Evaluation procedures and results

Evaluation form
An evaluation form was distributed at the start of the conference and submitted at the end. A summary of the results can be downloaded here.
Panel discussion
On the last day, the keynote speakers discussed various aspects of the conference in a plenary session. A complete transcription can be downloaded here.

Media
The University of Graz reported on the conference here. An article appeared in the magazine Korso.

Open space and workshops
The open space session yielded four major areas of interest, which became the topics of workshops on the following day. These were entitled terms and concepts; media; awareness; and networking. Each workshop had a coordinator who was asked to send a short summary. Below are summaries that we have received.

Networks and networking (summary by L. Mennel)
Networking was regarded as an important strategy for the purpose of intercultural work and transnational communication.The aim of networks is to establish links and contacts between experts in diverse fields and practices for the purpose of mutual empowerment and interchange of expertise. All of us agreed that it is easier to build networks among and with academics of different backgrounds in the sense of inter-disciplinary colaborations, than to bridge the distance between academics and practitioners. As one participant explained, it is nice to have and discuss all these theories, but it is in his small landscape and community that he finds more difficulties when raising the question of multiculturality. There, he will not find that ease in transcultural communication, but differing interests and practices of non-tolerance. The differing approaches of practitioners and academics seemed to be evident in the conference too.

Definitions (summary by Erica Bisesi and Ursula Hemetek)
We discussed the importance and implications of good definitions for key words.
1. The difference between terms and concepts. Although at first sight these words seem to refer to the same thing (as a single concept may correspond to many terms, and a single term may correspond to many concepts), a term is more linguistic, while a concept is mainly cognitive and mental. 
2. As we are speaking English – but most of us are not native English speakers – we have to adapt our language to other communities, for cultural learning purposes.
3. Inspired by the prefixes and suffixes introduced by Christiane Hartnack in her keynote (prefixes: inter-, trans-, multi-, cross-, hyper; suffixes: -ity, -ism, -ation) and following the idea that culture is a unique entity (so that we think of culture, not cultures), we concluded that we need no prefix. On the other hand, discourse on suffixes requires that we decide if the approach should be semantic or pragmatic. As interculturalism is integrated in a political resolution (Council of Europe, first statement in the “Standing Conference of European Ministers of Education”, Dublin) we chose to follow a pragmatic approach. In our definition, interculturality refers to a description, while interculturalism refers to a political and normative context. Furthermore, the suffix "-ation" (e.g., transculturation) is related to changing things and/or moving processes. Anyway, the problem of finding such good definitions depends on the linguistic context. In this regard, we discussed examples of the different use of the same terms in German, Croatian and French.
We concluded that we should not to be too strict with these terms. Instead, in the context of an interdisciplinary conference, we should be careful about explaining and exploring concepts.

Awareness (summary by Joana Lúcio and Ulrich Kattmann)
The main question that this group discussed, under the subject of awareness in the field of interculturality, was: What can we do to change the negative perception of difference?
- As researchers and/or practitioners in the field of social-educational intervention, participating in this kind of event (cAIR’10) was mentioned as an important aspect in promoting our own awareness and that of others with whom we work.
- Being exposed to difference/diversity is important, but having the opportunity to communicate (in its sense of finding a common ground) with those we perceive as different is fundamental in promoting a more positive approach to diversity. This allows for familiarity to overcome strangeness.
- Education is the basis: the knowledge of the Other is the starting point for intercultural awareness and dialogue.
- Diversity is, from our point of view, a very positive aspect of the contemporary world. This may be particularly pertinent when considering subjects like post-national identity. Individual and group memory play a very important role in one’s predisposition towards diversity. Although we perceive social cohesion as fundamental for a community’s development, we find it crucial to offer groups and individuals the opportunity to celebrate difference within unity. In this sense, we distance ourselves from the idea of “the melting pot” and embrace that of “the salad bowl”: social harmony should not depend on the dilution of differences and diversity.


Procedure for evaluation of submitted project summaries
The following text is no longer current, but it is maintained here for interest.

All submissions to cAIR were subject to a quality control procedure that was fair, thorough, constructive and helpful. Each submitted project summary was evaluated anonymously by at least two international experts corresponding to the submission’s specific academic discipline and area of practice or intervention (see committees). Members of local practice and research committees recommended evaluators, but did not evaluate submissions themselves. Authors' identities were withheld from evaluators and vice-versa (double-blind peer review).

The acceptance or rejection of submissions, and the classification of accepted submissions into talks or posters, depended on the following criteria:
On this basis, evaluators sorted submissions into excellent talks, regular talks, posters and rejects. When two evaluators disagreed significantly, a third was consulted.

Each evaluator was also be asked to briefly describe their relevant expertise, and - for each submission -
 Apart from keynotes, all talks and posters at cAIR, including all local submissions and all submissions from committee members, were subject to the same evaluation procedure.