Journal of Intergenerational Relationships

ISSN: 1535-0770 (Print) 1535-0932 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjir20

Sharing Intergenerational Relationships in

Educational Contexts: The Experience of an
International Program in Three Countries (Spain,
Poland and Turkey)

Carmen Orte, Marga Vives, Joan Amer, Lluís Ballester, Belén Pascual, Maria
Antònia Gomila & Rosario Pozo

To cite this article: Carmen Orte, Marga Vives, Joan Amer, Lluís Ballester, Belén Pascual,
Maria Antònia Gomila & Rosario Pozo (2018) Sharing Intergenerational Relationships in
Educational Contexts: The Experience of an International Program in Three Countries
(Spain, Poland and Turkey), Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 16:1-2, 86-103, DOI:
10.1080/15350770.2018.1404414

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2018.1404414

Published online: 22 Dec 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 19

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wjir20
JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
2018, VOL. 16, NOS. 1–2, 86–103
https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2018.1404414

SCHOLARLY
Research
Sharing Intergenerational Relationships in Educational
Contexts: The Experience of an International Program in
Three Countries (Spain, Poland and Turkey)
Carmen Orte, PhD, Marga Vives, PhD, Joan Amer, PhD, Lluís Ballester, PhD,
Belén Pascual, PhD, Maria Antònia Gomila, PhD, and Rosario Pozo, PhD
Department of Pedagogy and Didactics, University of the Balearic Islands, Palma, Spain

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Schools are settings where intergenerational relationships can Intergenerational programs;
be forged in their capacity as microcosms or small commu- lifelong learning;
nities through cooperative approaches and meaningful learn- intergenerational relations;
learning communities;
ing. This paper outlines the main practical, policy-related, and
program implementation
research implications of intergenerational education programs,
based on the experience of the European SACHI (“Sharing
Childhood”) project. From the resulting guide to good prac-
tices that was drawn up, the generation of synergies should be
highlighted as a means of bringing about changes in relation-
ships as opposed to just attitudes. The importance is also
raised of a rigorous assessment process.

Introduction
Education programs can be a good way of fostering intergenerational rela-
tionships. Carefully organized initiatives in social and educational contexts
can be promoted that go beyond the one-directional concept of children
being taught by more senior members of the population. Organizing such
initiatives in the form of a program also helps to ensure that certain content
matter is covered and targets met. It is also important to pay special attention
to the assessment of the process and results of the program so as to guarantee
the quality of its implementation, its continuance in the future and possible
application in other contexts.
This paper analyzes the Sharing Childhood (SACHI) program, a European
intergenerational relationship program within the framework of the
European Commission’s Lifelong Learning Program (Grundtvig), coordinated
by the GIFES research group (Social and Educational Training and Research
Group) attached to the University of the Balearic Islands (Spain), in colla-
boration with the Foundation for the Development of the Education System

CONTACT Marga Vives marga.vives@uib.eu Department of Pedagogy and Didactics, University of the
Balearic Islands, Palma 07122, Spain.
© 2017 Taylor & Francis
 JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS 87

(Lodz, Poland) and Bayat Halk Egitim Merkezi Mudurlugu (Afyonkarahisar,

Turkey).
85% of all European citizens believe that financial support should be
provided for initiatives and projects that integrate young and older mem-
bers of the population (Eurobarometer, 2008). Thus, there is an explicit
demand for intergenerational programs by European citizens which needs
to be taken into account. However, the reality of the situation, as noted by
Butts (2007) and the ENIL network (2012), is a fragile one, characterized
by a predominance of isolated programs or sporadically funded ones with
a limited length of time and scope, promoted by non-governmental bodies.
This situation must be rectified if expected social objectives are to be met.
Given these circumstances, in order to make sure that intergenerational
education projects are taken into account in public policies, a more solid
theoretical and practical base must be built up and, above all, scientific
evidence that these projects work and do bring about the envisaged
changes must be provided.
This practice-based paper attempts to provide a response to the above
by outlining the factors to be taken into account in the implementation of
education programs aimed at fostering intergenerational relationships,
based on the experience of the SACHI program, run in three different
countries. To do so, it focuses on: i) the rationale behind this kind of
program; ii) an explanation of the objectives, participants and benefits; iii)
a description of the skills and values worked on during the program; iv) an
outline of the content matter and format of the program; v) how the
program fits in with public policies in this field; and, vi) the practical
and policy-related implications for practitioners, researchers and
policymakers.

Rationale
From the perspective of active ageing and the potential for intergenerational
relationships, the UNESCO (Hatton-Yeo & Ohsako, 2001) points out that
intergenerational projects are beneficial insofar as they offer a response to
key social problems like how to narrow the generation gap, the revival and
transmission of traditional culture, and encouraging an active intergenera-
tional working and social life.
One noteworthy aspect of the SACHI project is the fact that it promotes
intergenerational relationships in schools through cooperative meaningful
learning processes in which the (senior adult and younger) students are the
main protagonists of the actual process, with the teachers accompanying
them in the experience. In line with Sánchez, Kaplan, and Sáez (2010), the
overall aim is to create intergenerational learning communities which not
only bring countries into line with European objectives on policies for the
88 C. ORTE ET AL.

third age, but also promote effective inclusion in both schools and the
community.

Policy framework
The SACHI program ties in with three main areas of public policy: inter-
generational policies, lifelong learning and empowerment of older people:

(a) In terms of lifelong learning, it is important to consider that not only

should everyone have the chance to continue learning throughout their
lives, but that they should also have the opportunity to learn together
by forging links among individuals at different stages in the lifecycle.
That is, they tread the same pathway, benefitting mutually from one
another as members of different generations with different character-
istics and experiences.
(b) Senior members of the population’s effective social inclusion must be
ensured through the promotion of an intergenerational society, as
indicated by the United Nations (2002) and European Commission
(2016), which has made calls for initiatives to be developed aimed at
building a society and a Europe for all ages, giving greater visibility to
the older population. In reference to intergenerational programs,
Sánchez and Martínez (2007) emphasize the need to ensure that the
ageing population is a central focus of public policies.
(c) Older people must be empowered through international, national and
regional policies that promote active ageing and quality of life for
senior adults. Sánchez and Martínez (2007) point out that ageing
must be regarded as a process so that it is seen in a new light as
something active and healthy.

European policy-related objectives were also worked on in a crosscutting

way, such as (1) promoting greater sensitivity to cultural and linguistic
diversity in Europe and striving to overcome prejudice; (2) integrating
methods for special needs students so as to foster their inclusion; (3) pro-
moting sex equality; (4) avoiding discrimination for reasons of age, ethnic
origin or disability; and (5) promoting interculturality in schools and in
exchanges among the participants of the different countries.
The intergenerational programs produce several benefits in the social
dimension (Kaplan, 2016; Maddox, Doran, Williams, & Kus, 2011; or
Dunham & Casadonte, 2009), preventing loneliness and its negative effects.
European policies aim to avoid the risks associated with ageing by giving
priority to social cohesion. Through the EU Europe 2020 strategy, the con-
cept of intergenerational relationships was developed and explored, taking
into account the mutual benefits that it offers participant groups. Some
 JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS 89

reviews of the subject, like Eagle Project (2008), indicate that intergenera-
tional practices can help to counter inequalities and overcome social segrega-
tion through the promotion of a better capacity for understanding, increased
respect among generations and positive social outcomes.
As Almeida (2009) points out, there is an emerging need to promote
intergenerational learning in Europe as a means of forging a sense of inter-
generational solidarity. Social cohesion can be defined according to three
dimensions: (1) social relations, (2) identification with the geographical unit,
and (3) orientation toward the common good (Schiefer & Van Der Noll,
2017). Discrimination is hence reduced and priority is given to the principle
of inclusion. In his articles, Van Den Heuvel (2015) highlights the need to
promote intergenerational relationships through a change in society’s values,
encouraging solidarity, equality, and participation.
With the principle of reciprocity as a basis, the challenge today is to go
one step further through the implementation of initiatives that have a
knock-on effect, impacting on more than just their participants (Henkin
& Butts, 2012). According to these authors, the aim is to foster ways of
helping the older population to offer their skills and talents to the com-
munity, transforming them into active visible citizens. They base their
ideas on the concept of active citizens who work together for the common
good. This notion coincides with Boström’s (2014) definition of social
capital as capital that is generated in contexts where people work together
to achieve a common goal.
Melville (2013) emphasizes the importance of places and their functions
and whether their design contributes to or hinders intergenerational relation-
ships. Schools are places with a high potential in this respect: they unite one
of the main target sectors of the population, they are designed to meet
multiple needs, they have ties with the whole local community through
their students (families, organizations etc.) and so on. They can be a meeting
point for the whole local community and so what goes on inside them can
make an impact on the entire neighborhood. Some difficulties still need to be
overcome, such as rigid timetables and curriculums or a lack of experience in
networking. If a more systemic community-based approach were taken by
society and by political institutions, it would be less difficult to put inter-
generational projects into practice in schools, helping them to open their
doors to the community.

Sharing childhood (SACHI) program

The main goal of the SACHI project is to foster positive relationships
between young and senior members of the population in order to combat
intergenerational stereotypes via the implementation of an intergenerational
program based on learning through values. The specific goals are:
90 C. ORTE ET AL.

(1) The development of an intergenerational value-based learning metho-

dology within the context of schools, directed at incorporating senior
adults in the process.
(2) The generation of positive attitudes toward the third age and toward
childhood by generating an active participatory image which acts as a
catalyst for ideas.
(3) To promote and disseminate an active, positive, committed image of
young people and senior members of the population.
(4) To foster social skills among young and senior members of the popu-
lation (listening, oral expression, group relations, creativity, etc.).
(5) To share knowledge and skills and to allow both generations to learn
from one another.
(6) To foster a positive relationship to the mutual benefit of both
generations.
(7) To disseminate an intergenerational process and work method that
can be integrated into educational practice.

Creating a strategic European network is a good means of working toward

these goals from a comparative perspective. The coordinating group (GIFES
research group, Spain) and its partners, the Foundation for the Development
of the Education System (Poland) and Bayat Halk Egitim Merkezi Mudurlugu
(Turkey), both have extensive experience in education programs.
The SACHI program’s application was based on two main cornerstones:
firstly, European directives relating to learning programs for senior adults
(the framework for our project) and, secondly, the principles proposed by
Sánchez et al. (2010) regarding the planning and implementation of
programs.
The educational units are agreed upon before the implementation of each
one by the participants and, simultaneously, adapted to a school curriculum
of each participating country. A principal activity is carried out (depending
on the unit, the sessions adapt to different matters such as language, knowl-
edge of the environment or physical education), a synthesis activity (conclu-
sion of the session), proposal of an activity for the next session, and self-
evaluation (of students, professors, and elderly in regard to the session). The
sessions are connected to the basic competencies of the school curriculum,
especially in the basic competencies in the primary education curriculums,
oriented toward the development of values that help to exercise a democratic
citizenship and develop social cohesion, stimulating learning and equipping
participants with tools of learning (Orte & Vives, 2016).
The values and skills promoted by the program are directly related with the
competencies of the curriculum. The basic competences described below were
incorporated in the different sessions. A review was made of horizontal
European key competences (language, digital and social competences,
 JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS 91

improved motivation, better self-confidence, and improved knowledge of coun-

tries and cultures) and they were integrated in the official curriculums of the
three countries taking part, with particular emphasis on social and civic com-
petences in association with the generations involved in the project. The
objectives of each session revolved around these last competences, while also
taking a global learning approach, since most of the sessions could be carried
out as part of different subjects (environmental studies, languages or art).
The curricula competences that were worked on were:

(1) Learning to learn. a) Seeking information from oral, written and

graphic sources; b) boosting motivation, self-confidence and an inter-
est in learning; and c) encouraging autonomy and personal initiative.
(2) Language competence. Communication skills (explanatory and listen-
ing skills, empathy-reciprocity and dialogue).
(3) Social and civic competence. a) Learning to live in harmony and to
accept rules; b) Developing social skills in relations with others; c)
Developing cooperative and group work skills; d) Appreciating your
colleagues’ contributions; e) Fostering an interest in other people’s
lifestyles and lifetimes; f) Showing interest and forming a positive
opinion of older adults; g) Showing interest and forming a positive
opinion of children; and h) Forging a sense of identity and learning to
appreciate one’s neighborhood.
(4) Cultural and artistic competences. a) Showing an interest in events
occurring locally and elsewhere; and b) encouraging creativity.
(5) Specific competences. a) Clarity in explaining a game; b) planning,
conducting, and analyzing an interview; c) giving verbal instructions;
d) taking part in communication-based situations in the classroom; e)
expressing opinions; f) appreciating culture’s rich value through pop-
ular games; g) appreciating the value of games as leisure and social
activities; h) relating to other people through games; and i) an aware-
ness of the physical world and interaction with it.

The internal structure of each of the sessions was as follows (Orte et al.,
2015): 1) opening activity; 2) main activity; 3) review activity; 4) the proposal
of an activity for the following session and 5) (Self-)assessment.
In general, the sessions can take about 70 minutes. Each senior adult joins
a group of six to eight students, chosen to work together by the class tutor.
So, SACHI counted on the participation of teachers, primary school
students, voluntary senior members of the population and the institutions
taking part in the project from Spain, Poland, and Turkey. It is important to
note that the project partners reached a consensus on a common set of
criteria to be applied for the selection of the participants in each country.
92 C. ORTE ET AL.

(1) As for the students who took part, the SACHI project was put into
practice using 6th-year primary school students (aged 11 to 12).
(2) In the case of the senior adults taking part—aged over 65 in Spain and
over 50 in Poland and Turkey1—they had to be active personalities
with social skills and an interest in learning.
(3) In the case of the schools taking part, they must be accessible to the
community. They must also use methodologies that fit in with an
intergenerational program (IP), such as project-centered work or
cooperative methodologies where the students play an active key role
and the educational community is involved in them.
(4) The organizing institutions must have prior experience of intergenera-
tional projects in the field of education and lifelong learning. It is also
advisable for these institutions to be members of international or
professional networks so as to build up more knowledge and ensure
more widespread dissemination.

Based on these criteria, SACHI was put into practice in three countries: in
Turkey at a primary school, in Spain at three primary schools (4 classes), and
in Poland at an organization as an extracurricular program. The first year of
SACHI, the three partners networked to coordinate the project and its
timeframe and assessment process. The second year, the project was put
into practice and assessed.
Because the program was organized at different levels (at school, country
and overall level) and it involved participants of different kinds (senior
adults, students aged 11 to 12, teachers and experts), efficient organized
networking was needed. In order to put the projects into practice at each
center, working groups were formed made up of:

(1) The participating senior adults (3 or 4).

(2) The class tutor as a professional representative even though the
school’s head staff were involved, plus the collaboration and participa-
tion of the teaching staff of subjects that might be taught when the
sessions were timetabled.
(3) The group of consultants (normally 2) from the organizing institution.
(4) Community associations and institutions with links with the education
center.
(5) Trainee teachers (collaborating university students, undergraduates on
placement etc.).

For example, in the Spanish implementation, each session involved about

31 people: 23 students, 3 seniors, 1–2 teacher(s), 1 research and 1 external
observer.
 JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS 93

Findings of the sachi evaluation

The SACHI program offers different benefits for the groups taking part. With
intergenerational programs, different generations’ needs can be met in such a
way that they fit in with one another (as occurs with children each day at a
normal school), while also giving each participant a new meaning and role,
boosting their classroom participation and sense of worth (Kaplan, Sánchez
& Hoffman, 2016). Jarvis (2001, in Kaplan et al., 2016) highlights the gen-
eration and transformation of experiences, knowledge, skills, attitudes,
beliefs, values, meanings, and emotions that take place in intergenerational
learning. The following benefits are derived from the relationship between
the different generations (Kaplan, 2016):

–Building up knowledge through a more personal learning process and

reciprocal relations, thus helping to foster an emotional bond.

(1) Improved communication skills with a group of people outside the

participants’ usual circle of contacts. Learning to communicate with
different generations, using a shared language.
(2) Sharing individual experiences of life with a different generational
group.
(3) Improved self-confidence and self-esteem by feeling a part of a valid
useful group during the activities. A heightened sense of worth.
(4) Developing a set of social skills and the use of ICTs.
(5) A heightened sense of public spiritedness and responsibility to the
community.

The moments and instruments of evaluation used include:

Initial: a) Standard survey in relation to the intergenerational relationships
(regarding perceptions, attitudes, and intergenerational relationships) and b)
Satisfaction survey (professors, seniors, and students). Biweekly follow-up
meetings of the implementation team.
Final: a) Standard survey in relation to the intergenerational relations
(about perceptions, attitudes, and intergenerational relations); b) satisfaction
survey (final): children, elderly, and c) final discussion groups (2) with the
senior student and tutors
Students, seniors, professor, and external observer complemented for each
session a questionnaire, obtaining a total of 168 questionnaires of each school
and a total of 672 questionnaires (four classrooms) in the Spanish imple-
mentation of SACHI. Depending of their profile (senior, student, professor,
or external observer), each participant complemented a questionnaire about
each SACHI session. The study was not submitted to the IRB for approval
94 C. ORTE ET AL.

because it was exempt from our Institutional Review Board requirements as

it was a program evaluation.
In reference to the pre/post survey, the following table presents a few
results obtained in the pre/post surveys of the elderly regarding their relation
with the Young. Please see Table 1, significant changes exist (p = 0.019)
concerning the interpersonal relations between the elderly and the youth.
The results of the questionnaire of students demonstrate that the superior
measures of satisfaction in the post-test with respect to the post-test’s valua-
tion of its relations with grandparents (maternal and paternal) and with other
elderly, although they are not significant. We must note that in this sense,
many of them recalled very positive relationships in the pre-test, a socially
desirable factor. The fact that some of them did not maintain these relation-
ships during the implementation of the program with their grandparents,
probably due to the inability to do so as a result of death or because of
circumstances (residency in a different country).
Regarding the structure of these IG sessions, there was initial activity
(related to the work carried out in the two inter-session weeks); principal
activity, final conclusions. The implication of the participants was high:
participants informed that the session was done completely (90%) and
84.2% of students did the work at home. The following Table 2 adds
complementary information about these results
Following the evaluation of the sessions, the elderly found the participa-
tion as optimal (93.56%); while the students self-evaluated the participation
as optimal (71.4%) or sufficient (23.8%), explained by the lack of time to be
able to explain more things. The fidelity of the sessions (meaning, to realize
the SACHI session as it was planned) was positive; adjusted on time in an
excellent form (60%) or fair (24.8%). The global activities also adjusted to the
time; a 71.4% regarding the initial exposition, 70% the conclusion, and 64.8%
regarding the work for home.
The modifications were due to the daily dynamics and circumstances of
the school center; for example, dedicating more time to the games, a student
doesn’t bring a task assigned for completion at home, a modification in the
methodology to avoid too much environmental noise in the classroom, or
modifying activities to be carried out indoors due to rain). Both valuations
demonstrate a positive organization of the sessions.
In the questionnaires for the different sessions and final ones used to
assess the project, the participants said that their desire to learn and level of
self-confidence had improved significantly (“It has enriched my experience, I
have familiarized myself more with the children of today” (SN3), “To see that
the seniors are able to do the same activities as us” (ST47) or “To think that we
can improve the knowledge of the students” (SN2)). Other aspects they high-
lighted were group work, seeing that there are not so many differences
between their generation and the other one, being at the center of their
Table 1. Test of independent sample regarding the valuation of the elderly with the young (grandchildren and non-grandchildren).
Levene test T test for equality of means
95% confidence interval
F Sig. t gl Sig. (bilateral) Mean difference Difference of standard mean Lower Higher
Valuation of relationship with grandchildren A .030 .864 −.339 20 .738 −.217 .639 −1.549 1.116
B −.337 18.717 .740 −.217 .643 −1.564 1.131
Valuation of relationship with other children A 7.343 .019 1.445 12 .174 1.167 .808 −.593 2.926
B 1.663 7.823 .136 1.167 .701 −.457 2.791
A. Equality of variance is assumed
B. Equality of variance is not assumed
JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
95
 96
C. ORTE ET AL.

Table 2. Valuations of the elderly, students, and professors regarding the sessions, the results in students and elderly.
Elderly Students Professors
N Mean Std. Deviat. N Mean Std. Deviat. N Mean Std. Deviat.
General information of the sessions
Preparation of the session 63 4,46 .534 - - - 26 4.46 .811
Completion of tasks 73 4.41 .642 629 4.38 .891 28 4.21 .630
Adjustment to time 61 4.49 .722 623 4.61 .671 26 4.50 .812
Results observed in students
Participation of students 66 4.48 .707 630 4.50 .805 28 4.68 .548
Comprehension of students 74 4.35 .650 630 4.66 .643 28 4.71 .460
Active listening 74 4.18 .783 629 4.53 .734 28 4.32 .772
Participation in small groups - - - 589 4.38 .820 - - -
Results observed in elderly
Active listening 63 4.52 .564 - - - 26 4.73 .452
Average: 1 = very poor; 2 = poor; 3 = average; 4 = good; 5 = excellent
 JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS 97

own learning process (the students), (“You can play whatever [game]
together”) (SN4)) and active involvement in the development of an inter-
generational project. At the same time, the initial training received by the
senior adults in cooperative learning helped them to overcome their initial
fear of entering the classroom by allowing them to see that they were capable
of participating actively in new scenarios. More concretely, “to live together
with the elderly” (ST12).
It is important not to overlook the benefits for the teaching staff involved
in the project, for instance the improvement of their language and digital
skills, new intercultural knowledge and management skills in organizing
education projects. All these things boosted their motivation and involve-
ment in their everyday work. These benefits were reported during the dis-
cussion groups.
It should be noted that at a university research and training level, the
project helped to encourage networking, cooperation, and the development
of new professional relationships. In the case of the university students who
collaborated in the project, they were able to add this experience and all these
skills to their education and training.

Discussion
Regarding the Implications for practitioners, researchers and policymakers,
at the beginning of the program, two challenges were posed. The first was to
gain an insight into how to improve intergenerational relationships, mon-
itoring the project’s impact on the participants, families, professionals and
communities where it was applied. The second was to draw up a guide to
good practices so that the project can be extrapolated to any European
context (Orte et al., 2015). The aim of this second challenge was to overcome
the various obstacles involved in the organization, implementation, assess-
ment and sustainability of intergenerational programs (Gomila, Amer, &
López-Esteva, 2016).
In the first case, a key factor in intergenerational programs is to view
intergenerational centers as microcosms or small communities within a
bigger one, as proposed by Sánchez (2007). In this way, senior adults,
students and schools can feel actively involved in the project they are engaged
in and pursue their proposed ideas, given that in meetings prior to the
project, in follow-up meetings during its application and in the final discus-
sion groups that were held, all of them contributed ideas and were involved
in taking them further. For instance, the senior adults were actively involved
in preparing the classroom materials and in the organization of the final
exhibition of the project (through committees) etc. This contrasts with
previous roles in schools as the mere conveyors of information (at best,
transmitting knowledge and values). In this case, they were at the center of
98 C. ORTE ET AL.

an educational project founded on collaborative learning and project-based

work.
At the same time, the created microcosm boosts the learning process,
making it more personal, active and meaningful, while also encouraging
the identification of points in common. This, in turn, narrows the gap
between the generations, encouraging an enjoyment and interest in finding
out about the experiences of other generations (Orte et al., 2015).
When intergenerational projects are conceived as an intra/inter-group
learning process among different generations and participants (junior and
senior students, teachers, researchers etc.), they become a clear source of
knowledge at a scientific level, in addition to the direct impact that they have
on the educational bodies or associations that apply them and on the local
community.
As for the second challenge, the guide to good practices presented here is
aimed, on the one hand, at describing the aspects that worked best, based on
existing literature and on the experience of the SACHI program. Bearing in
mind the international focus of some intergenerational projects (like
SACHI), a guide is required in different languages, accompanied by the
necessary material for the project’s application.
In the case of SACHI, the guide is available in Spanish, English, and
Polish. The accompanying materials consist of: a) the programming of the
teaching units for the sessions, describing the objective; b) (pre and post)
attitude-related questionnaires for each student (young and adult); c) ques-
tionnaires to assess each session and the final assessment questionnaire (for
the senior adults, young students and teachers); d) the training material for
the senior adults (teaching material and video recording of the session), in
this case, on cooperative learning; and e) a promotional video of the SACHI
project (to promote a raised awareness among centers wishing to apply it
etc.). Posters can also be made etc.
The following table of recommendations incorporates five key points: (1)
perspectives and preliminary considerations; (2) objectives and skills; (3)
methodology; (4) assessment; and (5) dissemination and transmission of
knowledge. Table 3 outlines the main recommendations.
Generally speaking, intergenerational programs try to bring about a
change in attitude (when negative) by one generation toward the other.
This is achieved by facilitating a shared space and specific purpose. That is,
it is not just a question of sharing for the sake of sharing, but of working on
skills, competences and knowledge so that closer relations can be forged
between the two generations, encouraging a sharing process and better
understanding of one another.
To achieve this goal, the programs must be carefully analyzed, planned,
and designed so that they do not become mere excuses for classroom
interaction and for the two generations to be together. The program
 JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS 99

Table 3. Recommendations regarding the implementation of SACHI.

1. Perspectives & preliminary considerations
✓ Adaptation to the educational context where it is to be applied
✓ An awareness of the age groups’ characteristics and needs
✓ The social construction of a collective memory
2. Objectives and skills
✓ Fostering exchanges and knowledge transfers among generations
✓ Promoting positive harmonious relations among generations
✓ Opening up new opportunities for knowledge of other generations
✓ Improving the participants’ self-confidence and satisfaction
✓ Boosting the intergenerational transmission of social capital
✓ Empowering individuals and age cohorts
✓ Promoting the social skills of young and older people through interrelations between different
generations
✓ Generating positive mutual benefits for both generations
✓ Exchanging knowledge and skills
✓ Developing an intergenerational method of learning new values in schools, based on the
incorporation of senior adults
✓ Opening up the intergenerational work method and process and making it a standard part of the
curriculum for both children and senior adults
✓ Basic skills: Learning to learn, language communication, social and civic skills, cultural and artistic
competences
✓ Specific skills: clarity in explaining games; planning, giving and analyzing an interview; giving verbal
instructions; taking part in communicative classroom situations; expressing one’s opinions; an
appreciation of culture’s rich value through popular games; appreciating games as leisure and social
activities; relating to other people through games; knowledge of the physical world and interaction
with it.
Methodology
✓ Collaborative networking
✓ Autonomy of the team implementing the project
✓ Implementation of the project through cooperative teamwork
✓ Adaptation to fit in with educational needs and profiles
✓ Preliminary process of informing the community and generating a raised awareness
✓ Training the participants: informative and/or awareness-raising sessions prior to conducting the
project, basic pedagogical training including methodological aspects like collaborative work in small
groups, group motivation etc. and training in the program’s assessment system.
Assessment
✓ Assessment criteria defined by the different participants
✓ Skills-based criteria for assessing the children
✓ Satisfaction-based criteria for assessing the senior adults
✓ Different assessment criteria for the trainers, class tutors and support team
✓ Definition of the assessment tools for the beginning, application and end of the project (validated)
Dissemination and transmission of knowledge
✓ Dissemination of the programs to other educational contexts
✓ Research, innovation and the development of new programs
✓ The projects’ integration in the normal programs of the institutions applying them, through formal,
non-formal or informal educational or social institutions.

should have a short-term objective for each session (integrated in the

school curriculum), a mid-term objective, taking into account the main
purpose of the intergenerational program, and a long-term goal focused on
attitudes, values and the possible extension of skills, competences, and
attitudes learnt in the classroom to other contexts (family or community
100 C. ORTE ET AL.

contexts for example), with lasting effects in the context in which they are
applied.
In short, tools like the guide to good practices can help to pave the way for
further new applications. For this purpose, socio-educational policies will be
needed that not only facilitate the program’s application but also the more
widespread stable use of intergenerational programs in the classroom, pro-
moting intergenerational education not just in primary schools, but also in
other settings, such as universities (Pinazo et al., 2016).
In conclusion, thanks to the SACHI program, an intergenerational project
can be adapted to fit in with countries’ different realities. At the beginning
and end of the program, an assessment was made of intergenerational
attitudes (the attitudes of the senior adults to the children and vice versa)
in the different countries taking part. From them, data could be gathered on
the program’s impact on the senior adults and children’s attitudes toward the
other generation. Thus not only were we able to assess prior and subsequent
intergenerational attitudes in the different cultures and countries, but
through the learning experience of the six sessions, synergies were generated
that led to exchanges, the acquisition of new knowledge, and activities that
allowed the participants (the students, senior adults and teachers) to work on
values in the different cultural realities of the participant countries (added
European value), as it has been described in the article.
What is more, it was proven that intergenerational programs not only
foster a change of attitude, but that they actually transform relations. They
foster meaningful learning processes for all the participants, provide ongoing
training for professionals, represent a more stable natural way of bringing
families into the classroom, boost the senior adults and students’ self-con-
fidence and capacity for self-assessment, and encourage a desire to learn. All
these benefits have been reported by the participants (mainly seniors and
students) through the survey of the session and in day to day interactions
throughout the program to professors and researchers. To guarantee these
advances, it is important to try and ensure the stability of intergenerational
programs in schools and to promote networking in order to share the good
practices of such programs.
Not all the necessary groundwork has been done. Through a systematic
review of the relevant literature and an assessment of the organization and
implementation of the SACHI program, we were able to draw up some
recommendations on future fields of research:

(1) To focus on a change of values as a means of fostering solidarity among

generations. To keep in sight social cohesion as a goal. This makes the
program sustainable in whichever school center in which it is
implemented.
 JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS 101

(2) To boost these interventions in schools, seeking to make an impact on

the community. They are places with a huge potential from a systemic
and community perspective, incorporating the program to impactful
community agendas.
(3) To take an interdisciplinary approach to research. In order to build up
a solid theoretical basis.
(4) A rigorous assessment process. To create an empirical base that acts as a
reference for others, incorporate a database that agglutinates all of the
implementations and their longitudinal follow-up.
(5) To make sure that intergenerational relationships occupy a central
position in public policies, particularly through the dissemination of
the IP.
(6) To promote a vision of ageing as a part of the lifecycle. To avoid a linear
vision and instead foster the idea of harmonious relations among
people at different points in the same lifecycle.

Intergenerational learning is essential in helping to promote a general

sense of solidarity among generations (Van Den Heuvel, 2015). A social
willingness and need by the community to work toward this goal must be
kindled, combined with the necessary policy-based support, financial and
human resources (Newman & Hatton-Yeo, 2008).
In conclusion, it is important to highlight the positive feelings that were
conveyed by both the students (young and adult) and teaching staff, described,
for example, in terms of the joy that these classroom experiences had represented
for them. These feelings were no doubt sparked off by genuine intergenerational
communication, benefits in the form of skills and competences acquired through
meaningful learning, and a new opportunity for generations to relate to one
another in a way that encourages an active sense of social integration.

Note
1. This age criterion was decided upon with the other partner countries in order to fit in
with their social and cultural realities.

Funding
This paper is the result of the following project: 2013-1-SE1-GRU06-73424, Sharing Childhood
(SACHI), Compartir la infancia. Proyecto intergeneracional 2013–2015. Lifelong Learning
Programme. Grundtvig. European Commission. Organismo Autónomo Programas Educativos
Europeos (OAPEE)-Spain.
102 C. ORTE ET AL.

References
Almeida, T. (ed.). (2009). Guide of ideas for planning and implementing intergenerational
projects. together: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Grundtvig Accompanying Measures
Project (2008/09). Lisbon: MATES Consortium from the European Commission and
Fundació Caixa Catalunya.
Boström, A. (2014). Reflections on intergenerational policy in Europe: The past twenty years
and looking into the future. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 12(4), 357–367.
doi:10.1080/15350770.2014.961828
Butts, D. (2007). Programas intergeneracionales e inclusión social de las personas mayores. In
M. Sánchez (Dir.). Programas intergeneracionales. Hacia una sociedad para todas las edades
(pp. 102–122). Barcelona, Spain: Fundación “La Caixa”.
Dunham, C. C., & Casadonte, D. (2009). Children’s attitudes and classroom interaction in an
intergenerational education program. Educational Gerontology, 35(5), 453–464.
doi:10.1080/03601270802605473
EAGLE Consortium. (2008). Intergenerational Learning in Europe. Policies, Programmes &
Practical Guidance (Final Report). European Commission. Retrived from http://www.
menon.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/final-report.pdf
ENIL, European Network for international Learning. (2012). International learning and active
aging. Grundtvig. European Commission. Lifelong learning programme. Retrived from
http://www.enilnet.eu/Intergenerational_Learning_and_Active_Ageing-Executive_
Summary.pdf
Eurobarometer. (2008). Retrived from http://www.ieee.es/estudios-sociologicos/Europa/euro
barometro08sp.html
European Commission. (2016). Europe 2020 Strategy. Retrived from https://ec.europa.eu/
info/strategy/european-semester/framework/europe-2020-strategy_en
Gomila, M. A., Amer, J., & López-Esteva, C. (2016). Proyectos educativos intergeneracionales,
una perspectiva nacional e internacional: La escuela como espacio de intercambio entre
generaciones. In C. Orte, & M. Vives (eds), Compartir la infancia. Proyectos intergener-
acionales en las escuelas (pp. 31–46). Madrid, Spain: Octaedro.
Hatton-Yeo, A., & Ohsako, T. (Eds.). (2001). Programas Intergeneracionales: Política pública e
implicaciones en la investigación. Una perspectiva internacional. Germany: Institute of
Education The Beth Johnson Foundation and UNESCO.
Henkin, N., & Butts, D. (2012). Intergenerational practice in the United States: Past, present and
future. Quality in Ageing and Older Adults, 13(4), 249–256. doi:10.1108/14717791211286913
Jarvis, P. (2001). Learning in later life. An introduction for educators & carers. London, UK:
Kogan.
Kaplan, M. (2016). Intergenerational Strategies for promoting Lifelong learning and
Education. In M. Kaplan, M. Sánchez, J. Hoffman (Eds.), Intergenerational Pathways to
Sustainable Society (pp. 87–107). New York, EEUU: Springer.
Kaplan, M., Sánchez, M., & Hoffman, J. (2016). Intergenerational pathways to a sustainable
society. Perspectives on sustainable growth. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47019-1.
Maddox, P., Doran, C., Williams, I. D., & Kus, M. (2011). The role of intergenerational
influence in waste education programmes. The THAW Project. Waste Management, 31(12),
2590–2600.
Melville, J. (2013). Promoting communication and fostering interaction between the genera-
tions: A study of the UK’s first purpose-built intergenerational centre (PhD dissertation).
UK: Keele University.
 JOURNAL OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS 103

Newman, S., & Hatton-Yeo, A. (2008). Intergenerational learning and the contributions of
older people. Ageing Horizons, 8(10), 31–39.
Orte, C., Pascual, B., Vives, M., Pozo, R., Gomila, M. A., & Amer, J. (2015). Educación
intergeneracional: El programa Sharing childhood- Compartir la infancia. In A. De Juanas
Oliva, & A. Fernández García (eds.), Pedagogía social, universidad y sociedad. Madrid,
Spain: UNED.
Orte, C. & Vives, M. (2016). Compartir la infancia. Proyectos intergeneracionales en las
escuelas. Madrid, Spain: Octaedro.
Pinazo, S., Agulló, C., Cantó, J., Moreno, S., Torró, J., & Torró, J. J. (2016). Compartiendo
visiones sobre la educación. Un proyecto intergeneracional como seniors de la Universitat
dels Majors y estudiantes de Magisterio. Educar, 52(2), 337–357.
Sánchez, M. (coord.). (2007). Programas intergeneracionales. Hacia una sociedad para todas
las edades. Colección Estudios sociales (pp. 23). Barcelona, Spain: Fundación “La Caixa”.
Sánchez, M., Kaplan, M., & Sáez, J. (2010). Programas intergeneracionales. Guía introductoria.
IMSERSO. Serie Personas Mayores. Colección Manuales y Guías Madrid, Spain: IMSERSO.
Sánchez, M., & Martínez, A. (2007). El concepto de una sociedad para todas las edades. In M.
Sánchez (coord.), Programas intergeneracionales. Hacia una sociedad para todas las edades.
Colección Estudios sociales (pp. 23). Barcelona, Spain: Fundación «La Caixa».
Schiefer, D., & Van Der Noll, J. (2017). The essentials of Social Cohesion: A literature Review.
Social Indicators Research, 132(2), 579–603. doi:10.1007/s11205-016-1314-5
United Nations. (2002). Report of the Second World Assembly on Ageing (A/CONF.197/9).
New York, EEUU: Author.
Van Den Heuvel, W. (2015). Value reorientation and intergenerational conflicts in ageing
societies. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 40, 201–220. doi:10.1093/jmp/jhu079