[SEFI AC] Transatlantic mobility

Joint International IGIP-SEFI Annual Conference 2010, 19th - 22nd September 2010, Trnava, Slovakia

Transatlantic mobility: Europe and Canada Outcomes and experiences from the symposium organised by the Board of European Students of Technology (BEST) and Canadian Federation of Engineer Students (CFES) Marina Sainz Comas1 1Marina

Sainz Comas, Board of European Students of Technology marina.sainz@BEST.eu.org ,

Abstract: Companies are looking for perfect employees for their jobs and within this globalised world an international academic exchange experience can make a difference between candidates. Both BEST and CFES strive to provide complementary education to their members and believe that mobility makes the students’ perspective wider and gives intercultural experience.

This paper presents outcomes from the event, that has been organised in cooperation with the Brno University of Technology in Brno (Czech Republic) in August 2009. The main topics that were discussed were the different mobility programmes between Europe and Canada. Diversity is the most appropriate word to summarise this Symposium, as participants from 15 different countries gathered to discuss about their education.

An in-depth analysis of the mobility status needs a previous knowledge of the different educational systems existing in every country. The main differences existed between Canada, European countries, Russia and Ukraine. Nevertheless the differences between European Union countries were still remarkable due to the different implementation of the Bologna Process. The understanding of each educational system was a key point for the participants to understand the situation of their colleagues from the other countries and the different mobility programmes possibilities.

General information about several mobility programmes was gathered (from the students attending the symposium); the discussions also included the main reasons for choosing one programme or another and the problems the students faced during the period of the programmes. Within the discussion groups there were described the perfect characteristics of an overseas mobility programme for engineering students and the main reasons for students involving in mobility programmes of any kind were gathered.

Keywords: Board of European Students of Technology, student input, mobility programmes, trans-Atlantic mobility.

Joint International IGIP-SEFI Annual Conference 2010, 19th - 22nd September 2010, Trnava, Slovakia

1. Description of the event The Joint Symposium on Education held in Brno (Czech Republic), August 2009, was organised together between Board of European Students of Technology (BEST) [1] and Canadian Federation of Engineering Students (CFES) [2], under the title of “Improving Engineering Education? Europe and Canada, let's do it together!” [3].

This Joint Symposium is the biggest cooperative project between the non-profit students’ organisations. It aims to strengthen their relationship, to analyse and dissect the university relations between Europe and Canada using the point of view of the most involved stakeholders in these matters: their students.

The topics chosen between BEST and CFES involved predominantly the sharing of the different educational systems, students experiences in exchange programmes all around the world and finally, undergraduate research. The event also counted with the helpful and altruist collaboration of Professor Zdrako Rusev, Professor Don Sparling, expert in both Canadian and European University Systems who introduced the participants into the topic of the Joint Symposium and finally Professor Wim Van Petegem, who attended the Joint Symposium through video conference [3].

In order to be able to collect the most useful information, participants were divided in 4 smaller diverse groups. In total, 10 Canadian students and 30 European attended the Joint Symposium. Those groups were facilitated by members of BEST and CFES. Nevertheless not all the sessions had the discussion group structure, other methods like presentations, video conference and learning cafe were used [3].

2. Challenges in students mobility Academic mobility has been one of the main goals of the Bologna Declaration since 1999 [5]. In the recent years, it has been further considered in Leuven - Louvain-laNeuve Communiqué, in 2009, as well as the Budapest - Vienna Declaration, in early 2010 [5, 6].

During the last decades, several actions have taken place in order to achieve those goals. European students are most familiar with the Socrates Erasmus Programme, which has been the main student mobility channel in Europe [7]. By now, more than four thousand Higher Education Institutions have joined the programme, more than two million students have participated.[8].

Mobility programmes in Europe evolved further in the recent years, and several international programmes were developed. Such are the Erasmus Mundus [9], and the special programmes between European Union and other countries, for example USA, Canada, Australia, Japan [10, 11, 12].

Throughout the discussion, a different perception of universities, between the Canadian and the European students respectively, became obvious. Canadians consider their studies in a University as a very strong bond between themselves and

Joint International IGIP-SEFI Annual Conference 2010, 19th - 22nd September 2010, Trnava, Slovakia

the Institution. One of the major reasons for this approach is the official evaluation and ranking of the universities by state authorities. Studies in a highly ranked university offer the students prestige and greater career opportunities. On the other side of the Atlantic, such rankings do not have such impact on students, as the society and the market do not consider them so faithfully [3].

Canadian students expressed that they are often encouraged by their universities to participate in mobility programmes, but despite the efforts, they usually prefer not to.

The main reason is the strong bond between the university and the student, increased by the prestige involved. Students often feel that going away from their university would be perceived negatively in their career, just “like a dark spot”, as one of the Canadian participants of the Symposium colourfully added. Another reason creating scepticism against mobility programmes are organisational issues related to recognition and accreditation, that even when they are regulated, they can become inconvenient, or even cumbersome, for participants of mobility programmes.

Furthermore, Canadian participants explained that mobility within Canada usually includes moving over considerable distance, which is comparable to the distance covered by European students participating in European transnational mobility programmes. Finally, the only mobility possibility that Canadian students accept easily is working abroad through the Co-operative Education Programme. This programme offers half-year internships agreed by both universities and companies, and provides to students the possibility to work abroad without any recognition problems for them [3, 13].

European participants described their experiences from various European mobility programmes. Mainly the Erasmus programme was considered, although the students referred to other programmes, as well, such as UNITECH [14], and to the services offered by organisation like IAESTE [15] and BEST [1]. Besides the recognition and accreditation issues, another participants’ main concern about the Erasmus programme was the financial aspect. The participants considered that the scholarship involved was sometimes not large enough to live on in some European countries with high living costs, such as Sweden [3].

It is important to note that the participants’ concerns on organisational points, on recognition and accreditation issues, and finally on financial matters, are not surprising for the ones interested and involved in the development and progress of EHEA. The same concerns have been actually reported by the ESN project PRIME [16, 17], and were considered during the Leuven - Louvain-la-Neuve Communiqué in 2009 [5].

The mobility programme between Canada and Europe [11] was especially considered in the Symposium. Canadian participants expressed opinion that their main concern for the programme was that it may affect their career negatively, as explained in the previous paragraphs. As for the European students, they considered the opportunities in Canada limited, and they raised the point that Canadian universities encourage the mobility of students less than the corresponding mobility

Joint International IGIP-SEFI Annual Conference 2010, 19th - 22nd September 2010, Trnava, Slovakia

of researchers. Furthermore, some of them had the impression that the level of the Canadian universities is much higher than the one of Europeans, and thus they feel intimidated by such a mobility step. Finally the financial support for an overseas mobility programme seems to be inadequate, as the funds received barely cover their travelling expenses. Eventually, all participating students agreed that the differences of the two studying structures (European and Canadian) could create inconvenience for them [3].

3. Conclusions The Joint Symposium of the two student Non-Governmental Organisations has been a breakthrough for their Educational Involvement, especially since it gathered forty participants studying in both sides of the Atlantic. The sessions dedicated to student mobility, including trans-Atlantic mobility, revealed several interesting facts [3].

One important outcome is that European mobility platform is more popular among European students, than the corresponding Canadian, to Canadian students. Canadian students do not consider trans-Atlantic mobility as an attractive choice during their studies, while European students would prefer the programmes to be broader and provided with higher financial support. A possible solution could be further promotion and support of the mobility programmes between European countries and Canada [3].

During the Joint Symposium, financial aspects for the mobility programmes were considered. Besides the need for further funds, it would be particularly interesting to see how the recent financial recession is affecting both European and overseas mobility programmes [3].

Additionally, recognition and accreditation issues are still severely challenging the smooth operation of European and trans-Atlantic student mobility platforms, and more effort is needed in order to eliminate them [3].

A final important outcome of the Joint Symposium is the need for a change of mentality of both European and Canadian societies so as to encourage their students to apply for a trans-Atlantic mobility programme. Canadians need to understand that mobility does not necessarily imply having a black spot in their student career and Europeans have to believe they are at top educational level, so that they go to Canada in an exchange programme [3].

4. Acknowledgements BEST and CFES would like to express their gratitude to Brno University of Technology for hosting and supporting the Joint Symposium, as well as the Canadian Embassy in Czech Republic for financing the event. Furthermore, we highly appreciate Dr. Zdrako Rusev, Dr. Don Sparling and Dr. Wim Van Petegem for their valuable participation in the event.

Joint International IGIP-SEFI Annual Conference 2010, 19th - 22nd September 2010, Trnava, Slovakia

References [1] Board of European Students of Technology (BEST), Website: http://www.best.eu.org.

[2] Canadian Federation of Engineering Students (CFES), Website: http://www.cfes.ca.

[3] BEST Educational Committee, Report from the Joint BEST and CFES Symposium on Education with topic “Improving Engineering Education? Europe and Canada, let's do it together!”, Brno, Czech Republic, August-September 2009. Since 201007-01, available online at: http://www.best.eu.org/student/education/documents.jsp.

[4] The Bologna Declaration, http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/documents/MDC/BOLOGNA_DECLARATION1.pdf, June 1999.

[5] The Leuven/Louvain-la-Neuve Communiqué, http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/conference/documents/Leuven_Louvain-laNeuve_Communiqu%C3%A9_April_2009.pdf, April 2009.

[6] The Budapest-Vienna Declaration, http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/2010_conference/documents/Budapest-Vienna_Declaration.pdf, March 2010.

[7] The Erasmus Programme, http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-programme/doc80_en.htm, September 2009.

[8] The Erasmus Programme Celebrates its 20th Anniversary, http://ec.europa.eu/education/news/erasmus20_en.html, November 2007.

[9] The Erasmus Mundus Programme, http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/erasmus_mundus/index_en.php, April 2010.

[10] The ATLANTIS Programme, EU-US Cooperation in Higher Education and Vocational Training, http://ec.europa.eu/education/eu-usa/doc1156_en.htm, January 2010.

[11] The new EU-Canada Cooperation Programme in Higher Education, Training and Youth, http://ec.europa.eu/education/eucanada/doc1563_en.htm, January 2010.

[12] The Cooperation in education and training with Japan, http://ec.europa.eu/education/eu-japan/doc1599_en.htm, February 2010.

[13] Canadian Association for Co-operative Education, http://www.cafce.ca.

[14] UNITECH International Program, Website: http://www.unitech-international.org.

[15] International Association for the Exchange of Students for Technical Experience (IAESTE), Website: http://www.iaeste.org.

[16] Erasmus Student Network (ESN), Website: http://www.esn.org.

[17] ESN, ESN PRIME Project (PRIME: Problems in Recognition In Making Erasmus), PRIME Report 2009, available online at: http://www.esn.org/sites/default/files/PRIME%20Booklet%20WEB.pdf.