1. Where would higher education be without Erasmus? AEF Europe- Focus sur les IP 14 mai 2009 Patricia De Smet Unit Higher Education; « Erasmus » European Commission

2. Europe could do better  Curricula are not up to date  Higher education is fragmented, over- regulated and under-funded  Not enough young people in higher education  Not enough adults in lifelong learning

3. Policy priorities in Higher Education the modernisation agenda for universities new skills for new jobs ….. to support the Lisbon Strategy and the Bologna process ERASMUS studies and papers

4. The modernisation agenda for universities  Curricular reform: the three cycle system, competence based learning, flexible learning paths, recognition.  Governance reform: autonomy, strategic partnerships, cooperation with enterprises, quality assurance.  Funding reform: diversified income, promoting equity, access and efficiency, role of tuition fees, grants and loans.

5. New skills for new jobs  What jobs will be available in about 10 years ?  Is the training provided now useful to find a job tomorrow ?  Are skills needs and jobs changing all over the EU ?

6. 6 Erasmus – a European Success Story (II) 2007/08: ~162 000 students (studies) ~18 000 students (placements)  3 700 HEIs and still expanding – 31 countries and more  180 000 Erasmus students per year and still increasing  At the end of 2008: in total 2 million students (over 21 years)  By 2012: in total 3 million students!

7. Impact of ERASMUS on European Higher Education Quality, Openness and Internationalisation

8. 1.Conceptual framework: impact levels and indicators 2.Study design: literature, surveys, case studies 3.ERASMUS’ impact at system & institutional level 4.Recommendations (system and institutional levels) Overview of the presentation

9. 1.Literature review 2.Surveys in 30 countries 2283 Central ERASMUS coordinators, 951 responses (42%) 2157 Institutional leaders, 752 responses (35%) 1747 Decentral ERASMUS coordinators at 547 institutions 903 responses from 328 institutions (15% resp. 60%) 3.20 Case studies (extent of progress in quality improvement, geographical spread, types of activities, types of institutions, …) Study design

10. T wo ways to understand an “excellent university”: 1.an excellent university is in the top 10% or 25% of institutions or programmes on the basis of indicators (e.g. research qualifications) 2.an excellent university maximises its potential to fully contribute to academic, economic and social development Excellence versus Quality Narrow versus inclusive concept E xcellence as an inclusive concept: all institutions can find themselves based on their own specific characteristics and qualities Quality Improvement

11. Conceptual Framework Impact levels of ERASMUS

12. Conceptual Framework Activity areas by level

13. Activity areas & Indicators System level

14. Impact at individual level  Upgrading skills  Promoting European citizenship  Stimulating self reliance  Enhancing employability

15. ERASMUS’ impact Institutional level E RASMUS impact at different levels 1.Central management Internationalisation (92 % top mgnt) Modernisation of management University – Enterprise relationships 2.Academic departments TeachingResearch Student services

16. Impact at institutional level  introduction of international offices and support services  modernisation and internationalisation of curricula  new teaching methods and exchange of good practices  transparency and transferability of qualifications  active participation in international research projects  ( networks,joint publication,benchmarks,..)  Internationalisation strategy  University-Enterprise cooperation

17. ERASMUS’ impact System level N o Bologna without ERASMUS ! 1.Bologna process: 5 out of 6 action lines direct from ERASMUS: transparency&recognition( DS, ECTS), mobility, QA and European Dimension; joint degrees 1.Quality assurance: pilot projects, ENQA, QA Standards & Guidelines, EQAR, Qrossroads database, EQF (Sectoral QFs), Tuning, AHELO, … 2.Wider impact: Classification, Lisbon Strategy, Modernisation Agenda, ‘clones’ eg Erasmus Belgica, Asian counterpart programme, …

18. Impact at system level: no Bologna without Erasmus  Mobility (need for convergence and recognition)  Quality (ENQA, EQAR, Qrossroads)  Recognition (ECTS and DS)  Joint Degrees (CD, EM)

19. Main Recommendations Institutional level 1.Central Management Level: 1.Policy emphasis on internationalisation and recognition 2.Leadership commitment 3.Carefully select ERASMUS partners (more selective) 4.Develop service infrastructure (information, accommodation) 5.Language training, scholarship funds 6.Intensify cooperation with enterprises 7.Internationalisation at home with international staff 8.Reward active staff

20. Main Recommendations Institutional level 2.Academic department level: 1.Positively inform students on mobility in an early stage 2.Organise mobile students’ feedback 3.Increase awareness about centralised actions 4.Remove mobstacles (recognition, language, academic calendars, …) 5.Reduce internal bureaucracy around mobility 6.Involve more staff in internationalisation: e.g. special rewards 7.Intensify “internationalisation at home” 8.Use international staff experiences 9.Better integrate foreign students in lectures & social activities (give presentations) 10.Stimulate “soft skills” and intercultural cooperation in curricula

21. 21 Further information ec.europa.eu/education/erasmus