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