While the cultural dimension is among other elements at the core of the European Union, according to our observation many young people tend to show little interest in commitment to cultural activities. Thus, we would like to share within this project more deeply with our students ideas and visions of culture and its relevance to us. In this manner, we hope to qualify young people to come to know different European cultures and, in this way, to raise awareness that Europe as a whole is interconnected by the diversity of its culture(s) of which they themselves form a significant part. To achieve this goal, we intend to make use of this year's opportunity that Rijeka, home to our Croatian partner school, is endowed with the title and the program of “European capital of culture”. In consequence, our project intends to propose to young generations the concept and idea of a “capital of culture” by linking it to their own cultural experiences. Therefore, the three schools aim to work with 60 of our students on the problem how to present one's own city and region as “capital of culture”. From that starting point, we will reflect on questions of “culture” in general, of the students' own cultural identity; we will try to sort out which cultural patterns can be discovered in their countries and how these patterns relate to each other and could produce a mutual enrichment. Finally, we would like to ask them to work out what a common European culture might look like and how this common European culture might be of significance for the growth and development of Europe's prosperity and its society at large. By participating within this project, students will be empowered to form an active part of developing a common European culture and identity beyond the borders of their own local, regional or national culture. The project will consist of three learning activities, one at each of the home towns of each partner school, during each of which the students of the hosting school will present to their guests their reflections on and discoveries within the culture of their surroundings by organizing visits to cultural events or by staging themselves their ideas concerning culture and identity in traditional (e.g. talks, papers, various written or drawn products) or digital (e.g. electronic guides) ways. Subsequently, the guests themselves will introduce their own ideas about what they heard and saw, thus enabling the hosts to reflect more deeply about their own cultural identity and the cultural program on display within their home town. As to the guests, all three encounters will be prepared by collecting expectations while the hosts will be making provisions for their presentations. After the learning activities when all are back home each school will strive to deepen their own cultural experiences while working on the term and the significance of our common European culture. As genuine results we expect to be able to release at least part of the presentations by which the participants introduce each other to displays, events, exhibitions, historical or religious data and other discoveries within their own cultural context as they will be of wider interest to the public. We do not intend to tie the students to prearranged tasks or manners of composing these presentations as we want to reinforce their self-reliance and their perception of self-efficacy. Accordingly, the students themselves will determine how to proceed and what to produce within the framework given by this project. Another genuine result of our project will be the students' efforts to answer the question of what is characteristic about “European culture(s)”. Here we might expect an exhibition, blog, webpage or some sort of performance on stage. We expect that by discussing our cultural identity and the problem of “European culture(s)” we will have a strong impact on the subjects concerned (e.g. politics, history, geography, religious education, arts, music, languages) and its curricula and hence on interdisplinary learning. Furthermore, students will profit by gaining a higher esteem of cultural events and the necessity of intercultural dialogue. Finally, the presentations composed by the students will be of lasting use to everybody who intends to discover the culture on display in the three schools' home towns and their surroundings.
While the cultural dimension is among other elements at the core of the European Union, according to our observation many young people tend to show little interest in commitment to cultural activities. Thus, this project intended to share more deeply with our students ideas and visions of culture and its relevance to us in order to qualify young people to come to know different European cultures and, in this way, to raise awareness that Europe as a whole is interconnected by the diversity of its culture(s) of which they themselves form a significant part. To achieve this goal, we intended to make use of the opportunity that Rijeka, home to our Croatian partner school, is endowed with the title and the program of “European capital of culture” of the year 2020. In consequence, our project intended to propose to young generations the concept and idea of a “capital of culture” by linking it to their own cultural experiences. Therefore, in our project prominence was given to the presentation of one's own city and region as “capital of culture”. From that starting point, questions of “culture” in general and of the students' own cultural identity were reflected on, in addition to the exploration of cultural patterns in their countries and how these patterns relate to each other and could produce a mutual enrichment. The final aim was to work out what a common European culture might look like and how this common European culture might be of significance for the growth and development of Europe's prosperity and its society at large. The task of carrying out our project was deeply disturbed by the measures to prevent spreading of the Corona disease. Thus, major parts of the Rijeka's program as „European capital of culture“ were canceled, postponed or were unavailable to our students due to restrictions of access; in addition, as traveling abroad with classes was not allowed, the German and Hungarian participants could not participate in Rijeka's cultural events of 2020. In consequence, larger parts of our project had to be organised as video conference or by working together via eTwinning only. Also visiting local events in their home towns was hardely possible for the students, as these events also often were canceled or access to them was heavily restricted. In many cases, even after the pandemic there was no way back to normal. Nevertheless, in order to work on our project and to attain the goals intended with our project, we had to shift the focus to forms of everyday culture which were known to the participants and were readily available within their everyday life so that more impressive forms of cultural activity as presented in a “European capital of culture” were naturally less prevalent in our work. As realised, our project consisted of a first part in which students reflected on what is meant by “culture” and by a “capital of culture”. After comparing the relevant results, the characteristics and the program of a “European capital of culture” were focused upon at least in a theoretical manner by interviewing Vojko Obersnel, then mayor of Rijeka, as to make sure that there was a basis for further pursuing the project. Unfortunately, the presentation of the three cities concerned, in particular of Rijeka, could only be done via a series of video conferences so that the knowledge of the cultural events attained hereby had to remain rather vague. Working on the challenges of urban development in terms of culture and beyond gave rise to the examination of specific subjects which were afterwards examined in interschool groups. In addition to aspects of culture, aspects of politics, society, inclusion, sustainability, education, environment, transport and sport were taken into account. When travel restrictions were lifted, at the first physical meeting at Rijeka some basic aspects of Rijeka's presentation as a “capital of culture“ could be examined (though with one and a half year's delay); in addition, main aspects of Croatian culture were presented by the Croatian students. At a second physical meeting at Székesfehérvár, beyond discussing typical elements of Hungarian culture and history the students focused in workshops on their own concept of a “capital of culture” and its feasibility. The central aspect of the final meeting at Cloppenburg, besides showing typical aspects of local culture, was to work on an exhibition presenting in a variety of products their on vision of a “capital of culture” to a broader public.