The Value of Study Abroad

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

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

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.

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”).

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).

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.

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.

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

A Model for the Explanation of Professional Success ERASMUS ERASMUS ERASMUS

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.

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.

Importance of Recruitment Criteria (Graduates and Employers´ View) (in percent) 41% Eastern & Central Europe25% Western Europe 87% Eastern & Central62% Western Europe 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.

Perceived Positive Influence of ERASMUS Study Period on Employment and Work * Year of graduation

Links Between Study and Subsequent Employment and Work Perceived by Former ERASMUS Students (% of employed graduates) * Year of graduation + Different formulation: satisfaction with professional situation

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.

International Dimensions of Employment and Work of Former ERASMUS Students (2001/01) (%) * Year of graduation

International Dimensions of Employment and Work of Former ERASMUS Students (%)

Impact of Student Mobility on Professional Mobility * Year of graduation + No data available

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

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“

The Value of Study Abroad