A Comparative Evaluation of Erasmus Coordinators' Perception of Erasmus Program in Europe

Author(s):

Mustafa EryamanCumali YasarEbru Aktan

Conference:

ECER 2009

Network:

22. Research in Higher Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

22 SES 08 B, Internationalisation of Higher Education (Part 2)

Paper Session. Continued from 22 SES 06 B.

Time:

2009-09-30

08:30-10:00

Room:

HG, HS 30

Chair:

Mariana Gaio Alves

Contribution

Erasmus is a European Union program which enables higher education students, academicians and institutions in 31 European countries to travel for work and study, and to initiate trans-national co-operation projects among universities across Europe. European Universities are increasingly pursuing bilateral and multilateral ERASMUS agreements in European countries with a view to innovative subjects and projects. The development of Erasmus activities contemplates the extension of international relations to new Universities and Academic Institutions, in a wider range of fields and levels of studies and placement opportunities; increases general mobility for students, teachers, and administrative staff; promotes new projects of International teaching and research, Intensive Programs, Curriculum development; endorses transversal programs focusing on innovation in languages and instruction. Despite widespread criticism of bureaucratic complexity and lack of funding for individual students and universities, ERASMUS program is seen as having helped student and academician mobility in Europe. The purpose of this comparative study is to evaluate the University Erasmus Coordinators' Perception of Erasmus Program in Germany, England and Turkey. A Quantitative Survey method has been employed in this study. Research data were gathered through questionnaires. The study further aims to answer to the following questions: 1. What are the main issues of coordinating the ERASMUS mobility programs in Turkey, Germany and England? 2. What are the negative and positive features of Erasmus programs in Turkey, Germany and England from the perspective of the Erasmus Coordinators? 3. What are the differences and similarities among the problems and issues of the Erasmus Coordinators.

Method

A Quantitative Survey method has been employed in this study. Research data were gathered through questionnaires. First, literature and various questionnaire forms were analyzed, and an “ERASMUS Coordinators Attitude Survey” has been developed. Then an online version of the questionnaire form has been created for the ERASMUS coordinators who work in German, English and Turkish Universities. In the data analysis stage, the data was organized by using MS Excel, and then evaluated with the SPSS/PC (11.5) (Statistical Package of Social Science) software. In this evaluation, Frequency and percentage, t-test, Pearson R correlation analysis, and one-way analysis of variance were used, and meaningfulness levels are taken as 0.05 and 0.01.

Expected Outcomes

Three major themes are emerged after the initial data analysis. 1. Issues of Inservice Training, 2. Language and cultural difficulties and 3. Struggle for developing a European Union Scholarship. There is an evident lack of coordination between home and host universities. Sometimes even the transmission of grades can be problematic. Most of the Erasmus coordinators are not paid and trained to be coordinators , and most of the time they are told to be coordinators. The expected outcomes of the study are: 1. identifying key issues of the ERASMUS coordinators and developing mutual collaboration among them, 2. developing a common sensitivity toward the local and European level problems of ERASMUS coordinators and creating collaborative efforts to solve these problems, 3. providing policy makers, university administrators, academicians and students with knowledge about ERASMUS exchange program, issues of mobility, cultural, academic, financial and social problems of ERASMUS mobility coordination

References

Blumenthal, Peggy et.al. (edits.) (1996). Academic Mobility in a Changing World. (Higher Education Policy Series 29). London, Kingsley Publishers. Enders, Jürgen (1998). Academic Staff Mobility in the European Community: The ERASMUS Experience, Comparative Education Review, Vol. 42, No. 1, 46 - 60-. European Commission - Community Research (2004). Europe needs more scientists. Report by the High Level Group on Increasing Human Ressources for Science and Technology in Europe. Brussels, European Commission. European Commission (edit.) (1995). ERASMUS Subject Evaluation - Summary Reports of the Evaluation Conferences by Subject Area. Vol. 1, Brussels, European Commission. Europe Unit (2004) Europe Note 04/22: HEFCE Study on International Student Mobility. Universities UK. HEFCE (2004) International Student Mobility. Report by the Sussex Centre for Migration Research, University of Sussex, and the Centre for Applied Population Research, University of Dundee. Stronkhorst, R. (2005), Learning Outcomes of International Mobility at Two Dutch Institutions of Higher Education, Journal of Studies in International Education, Vol. 9, No. 4, Winter 2005, 292 - 315. Teichler, Ulrich (edit.) (2002). ERASMUS in the SOCRATES Programme - Findings of an Evaluation Study. (ACA Papers on International Cooperation in Education). Bonn, Lemmens. Teichler, Ulrich and Maiworm, Friedhelm (1997). The ERASMUS Experience - Major Findings of the Erasmus Evaluation Research Project. Luxembourg, European Commisson. UK Socrates-Erasmus Council (2007) UK Erasmus Mobility and Institutional Performance Data: http://www.kent.ac.uk/erasmus/erasmus/statistics/. (Last accessed 31 March 2008). Williams, Tracy. R. (2005). Exploring the Impact of Study Abroad on Students´ Intercultural Communication Skills: Adaptability and Sensitivity, Journal of Studies in International Education, Vol. 9, No. 4, Winter 2005, 356-371.

Author Information

Mustafa Eryaman

Turkish Educational Research Association

Canakkale

212

Cumali Yasar

Turkish Educational Research Association, Turkey

Ebru Aktan