce that, for next year, a higher budget will be available for EJTN actions. Nevertheless he reminds that once the budget is approved, all the financed activities need to be concretely implemented, so to comply with the execution rate, in line with the EJTN s trend in the last years: in 2011 the execution rate has been around 70% of EJTN funds, in 2013 it corresponded to 89%, in 2014 according to the current closing of the accounts, the rate corresponds to the 92%. So the perspective for 2015 needs to be around 95% of execution rate, also to meet the goals set by the EU COMM. In 2016 the overall EC contribution to the EJTN budget will be of 8,8 millions (which corresponds to an increase of 15,9% to the 2014 budget). This means that the EU funding will be of 96%, with a consequent decrease to 4% of the MMSS membership fees. These figures pertain to the Justice implementing programme of the EU COMM which will be officially issued by February/March 2015: once it will be approved, EJTN will proceed to the signature of the agreement with the EC. With these very positive preconditions, the SG invited the WG members to widen the planning perspectives as of 2016 JTM activities onwards. The Convener, Ms. Rosa JANSEN and Ms. KALNINA-CAUNE ask the SG for more details in terms of budget increase and Mr. POSTULSKI replies that the WG JTM is new but it is considered as 1/3 of the overall EJTN activities, together with the other two WGs, Programme and Exchange Programme. The effect of raising WG JTM s funds is justified since, until now, the number of implemented actions has been limited due to its recent creation. He underlined that planning should be needs-driven, not budget-driven. Ms. Joanna KORNER asks confirmation about financing, with reference to the UK opt out position at EU level on the Justice Programme. Mr. POSTULSKI replies that UK participants, are 3

4 more than welcome to attend and take active part to EJTN activities, however the opt out implies that they cannot be funded, by EJTN, in their participation. He adds that the same position applies to Danish participants. By consequent, travel costs and per diem are not covered by EJTN but UK and DK experts are entitled to receive EJTN financial support. With specific reference to England and Wales, the Secretary General specifies that the frozen funds - still stocked within EJTN - have not been returned to the country because they are being used to support England and Wales participants to EJTN actions. b) WG JTM actions for 2015 Planning The SG says that, for 2015, the JTM will be entrusted of the implementation of three actions and this WG meeting is devoted, among other issues, to their detailed planning and contents definition. He highlighted that the WG activities should be addressed to all the EJTN members not only WG members, so discussions on content of WG mandate should not take place within the WG, these should aim at preparing the activities. c) EJTN website The SG says that, among other news, EJTN is also pleased to allow the access to its new website. Many news have been conceived and concretised, others are undergoing as the creation of a digital library, whose aim is to collect all the training material and make it accessible to all interested beneficiaries, fostering its widest dissemination. By consequent, the WG should determine and decide what is to be collected according to WG JTM. d) Observers Mr. POSTULSKI informs that judges and prosecutors of observing countries will be invited to attend EJTN meetings/seminars. EJTN encourages this participation which will concern three western Balkan countries (1 participant per country, maximum 2). Their financing will not be supported by EJTN but by the EU COMM (DG Near). Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO asks whether their participation is to be considered in the overall amount of the participation per activity (i.e 35 participants per seminar) or they have to be counted separately: the SG replies that observing countries participants are not to be included in the calculation of EU participants per activity. e) Follow-up of the Directors Conference (DC), European Parliament, December 2014 This event has been prepared by the WG JTM and Mr. POSTULSKI says that is appears opportune now to evaluate the work carried out and the follow-up of the event. 4

5 The Steering Committee (SC) in September 2014 has given mandate to the WG JTM to proceed to the preparation of the DC; then the SC in November 2014 identified the clear objectives of the Conference. The Secretary General, after thanking warmly the four portfolios members for the hard work prepared, proceeded to the following considerations: Data and costs: the Conference saw the participation of 72 attendees, 56 from the MMSS, 10 EU officials, 3 guests from MMSS and EJTN staff. Finally, 4 countries were not represented: LU, CZ, IE and SI. The overall costs for this event has been of ,57. Outcomes: the works of the four portfolios has been crucial. Remarks: the SG recalls the attention on two elements which can be considered as two big disappointments : 1 the keynote speech: he says that the speech did not reflect the inputs and the expectations set by the Steering Committee nor the message that EJTN intended delivering to the attendees of the conference; 2 the panel: the way how it was run, did not meet the set objectives. The moderator could not be contacted easily to prepare the work and he adopted a methodology which differed a lot from the one it was decided to be used. Then the Secretary General recognises that it has been a lesson to be learned which will contribute to a better work for future events, mainly the Conference scheduled in Thessaloniki (GR) next July He adds that, for this event, the time left is not that much and for this reason invites Ms. Rosa JANSEN as convenor of WG JTM to take care about the organisation and the structure of the Conference. Before leaving the floor to the WG members, he informs he will not be attending the afternoon session of the meeting due to his participation to another meeting already foreseen. Ms. Rosa JANSEN, while opening the floor for comments and observations, informs that it will be important to set, before the implementation of any activity, the ownership of each event. Mr. Rainer HORNUNG considered that the DC goals have not been met because the expectations were too ambitious in terms of its length (only 1,5 day), but he recognises the success of the workshops sessions and the Plenary (2 nd conference day), were very productive in terms of concrete input received and given. Moreover, he reminds his regret as for the decision not to disseminate the questionnaire on evaluation before the Conference. Ms. Otilia PACURARI considers that the Conference has been very positive in terms of allowing many EU stakeholders to meet and to better know EJTN s actions and actors. Moreover, she considers that, to reach more satisfactory results, a longer event (or two different conferences) would have been needed so to achieve the two main goals: more effective outcomes on the methodology (contents) and a wider networking (get EJTN actions to be more disseminated and well known). 5

6 Mr. Jean-Philippe RAGEADE considers two positive aspects: the excellent work carried out by the portfolio leaders as well as the 2 nd day devoted to the rendition of the workshops outcomes: both have been extremely interesting and productive in terms of inputs, dynamics and active results achieved. On the contrary, he agrees on the fact that the key note speech did not meet the expectations given by the SC, however it has to be pointed out that in Lisbon the members of the Steering Committee changed some of the topics to be dealt by the Key note speaker, so Mr. Henrik ROTHE might not have been duly informed accordingly. On the basis of these comments, the Secretary General takes the floor to add the following : with reference to the ownership of the events: A) he has been mandated by the SC to organise a follow-up of the Lot 1 Pilot Project, which is an EJTN event; B) it has been cleared by the SC who was responsible for the DC (concrete groups/body/person) : that has to be considered in the overall framework, where anyone of the activities implemented by EJTN belongs to EJTN, Network of members. Ms. Rosa JANSEN replies that in Utrecht (SSR, September 17 th, 2014) the four portfolios have been set up and, at now, it has not yet been decided the kind of the activities to be implemented by the WG, however is very important to have a division on the topics for each one of the portfolios, so to plan in advance the WG s works. Moreover, the DC contributed to get valuable action plans, which appear very useful while drafting actions for She considers the importance to keep an open minded approach on what it has been done so to plan, in the best way, future actions. Mr. Wojciech POSTULSKI is glad to open the debate on the 2015 actions and, before leaving the discussion to the members, he wishes to make two comments on this years planning: - the format of the activities : (seminar or other): this is to be considered only under the budget perspective, since is refers to numbers of budgeted participants per each action - dates and venues: in July 2014 all EJTN members have been recipient of a call for hosting message, sent by EJTN as to inform them about the 2015 actions, according to the approved budget and asking about members interest and availability to host one or more actions in the diversified projects/programmes. This has been done for several reasons: a) favor a preliminary planning of any of the EJTN activities, b) simplify their organisation (with a better planning) and c) avoid last minute actions which may raise organisational and structural difficulties in their preparation. In September, following the closing of the call, it has been drafted a calendar of activities indicating the venues and the dates which have been agreed with the hosting countries. This calendar has been illustrated during the WG Programmes on November For these reasons, the dates and the venues decided cannot be changed anymore according to the fact that the availability to host is bound to the dates offered by that country. 6

7 Ms. Ineke VAN DE MEENE asks about the funds availability for 2015 actions and Mr. Wojciech POSTULSKI replies that the budget will cover, as ever, travel expenses, per diem, experts fees and the interpretations costs. Additional savings might be available. On this point, Ms. Ineke VAN DE MEENE asks whether they could be used also to cover any kind of costs and Mr. POSTULSKI replies positively according to the budget lines. 4. Drafting action plan of the WG for Portfolios presentations Then Ms. Rosa JANSEN leaves the floor to the presentation of the papers of each one of the four portfolios: N. 1 : Ms. Kari BERGET, n. 2 Mr. Rainer HORNUNG, N.3 Ms. Otilia PACURARI and N. 4 Ms. Ineke VAN DE MEENE. Each portfolio leader proceeds to the presentation of this/her respective papers, submitted preliminary to EJTN and uploaded on the EJTN members area, so to be accessible to all the WG JTM members before the meeting. Portfolio 1 - keys ideas in a nutshell (Presentation by Kari BERGET) New approach to learning and finance : - targets: a) share judicial training practices, b) set up a new approach towards the delivery of training knowledge, c) combine judicial training with the quality of justice, d) focus on wider objectives to be reached, extended use of technology; - How to reach these targets? organisation of seminars (or other)? - Reflections on the WG JTM: a) opportunity to share different approaches, b) work on the competence development, c) discuss more on common aspects rather than on discrepancies; - Room for reflection: a) how to work on judge craft, b) value for money and time, c) create methods and culture for feedbacks, d) for 2015/2016 actions the WG JTM could combine the organisation of seminars with the opportunity of study visits/tours in schools/training institutions; e) proposal aiming to translate most of the didactic material in EN language. The comments which followed this presentation, raised the interest on the organisation of judge craft actions, by Ms. Joanna KORNER. So Ms. Rosa JANSEN considers the opportunity to develop this topic in one of the 2015 actions. Portfolio 2 - keys ideas in a nutshell (Presentation by Rainer HORNUNG) Measuring learning results and training effects : - Reference to Kirkpatrick s model (and related levels) for evaluation; - Evaluation and assessment questionnaire (in electronic format) has been drafted in collaboration with Ms. Višnja MARINOVIC. It should be disseminated to all EJTN members to collect information on evaluation practices; ; 7

8 - Reflection on what could be measured? (reference is made to skills and capacities); with the use of which techniques? Ms. Otilia PACURARI highlights the importance of the culture of feedback and reflection : how do we measure? She considers that specific information on this aspect is not available, so the WG could work also on that. Ms. Maria AGERVIG TARP informs the WG members that Denmark has conceived a booklet, actually in Danish language, 40 pages in total) devoted to the impact of learning, a sort of inspiration catalogue on how to proceed to assessment before training: she considers that this tool might be useful to the WG works and it could represent one of the topics to be developed in a future seminar. The WG suggests whether this booklet could be translated into EN. Portfolio 3 - keys ideas in a nutshell (Presentation by Otilia PACURARI) Learning as impetus for change : - Who is our learner? Identification of his/her job profile ; - Training and practices should be in line with XXI century challenges; - Training should be continuous, with a frequency, by using different modes: i.e. E-learning, blended learning, face to face learning, training at the workplace etc.. - Goal by 2017: foster a common language for the providers of judges and prosecutors training; - Identify common aspects within the best practices which are implemented in all EU institutions, in different ways, with different tools, but common aspects and practices do exist: let s identify them; - Identify those indicators which are not negotiable on which trainers should plan, design and assess; - Actions to undertake: summer school (i.e. 5 days length 40 hours training) aiming to explain: how to be a leader, how to organise training etc.. - Stop with ex-cathedra presentations. Following Ms. PACURARI s presentation, Mr. Raffaele SABATO informs the members about a study he has carried out (and it s partially included in the presentation of this Portfolio N.3) on the following aspects: - Rarely innovators: it means that innovation is rare in judicial training and judges appear quite reticent to innovations. Moreover, innovation sometimes implies the break of the rules; - Not ready both as individuals and as a profession: training as a tool to address both individual and collective uneasiness toward change. Judicial training should take more in account human behaviour on institutional change, in order also to favour a more efficient impact of training; - No prejudice to judicial independence; 8

9 - In the long run: training should be seen in the long term perspective (not a one-day activity); - Creating motivation and conditions to change: new approaches/tools/management able to comply with judicial independence; - Simulate a way ahead: training is a precondition to the successful implementation of changes in the settings of justice in Europe. Following his presentation, Mr. SABATO informs that he will upload the mentioned document to the Moodle platform of WG JTM. Ms. Joanna KORNER highlights two aspects on which the WG could invest more on: - the length of training, one of the aspects which is quite debated in UK, since judicial training could be devoted more time, - take into consideration the training of lawyers: that would bring effective added value to judiciary, trainers and justice professionals ; Ms. Solvita KALNINA recognises the added value of the seminars implemented until now: sharing of experiences and bringing people together. So she proposes to invest more than 1,5 day for each training event (her proposal would be of 2 / 2,5 day training). The motivation is due to the need for more time to allow participants to benefit more of the offered training occasions; Ms. Otilia PACURARI proposes to invest on language skills. Portfolio 4 - keys ideas in a nutshell (Presentation by Ineke VAN DE MEENE) Relations between career management HR - and learning : - She illustrates the preconditions for judicial training in Europe which raised at the DC - according to: a) EJTN, b) members and c) judicial training institutions/national courts; - She illustrates the project of the digital library, so to make activities more relevant to a broader circle of beneficiaries. This library should contain manuals and training material accessible to the widest number of interested people (in such a way that the materials are also to whom did not attend a seminar/training event within EJTN); - learning at the workplace : in the framework of judicial training, the tendency is to focus on training events, while learning also takes place at the workplace and in collaboration and contact with others (70% learning from experience, 20% learning from others, and 10% structured learning). So she invites to reflect on where the WG JTM would like to operate in that framework and what EJTN could do to this aim? To conclude, she indicated a number of preconditions on how the WG JTM should proceed: o Invest on leadership o Make sure that actions provided by EJTN meet the expected efficiency ; o Make a choice among the activities to be proposed/implemented; o Invest on the workplace learning (to be identified how); 9

10 o Explore the combination of learning and performing : what is needed to shift from learning for the sake of learning to learning for better performance? o Favour the dissemination of Lot 1 outcomes. Following these presentations, Mr. Wojciech POSTULSKI considers how there are no clear cut distinctions among the four portfolios, so there might be the risk of topics overlapping. Then he proceeds with the following comments: a) Need of leadership : reference is made to the EJTN s Exchange Programme and the exchanges of courts, an opportunity which is addressed to courts leaders; b) Invited the WG members to reflect on the fact that, while implementing training actions across Europe, it should be avoided the speeding up of small groups of schools which appear more modernized than others: the approach the WG should adopt, need to be applicable to any country indistinctively. Following the lunch break, the meeting restarts without the presence of the Secretary General. Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO then informs the WG members and the Convener about the necessity to proceed to schedule actions and Ms. JANSEN replies that the 2016 planning shall be discussed the following day. Ms. Rosa JANSEN considers that in the four portfolios presentations common aspects for each one of them have also been highlighted. Mr. Rainer HORNUNG proposes to criss-cross the four portfolios, by fixing keys idea for each one of them and then leave the opportunity to mix common aspects so to avoid overlaps. That opens the debate amongst the WG members and, indeed, most of them do recognise the overlapping of many topics among the portfolios. Then Ms. Nathalie MALET, in line with this position, considers that trainers might be carried out training on two levels: - pedagogical face to face - Pedagogical engineering (how to organise training, reflection on its influence on the career, etc ) These two levels entail a different public, so different training events could be organised accordingly. Moreover she adds that it might appear interesting to make a distinction between the roles of the trainers. In conclusion, she says that the four portfolios may play as a guideline, however it could be good to undertake initiatives also according to a) the targets which should be reached by the WG and b) the role of the trainers. One of the themes under discussion is the training of trainers. Ms Otilia PACURARI considers how many training prerequisites are in common and the WG JTM could work on them as i.e. the trainers and the learning environment or training material design. 10

11 Ms. Ineke VAN DE MEENE says that this could appear as a continuation of the former training the trainers SWG s actions. Ms. Solvita KALNINA reminds how in Utrecht the WG discussed about how to support the training system and who is responsible for the conception of training programmes: those actors are the ones who do have the knowledge. Moreover she adds that, some topics for 2015 actions, have already been identified as EU judge craft and assessment/evaluation, which are perfect for this year s actions. On this planning aspect, Ms. Otilia PACURARI confirms her interest to keep also the topic on training the trainers, due to its importance and versatile development. Ms. KALNINA says that the WG JTM should focus on dissemination of training methodologies, while a minor relevance should be given to clear cut definitions. In this perspective, and in line with prior comments about overlapping risks, she expresses some doubts about the effective significance in keeping the portfolios division. Another topic that was discussed was the nature of the activities of the WG JTM. Ms. VAN DE MEENE says that this WG also should serve as a think-tank or research group for the benefit of the network and its members. Ms. KALNINA highlights how this conception could lead to a very big difference on how to see things and she reminds the words spent by the Secretary General in the morning session, inviting to take in full account the differences existing among the national schools. Mr. Raffaele SABATO reminds the heritage of the TT SWG which should be kept as one of the sources for actions of this WG, but in an evolving perspective. So he puts forward the following reflections: - Will this WG discuss only about methodologies or will it effectively run programmes on teaching methodologies? If the reply goes toward the second option, then it necessarily entails TT, since this target will be possible also through the work of trainers; - He would be rather keen on keeping the experience rather than the portfolios division, but keeping an eye on widening the targeted public involved, which should gather also chief judges, assistants to secretary general, clerical staff, IT specialists, organisational staff (the ones working together with chief judges) etc To conclude, Mr. SABATO invites to maintain the division in portfolios as a methodological approach, but the following principles should be taken for reference: - Contents - Wider approach to the Interested public the WG would like to address to (by including also trainers, courts leaders, IT specialists, etc.). Ms. Rosa JANSEN then asks the members where does this path shall lead the WG actions? and Ms. KORNER replies that we are a WG aiming to put forward methodologies with concrete suggestions on judicial training field. Ms. Otilia PACURARI highlights that methodology for the 11

12 WG JTM is a content. Mr. Rainer HORNUNG considers that the WG shall meet 2 or 3 times a year to plan actions and there is the risk to not to meet the concrete and targets if too much space is left to philosophy. So he invites to proceed concretely to the identification of the training events. - Following the debate Ms. Rosa JANSEN proposes four topics (as starting points see 1 st table page 13) for discussion within the WG. The proposal on topic n. 4 (initially modern methodology in judicial training ) has been considered too wide and its field of action has been narrowed (Mr. Rainer HORNUNG) and indicated in the table here below; - For the topic N. 2, Mr. Raffaele SABATO suggests to include among the topics the reference to court leaders in the field of IT and planning of training actions; moreover he asks about adding training in organisational change, New technologies, new approach in training and informal learning as sub-topics to N. 2. On this point Ms. Rosa JANSEN replies that the booklet illustrated by Ms. Maria AGERVIG TARP could be of effective support; - Ms. Maria AGERVIG TARP says that talent management could also constitute a proper issue to be dealt separately in a training event. Ms. Rosa JANSEN reminds the interesting connexion which could be done with the exchanges of leaders, whose implementation will start in March 2015 under the aegis of the WG Exchange Programme. This action could also be developed more by the WG JTM since is appears very close to the WG JTM targets (enriching in terms of inputs and experiences). The WG has agreed on the following: DECISION: the following decisions have been taken according to each portfolio activity: Portfolio N. 1 : the existing questionnaire on evaluation shall be disseminated. However it is to be determined who is responsible for its collection, and to work out the related results. The dissemination shall be done in the 3 days following the meeting by Mr Rainer HORNUNG and/or Ms. Višnja MARINOVIC; Portfolio N 2 : Ms. Kari BERGET says that craftsmanship is also bound with leadership and the leaders are very important for the competence development. The focus should be on leadership rather than on training programmes ; Portfolio N. 3: on this point Ms Rosa JANSEN informs that the document drafted by Mr. John PHILLIPS could be the reference paper. Mr. Raffaele SABATO reminds the reference of this text with the paper illustrated by Prof. Jeremy COOPER at the GA in Thessaloniki last June 2014 Portfolio N. 4: Ms. Rosa JANSEN says that some aspects of the TT shall be developed. Then the Convener informs that all these topics do have in common the library as well as the reference to the cost benefits (see table here below). 12

13 DIGITAL LIBRARY 1) (long term) evaluation / assessment 2) European Leadership : competence development 3) Craftsmanship/ judgecraft 4) Promotion of modern methodology in judicial training COST BENEFIT The meeting is suspended at 17.30; it has restarted on 27 th January at 9h00. Ms. Rosa JANSEN, on the basis of the four agreed topics, invites the WG members to develop more each one of them. To better achieve this result, she proceeds to split the WG members in three groups and proposes 45/50 minutes of brainstorming, which led to the following presentations: 1. Presentation by Kari BERGET: Evaluation assessment Leadership / competence development -Target group: Trainers, directors, course directors, board at institutional level -What is needed: to know the existing across EU on: different a)methods, b) instruments, c) designing evaluation, d)instrument to be used on how judicial training institutions deal with the information got from the evaluation. Which are the standards recommended? -Tools: Digital Library (website) and face to face -Target group: Trainers, course directors, board at institutional level. Focus on how to manage offices -Status: a) collecting methods, b) tools, c) designing contents, d) watchdo/reflect-do, e) experience, f) feed-back Craftsmanship craft judge -Target group: judges, trainers of judges - Starting points: a) refer to the document drafted by Mr. John Phillips, b) blended learning methods, c) contents designing, d) good practices. The principles need to be developed. Promotion of modern methodology in judicial training -Focus: a) where are we? (good practices) b) active learning methods -Observations: a) the word modern does not appear significant Ms. Rosa JANSEN suggests to try by the implementation of a Pilot Project. -Tools: face to face Tools: Digital Library (website) and face to face 2. Presentation by Rainer HORNUNG: Evaluation assessment Leadership / competence development Craftsmanship craft judge Promotion of modern methodology in judicial training 13

14 - proposals for 2015 actions: a) Dissemination of the electronic survey to assess the state of play. (It s ready: just need to send it out to the EJTN members as agreed); b) workshop on existing practices on Level I (Kirkpatrick Model). Open questions to be decided: what to do with the information collected?, How could it be used in better way? Goal: Model tools for proposals for 2015 actions: a) counselling with WG EXP on leadership in EU. Input for further collaboration and - make use of/accede to - their programme b)good practices in leadership training; c) develop a leadership programme (modules) : it is important that leadership could be connected with training. Why not including that as topic for a Conference (i.e in Thessaloniki - Greece?) -Tools: face to face - Target group: training organisers proposals for 2016 actions: c)collection and illustration of the already existing practices on level 2 to 4 (Kirkpatrick Model) d) determine which learning results are measurable and which not, paying attention to certain burdens (infringement of judicial independence etc..) 3. Presentation by Ineke VAN DE MEENE: - proposals for 2015 actions: a) detecting practices on training ; b) translate the existing material (wider linguistic approach) - proposals for 2016 actions: a)simulating of handling judge craft scenarios with national core groups and audio/video feedback. a) collection of practices on informal training (if not already detected by Lot 1 outcomes); b) Visit schools: associate this new initiative to the actions implemented by the EXP. It s important the 3 WGs (JTM, EXP, Programmes) do interrelate among each other; c)share materials; d) promote video feedback; e) promote idea on technology for more supplements on translation of universally usable concepts; f) fora and live streaming: a wider use of streaming should be done, so to share practices/materials/information and tools more easily among EU countries Evaluation assessment Leadership / competence development Craftsmanship craft judge Promotion of modern methodology in judicial training 14

15 a)questionnaire and outcomes (level 1 to 2 Kirkpatrick Model) b) what about long term evaluation? (level 3 to 4 Kirkpatrick Model ) c) there might be needed more development/external expertise in this field a) workshop on good practices; b) how should be a leadership programme? c) involvement with EXP actions referring to leadership (exchanges both in group and bilateral) -Target group: judicial training institutions Broad subject. Some perplexities about its consistency: however it should cover both common law and continental law countries. Broad subject. a)collecting best practices b)enriching the TT Handbook (already existing) Following the presentations carried out by the 3 groups, Ms. Joanna KORNER is glad to present the judge craft programme implemented in UK and so already available. She says it is composed by a mixture of lectures and talks on subjects like - i.e. - judicial ethics, how to manage a court, or a case or how to deal with witnesses. This programme is composed by phases: it starts with a short talk (around 30 minutes) on a specific topic; then the next phase implies to go to the Plenary. Finally the final phase is to discuss with the Groups (assisted by a leader and video support). Finally: there s time for questions, leading to general discussion. This practice, as confirmed by Ms. KORNER, makes also reference to actors and the involved groups are trained accordingly. Ms. Rosa JANSEN wishes to bring back the discussed ideas and to proceed to their summary in key topics (table here below): DECISION: Evaluation assessment European Leadership / competence development -The questionnaire already exists, then, in addition to its dissemination TO DO in 2015: the WG could organise a seminar with the target group as described TO DO in 2016 A better thinking on that could be done after the -take direct contact with the WG EXP - organisation of a seminar or conference on good practices (with the support of Ms. Joanna KORNER) Craftsmanship craft judge -collection of good practices; - organisation of a seminar or conference to bring more judicial systems together TO DO in 2015: organise a seminar/conference with the target group as described TO DO in 2016 The opportunity to Promotion of modern methodology in judicial training -promotion of good practices -Audio/visual support - collects learning practices 15

16 implementation of the seminar on What is measurable. undertake simulations are to be taken in to consideration (simulating of handling judge craft scenarios) 5. Activities in 2015 according to the results of the call for hosting and for presentation of the 2015 EJTN draft curriculum of activities: discussion and decision: That debate also led to the definition of the planning of the WG JTM activities for 2015: DECISION: 1 st event : Seminar Topic: Assessment/evaluation Date & Venue: 5 th -6 th May 2015, in Zagreb (Croatia) - Length 1,5 day Members of reference for the seminar s organisation: Rainer HORNUNG (contact person), Otilia PACURARI, Višnja MARINOVIC, Jean Philippe RAGEADE, Gaja STOVICEJ Numbers: 35 participants, including 3 experts (with fees) 2 nd event : Conference Topic: Leadership Date & Venue: 2 nd -3 rd July 2015 (changed after the meeting in June 30 and July 1) in Thessaloniki (Greece) - Length 1,5 day / 2 days Members of reference for the Conference s organisation: Maria AGERVIG TARP, Raffaele SABATO (contact person), Nathalie MALET, Solvita KALNINA, Rosa JANSEN/SSR Numbers: 60 participants, including 5 experts (with fees) 3 rd event : Seminar Topic: Craftsmanship/Judgecraft Date & Venue: 12 th -13 th October 2015, in Omšenie (Slovakia) - Length 1,5 day Members of reference for the seminar s organisation: Joanna KORNER (contact person), Kari BERGET, Olivea EBANKS, Maria PERQUILHAS, Maria DE LA O SILVA FERNANDEZ. Numbers: 35 participants, including 3 experts (with fees) With reference to any activity pertaining to the fourth topic Promotion of modern methodology in judicial training a decision shall be taken at a later stage. The WG agrees that material and communication for the scheduled activities shall be coordinated by SSR (Ineke VAN DE MEENE/Nathalie GLIME) and EJTN (Benedetta VERMIGLIO). 16

17 Following the debate, Mr. Jean Philippe RAGEADE shows perplexities about the proposals put forward by the Convener and considers that the proposed path would not necessarily lead to concrete results. More in detail, the WG Programmes Convener considers that the WG Programme structures its activities by identifying one unique Activity Coordinator per each event, who is the sole responsible for drafting the programme of the training event, as well as for the identification of the experts, so to have a faster decision-taking and make things easier. Moreover, clear Guidelines are in application to drive the works of the WG (and the related SWGs) in the most efficient way. The proposed way of proceeding for the WG JTM, according to Mr. RAGEADE s opinion, seems not to reply to the requirements of efficiency and concrete structural approach. Then Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO resumes the agreed actions (and the related budget information) concerning the WG JTM activities for 2015; moreover she invites the Convener and the WG on a fast decision on the 2016 planning to allow the draft of the budget. With reference to next year s actions, some proposals/requests are registered during a first consultation with the members: - Longer length of training events: Mr. Rainer HORNUNG considers that 1,5 day length appears too short to make training more effective. For this reason, he proposes 2 2,5 day length per event. Moreover he adds that the face-to-face approach should be widened leaving also room to research actions; - Ms. Solvita KALNINA considers that higher fees should be available to pay experts; - Ms. Rosa JANSEN considers that super experts should be either included both in the programmes and in the budget (with also higher amounts of fees available) Following these first inputs, the WG members are split in groups to discuss about the main aspects/goals which should be identified in order to set up a budget for 2016 actions as to be delivered on time to the next GA in Riga (June 2015). Presentation of draft proposals for 2016 actions and related budget: 1 st group 2 nd group 3 rd group 4 th group Joanna KORNER Cornelia RIEHLE Raffaele SABATO Rosa JANSEN Craftsmanship/Judgecraft Long term evaluation and Leadership and assessment competence development ACTIONS PROPOSALS ACTIONS PROPOSALS ACTIONS PROPOSALS a) Conference (between July 2015 and 2016) to collect training material ACTIONS PROPOSALS a) time and funds to meet 3 times a year with WG JTM : 2 meetings devoted 17

18 a)analyse feedbacks from October 2015 seminar ; b) run 2 pilot schemes (according to Mr. John PHILLIPS s paper); c) development and translation of the existing material; a)development of Level 2 to 4 (Kirkpatrick model); b)research; c) paper booklet; on leading positions in the judiciary and training future leaders to leadership. Its outcomes could constitute basis for further research; b) small group meeting. to planning; 1 meeting aiming to stimulate ourselves (members) b) proceed to research on innovation programmes (including techniques). d) Conference (to be organised at the end of 2016) to present the outcomes of 2016 actions; e) time and funds to meet for the WG members. PROPOSALS FOR BUDGET 1) (point B) 2 pilot schemes: 2,5 days each, N. of participants = 28 each 2) (point D) Conference: 60 participants, 1,5 day length 3) (point E) WG JTM meetings : travel costs/per diem 4) higher fees for experts PROPOSALS FOR BUDGET 1)point (A): organisation of 2 workshops, 28 participants each, 4 experts each, length 2,5 day and 1,500 each for technical equipment (not relating to interpretation but to research/it) 2) (Point B): funds for a researcher assistant 2 days per month 3) (point C): booklet reproduction in 100 copies EN/FR PROPOSALS BUDGET FOR 1) (Point A): conference: 35 participants, 5 experts, 1 super expert. 2)(Point B): small group meeting, (proposal to organise it in Italy) PROPOSALS BUDGET FOR 1) (Point A): 3 WG meetings per year, 2 of 1,5 day each and one of 2,5 day length, including budget to invite an external expert; 2) (point B) innovation programmes and use of techniques Ms. Kari BERGET adds that more funds should be available for development rather than for seminars. Mr. Rainer HORNUNG wishes also to include funds for a conference to present the results on long term assessment 6. Relations between the WG JTM and the WG Programmes: 18

19 The WG JTM welcomes an open approach/dialogue with the other 2 WGs: EXP and Programmes. Ms. JANSEN illustrates briefly the document (Point 6) and stresses its two main aspects: - The evaluation: she recognises that this subject has been widely discussed during the WG meeting and the WG has decided to invest on it, both on 2015 and 2016; - The Guidelines: on this point, she recalls the TT Handbook which has been completed in 2014 by the TT SWG members. So she asks whether its update might be already necessary. On this last point Guidelines Mr. Jean Philippe RAGEADE informs the WG members that at now, EJTN Guidelines do exist for the following fields Administrative, Civil and Penal. In the WG Programmes framework, the related SWGs have discussed about the guidelines update: the outcome has led the general approach not to invest anymore on them because of the insufficient use which is made of them. This position has been also discussed within the WG Programmes. However Mr. RAGEADE, as member of the WG JTM and Convener of the WG Programmes, asks the WG JTM to give their advice on how to improve the guidelines use. This is a request put forward by the EJTN Secretary General during the last WG Programmes; then once received the WG JTM s advice, a final decision shall be taken. Ms. Rosa JANSEN considers that this topic is not currently in the WG s JTM priority list so a decision could wait on this issue. Then Ms. Solvita KALNINA manifests her support in keeping the guidelines which have requested a lot of work to be accomplished. DECISION: Ms. Rosa JANSEN delegates Mr. Jean Philippe RAGEADE, Ms. Otilia PACURARI and Ms. Solvita KALNINA to discuss about this issue together with the WG Programmes and to report accordingly. 7. Additional items: Date and location of the next WG JTM meeting: Following a discussion among the WG members, it has been agreed that the next meeting will be held on September in Lisbon (PT) at the CEJ. Ms. Maria PERQUILHAS confirms the dates and says that the CEJ will be glad to welcome the WG members in Lisbon. Approval of the Minutes of the WG meeting held in Utrecht last 17 September 2014 (SSR) Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO informs the members that the only changes made to the last version concerned the following: - Mention of German to the Judicial Academy : amendment put forward by Mr. Rainer HORNUNG - Mention of Judicial Academy rather than Ministry of Justice : amendment put forward by Ms. Višnja MARINOVIC 19

20 On these basis, the Convener asks the WG members if the minutes can be approved and they are adopted by unanimity. The meeting is closed at Read and Approved Brussels, 30/01/2015 The Convener Rosa JANSEN EJTN Secretariat Benedetta VERMIGLIO With the support of the European Union 20