findings of the seismic ii study – student and staff erasmus mobility in times of financial crisis

Dr. Dominic OrrAffiliated researcher at DZHW Hannover (http://www.dzhw.eu/en)Affiliated researcher at FiBS Research Berlin (http://fibs.eu/en/)[email protected] and @DominicOrr

Findings of the SEISMIC II study – student and staff Erasmus mobility in times of financial crisis

DAAD Erasmus + Annual Conference Berlin, 28-29 September 2015

The Meccano Bridge built by Queen's University civil engineering students at

Clarendon Dock, Belfast. Pic: Stephen Davison/Pacemaker.

mailto:[email protected]

2DAAD, 28/09/2015@DominicOrr#Erasmus_mobility

Contents

1. A few words on the Erasmus programme and its context2. Introducing the study3. Mobility trends4. Possible dimensions affecting mobility5. Putting Erasmus in context – reasons for going abroad6. Key policy lever (?): grants supporting periods abroad7. Key policy lever (?): duration of period abroad8. How dimensions work together9. What changes to Erasmus policy and practice do we need?


1. Setting the scene: What we know about Erasmus

1. Important programme for the internationalisation / Europeanisation of European higher education; also for broadening cultural, but also academic horizons and future job prospects (especially with countries of such different sizes)

2. Continues to grow fast (200 K studies abroad, 50 K internships and c. 40 K mobile academics)

3. Remains socially selective4. Of varying relevance to mobility efforts in different countries5. Flexible implementation at national and institutional level


2. Setting the scene – Erasmus student mobility in context

Organisation of most recent enrolment abroad, 2014

Source: Hauschildt et al. (2015)

Only for some countries major form of temporary mobility


2. Introducing SEISMIC

Purpose of the study Monitoring report for Erasmus mobility commissioned by DAAD Focus on 7 crisis countries, but also general trends Slowly building a new information set, combining quantitative (admin) data with

qualitative context information

Make-up of the study General analysis of main trends in student and staff mobility 10 country reports which: put individual country into the context of European trends

and enrich official data through semi-structured interviews10 case study countries Cyprus, *France, Greece, *Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, *Poland, Portugal, Spain (*ref.

countries) Criteria for selection: quantitative importance of Erasmus for the national system;

quantitative importance of the participants from a country for the Erasmus programme as a whole; geographic parity; the development of a country’s budget deficit


2. Introducing SEISMIC

Assumptions of the study as reflected in method and focus Since the crisis was financial, assumption is that economic factors, directly and indirectly

related to educational mobility, influence educational mobility behaviours. Since international mobility has been growing strongly ever since it became a European

action line, assumption is that growth will continue and changes can be seen in speed of growth year-on-year rather than absolute proportions.

Study remains exploratory in its attempt to find policy-related factors driving mobility In this, it uses expertise from the national level to help interpret trends It wants to encourage policy discussions between countries on how to improve mobility It’s a small scale study in terms of budget and scope

What’s new in 2014 edition (compared to 2013)? More context information on countries First attempt to identify factors, directly and indirectly related to educational mobility

behaviours, using simple statistical correlations


3. Mobility trends – student mobility continues to grow

Year on year growth in all countries


3. Mobility trends – pace of growth different by activity

08/09 > 09/10 09/10 > 10/11 10/11 > 11/12 11/12 > 12/130%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

SMS SMP STA STT

Teacher training &Student internships fastest growth


4. Possible dimensions affecting mobility

Few strong links – except health of economy (GDP) and incoming study mobility


4. Possible dimensions affecting mobility – GDP vs. incoming SMS growth

Y: GDP per capita growth X: Study mobility growth


5. Putting Erasmus in context – reasons for going abroad

Study on migration of young people (15-34 yrs.) (Kahanec et al. 2013): Better chances of finding employment abroad To discover something new and meet new people

Erasmus Student Network (2010): Meeting new people (…) Improving employment prospects

Mobility not alone influenced by economic motives (not even for migration)


CY DE ES FR GR IE IS IT PL PT0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

6. Key policy lever (?): grants supporting periods abroad

Grants for studies abroad by country

Mixed trend – convergence to a common level?



200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

6. Key policy lever (?): grants supporting periods abroad

Grants for internships abroad



7. Key policy lever (?): duration of period abroad

2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/134.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.6

6.3 6.36.4 6.3 6.3

Av all Erasmus countries Av case study crisis countriesQ1 all Erasmus countries Q3 all Erasmus countries

Duration of studies abroad

Slight shortening of duration of study period abroad




1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13




2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/133.0

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4.0

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.8

4.2

3.9

4.1 4.14.2

4.1 4.0

4.3 4.24.4

Av all Erasmus countries Av case study crisis countriesQ1 all Erasmus countries Q3 all Erasmus countries

Duration of internship abroad

Slight lengthening of duration of internship period abroad




1

2

3

4

5

6

2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13



8. How dimensions work together

08/09 > 09/10 09/10 > 10/11 10/11 > 11/12 11/12 > 12/13-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Average growth per study year for outgoing study mobility

DE 1 quartile median 3 quartileGR IE IT

Mixed trends – are there clear determinants?


8. How dimensions work together

Germany Greece Ireland Italy% of mobile students

1.3% 0.7% 1.5% 1.4%

Growth trend

since 12/13

since 12/13

since 11/12

since 12/13

Study duration

5.7 mth 5.2 mth 7.1 mth 6.6 mth

Study grant €223 €455 €240 €215

GDP per capita (pps)

€32,600 €19,300 €34,500 €26,500

Mixed trends – are there clear determinants?


9. What changes to Erasmus policy and practice do we need?

Some insights from the Seismic study: The “crisis countries” have not been affected in the same way by the crisis It is difficult to generalise on what is driving mobility of students and staff This is most likely due to two main factors:

- Factors affecting the motivation of students and staff to go abroad (e.g. economic health of country), but also chance to learn / experience something new

- Policy levers related to ease of mobile period abroad: between-country differences in duration of period abroad and differences in grants provided to students and staff for period abroad

With these insights, the study leads to these considerations: Discussions between policy-makers on trends and successes in promoting mobility are

needed to improve the knowledge base and mobility practices (what is good policy? / what is good practice?)

Monitoring schemes such as Seismic can provide input into differences and similarities Are the differences seen in the durations of periods abroad and for grant amounts

necessary / sensible / helpful or should there be some harmonisation?


Appendices: Further reading

ESN (2011): ESNSurvey 2010: E-Value-ate Your Exchange. http://issuu.com/esnint/docs/esnsurvey2010_final

Haaristo, H.-S., Orr, D. (2014): Student and staff mobility in times of crisis. Bonn: DAAD. https://eu.daad.de/medien/eu/publikationen/studien/2014-mobility_in_times_of_crisis.pdf

Hauschildt, K., Gwosć, C., Netz, N., & Mishra, S. (2015). Social and economic conditions of student life in Europe (EUROSTUDENT V 2012-2015). W. Bertelsmann. http://doi.org/10.3278/6001920bw

Kahanec, M., & Fabo, B. (2013). Migration strategies of crisis-stricken youth in an enlarged European Union. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 19(3), 365–380. http://doi.org/10.1177/1024258913493701

Orr, D (2013).: Where do internationally mobile students come from and where do they go? An overview of the flows of internationally mobile students. EAIE-Handbook - Internationalisation of European Higher Education (A 2.1-7). Berlin: Raabe.

Orr, D.; Haaristo, H.-S. (2013): Student and staff mobility in times of crisis. Bonn: DAAD.https://

eu.daad.de/medien/eu/veranstaltungen/bologna/student_and_staff_mobility_in_times_of_crisis_study.pdf

http://issuu.com/esnint/docs/esnsurvey2010_final

https://eu.daad.de/medien/eu/publikationen/studien/2014-mobility_in_times_of_crisis.pdf

https://eu.daad.de/medien/eu/publikationen/studien/2014-mobility_in_times_of_crisis.pdf

http://doi.org/10.3278/6001920bw

http://doi.org/10.3278/6001920bw

http://doi.org/10.1177/1024258913493701

http://doi.org/10.1177/1024258913493701

https://eu.daad.de/medien/eu/veranstaltungen/bologna/student_and_staff_mobility_in_times_of_crisis_study.pdf


