1. The Value of Study Abroad INTERNATIONAL VALORISATION CONFERENCE STRENGTHENING THE IMPACT OF LEARNING MOBILITY Ljubljana (Slovenia) 8 December 2011 Prof. Dr. Ulrich Teichler International Centre for Higher Education Research Kassel (INCHER) Email: teichler@incher.uni-kassel.de

2. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 2 The Value of Study Abroad and Horizontal Mobility: The European Discourses since WW II 1. Enhancement of cultural understanding and cooperation: The imperative after WWII - U.S. “Junior Year Abroad” and Fulbright Fellowships - Council of Europe (and subsequently UNESCO): Conventions on Recognition from the early 1950s to the Lisbon Convention 1997 2. 1970s: Concern about relative decline of student mobility in the process of he expansion and the establishment of the EC “Joint Study Programmes” 3. 1987: The ERASMUS Programme 4. 1998-1999: Sorbonne and Bologna Declarations 5. 2009: Leuven Communiqué: The 20% event of outwards mobility for 2020

3. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 3 Some Statistical Figures  The number of foreign students worldwide has increased from about 200,000 in the mid-1950s to about 3 million in recent years, but the proportion among all students remained constant at about 2 percent.  Among about 22 million tertiary education students in 32 European countries in 2007, about 3.3%, i.e. more than 700,000 studied abroad (according to the UOE statistics).  Deficient statistics: In Europe, about one quarter of foreign students are not mobile, and about one tenth of mobile students are not foreign.  Deficient statistics: Half of the temporarily mobile students in Europe are not included in the international statistics.  The annual number of ERASMUS students has reached about 200,000.

4. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 4 The Event of Outwards Mobility ERASMUS target formulated in 1987:  10% of students eventually should study abroad in another European country with the help of ERASMUS.  Consequently, if the duration of study is four years, 2.5% of students should study abroad with the help of ERASMUS (or possibly other programmes); actually 0.8% in 2007. Bologna target for the year 2020 formulated in the Leuven Communiqué 2009:  20% of student should be outwards mobile for purpose of study or internship during their course of study.  Most recent figures of the event of temporary study abroad of Bachelor graduates according to graduate surveys: Netherlands 24%, Austria 17%, Germany 15%, Czech Republic 6%, Italy 5%, UK. 4%, Poland 2% (not included: “degree mobility”).

5. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 5 Key Literature on Student Mobility Statistics  Kelo, M., Teichler, U. & Wächter, B. (Eds.) (2006). EURODATA: Student Mobility in European Higher Education. Bonn: Lemmens.  Lanzendorf, U. & Teichler, U. (2003). Statistics on Student Mobility within the European Union. Luxembourg: European Parliament.  Schomburg, H. & Teichler, U. (Eds.) (2011). Employability and Mobility of Bachelor Graduates in Europe: Key Results of the Bologna Process. Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers.  Teichler, U., Ferencz, I. & Wächter, B. (Eds.) Mapping Mobility in Higher Education in Europe. 2 Volumes. Bonn: Deutscher Akademischer Austausch Dienst (in press).

6. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 6 Output of ERASMUS: Results of Major Evaluation Studies  Less than a quarter of ERASMUS students believe that they learned less abroad than during a corresponding period at home.  Recognition: 70%-80%, but more than half prolongation of study.  Major impact: Learning from contrasts.  Academics and coordinators believe: Former ERASMUS students upon graduation are slightly superior to other students regarding general academic level.  Former ERASMUS students are clearly superior regarding visible international competences.

7. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 7 Three Surveys of Former ERASMUS Students  ERASMUS 1988/89 Students Three Years and Five Years Later 1,339 and 1,234 former ERASMUS students from 12 countries Friedhelm Maiworm and Ulrich Teichler. Study Abroad and Early Career. London and Bristol, PA: Kingsley, 1996  ERASMUS 1994/95 Graduates Five Years Later as Compared to Other Mobile and Non-mobile Graduates 407 former ERASMUS students graduating in 1994/95 as compared to more than 1,000 other mobile students and more than 10,000 non-mobile students Ulrich Teichler (ed.). ERASMUS in the SOCRATES Programme. Findings of an Evaluation Study. Bonn: Lemmens, 2002  ERASMUS 2000/01 Students Five Years Later More than 4,500 former ERASMUS students from 25 countries Kerstin Janson, Harald Schomburg and Ulrich Teichler. The Professional Value of ERASMUS Mobility. Bonn: Lemmens 2009.

8. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 8 Impact versus Graduate Employment and Work  Educational and socio-biographic selectivity of ERASMUS students  Other international experiences of ERASMUS students  Difference between ERASMUS students and other mobile students  Difference between ERASMUS students and non-mobile students  Possibly biased perceptions of former ERASMUS students  Possibly biased perceptions and actions of employers

9. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 9 A Model for the Explanation of Professional Success ERASMUS

10. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 10 Higher Competences upon Graduation Higher than Non-mobile Graduates (in percent) Question A21: At the time of return, how do you rate your knowledge and competences as compared to non-mobile students in the following areas?. Answer 1 and 2 on a scale of answers from 1 = much better to 5 = much worse.

11. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 11 Comparison of Mobile and Non-mobile Graduates by Employers (in percent) Employer Question C4: Please rate the competences of the young graduates in your organisation. To what extent do they have competences in the following areas on average?Answer 1 and 2 on a scale of answers from 1 = to a very high extent to 5 = not at all.

12. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 12 Importance of Recruitment Criteria (Graduates and Employers´ View) (in percent) Student Question D6: How important, according to your perception, were the following aspects for your employer in recruiting you for your initial employment after graduation, if applicable? Employer Question B2: How important are the following aspects in recuriting young graduates for your organisation? Answer 1 and 2 on a scale of answers from 1 = very important to 5 = not important at all. 41% Eastern & Central Europe 25% Western Europe 87% Eastern & Central 62% Western Europe

13. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 13 Perceived Positive Influence of ERASMUS Study Period on Employment and Work 1998/991994/95*2000/01 Obtaining first job 716654 Type of work task involved 494439 Income level 252216 * Year of graduation

14. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 14 Links Between Study and Subsequent Employment and Work Perceived by Former ERASMUS Students (% of employed graduates) 1988/89 ERASMUS 1994/95* ERASMUS 1994/95* Non-Mobile 2000/01 ERASMUS High use of knowledge67444761 Appropriate level72766772 High satisfaction with current work 52746362 Field of study the only possible/the best for area of work +313941 * Year of graduation + Different formulation: satisfaction with professional situation

15. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 15 International Work Tasks of Former ERASMUS Students Question F6: To what extent do the responsibilities of your work involve the following? Scale fo answers from 1 = to a very high extent to 5 = not at all.

16. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 16 International Dimensions of Employment and Work of Former ERASMUS Students (2001/01) (%) 1988/89 ERASMUS 1994/95* ERASMUS 1994/95* Non-Mobile 2000/01 ERASMUS International scope of employing organisation +++51 Frequent contacts of employing organisation with other countries 71++59 Employed abroad since graduation1820518 Sent abroad by employer+221012 Professional knowledge of other countries important +402045 Understanding of different cultures and society important +523257 Working with people from different culture important +624367 Communicating in foreign language important +603070 * Year of graduation

17. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 17 International Dimensions of Employment and Work of Former ERASMUS Students (%) HumSoc Bus EngMNATOtherTotal International scope of employing organisation 41466961553251 Frequent contacts of employing organisation with other countries 51557567644755 Employed abroad since graduation 19152018191618 Sent abroad by employer 891614181012 Professional knowledge of other countries important 52465237313945 Understanding of different cultures and society important 68556049405957 Working with people from different culture important 69617166596967 Communicating in foreign language important 7263747167 70

18. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 18 Impact of Student Mobility on Professional Mobility 1988/89 ERASMUS 1994/95* ERASMUS 1994/95* Non-Mobile 2000/01 ERASMUS I considered working abroad +694048 I sought employment abroad +311022 I have actually had regular employment abroad/I am currently employed abroad +20(REFLEX ca. 2%) 18 * Year of graduation + No data available

19. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 19 Summarising Results Former ERASMUS students  believe to have higher academic knowledge and skills and to be better prepared for employment and work than formerly non-mobile students  note often a positive effect of ERASMUS in obtaining a first job, some a positive effect on the types of work tasks and on average no positive impact on income level  report more often about international work tasks and an international working environment  are in a somewhat better position than non-mobile students regarding the links between education and work assignments and in general employment situation  are more international mobile

20. Ulrich Teichler: The ERASMUS Experience 20 SUMMARY  Very positive subjective ratings of the professional outcomes of mobility (employers > graduates)  More work task relevance than status relevance  ERASMUS as „door-opener“  Work and research in an international context  Student mobility seems to create an new „European Mobility Identity“  Differences by country and field of study (strong differences between Western and Eastern & Central European countries) => Comparison with former studies shows ERASMUS is gradually loosing ist uniqueness – being mobile becomes „normal“