Abstract:

Blended Intensive Programmes (BIP) are increasingly used within Erasmus+ mobility schemes. BIP is a short-term format that combines virtual and face-to-face activities within a single structured learning sequence. This paper presents a case-based analysis of one STEM-focused BIP implemented for academic staff. The analysis is based on participant evaluations collected through a post-programme survey consisting of Likert-scale ratings and open-ended responses.

The purpose of the study is to examine how specific design elements of the programme were evaluated by participants and to identify patterns between component ratings and overall programme assessment. The focus is not on measuring learning outcomes or individual competence development, but on analysing the structural and pedagogical configuration of the programme. Particular attention is given to the relationship between online sessions, preparatory tasks, laboratory workshops, practical workshops, discussions and reflections, and overall programme organisation.

Descriptive statistical analysis was used to determine mean ratings and variability across components. Spearman correlation analysis was conducted to explore associations between component evaluations and overall programme structure. The dataset includes responses from 20 participants. In addition, thematic analysis of qualitative feedback was used to identify which programme days and activities were perceived as most impactful and how participants described the strengths and areas for improvement.

The results show that laboratory and practical workshops received the highest average ratings and demonstrated the strongest associations with overall programme evaluation. Discussions and structured reflection were moderately associated with perceived programme coherence. Online sessions and preparatory homework were strongly interrelated, indicating that participants perceived the virtual and face-to-face elements as connected rather than independent components. Logistical factors such as onsite conditions showed minimal association with overall programme assessment, whereas schedule quality demonstrated a moderate relationship.

The findings are interpreted using the ICAP framework, which distinguishes between passive, active, constructive and interactive forms of engagement. Activities that required constructive and interactive engagement were evaluated more positively than components primarily involving passive participation. Based on this case, the paper outlines empirically grounded considerations for designing short-term international programmes that integrate virtual preparation, hands-on activities and structured reflection in a coherent sequence.

Keywords:

Learning design, participant evaluation, ICAP framework.