Evaluation of the Seminar “Xenophobia and Post-Socialism”
Ljubljana, 3-7 October 2001
WHAT WAS GOOD?
A
Presentation of problems concerning xenophobia in other countries
Social life of the conference group was well organized
Final conclusion regarding RINAX was the best of all
Some concrete ideas about further action were good
B
Meeting
Exchange of ideas
Organization
Some presentations, especially I. Žagar and T. Kuzmanić
Final proposal about personal networking and the fact that after the seminar we will start cooperation on a few levels
Workshops
C
New people
Gathering a lot of information about differences and common things in Eastern Europe
Several very interesting presentations
Some really new ideas in the workshop
D
Plans for networking
Group of participants
Some very interesting presentations
Exchange of experiences
Development of cross-regional contacts
Great work of the organizing team
Metelkova per se
E
A lot of different aspects were presented
Good organization
F
The theoretical presentation was very interesting
Discussion
Atmosphere; it was not a formal seminar. I like the idea of working together. I found out a lot
of new things and I find out how to solve some problems that we have in our country
G
The place
Food and stuff
Several presentations
The very idea for the conference
1
H
The idea to invite people from different countries
The idea to bring together scholars with people with practical experience
To consider the problem of xenophobia
The location (place)
Different approaches to the problem
Food
Final conclusion
Active methods during the workshops
Organization of the seminar
I
Organization: You choose a very original place for the seminar, that created a good
atmosphere
You divided seminar into two parts; theoretical (with presentations) and practical (with
outputs and collective opinions)
J
Organization
Connecting the subject of seminar with a very special place – Metelkova
The way that seminar was planned – presentations together with workshops
Open and informal atmosphere all the time
The idea to invite people from different countries
Working on both theoretical and practical levels
K
Excellent presentations and discussions
Great friendship and hospitality
Organization of seminar
Contacts
L
Igor Žagar, Hania Fedorowicz, Ferid Muhić, Vlasta Jalušič
Intensive contacts with people
Program
Food, organization, organizers
M
Exchange of opinions
Variety of participants
Solid theoretical lectures
Atmosphere in »Metelkova«
Proposal for the network
Ljubljana and hospitality of the organizers
N
Workshop
The place
The topic
2
Hospitality
Kindness of the organizers
Professors
O
Organization was excellent as well as the diversity of those attending
Presentations were inspiring
P
Excellent as a beginning
Beautiful Surroundings
Good food
Good group dynamics
Good combination between theory and practice
R
People (participants and organizers)
Topics
Methods
Environment
Meals
Place
Metelkova
S
The best thing about this workshop is that it was convened and that there are people in this
region trying to do something against xenophobia
IDEAS FOR IMPROVEMENT
A
More structure
Have an introductory session or opening: let participants briefly introduce themselves and
their organizations
Focus on a specific issue and a prospective joint project (for the workshop phase)
More distinct (logical) sequence of presentations
Clearly formulated objective(s) at the outset
B
The workshop (2. group) was not effective, because instructions were not clear. So we spent a
lot of time and energy for nothing.
Some presentations were too broad. Too much information and not enough time.
C
The workshop should be more organized. The things that I should do at the workshop should
be more clear.
We should work in little groups with 4-5 person each.
We should respect the schedule more.
3
D
More free time
Special box for proposals
To improve information system
E
The instruction for the workshop (in group 2) should/could be more clear – it resulted in a
huge loss of energy
We should stick to the time limits (limit the presentations)
F
Enlarging the number of participants
Making social program
More focused content dealing with very concrete issues (discussing phenomena by focusing
on a specific case or discussing a kind of policy or educational activity in a clear frame). More
practical work, but in a proper (not beginner!) way.
Better thematic selection of participants and balance between level of seminar and level of
participants’ experiences and knowledge
G
More interaction
Beginning with the workshop, while presentations should be included in the program
Respecting time and agenda
More compact leadership of the whole seminar is required
H
To start generally, but to have more focus at the workshop
To work outside if sun shines
I
Too intensive, shortage of time
More time for debate (without reading papers, just thesis)
Concentrating on one aspect of the problem
People from the other parts of Eastern Europe (as much as possible!)
Work on documentation dealing with xenophobia in Eastern Europe
Inclusion of the subject (xenos) within some of invisible colleges (?)
J
Besides the presentations and group work, there should also be a special part of the seminar
devoted to debate
K
It would be much better (productive) if the workshops wouldn't start from elementary ideas
and basics in HR. Most of the people, if not all, have some / a lot of experience in many issues
of HR. Spending time and energy on the basics can only hurt the concrete projects at the end.
Use initial energy wisely.
L
More constructive work
Connecting theoretical and activist levels of work.
4
M
Should be more focus on specific and executable initiatives that we as a group could carry
out.
N
More narrow topic
To start from some one big document (or paper) on the topic (for example: )
To ask everybody to send their papers (documents) to all others – to prepare better. Or even to
start discussion in advance – on E-list.
O
To be careful in choosing participants to achieve balance with regard to experience.
P
The subject was too wide – it was very difficult to find a common ground during discussions
It would be better, if we could get some information earlier - it would be possible then to
prepare better for the seminar
It will be nice if we had some free time (like 1-2 hours a day) to have a possibility to visit the
city without skipping any of the lectures
R
Different problems (topics) that people (countries) face in their everyday work on the issues
of xenophobia
Very different theoretical level of participants
More focused topics within the workshop and future action-planning
Involvement of many more »real« local NGO's that work on these issues everyday
Think twice on the place of next meeting: a) Pristina; no one attended from there! (it could
look like an uninvited guest) b) Sarajevo; Tuzla could be better (especially because of high
travel costs for people who are far away (Russia, Romania, Poland...)
SYNTHESIS WORK: COMMENT OR INSIGHT ABOUT THE WORK PROCESS
(WORKSHOPS)
-
-
Informal atmosphere was very positive influence to be active; the output of workshop
is always better then the output of formal conference
I like very much a perfect connection of subjects, place and the way everything was
organised (presentation; workshop)
Combination of theory and praxis
The choice of the topic was very good in this time especially after the events of 11th of
September. The way of workshop was new for me and I think it is very good
The work could be more compact, but it was useful, because of exchange of
experience. People in the group ware very nice
It was interesting to try to invent strategies from the very beginning, from visions. But
maybe it would be more useful to take some of prepared strategies or programs and try
to add something new
5
-
I’ve given all my good ideas, so now I have an empty head
We have the same manifestation of xenophobia in our country, so we should find a
common strategy for dealing with it
-
Interesting concepts suggested
The green, blue and yellow papers were a detour; we should have focused on the red
Objectives should have been set more clearly at the outset
Too general. We could have concentrated on our group – specific projects, resources,
things to do together
-
The process was interesting, but I will have difficulty on agreeing on policy paper.
The process is good exercise to link NGOs in future work
Mixing red and green phase (which is more articulated)
There should be more productive approach to ideas
-
Time (we should spend more time for workshops)
Focus (subject of our focus was too big)
Target group
The importance of local initiatives before regional initiatives
LAST THOUGHTS
-
I learned a lot
We could make more use of existing initiatives; make direct contact
Expand idea of using art (against racism) & public exhibits
Need more research about xenophobia
Need more attention to this phenomenon
Create new political space
Focus on Jans projects (whatever we agree upon)
Don't forget: stay in contact!
Hungary has different climate on xenophobia – analysis
Follow up in Budapest
Try to suggest definitions of keywords (or use EC on MR definitions)
This is only a beginning
Trying to find possible ways
Be aware of all 'troubles' associated with beginning
I've learned a lot about my own xenophobic feelings
6