rome seminar jolanta urbanik
DESCRIPTION
Mobility and language experienceTRANSCRIPT
Mobility and language experience
Language preparation and support
2
• Speakers• Aims of the session• Presentations• Discussion• Recommendations
Overview of the session
33
• Jaroslava Staškovà, Prešov University, Slovakia• John Reilly, University of Kent, UK• Jolanta Urbanikowa, University of Warsaw, Poland
• Old & New Europe• The widely used and taught language• Less widely used and taught langauges• Over 20 years experience in Erasmus• Less experience in EU funded mobility• More in-coming - importing• More outgoing - exporting
Speakers
4
To address the questions• Of mobility• Of the obstacles• Of motivation• Of language preparation and support
To identify and share• Good practices• Factors related to language learning and intercultural
experience boosting mobility
To propose recommendations at• European level• National level• Institutional level
Aims
5
1. Jolanta Urbanikowa
2. Jaroslava Staškovà
3. John Reilly
Presentations
6
Communiqué to be adopted by Ministers in Leuven April, 2009
„More mobility:
16. Opportunities for mobility shall be further developed and diversified so that mobility will be considered the rule and no longer the exception.
Mobility of students, early stage researchers and staff, embedded in institutional policies to enhance the quality of programmes, strengthens the academic and cultural internationalisation of European higher education.
Mobility, which is important for personal development and employability, also fosters respect for diversity and a capacity to deal with it.
Mobility – plans and delivery
7
Communiqué ctd
It also encourages linguistic diversity, thus underpinning the multilingual tradition of the EHEA and it increases cooperation and competition between higher education institutions.
It shall be the hallmark of the EHEA, with a target of at least 20% of graduates that have been mobile during their studies by 2020. Moreover, there shall be an increase of 20% of incoming students from third countries.”
Mobility – plans and delivery
8
Key concepts:
Mobility for all
Linguistic diversity encouraged
Increased numbers of students from third countries
IMPLICATIONS?
Mobility – plans and delivery
9
Quantity in mobility
3 mln mobile students by the end of 2012 (end of LLP) 1st, 2nd, 3rd cycle academic mobility Horizontal, vertical Placements
Students, teaching staff, administrative staff
2008: 3.5% of target population mobile in Erasmus
Growth rates slackening – 3.2% in 2006 vs 7.2% in 2005 versus predicted annual growth of 8%
Mobility – plans and delivery
10
Quality of mobility – incl. of provision of language preparation and support
Codes of good practice / basic requirements European Quality Charter for Mobility Erasmus University Charter Erasmus learning/training agreement placement contracts
Manuals and guidelines for institutions
Monitoring and advice via National Agencies
Grants for cultural, linguistic and educational preparation
Quality labels, awards, prizes
Mobility – plans and delivery
11
Lack of information
Lack of motivation (also influenced by family, peers, educational organisation)
Lack of opportunity personal circumstances
Lack of a suitable mobility opportunity in the existing programmes
Lack of recognition
Lack of appetite to surmount (perceived or real) bureaucracy
Lack of funding
Lack of linguistic preparation
Mobility – obstacles
12
Information
Organisational environment
Support services (including recognition, credit accumulation/transfer, qualifications)
Availability and design of programmes
Initiatives to rectify imbalanced flows
Data and monitoring
Funding
Virtual mobility?
Language-learning
Mobility – boosting
13
UNICA – a network of Universities in Capital Cities of Europe
a survey in 2007/2008
Language of the host university a selection criterion: 68%
Language of instruction a selection criterion: 54%
Proficiency of incoming students in the host language: 42% poor
Complaints from TS related to poor command of the language
disrupting classroom activities and impeding academic attainment: 65%
Linguistic preparation for Erasmus – UNICA survey
14
Increasing importance of English
90% of all students in upper secondary education are learning English (Eurobarometer)
Raising awareness of the relevance of multilingual competence to employbility, career prospects, competitiveness
Languages of instruction – subject-related
Language proficiency – general, academic, subject-specific
Languages – essential for academic attainment
Languages – essential for social integration
Some language preparation must be offered in all the languages relevant to patner institutions Learning outcomes related to CEFR Credited
Languages for mobility – basic considerations
15
TR and a certificate of language proficiency in the language of instruction should be provided
Langauge competence a selection criterion
Basic knowledge of the local language if different from the language of instruction necessary
Information on language requirements of the receiving institution
Opportunities provided for non-formal language learning and validation
Key factor: motivation to learn the language in question;
Languages for mobility – basic considerations
16
2007/2008 Erasmus Out-going 1020 In-coming 420 Out-going placements 77 Staff out-going 123 Staff Training 78 Staff in-coming 33
Selection criterion for out-bound mobility Language proficiency – English C1, other languages B2 Recognised language certificates, university language examination, European Language Portfolio &
interview
ECTS credits for languages
Mobility – University of Warsaw
17
Language preparation & support
University System of Language Provision (50 languages) Language courses for out-going Language courses for in-coming (same access rules as for home students): English & Russian most
popular Polish as a foreign language (credited) Free of charge (240 h of tuition available) Tandem Learning (ESN) Consultations from language teachers Advice from IRO and Erasmus co-ordinatrors Flexibility with LA: originally chosen subjects may be replaced with language courses
Prosects unclear Cost Fewer candidates for mobility programmes, selecteion process no so competitive, the need to allow
lower proficiency ?
Mobility – University of Warsaw
18
ctd
Presentations
1919
Perceptions of mobility: emphasis on academic experience and attainment or cultural and linguistic experience
Institutional language policy: the need to embed language preparation and support
Mobility encourages linguistic diversity or strengthens the position of English
The impact of students mobility from third countries
NQF – communication skills in the profile of students and graduates
Internationalisation for some or „at home” for all: language of instruction (LWUT languages)
EU funds to promote linguistic and intercultural skills
Language preparation and support through ICT
Programmes offered vs languages taught
Mobility motivates language learning or language learning motivates mobility
The strategic role of language centres in student and staff mobility
Discussion
2020
European level
National level
Institutional level
Recommendations