Higher education in "Erasmus for all“: Hopes and fears
Dr. Siegbert Wuttig, DAADBrussels, 27 March 2012
2Dr. Wuttig03/12
1. Current European policy agendas and EU programmes: main achievements and desirable improvements (the ERASMUS example)
2. General remarks on the Erasmus for all proposal and the programme architecture
3. Many hopes, new opportunities and perspectives for higher education institutions
4. Some fears expressed by the HE sector
5. Recommendations to the European Parliament
What I am going to talk about?
3Dr. Wuttig03/12
Selected European policy agendas including higher education
New Transatlantic Agenda Neighbourhood Policy
Eastern Partnership Initiative
Asia-Europa Meeting ASEM
EU-Australia Partnership
Framework
Africa-EU Strategic
Partnership
Neighbourhood Policy
Union for the Mediterranean
EU-Latin America Partnership
Europe 2020 Bologna Process Copenhagen Process
4Dr. Wuttig03/12
EU Higher education programmes - worldwide
NORTH AMERICA•ATLANTIS (EU-USA)•TEP (EU-Canada)•Erasmus Mundus II
EUROPE•ERASMUS•Tempus IV•Erasmus Mundus II
ASIA•Tempus IV•Erasmus Mundus II•EU-Japan/Korea Programme •Vulcanus (Japan)
OCEANIA•EU-Australia/New Zealand Programme •Erasmus Mundus II
•AFRICA / CARRIBEAN / PACIFIC•EDULINK•ACP Science and Technology Programme•Erasmus Mundus II•Intra-ACP Academic Mobility Scheme
NORTH AFRICA / MIDDLE EAST•Tempus IV•Erasmus Mundus II•Intra-ACP Academic Mobility Scheme
LATIN AMERICA•ALFA III•Erasmus Mundus II
5Dr. Wuttig03/12
25 years of ERASMUS: Main achievements
Almost 3.000 participating HEIs
2.5 million mobile students
300,000 mobile staff
Significant impact on individuals, institutions, national education systems and Europe
Worldwide role model for regional mobility and academic cooperation
6Dr. Wuttig03/12
25 years of ERASMUS: Desirable improvements
Geographical coverage
Modernisation of programme measures in the Bologna context
Strategic use of the programme as internationalisation instrument for HEIs
Quality of mobility (e.g. linguisticpreparation, recognition of studyachievements abroad)
Monthly student grants
Simplification of administration
7Dr. Wuttig03/12
Different geographical coverage EHEA: 47 signatory countries
ERASMUS Area: 33 partner countries 1999 (Bologna: 30)Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom
2001 (Prague: 33)Croatia, Cyprus, Turkey
2003 (Berlin: 40)Albania, Andorra, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Holy See, FYR of Macedonia, Russia, Serbia
2005 (Bergen: 45)Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine
2007 (London: 46)Montenegro
2010 (Vienna: 47)Kazakhstan Bologna H.E. Area
Kazakhstan
8Dr. Wuttig03/12
ERASMUS student mobility (studies) and monthly grant in Germany
Average monthly grant
2010
/11
9Dr. Wuttig03/12
Dr. Siegbert Wuttig, DAAD
Erasmus for all (2014 – 2020): The proposal
My credo: It is imperative to keep the sector-specifity and the successful brand names !
The Commission‘s proposal for „Erasmus for all“ contains a number of promising ideas:•Increasing significantly the budget•Simplifying the programme management•Integrating international EU higher education programmes•Supporting intra-European degree mobility at Masters level with EIB loans•Strengthening university-business cooperation.
However, there is also the idea for a radical change of the programme architecture:•Integrating all existing education programmes and abandoning their brand names•Introducing three horizontal action lines instead
10Dr. Wuttig03/12
Youth in Action Programme
Internationalhigher education
Programmes (currentlyErasmus Mundus,
Tempus,Alfa, Edulink)
Grundtvig
Erasmus
Leonardo
Comenius
LifelongLearning
Programme:
A single integrated programmeExisting programmes
The proposed programme architecture
Erasmus for all
1.LearningMobility
3.Policy
support
2.Institutionalco-operation
Budget: 19 billion Euro (+73 % ?)
Change of paradigm: From a sector-specificapproach to an action-oriented approach.
11Dr. Wuttig03/12
More observations on the Commission‘s proposal
1. Programme name: ERASMUS means EuRopean Community Action Scheme for the Mobility of University Students; Erasmus really for all?
2. Budgets for actions and sectors: for actions ok; no indication for sectors: fixed budgets (80-85%) are imperative for stability and planning security ;
3. Programme administration: simplification for all?; administration is more than managing money; responsibility for national programme administration should lie with the MS;
4. Programme description: too vague and general; many details are unknown so far; the programme is probably better than its description.
12Dr. Wuttig03/12
Higher education in “Erasmus for all”: Hopes
• More opportunities by integrating intra-European and international HE programmes
• Significant programme budget increase (73%) with adequate consideration of higher education
• Priority on learning mobility (63%)
• New perspectives for HE in all 3 horizontal actionlines:
Learning mobility of individuals Partnerships Policy support
13Dr. Wuttig03/12
National Agency for EU Higher Education Cooperation
Impact of ERASMUS for All
Internationalisation and attractiveness of European HEIs ; capacity building
13DAAD: March 2012
Intra-European and global
higher education
policy dialogue
Mobility of individuals
Policy support and measures
Cross-sectorallifelong learning
cooperation
Structural cooperation of
institutions
Employability, European/global
citizenship of students and
university staff
Bridge building with other education
sectors
Higher education in “Erasmus for all”: Hopes
14Dr. Wuttig03/1214
HE in EfA: Opportunities and perspectives
Current programme
Action EfA action line Comment
ERASMUS Mobility of
students (studies/ placements) and
staff
Learning mobility of individuals; intra-European
dimension
Mass credit mobility
(with minimum quality standards)
ERASMUS Mundus
A2: Mobility partnerships (with
regional focus) students/staff
Learning mobility of individuals: international dimension
New: ERASMUS type credit mobility (with regional focus? )
15Dr. Wuttig03/1215
HE in EfA: Opportunities and perspectives
Current programme
Action EfA action line Comment
Erasmus Mundus
A1a: Joint Masters A1b: Joint PhDs
A1a: Learning mobility; international dimension;A1b: moves to Marie-Curie
Elite degree mobility of Masters students; loss of joint PhDs
Learning mobility of Masters students; intra-European dimension
New: Degree mobility of Masters students; loan guarantee facility
16Dr. Wuttig03/1216
HE in EfA: Opportunities and perspectives
Current programme
Action EfA action line Comment
ERASMUS
Centralised actions (curriculum development, UBC); Intensive programmes
Strategic partnerships
No separate actions anymore
Strategic partnerships; Knowledge alliances
New: structural cooperation (incl.
UBC) with focus on quality
17Dr. Wuttig03/1217
HE in EfA: Opportunities and perspectives
Current programme
Action EfA action line Comment
Tempus Higher education reform: institutions and systems (with regional focus)
International HE capacity building
Focus on neighbourhood countries (excl. some Tempus countries)
Alfa, Edulink
Capacity building; regional integration (Latin America, Africa)
International HE capacity building
Focus on neighbourhood countries (what about Asia?)
18Dr. Wuttig03/12
1. Do we lose our visibility and „sense of ownership“ ?
2. Does the change from a sector-specific approach to an action-oriented approach mean more focus on administrative programme aspects?
3. Will we have to compete for funds with other educationsectors?
4. Will there be stability and long-term planning securityfor systemic institutional involvement?
Higher education in “Erasmus for all”: Some fears
19Dr. Wuttig03/12
Possible solution: Combining actions and sectors
3 Action lines ER
ASM
US
CO
MEN
IUS
LEO
NA
RD
O
GR
UN
DTV
IG
YOU
TH IN
A
CTI
ON
New Education Programme
Separate:Sport,
Jean Monnet
20Dr. Wuttig03/12
Dr. Siegbert Wuttig, DAAD
Recommendations (1)
1. Make the programme a real European policy support instrument (e.g. to help implement the quantitative and qualitative goals of the Bologna Process).
2. Propose a significant budget increase for the overall programme to continue proven actions, implement new elements, broaden the geographical scope of the programme (international dimension) and enhance access to the programme (e.g. through better student grants, strict recognition requirements, special funding for people with special needs).
21Dr. Wuttig03/12
Dr. Siegbert Wuttig, DAAD
Recommendations (2)
3. Keep the proposed action lines, add sector-specific windows and maintain the well-established brand names for these windows.
4. Define clear minimum budgets for the different education sectors in the legal text. 80-85% of the total programme budget should be fixed in order to guarantee stability and planning security for the beneficiaries.
5. Make the programme simple, transparent and user-friendly for the beneficiaries and leave the organisation of decentralised programme administration to the Member States.
22Dr. Wuttig03/12
Thank you for listening!
Youth in Action Programme
Internationalhigher education
Programmes
Grundtvig
Erasmus
Leonardo
Comenius
LifelongLearning
Programme:
New educationprogramme
1.LearningMobility
3.Policy
support
2.Partner-
ships