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

Dr. Dominic Orr
Affiliated researcher at DZHW Hannover (http://www.dzhw.eu/en)
Affiliated researcher at FiBS Research Berlin (http://fibs.eu/en/)
dominicjorr@gmail.com 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.

2DAAD, 28/09/2015@DominicOrr#Erasmus_mobility
Contents
1. A few words on the Erasmus programme and its context
2. Introducing the study
3. Mobility trends
4. Possible dimensions affecting mobility
5. Putting Erasmus in context – reasons for going abroad
6. Key policy lever (?): grants supporting periods abroad
7. Key policy lever (?): duration of period abroad
8. How dimensions work together
9. 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 selective
4. Of varying relevance to mobility efforts in different countries
5. 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 interviews
10 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
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
08/09 > 09/10 09/10 > 10/11 10/11 > 11/12 11/12 > 12/13
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)

0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
CY DE ES FR GR IE IS IT PL PT
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
Grants for studies abroad by country
Mixed trend – convergence to a
common level?

0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
Grants for internships abroad
common level?

5.7 5.7 5.7
5.7 5.6
6.3 6.3
6.4 6.3 6.3
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
Av all Erasmus countries Av case study crisis countries
Q1 all Erasmus countries Q3 all Erasmus countries
Duration of studies abroad
Slight shortening of duration of
study period abroad

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
common level?

4.2
3.9
4.1 4.1
4.2
4.1
4.0
4.3 4.2
4.4
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4.0
4.2
4.4
4.6
4.8
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
Av all Erasmus countries Av case study crisis countries
Q1 all Erasmus countries Q3 all Erasmus countries
Duration of internship abroad
Slight lengthening of duration
of internship period abroad

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
Mixed trend – convergence to
a common level?

-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
08/09 > 09/10 09/10 > 10/11 10/11 > 11/12 11/12 > 12/13
Average growth per study year for outgoing study mobility
DE 1 quartile median 3 quartile GR IE IT
Mixed trends – are there
clear determinants?

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

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

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (6)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (12)

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

Ähnlich wie Findings of the SEISMIC II study – student and staff Erasmus mobility in times of financial crisis (20)

Mehr von Dominic Orr

Mehr von Dominic Orr (17)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

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