COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Youth on the Move Results of the consultation on the Green Paper on the Learning Mobility of Young People   Accompanying document to the  Proposal for a  RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNCIL  Youth on the Move: Promoting the learning mobility of young people     {COM(2010) 478 final}
Date: 2010-09-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: education, education policy, knowledge economy, student mobility, teaching quality, young person, youth policy

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 15.9.2010 
SEC(2010) 1048 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Youth on the Move 
Results of the consultation on the Green Paper on the Learning Mobility of 
Young People 

Accompanying document to the 

Proposal for a 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNCIL 

Youth on the Move: Promoting the learning mobility of young people 

{COM(2010) 478 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 3 

2. Executive Summary of Contributions .................................................................................... 3 

3. Written contributions.............................................................................................................. 5 

4. Online responses to the questionnaire.................................................................................... 6 

5. Key messages from the consultation...................................................................................... 7 

5.1. Information and Guidance................................................................................................... 7 

5.2 Promotion and Motivation ................................................................................................... 8 

5.3 Languages and Culture....................................................................................................... 10 

5.4 Legal Issues ........................................................................................................................ 10 

5.5 Portability of Grants and Loans ......................................................................................... 11 

5.6 Mobility to and from the European Union ......................................................................... 11 

5.7 Quality Assurance .............................................................................................................. 12 

5.8 Reaching out to Disadvantaged Groups ............................................................................. 13 

5.9 Mentoring and Integration.................................................................................................. 13 

5.10 Recognition and Validation.............................................................................................. 14 

5.11 Mobilising Actors and Resources .................................................................................... 14 

5.12 More active involvement from the business world .......................................................... 15 

5.13 Virtual Mobility................................................................................................................ 15 

5.14 eTwinning......................................................................................................................... 16 

5.15 Engaging the ‘Multipliers’ ............................................................................................... 16 

5.16 Mobility Targets............................................................................................................... 17 

Annex 1: Examples of Good Practice ...................................................................................... 18 

Annex 2: Contributions by Organisational Type ..................................................................... 25 

Annex 3: Response Charts for the Online Questionnaire ........................................................ 37 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
1. INTRODUCTION 

On  8  July  2009  the  European  Commission  published  a  Green  Paper  on  Promoting  the 
learning mobility of young people1. The aim of the Green Paper was to launch a broad public 
consultation to identify the most important obstacles to mobility and how to overcome them.  

The  Green  Paper  highlighted  the  benefits  of  mobility  in  supporting  acquisition  of  new 
knowledge  and  skills.  It  also  underlined  the  contribution  to  opening  up  the  education  and 
training  institutions  to  a  wider  world,  different  audiences  of  learners  and  consequently 
contributing  to  enhancing  the  quality  of  education  and  training.  Other  benefits  noted  were 
those of combating isolation, protectionism and xenophobia.  

A clear consensus in Europe has emerged at the political level on the objective of expanding 
mobility opportunities to young people. The purpose of the Green Paper was to open up the 
debate to stakeholders and the wider public on how to achieve these ambitions.  

The public consultation closed on 15 December 2009 and met with a high response. In total 
2798 on-line responses, mainly from young people, and 258 written responses were received, 
from a wide range of stakeholders, including Member States authorities, the Committee of the 
Regions2,  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee3,  regional  and  local  authorities, 
European and national associations, social partners, academics and individuals.  

In  line  with  the  Commission’s  general  principles  and  standards  governing  consultation  of 
interested  parties,  this  report  describes  the  consultation  procedure  and  analyses  the 
contributions received. 

The  objective  of  this  report  is  to  provide  an  overview  over  the  wide  range  and  diversity  of 
ideas, opinions and suggestions contained in the contributions received. Without claiming to 
be  exhaustive,  the  report  identifies  the  main  trends,  views  and  concerns  arising  from  the 
contributions.  In  order  to  ensure  full  transparency,  the  report  is  complemented  by  the 
publication of the full text of the contributions received on the internet. This is a report on the 
public consultation. It does not aim to draw policy conclusions from the consultation process.  

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF CONTRIBUTIONS 

The vast majority of respondents were strongly in support of the Green Paper.  

There was a clear consensus that the quality of information and guidance related to mobility 
needs to be improved. Some respondents saw a need for a single integrated EU web portal, 
not only as a tool to provide relevant information but to promote the benefits of mobility to 
learners, parents, education institutions and employers. There was much support for new and 

1 
2 

3 

http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc/mobility/com329_en.pdf  
http://coropinions.cor.europa.eu/CORopinionDocument.aspx?identifier=cdr\educ-iv\dossiers\educ-iv-
043\cdr246-2009_fin_ac.doc&language=EN  
http://www.eesc.europa.eu/sections/soc/education_training_youth_culture.htm  

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
creative  ways  to  disseminate  information,  e.g.  through  social  networks,  and  consensus  that 
teachers and trainers should themselves be experienced in mobility.  

Promoting the benefits of mobility for young people by providing evidence of the added value 
of  mobility  in  terms  of  future  employability  and  their  professional  and  intercultural  skills 
development was recommended by all respondents. The cooperation between all stakeholders, 
from  regional  and  local  authorities  to  young  people  and  their  families  should  be  improved 
with a view to motivating more young people to be mobile. 

The importance of language learning to begin during early stages of education was stressed. 
Many respondents emphasised the requirement for more creative modes of language teaching 
as  well  as  for  higher  levels  of  funding  to  promote  preparatory  and  continued  language 
learning. There was support for a mandatory mobility period for teachers and trainers. 

Difficulties  associated  with  visa  requirements,  lack  of  legal  status  of  mobile  learners  and 
recognition problems were highlighted as the main legal obstacles to mobility. 

Variations  in  the  portability  of  grants  and  funding  arrangements  from  one  Member  State  to 
another were seen as key obstacles to mobility and the need for action was confirmed by most 
respondents. General support, but also some reservations were expressed regarding the idea to 
formulate  guidance  at  European  Level  applicable  to  Member  States  in  relation  to  the 
portability of grants, loans and access to benefits. 

All  organisational  types  highlighted  the  need  to  reduce  administrative  and  legal  burdens  in 
order  to  promote  mobility  to  and  from  the  European  Union.  More  cooperation  and 
partnerships  with  third  countries  and  agreements  between  competent  authorities  across 
Member States and bilateral agreements between institutions (e.g. on recognition) could help 
in this regard. 

There was strong support for the idea of using existing quality charters to ensure mobility is 
of  high  quality,  for  introducing  monitoring  and  evaluation  methods,  and  for  the  use  of 
standardised guidelines and templates such as learning agreements. 

The  main  obstacles  to  increased  mobility  of  disadvantaged  groups  concern  financial 
constraints,  lack  of  information  regarding  specific  provision  for  learners,  and  existing 
programmes not meeting the needs of learners. Teachers, trainers, youth workers and social 
workers  should  be  aware  of  and  experienced  in  dealing  with  specific  issues  facing 
disadvantaged learners. 

Good  mentoring  and  integration  for  supporting  students  throughout  the  learning  mobility 
phase was considered essential by most respondents. Peer support ("buddying") among young 
people should play an important role.  

The  validation  and  recognition  of  both  formal  and  non-formal  learning  still  constitutes  a 
considerable  obstacle  to  the  mobility  of  young  people.  Existing  EU  instruments  which 
facilitate  the  recognition  and  transfer  of  educational  qualifications  between  Member  States 
should  be  better  promoted.  One  promising  solution  can  be  the  development  of  good 
partnerships based on mutual trust and dialogue between different educational institutions.  

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
To  create  a  new  partnership  for  mobility,  cooperation  with  both  public  and  private  actors 
needs to be intensified and networks for the exchange of information and best practice should 
be  created.  Regional  authorities  should  play  an  increasing  role  in  promoting  mobility.  A 
system with funding from different sources needs to be established. The EU should streamline 
mobility  notably  in  the  Structural  Funds  and  the  Research  and  Development  Framework 
programme.  It  is  also  noted  that  the  European  Social  Fund  should  become  an  additional 
source of funding. 

All  respondent  types  see  a  stronger  involvement  of  businesses  as  an  important  factor  in 
strengthening  youth  mobility.  In  order  to  improve  the  motivation  of  businesses,  incentives 
should be given, e.g. in the form of special grants or tax exemptions. 

There  is  a  clear  consensus  that  virtual  mobility  should  accompany  physical  mobility  rather 
than  replace  it.  ICTs  can  play  an  important  role  in  strengthening  the  support  for  mobile 
learners  during  preparation  and  follow-up  but  that  will  often  require  a  significant 
improvement of existing ICT infrastructure. 

The eTwinning approach, according to many respondents, should be extended to all forms of 
formal and non-formal learning, in particular in the vocational and voluntary sector.  

Mobility opportunities for ‘multipliers’, such as teachers, trainers and youth workers should 
be  given  additional  support  and  prominence  in  European  programmes.  Many  respondents 
suggested  that  teacher/trainer  courses  should  include  a  mandatory  period  of  mobility. 
Employers in education and training should provide incentives and recognition to staff with 
particular commitment to mobility. 

Nearly  all  respondents  considered  mobility  targets  a  useful  tool  in  defining  a  mobility 
strategy,  though  preferences  varied  regarding  the  most  appropriate  level  for  such  targets 
(European, national, regional, institutional, etc.). There was some concern that targets in terms 
of quantity may have negatively affect quality.  

For each issue examples of good practice were provided. Those that contained web-links for 
further information are listed in Annex 1. 

3. WRITTEN CONTRIBUTIONS 

The  written  contributions  can  be  grouped  into  the  following  categories:  Governments, 
Regional  Authorities,  Local  Authorities,  European  Associations,  National  Associations, 
Education  Institutions  (e.g.  schools,  universities),  Political  Groups,  Individuals  and 
Businesses. The contributors, except for the individuals, are listed in Annex 2. 

Figure 1 presents an illustration of responses by organisational type. However, these numbers 
cannot be considered as representative of the wider consultation process as they do not take 
into account the consultations organised at national level. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
 
Figure 2 presents the composition of responses according to country contributions. Also EU 
organisations (e.g. social partners, organisations, networks) responded to the consultation and 
their representation is illustrated in figure 2.  

4. ONLINE RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE 

2798 responses were received to the online questionnaire. By far the largest numer came from 
from individuals (2206 - 78.8%), while 532 responses (19%) were sent by organisations. The 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
 
 
majority of the respondents were female (1719, or 61.4%) and young people under 35 years 
(1758 - 62.8%).  
In terms of geographical distribution, most replies come from Italy (19.5%), France (10%), 
Spain (7.8%) and Germany (7.5%), followed by Romania, Turkey, the UK and Belgium.  

For a more detailed analysis of the responses see the response charts in Annex 3. 

5. KEY MESSAGES FROM THE CONSULTATION 

5.1. Information and Guidance 

How  can  the  availability  of  information  and  guidance  related  to  mobility  be 
improved? 

There is consensus among all respondent types regarding the need to improve the quality of 
information and guidance related to mobility. Information was named as the most important 
issue related to mobility by the online respondents: 77% see it as important or very important. 
Effective,  clear  and  transparent  information  requires,  however,  the  precise  definition  of 
potential  target  groups  eligible  for  mobility.  Good  and  appropriate  information  is  more 
difficult to get hold of for young people in schools, vocational education and apprenticeship 
training than in higher education. 

Information  should  be  available  in  a  variety  of  forms  including  dedicated,  one-stop-shop 
websites, mass media routes such as television and also in printed form. The responses to the 
online  questionnaire  showed  that  large  numbers  of  respondents  didn't  know  the  various  EU 
portals related to mobility, such as PLOTEUS, Study in Europe or Euraxess. The need for a 
single, integrated, simplified and clear EU portal was proposed. One suggestion is for a portal 
called  www.mobility.eu  which  should  be  linked  to  national  systems  in  order  to  route 
information more effectively. 

The  need  for  more  creative  ways  and  forms  to  disperse  information  for  example  was 
recognised, e.g. through the use of social platforms, clubs, youth organisations, rock concerts 
and public spaces highly frequented by young people. 

Many  responses  emphasised  the  importance  of  promoting  mobility  and  the  benefits  of 
mobility at an early age. In this context the awareness of teachers, trainers and parents of the 
benefits of mobility is crucial. It was suggested that mobility opportunities should be part of 
the core training for teachers and careers advisors.  

"Ambassadors  of  mobility",  such  as  previously  mobile  learners,  were  suggested  as  a  good 
way  to  promote  and  make  available  information  and  guidance  related  to  mobility  in  an 
accessible manner.  

Some  respondents  highlighted  the  importance  of  training  centres,  hubs,  or  centres  for 
information, e.g. in the form of “European offices” within the education institutions.  

It was suggested that the EU should support more research on acquired competences during 
mobility and conduct a survey of employers’ perspectives of mobile students across the EU, 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
as this could help inform the development of greater diversity in work placements and study 
mobility periods. 

5.2 Promotion and Motivation 

What  can  be  done  to  better  promote  and  motivate  young  people  to  be  mobile?  
How should this be done to ensure maximum effect?  

Motivation (together with funding) is considered to be important or very important by 75% of 
the  online  respondents.  Promoting  the  benefits  of  mobility  for  young  people  by  providing 
evidence  of  the  added  value  of  mobility  in  terms  of  future  employability  and  their 
professional and intercultural skills development was recommended by all respondents.  

The  most  important  benefits  of  learning  mobility  to  online  respondents  were  "personal 
development",  "foreign  language  skills"  and  "added  knowledge  and  skills  in  the  area  of 
specialisation".  

Many respondents stressed the need to promote the benefits of mobility at an early stage and 
much more broadly to reach employers, teachers, parents as well as learners, policy makers 
and civic organisations. Learners and their families should be reminded of their responsibility 
to make use of existing opportunities.  

Better  cooperation  at  European  level  and  networking  between  agencies,  regional,  local 
authorities,  institutions,  teachers,  trainers,  youth  workers,  ex-beneficiaries,  policy  makers, 
employers,  civic  society,  young  people  and  their  families  with  a  view  to  a  ‘joined  up’ 
approach was encouraged. 

All  respondents  highlighted  the  need  for  clear,  factual,  practical  and  targeted  information 
tailored to individual learners. Peer exchange with a focus on the experiences of young people 
returning from mobility experiences was proposed as one way to better promote and motivate 
young people.  

Most  respondents  agreed  that  a  stronger  focus  on  systematic  preparation  within  the 
curriculum, e.g. by promoting the notion of internationalisation, and improving opportunities 
for recognition and validation of learning is critical to persuade learners to be mobile, as are 
adequate funding and resources. 

Some contributors suggested improving the motivation of learners to be mobile by removing 
age  restrictions  and  allowing  for  greater  flexibility  in  mobility  –  such  as  access  to  shorter 
mobility periods and fostering mobility through sports.  

Individuals focused on a number of practical issues in order to better promote and motivate 
young  people  to  be  mobile,  ranging  from  finding  suitable  temporary  accommodation, 
subsidised  transport,  simplifying  application  procedures  to  improving  foreign  language 
teaching.  

Although  physical  mobility  cannot  be  replaced  as  such,  it  was  suggested  virtual  mobility 
could  significantly  promote  the  concept  of  ‘internationalisation’  among  young  people  at  a 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
reasonable  cost.  It  was  noted  that  shorter-term  exchanges  for  mobility  should  also  be 
considered. 

EU  tools  such  as  Eurodesk,  Eures,  Euroguidance  and  Europass  should  be  used  more  to 
channel information to learners. 

What do you see as the main barriers to the motivation of young people to become 
mobile? 

Most respondents highlighted financial constraints as the main barrier to mobility. Among the 
online respondents, 75% considered funding to be an important or very important issue. Other 
constraints include: a reluctance to leave home, family commitments, linguistic and cultural 
barriers,  fear  of  lack  of  recognition  and  potential  consequences  of  an  interruption  of  study 
programmes,  lack  of  information,  administrative  and  logistical  issues  (including  differing 
academic calendars and lack of accommodation) and lack of involvement of businesses and 
opportunities for work placements. 

Linked  to  financial  constraints,  there  is  a  general  view  that  the  rules  and  regulations  of 
European  programmes  limit  the  impact  of  mobility  opportunities  and  that  funding 
arrangements should be simplified. 

The need to make language classes in particular more attractive was highlighted. With regard 
to  the  language  skills  of  VET  learners,  teaching  methods  must  be  better  adapted  to  the 
specific pre-requisites and needs of the target group and be linked to career objectives.  

Difficulties in obtaining a visa were highlighted as a barrier. The time taken to set up mobility 
periods is time-consuming and often acts as a barrier to the motivation of young people.  

The  fear  of  leaving  home  is  considered  particularly  pertinent  for  young  people  who  are 
socially  disadvantaged  and  those  with  low  skills.  More  support  structures  are  needed 
especially for these groups.  

Concerns were expressed that families and employers will not support mobility as they do not 
recognise or witness the benefit of a mobility period in educational terms. The use of ECTS 
should be improved and the development of ECVET accelerated.  

It was noted that greater public investment in education is required more generally, but also 
that  the  Green  Paper  does  not  cover  the  many  financial  and  organisational  measures  to 
promote mobility outside the EU programmes in Member States. 

It is suggested that Member States should remove the administrative and legislative obstacles 
relating to residence permits, social security rights and recognition of student cards from other 
countries.  

As learners become increasingly aware of the environmental effects of travel, the principles of 
sustainable  development  can  become  an  important  criterion  in  deciding  on  mobility  in  the 
future.  

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
5.3 Languages and Culture 

How can the linguistic and cultural obstacles to mobility be best addressed? 

The importance of language learning by embedding it into the curriculum, from early stages 
of education through to continued education was stressed by all categories of respondents. 

Using  more  creative  methods  for  the  delivery  of  language  learning  and  ensuring 
disadvantaged  learners  are  not  excluded  from  languages  and  mobility  opportunities  was 
recommended. Many respondents emphasised the requirement for higher levels of funding to 
promote preparatory and continued language learning, particularly for VET learners.  

There  was  a  call  for  Member  States  to  revisit  and,  where  appropriate,  reform  national 
education polices to embed language learning into the national curriculum.  

Several types of respondents expressed support for a mandatory mobility period for teachers 
and trainers of up to a one year. 

Member States were requested to do much more through national education policies to meet 
the target of every EU citizen speaking at least two other EU languages. In this context it was 
underlined  that  language  learning  must  be  credit  bearing  and  delivered  in  more  creative, 
social ways – for example in bars, cafes, culinary and or cultural evenings and between native 
and foreign learners.  

5.4 Legal Issues 

What are the main legal obstacles to mobility that you have encountered? 

Issues relating to visa requirements and the legal status of mobile learners were highlighted by 
nearly  all  respondents  as  the  main  legal  obstacles  to  mobility.  Also  problems  linked  to  the 
recognition of learning were mentioned as a barrier to mobility. The overarching message was 
that there is no clear legal framework for learners participating in mobility periods. 

In relation to the Green Paper’s proposal to establish a framework to support minors, it was 
noted  that  the  different  legal  rules  exist  across  Member  States  may  make  it  difficult  for  a 
European framework to be developed and implemented.  

Further  to  the  proposal  to  introduce  a  European  Trainee  Statue,  few  but  mixed  views  were 
received. Some thought that European Trainee Statute would help to ensure equal treatment 
and provide much needed clarity on legal matters while others insisted that it would have to 
remain voluntary as there will be national circumstances which cannot be changed.  

It  was  noted  that  within  the  university  sector  a  specific  problem  persists  for  doctoral 
students/young  researchers  whose  status  may  vary  between  student/scholarship  holder  and 
employee. That lack of clarity about the status of mobile learners has implications for social 
security claims and can discourage them from becoming mobile.  

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
5.5 Portability of Grants and Loans 

What  kind  of  obstacles  have  you  encountered  regarding  the  portability  of  grants 
and loans and access to benefits? 

60%  of  the  online  respondents  consider  the  portability  of  grants  an  important  or  very 
important  issue.  All  respondent  types  cited  variations  in  the  eligibility,  portability  of  grants 
and  funding  arrangements  from  one  Member  State  to  another  as  key  obstacles.  Lack  of 
information,  together  with  administrative  and  bureaucratic  burdens  were  cited  as  adding  to 
difficulties  associated  with  the  portability  of  grants  and  loans.  Late  payments  or  delays  in 
funds  reaching  learners  can  be  problematic  and  especially  difficult  for  economically 
disadvantaged learners. 

A  number  of  responses  discussed  the  possibility  to  formulate  guidance  at  European  level 
applicable  to  Member  States  in  relation  to  the  portability  of  grants,  loans  and  access  to 
benefits. Whilst many noted a central guidance document could be beneficial, the need to be 
careful  that  it  is  not  too  restrictive  was  emphasised.  If  a  central  document  were  to  be 
produced, it should be developed with Member States. Concerns about the added value of a 
publication of guidance from the European Commission on the application of European law to 
current  arrangements  were  however  raised.  There  is  a  concern  that  common  guidance  may 
make it difficult for individual countries to make decisions based on their own systems.  

In  order  to  equally  fund  all  learners  and  not  exclude  learners  from  poorer  countries 
participating  in  mobility  opportunities  in  more  expensive  European  countries,  it  has  been 
suggested that resources should be distributed centrally by a Centralised European Institution, 
once the number of outgoing learners has been identified. 

5.6 Mobility to and from the European Union 

What more should be done to promote mobility to and from the European Union? 
How should this be done? 

All  types  of  respondents  highlighted  the  need to  reduce  administrative  and  legal  burdens  in 
order  to  promote  mobility  to  and  from  the  European  Union.  Visa  issues  and  high  costs 
associated with mobility (travel, accommodation) are considered to be the biggest problems. 
Many  respondents  called  for  greater  cooperation  and  partnerships  with  third  countries  and 
agreements  between  competent  authorities  across  Member  States  and  bilateral  agreements 
between institutions. 

There  were  frequent  requests  to  improve  access  to  quality  information,  enhance  funding 
opportunities  for  non-nationals,  and  create  more  programmes/opportunities  for  learners  in 
order to promote mobility to and from the European Union. The need for greater flexibility in 
terms of the validation and recognition of mobility periods abroad was highlighted. 

Some  respondents  expressed  the  view  that  a  long-term,  gradual  expansion  of  learning 
mobility programmes into third countries such as China, India, Japan and the USA would be a 
reasonable  investment.  However,  serious  efforts  should  be  made  to  avoid  brain  drain  from 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
Europe, whilst making Europe an attractive location both for learners of European origin and 
those from outside Europe. 

It was suggested that EU exchange programmes should better reflect the desire of Europe’s 
young people  to travel  outside  the  EU,  but that this would  require further financial support. 
Regarding  higher  education,  a  need  for  greater  flexibility  on  the  interaction  of  non-ECTS 
credit systems with ECTS was highlighted. 

Some considered that, if more funding were directed to mobility beyond the EU, solutions to 
practical  problems  would  follow  suit.  However,  it  was  noted  that  problems  exist  due  to  the 
differences in legislation of Member States concerning third country nationals. One solution 
would be to harmonise the rules and create a specific common status for third country mobile 
learners. 

5.7 Quality Assurance  

What measures can be taken to ensure that the mobility period is of high quality?  

Nearly all organisational types of respondents were in support of using quality charters (such 
as the ones used in the Leonardo da Vinci and Erasmus programmes) to ensure mobility is of 
high quality. There was also support for introducing monitoring and evaluation methods, such 
as  systematic  quality  assurance  procedures  for  each  aspect  of  mobility,  continuous  dialogue 
and  clear  contractual  arrangements  between  all  actors  and  beneficiaries,  guidelines  and 
templates  such  as  learning  agreements,  transparent  selection  procedures,  peer  exchange  and 
structured learner support. 

Many  respondents  stressed  the  importance  of  good  preparation  required  by  all  actors 
including  teachers,  trainers,  youth  workers,  managers  and  schools.  It  was  also  noted  that 
cultural preparation is especially important for minors and preparatory language learning for 
all learners. 

Of particular importance is the quality assurance process associated with the recognition and 
validation of learning.  

Bilateral  intergovernmental  agreements  can  provide  the  necessary  focus  and  mechanisms  to 
ensure  the  quality  of  delivery.  On  a  more  practical  level,  reducing  administrative  burdens, 
clear  communication  and  regularly  updated  partnership  agreements  concerning  the  focus  of 
the  mobility  period,  together  with  a  clear  definition  of  roles  and  responsibilities  of  those 
involved in the mobility arrangements, are also necessary. 

Organisational  suggestions 
tailored  selection  and  monitoring  arrangements, 
improving  the  availability  of  and  access  to  practical  information  (particularly  for 
disadvantaged  learners),  pastoral  care  to  support  younger  learners  and  ensuring  mobility 
becomes a mandatory component of the curriculum. 

included 

Wider  use  of  qualifications  frameworks  and  study  and  training  programmes  with  clear 
objectives and based on learning outcomes can contribute to high quality mobility.  

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
5.8 Reaching out to Disadvantaged Groups 

Which  are  the  most  important  difficulties  encountered  by  disadvantaged  groups 
with regard to learning mobility? 

Among  the  online  respondents,  more  than  two  thirds  expressed  their  support  for  an  even 
stronger  focus  in  European,  national  and  regional  programmes  on  providing  mobility 
opportunities to disadvantaged groups. 

The  main  barriers  cited  by  all  respondent  types  concern  financial  constraints,  lack  of 
information  regarding  specific  provision  for  learners  and  existing  programmes  not  meeting 
the  needs  of  learners.  It  was  suggested  that  Member  States  should  ensure  that  access  to 
education is based on an ability to learn and not on the ability to pay. 

Greater flexibility in mobility opportunities is needed in order to encourage the participation 
of disadvantaged learners, but the difficult personal constraints of these learners will require 
in addition targeted learner support and appropriate levels of funding.  

It  was  also  underlined  that  those  involved  in  mobility,  such  as  teachers,  trainers,  youth 
workers  and  social  workers,  should  be  aware  of  and  experienced  in  dealing  with  specific 
issues facing disadvantaged learners.  

The  notion  of  ‘disadvantaged’  groups  should  be  further  defined  as  this  term  encapsulates  a 
wide range of learners with very different needs. 

It  is  through  targeted  action  within  the  compulsory  stage  of  education  that  “prior  mobility” 
can be offered to all and the desire for further “self development” and “cultural experience” 
can be imbued in all citizens irrespective of gender or socio-economic background. 

It was also noted that permanent access to European mobility for disadvantaged young people 
should be funded on a constant basis by local and national funding institutions. Here it was 
noted  that  the  European  Commission  could  play  a  greater  role  by  setting  priorities  and 
indicators and assuming a driving and coordinating role. 

5.9 Mentoring and Integration 

Can you give some concrete examples of good practice in this area? 

All  respondent  types  underline  the  importance  of  good  mentoring  and  integration  for 
supporting  students  throughout  the  learning  mobility  phase.  As  examples  of  good  practice 
respondents referred, inter alia, to academic mentoring and peer buddying schemes. There are 
differences of opinion regarding the kind of accommodation in which mobile learners should 
be placed, ranging from mixed accommodation and dormitories to host families. 

Since adaptation to the new environment is very important, particularly in the first weeks of 
arrival,  specially  programmed  orientation  events  should  be  made  available  to  incoming 
students to orientate them in academic and practical matters. Such events should be organised 
by the host educational institution or by a student organisation.  

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
The  role  of  student  (or  other  youth)  organisations  was  also  underlined  as  important  in 
supporting their integration - through familiarising them with the culture and everyday life of 
the host country and creating a favourable environment for social interaction.  

5.10 Recognition and Validation 

In your experience, is the validation and recognition of both formal and non-formal 
learning still a significant obstacle to mobility? 

There is a unanimous view shared by all respondent types that the validation and recognition 
of both formal and non-formal learning constitutes a considerable obstacle to the mobility of 
young  people.  Among  the  online  respondents,  over  one  third  (38%)  shared  this  view.  The 
most  common  problems  with  the  validation  and  recognition  of  learning  are  associated  with 
the variability of practices among institutions and the lack of a common language about them. 
Other relevant issues include: 

•  Lack of information about existing EU instruments which facilitate the transfer of 

educational qualifications between Member States 

•  Insufficient appreciation of the value of non-formal learning 

•  Lack of flexibility in validation and recognition in primary and secondary schools 

•  Lack  of  flexibility  in  validation  and  recognition  in  some  profession-oriented 

programmes (e.g. nursing, engineering, social work) 

•  In  higher  education  contexts,  problems  with  ECTS  in  universities  (recognition, 

heavy learning requirements, lack of transparency and comparability) 

•  Further development of ECVET and compatibility with ECTS should be ensured. 

In  order  to  address  the  above  issues  respondents  emphasise  as  a  general  rule  the  need  for 
establishing  clear  definitions  as  well  as  synergies  between  formal  and  non-formal  learning. 
Furthermore,  the  development  of  good  partnerships  based  on  mutual  trust  and  dialogue 
between  different  educational  institutions  is  considered  essential  in  harmonising  validation 
and recognition practices.  

Recognition  instruments  such  as  Europass  and  Youthpass  should  be  better  promoted, 
particularly among employers who are presently not familiar with them. It is suggested that a 
common recognition tool should be established which would help individuals to document all 
the  knowledge,  skills  and  competences  acquired  throughout  their  lifetime.  A  broader 
understanding of the value of non-formal learning for the acquisition of key competencies for 
lifelong learning should be promoted in society.  

5.11 Mobilising Actors and Resources 

How  can  all  actors  and  resources  at  national,  regional  and  local  levels  be  better 
mobilised in the interest of youth mobility? 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
All  respondent  types  agree  that  creating  or  improving  partnership  involvement  as  well  as 
improving  funding  opportunities  and  information  and  support  structures  would  help  to 
mobilise all actors in the interest of youth mobility. A majority of online respondents (56.4%) 
sees the European Union and its institutions as the most important actor in promoting a new 
partnership for mobility. 

The  opportunities  offered  by  mobility  at  European  level  should  be  promoted  by  the 
appropriate  national  and  regional  organisations,  since  such  ‘intermediary  bodies’  are  more 
likely to have effective cooperation networks with the target groups of the LLL programme. 

Successful  mobility  partnerships  should  be  formed  with  both  public  and  private  actors 
operating at local level; chambers of commerce, business associations, and NGOs can also be 
very valuable partners.  

Regional authorities should play an increasing role in promoting mobility  through networks 
and  financial  support.  It  was  suggested  that  a  system  with  funding  from  different  sources 
needs  to  be  established.  The  EU  should  streamline  mobility  notably  in  the  Structural  Funds 
and the Research and Development Framework programme. 

5.12 More active involvement from the business world 

How  can  businesses  be  motivated  to  become  more  strongly  involved  in  youth 
mobility? 

All  types  of  respondents  perceive  the  involvement  of  businesses  as  an  important  factor  in 
strengthening  youth  mobility.  To  improve  the  motivation  of  businesses,  active  cooperation 
and communication (including awareness-raising and advocacy about the value of mobility) 
between the educational and the business sector is essential. 

The  latter  should  not  only  be  familiarised  with  the  benefits  of  mobility,  but  also  given 
incentives to engage more young people in training periods abroad. It is suggested that such 
incentives should be in the form of special grants or tax exemptions, or ethical awards such as 
“mobile excellence labels”. 

Businesses  themselves  see  costs,  lack  of  information  and  administrative  effort  as  the  main 
barriers  against  a  stronger  engagement  of  the  business  world  for  learning  mobility.  The 
procedures  in  programmes  such  as  Leonardo  da  Vinci  should  be  simplified  in  order  to 
increase the number of SMEs taking part in it.  

5.13 Virtual Mobility 

How  can  we  best  make  use  of  ICTs  to  provide  valuable  virtual  mobility 
opportunities to enrich the physical mobility? 

There is a clear message that virtual mobility should accompany physical mobility rather than 
replace it. Virtual mobility and ICTs play an important role in strengthening the support for 
learners  when  it  comes  to  preparing  them  for  the  physical  mobility  phase  as  well  as 
maintaining  follow-up  communication  and  networking  after  the  learner’s  return.  To  make 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
virtual  mobility  and  ICTs  a  valuable  source  of  preparation,  there  should  be  electronic 
guidance and counsellor services and teachers and trainers should undergo regular training to 
ensure  an  adequate  provision  of  such  services.  In  addition,  online  learning  communities 
between  teachers  and  learners  should  be  established  to  support  those  willing  to  go  abroad 
through peer learning. ICTs should also offer online language courses to learners prior to the 
stage of mobility.  

Several  respondents  alerted  to  the  need  to  introduce  or  significantly  improve  the  ICT 
infrastructure at schools before aiming at using it for the purpose of promoting mobility. 

5.14 eTwinning 

Can  the  eTwinning  approach  be  used  in  other  learning  sectors  e.g.  voluntary 
service, vocational sector? 

The  eTwinning  approach  is  embraced  by  all  types  of  respondents.  They  underlined  that  it 
should be extended to all forms of formal and non-formal learning, in particular the vocational 
and  voluntary  sector.  eTwinning  is  seen  as  a  very  good  way  to  develop  partnerships  with 
educational  institutions,  to  exchange  experiences  and  good  practice  and  to  advance 
internationalisation  without  physically  moving  from  one  country  to  another.  eTwinning  can 
lead  to  the  dissolution  of  barriers  for  students  with  special  educational  needs  and  special 
conditions and thereby involve a wider range of individuals in virtual mobility. 

The  eTwinning  approach  may  be  utilised  with  success  in  other  learning  areas  such  as 
voluntary service, higher education, and VET. 

5.15 Engaging the ‘Multipliers’ 

Should  mobility  opportunities  for  "multipliers"  (teachers,  trainers,  youth  workers, 
etc.) be given additional support and prominence in European programmes? 

What do you see as the main obstacles to a stronger engagement of teachers and 
trainers in promoting mobility? 

Most  respondents  clearly  indicated  that  mobility  opportunities  for  ‘multipliers’  should  be 
given  additional  support  and  prominence  in  European  programmes.  ‘Multipliers’  such  as 
teachers, trainers and students who previously participated in a mobility stage can be a great 
source of inspiration for their students or peers and helps to promote young people’s mobility 
in Europe.  

To  provide  more  mobility  opportunities  for  multipliers,  teacher/trainer  courses  should  be 
modernised  to  include  a  mandatory  period  of  mobility.  Employers  in  education  should 
accommodate 
that  additional 
workload  is  avoided  and  should  provide  incentives  and  recognition  to  staff  with  particular 
commitment to mobility. 

teachers/trainers’  professional  mobility 

involvement  so 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
It was also suggested that more accurate statistical information about the experience of staff in 
mobility should be compiled, and databases gathering the testimonials of students who have 
experienced mobility should be established/ developed. 

The  importance  of  the  Grundtvig  mobility  programmes  which  also  enable  adult  education 
staff (also teachers and trainers) to be mobile was underlined. 

The  main  obstacles  associated  with  engagement  of  teachers  and  trainers  in  promoting 
mobility include: 

•  Little  recognition  of  staff  commitment  by  employers.  Though  mobility  is 
considered  to  enrich  a  teachers’  career  and  experience,  the  benefits  for  career 
development are uncertain. 

•  Lack  of  time  for  staff  to  commit  to  mobility  and  schedule  mobility  into  the 

curriculum. 

•  Staff lacks personal mobility experience and language skills.  

•  Budgetary constraints to support mobility opportunities for staff were highlighted. 
It  was  suggested  the  CEDEFOP  Study  Visits  where  important  opportunities  for 
staff working in mobility. 

•  Difficulties faced by staff when balancing mobility experiences with family life.  

•  Difficulties related to staff substitution.  

5.16 Mobility Targets 

Do  you  consider  targets  a  useful  tool  in  defining  a  mobility  strategy  and  if  so,  at 
what level (European, national, institutional, sectoral, etc.)?  

Nearly  all  respondents  consider  targets  a  useful  tool  in  defining  a  mobility  strategy,  though 
preferences  regarding  the  most  appropriate  level  for  targets  varied.  Many  considered  that 
targets should be set at European and national levels, while others felt they should be set at an 
institutional level.  

There is a general view that targets would help to ensure coherence and efficiency. However, 
there is a concern that quantitative targets may negatively affect quality. There was a strong 
view that mobility targets should be realistic, supported by adequate financial tools, and not 
primarily focused on quantitative aspects at the expense of qualitative aspects. 

Those less in favour of target setting at level felt that targets are a very blunt instrument and 
are only of value if resources are in place to achieve them. 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
Annex 1: Examples of Good Practice  

Information and Guidance  

In  Denmark,  a  website  provides  useful  information  for  young  people  who  are  interested  in  study  visits, 
voluntary work, practical training and employment after completing their education: 

www.udiverden.dk 

An example of good practice in making use of young people's experience of mobility can be found in Finland: 

http://www.maailmalle.net/Resource.phx/maailmalle/mainpage/mainpage.htx.  

In the Netherlands, the ‘orange carpet award’ was first introduced in 2009 for higher education institutions who 
offer elaborate support to foreign learners:  

http://www.nuffic.eu/home/news-events/newsletters/education-promotion-e-
newsletter/2010/march/news/general/delft-university-of-technology-wins-orange-carpet-award  

In  Germany,  an  electronic  information  system  containing  information  on  mobility  will  be  implemented  in 
university restaurants and cafeterias: 

http://www.campustv-b2b.info/ 

Promotion and Motivation 

In France, European Cartoon Animation supported by Youth in Action motivates young people at early stages 
for mobility: http://www.asso-eca.org/ 

The White Paper on Internationalisation of Education in Norway offers a platform for the further development 
of internationalisation of education in Norway: 

http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/KD/Vedlegg/Internasjonalt/Internationalisation_14_2008_2009.pdf.  

Similarly, Finland’s strategy for Internationalisation of its higher education recommends that higher education 
institutions incorporate a module supporting internationalisation into degree programmes:  

http://www.minedu.fi/export/sites/default/OPM/Julkaisut/2009/liitteet/opm23.pdf 

In France, a video was created by Onisep and Centre-info about apprenticeship and mobility:  

http://www.onisep.fr/depart/camera.html 

In  Germany,  a  website  provides  a peer-learning  platform  for  VET  students  to  review  student web  blogs  on 
placements undertaken throughout Europe: 

www.mob-reg.eu 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
Languages and Culture  

Franco-German  guidelines  for  work  placement/vocational  education  abroad  are  available  to  support  learners, 
also linguistically:  

http://www.plate-forme-franco-allemande.com/  

The Czech-German-Polish website 'Trio linguale' supports the linguistic preparation of youth exchanges:  

http://www.triolinguale.eu 

In  Norway,  the  White  Paper  “Languages  open  doors”  presents  a  general  policy  on  how  to  boost  language 
learning both in a lifelong learning perspective: 

http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/KD/Vedlegg/Grunnskole/Strategiplaner/LanguagesOpenDoors_07web.pdf 

In order to promote inter-cultural skills, the University of Warwick in the UK has developed Global People:  

http://www.globalpeople.org.uk/ 

Legal Issues 

In  Belgium,  an online  database  allows  young  people  to  check  what  they  need  to do  before being  mobile  they 
leave in order to be prepared in legal terms:  

www.kamiel.info  

In January 2008, Malta enacted legislation which aims to provide for the issue of a visa and a residence permit, 
and allows part-time employment to those non EU higher education students who want to stay in Malta to pursue 
their studies for more than one year.  

http://www.foreign.gov.mt/Default.aspx?MDIS=539 
http://www.doi.gov.mt/en/legalnotices/2008/01/LN%2029.pdf 

and 

Portability of Grants and Loans 

Danish students have the option to use their government grant for studying abroad and may also obtain stipends 
to cover tuition fees at educational institutions abroad:  

http://www.su.dk/English/Sider/agency.aspx 

In  Norway,  both  temporarily  mobile  students  and  degree  students  at  Bachelor,  Master  or  doctoral  level  are 
entitled to portable grants and loans from the State Educational Loan Fund:  

http://www.lanekassen.no/Toppmeny/Languages/English/About-the-Norwegian-State-Educational-Loan-Fund-/ 

Mobility to and from the European Union 

The  Scottish  Government  has  signed  a  Memorandum  of  Understanding  with  China  in  2008  that  includes  a 
number  of  commitments  to  promote  mobility,  including  concrete  arrangements  for  the  exchange  of  students. 
Some similar initiatives are underway with India, Canada and the USA. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2008/04/07104858 

The  Cinformi  project  in  the  autonomous  province  of  Trento,  Italy,  supports  third  country  citizens,  including 
students, in administrative procedures:  

www.cinformi.it 

In  Norway,  the  Norwegian  Programme  for  Development,  Research  and  Education  (NUFU)  supports 
independent  academic  cooperation  between  researchers  and  institutions  in  developing  countries  and  their 
partners  in  Norway.  Approximately  36  million  Euros  are  available  for  the  current  programme  period  (2007-
2011).  

http://www.siu.no/en/Programme-overview/The-NUFU-programme 

In the UK, the International Gateway for Gifted Youth (IGGY) aims at gifted and talented 11-19 year olds from 
around  the  world.  Through  IGGY,  Warwick  University  has  sent  undergraduate  and  postgraduate  students  to 
work with these young people at educational programmes delivered internationally. 

http://www.warwick.ac.uk/go/iggy  

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
Quality Assurance 

The  National  Agency  of  the  Youth  in  Action  in  France  organises  preparation  and  evaluation  events  for 
prospective abroad students:  

http://www.injep.fr/Guide-Monter-un-echange-de-jeunes.html 

In  Germany,  the  Gütegemeinschaft  Au  pair  e.V.  project  is  aimed  at  increasing  quality  standards  in  Au-Pair 
programmes:  

www.guetegemeinschaft-aupair.de 

Nuffic in the Netherlands has developed a special tool that universities can use to evaluate the quality of their 
own internationalization activities and policies, called Mapping Internationalization:  

http://www.nuffic.nl/mint.  

Together with European partners, Nuffic is now working on a similar  European tool (Indicators for Mapping 
and Profiling Internationalisation): 

http://www.impi.pl . 

i2i  (internship  to  industry),  a  European  project  coordinated  by  a  school  in  Sweden,  focuses  on  enhancing  the 
quality of internship projects. A webpage has been made to provide manuals and a tool box for parties involved 
in the internship process: coordinators, supervisors and trainees: 

www.internship2industry.eu 

Reaching out to Disadvantaged Groups 

Eurochance provides language courses for blind and visually impaired: 

http://eurochance.brailcom.org/index 

The Franco-Germany Youth Office initiated a programme for single-parent children to promote their education 
abroad:  

http://www.ofaj.org  

The Agency of Youth in Action in France elaborated a strategy to tackle the problems of disadvantaged young 
people. 

http://www.injep.fr/-Inclusion-.html 

In  Scotland,  the  Teachability  Project  (1999  –  2006)  promoted  the  creation  of  an  Accessible  Curriculum  for 
Students  with  Disabilities.  It  has  been  widely  used  by  academic  staff  in  the  UK  and  beyond  to  evaluate  the 
accessibility of course provision for disabled students. 

http://www.teachability.strath.ac.uk 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
Mentoring and Integration  

Buddy  schemes  operate  successfully  in  many  universities  in  the  UK.  Within  the  University  of  Glasgow,  the 
Student  Network  provides  impartial  advice  to  all  students,  including  those  considering  or  participating  in  a 
period of study abroad, on almost any aspect of studying there, both personal and academic.  

http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/studentnetwork/ 

The University of Warwick, UK, runs a 4-day residential Orientation programme for new international students 
at the start of every academic year: 

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/international/offerholders/orientation 

At  the  website  of  the  youth  residences  in  Germany,  Auswärts  Zuhause,  young  people  find  the  support  of 
qualified  contact  persons  who  can  provide  them  with  ongoing  advice  and  help  them  in  their  integration  in 
Germany:  

http://www.auswaerts-zuhause.de/ 

The University of Gothenburg (Sweden) developed a Peer Help Programme that trains students so that they can 
provide active listening, support and spontaneous assistance to other students. The Peer helper core training is 
now scheduled in English once a year in order to open up the programme to international students.  

http://www.utbildning.gu.se/education/studentsupportunit/Peer_Help_Programme/ 

Recognition and Validation 

European Training Services are developing a European Skills Account system which will enable participants 
to record the development of generic employability and language skills. It will be an online portfolio divided into 
several  modules.  As  participants  progresses  through  the mobility  project  they  are  encouraged  to  think  about  a 
particular category of skills and to find ways to demonstrate those skills so that they can be assessed by the host 
organisation. 

http://www.europeantrainingservices.co.uk/en/ 

he Confederation of Skilled Crafts in Germany (ZDH) coordinates the project SME MASTER Plus. With six 
partner  organisations,  it  works  on  the  implementation  of  ECVET  to  support  stays  abroad  during  the  master 
education of specialists and trainees. 

http://sme-master.schnittsteller.de/  

The Project 'Learn and Work Abroad', coordinated by the Chamber of Crafts Muenster (Germany), implements 
ECVET and e-learning structures to optimize and implement joint cross-border vocational education and training 
in crafts and skilled trades: 

http://www.lawa-quality.eu 

Mobilising Actors and Resources 

The International Programme Office for Education and Training (Sweden) offers one-year programmes enabling 
upper  secondary  school  pupils  the  opportunity  to  study  in  France,  Spain  or  Germany/Austria  for  one  year. 
Students are allowed to use their normal student grants for such placements, including housing subsidies. 

http://www.programkontoret.se/sv/Program-Stipendier/Program1/Ettarsprogrammen/ 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
The project MOBIVET-Region, funded by the ESF and the FREREF (a network of European regions) supports 
the mobility of young people in VET:  

http://www.freref.eu/page.php?page=66 

A  network  of  universities  in  the  SaarLorLux  region  promotes  the  exchange  of  professors,  employees  and 
students and has established interregional study programmes, with full recognition of student achievements and 
academic grades: 

http://www.granderegion.net/fr/autres-cooperations-interregionales/f2_charte_universitaire/index.html  

Involving Businesses more strongly  

The  Franco-German  exchange  programme  for  young  people  and  adults  in  vocational  education  allows 
vocational school students of both countries to stay in a training centre or in an enterprise of a partner country for 
three months. 

http://www.dfs-sfa.org  

The Confederation of Employers of Galicia in Spain has signed a collaboration agreement with the University of 
Santiago de Compostela to conduct business practices. It allows foreign Erasmus to simultaneously study at the 
university and carry out work experience in companies and institutions. 

http://www.usc.es/csocial and  

http://www.ceg.es 

Virtual Networking 

To4ka-Treff,  a  German-Russian  youth  portal,  provides  information  and  support  to  young  people  from  both 
countries who want to know more about the language and culture of the other country and would like to visit it:  

http://www.to4ka-treff.de 

ahoj.info, a Czech-German youth portal, offers similar services to young people from Germany and the Czech 
Republic:  

http://www.ahoj.info 

The ‘Acculturation’ pilot project is part of the Dutch national action plan on e-learning which aims to support 
and strengthen incoming international students by providing high-quality online preparation: 

http://www.acculturation.nl/pilots/the-hague-university-app-sc-pilot 

eTwinning 

The  Pizza  business  across  Europe  project  was  the  winner  of  the  2009  international  eTwinning  competition 
among vocational schools in the category of 16 to 19 year-olds. It investigates the sociological aspect and the 
practicability of pizza business across Europe. 

http://pizzacrosseuropetorneo.blogspot.com/  

Engaging the multipliers  

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
In  the  Netherlands  teacher  mobility  in  primary  and  secondary  education  is  supported  by  funding  provided 
through  the  European  Comenius  programme  and  the  Dutch  BIOS  programme  which  allow  more  than  7000 
teachers annually to take part in international exchanges, go on a work placement or study abroad and enrol in 
post graduate courses. 

http://www.nuffic.nl/international-organizations/docs/keyfigures/internationalization-monitor-of-education-in-
the-netherlands-2008.pdf 

The Swedish Government initiated an investment of SEK 20 million in increased teacher mobility for 2010–
2011.  

http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/11862/a/124195 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
Annex 2: Contributions by Organisational Type 

Government  

Ministry of Science and Research et al  

Austria 

Ministère de la Communauté française de Belgique 

Belgium FR 

Ministry of Education, Youth and Science 

Ministry  of  Education  and  Culture  of  the  Republic  of 
Cyprus 

Bulgaria 

Cyprus 

Ministry  of  Education,  Youth  and  Sports  of  the  Czech 
Republic 

Czech Republic 

Parliament of the Czech republic - Senate 

Czech Republic 

Danish Parliament’s Education Committee and European 
Affairs Committee 

Denmark 

Ministry of Education 

Denmark 

Estonian  Ministry  of  Education  and  Research  and  the 
Archimedes Foundation 

Estonia 

Ministry of Education and Culture 

French  Authorities, 
Representation to the EU 

through  France's  Permanent 

BMBF  und  KMK  -  German  Federal  Ministry  of 
Education and Research and the Standing Conference of 
the  Ministers  of  Education  and  Cultural  Affairs  of  the 
German Länder 

Bundesrat (Federal Council) 

Hungarian Ministries' Representatives 

Department of Education and Science 

Irish  Parliament  -  Oireachtas  Joint  Committee  on 
European Affairs 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Germany 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Ireland 

National  Student  Council  -  Ministry  of  Education, 
University and Research 

Italy 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
Ministry  of  Education  and  Science  of  the  Republic  of 
Latvia 

Latvia 

Ministry of Education, Culture, Youth and Sport 

Malta 

Ministry of Education, Culture and Science 

Netherlands 

Norwegian  Ministry  of  Education  and  Research  and  the 
Norwegian  Centre  for  International  Cooperation 
in 
Higher Education (SIU) 

Norway 

Ministry of Education 

Poland 

Ministry of Education, Research and Innovation  

Romania 

Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic 

Slovakia 

Ministry of Education, Andalusia 

Ministry of Education, Spain 

Swedish Parliament 

Scottish Government 

UK Government  

Spain 

Spain 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

Welsh Assembly Government EU office 

United Kingdom 

Regional and local Authority  

IFAPME - Institut wallon de Formation en Alternance et 
des indépendants et Petites et Moyennes Entreprises 

Belgium FR 

Flemish Department of Education and Training 

Belgium NL 

Flemish Youth Council 090922 

Flemish Youth Council 091214 

VLHORA  -  Flemish  Higher  Education  and  Flemish 
Higher Education Board 

Belgium NL 

Belgium NL 

Belgium NL 

VLIR-UOS  -  Flemish  Interuniversity  Board  -  University 
Cooperation for Development 

Belgium NL 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
 
VSKO - Flemish Board of Catholic Education 

Belgium NL 

South Moravian Region 

Czech Republic 

Euroregion Galicia - North Portugal 

organisations 

EU 
networks 

and 

Brittany Region 

Champagne Ardennes - Region 

Limousin Region 

Paris Chamber of Commerce and Industry 

Pays de la Loire Region 

Poitou-Charentes Region 

Regional Council Lorraine 

Regional Council of Auvergne 

Regional Economic Council of Ile de France (1) 

Regional Economic Council of Ile de France (2) 

Regional Economic Council of Ile de France (3) 

Rhone Alpes Region 

France 

France 

France 

France 

France 

France 

France 

France 

France 

France 

France 

France 

Ländliche  Erwachsenenbildung  Thüringen  [Educational 
institution engaged in vocational training] 

Germany 

Leonardo  da  Vinci  Koordinatoren  der  Hessischen 
Hochschulen 

Germany 

Oberrhein Conference, Upper Rhein Region 

Saarland fur Grossregion Saarlorlux 

Germany 

Germany 

ServiceBureau 
Mobility Information Point] 

Jugendinformation 

[Eurodesk  Youth 

Germany 

Unioncamere Calabria [Regional Chamber of Commerce]

Italy 

Buskerud County, Department of Education 

Norway 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
Oppland County Authority 

Department  of  Education  and  sport  -  Region  of 
for 
Malopolska 
Improvement  of 
the 
Employment Office of Cracow 

the  Centre 
teachers  of  Malopolska  and 

in  cooperation  with 

Cambra Oficial de Comerç i Indústria de Terrassa 

Government of Cataluña 

City of Gothenburg 

Stockholm Region European Committee (SEU) 

Swedish  Association  of  Local  Authorities  and  Regions 
(SALAR) 

Vastra Gotaland Region 

Norway 

Poland 

Spain 

Spain 

Sweden 

Sweden 

Sweden 

Sweden 

East of Scotland European Consortium 

United Kingdom 

European Union Bodies 

Committee of the Regions 

European Economic and Social Committee 

EU Body 

EU Body 

European Associations  

UEAPME  -  European  Association  of  Craft,  small  and 
medium-sized Enterprises 

Belgium FR 

Don Bosco International aisbl 

112 Foundation 

Belgium NL 

EU Association 

ACC - Association for Community Colleges 

EU Association 

AEPL - Association Européenne de la Pensée Libre 

EU Association 

AGDF - Aktionsgemeinschaft Dienst für den Frieden 

EU Association 

Assembly of European Regions / Eurodysée 

EU Association 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
 
  
AVSO - Association of Voluntary Service Organisations  EU Association 

BusinessEurope 

CEEMET  -  Council  of  the  European  Employers  of  the 
Metal, Engineering and Technology-based Industries 

EU Association 

EU Association 

CESI  -  European  Confederation  of  Independent  Trade 
Unions 

EU Association 

CEVI  -  Confédération  Européenne  des  Vignerons 
Indépendants 

EU Association 

COIMBRA Group 

EADTU  -  European  Association  for  Distance  Teaching 
Universities 

EU Association 

EU Association 

EAEA  -  European  Association  for  the  Education  of 
Adults 

EU Association 

EARLALL  -  European  Association  of  Regional  and 
Local Authorities for Lifelong Learning 

EU Association 

EEA EFTA States (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) 

EU Association 

EPA - European Parents' Association 

EU Association 

EPSA - European Pharmaceutical Students' Association 

EU Association 

Erasmus Student Network- International 

EU Association 

ETUCE  -  European  Trade  Union  Committee  for 
Education 

EU Association 

EUNEC - the European Network of Education Councils 

EU Association 

Eurochambres 

European Civic Forum 

European Students' Union 

European University Foundation 

European Youth Forum 

EU Association 

EU Association 

EU Association 

EU Association 

EU Association 

JEF Europe - Young European Federalists  

EU Association 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
Merseyside Network for Europe 

EU Association 

NESSIE - Network for Experts in Student Support 

EU Association 

NRW.Europa - An Enterprise Europe Network Partner 

EU Association 

Rural Youth Europe 

EU Association 

YES Forum - Youth and European Social Work Forum 

EU Association 

CPMR  -  Conference  of  Peripheral  Maritime  Regions  of 
Europe 

France 

FREREF - Regions in Action for Lifelong Learning 

France 

ECIU - European Consortium of Innovative Universities  Germany 

Kolpingjugend Europa 

Germany 

AEC - European Association of Conservatoires 

Netherlands 

EUproVET  -  representational  platform  for  European 
VET providers 

Netherlands 

-  Youth  Cross-border  Cooperation 

Yc3 
Communication Project 

and 

Sweden 

DIW - Disability Issues Worldwide 

United Kingdom 

National Association  

Austrian Federal Chamber of Labour 

Fachhochschulstudiengänge Burgenland  

Jugend in Aktion - Austrian Agency 

Austria 

Austria 

Austria 

AEF  -  l’Agence  Francophone  pour  l’éducation  et  la 
Formation tout au long de la Vie  

Belgium FR 

Enterprise Europe Flanders 

JINT  -  Flemish  Coordinating  Agency  for  International 
Youth Work 

Belgium NL 

Belgium NL 

Interkultura - the Intercultural Centre 

Croatia 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
 
Institute of Hospitality Mangement 

Czech Republic 

CIMO - Centre for International Mobility 

International  Working  Group  of  the  Organisers  of 
Apprenticeships 

National Union of University Students in Finland 

SAMOK  -  Union  of  Students  in  Finnish  Universities  of 
Applied Sciences 

Trade Union of Education 

AFPEJA  -  l'Agence  Française  du  Programme  Européen 
Jeunesse en Action  

Finland 

Finland 

Finland 

Finland 

Finland 

France 

APCM  -  l’Assemblée  Permanente  des  Chambres  de 
Métiers et de l’artisanat 

France 

ASF Vivre Sans Frontieres 

Association of French Regions 

France 

France 

CIEP - International Centre for Pedagogical Studies 

France 

CNOUS - Centre National des Oeuvres Universitaires et 
Scolaires  

France 

House  of  Europe  Paris  -  Collective  Response  from  14 
French Associations 

France 

Jeunes Européens-France 

l’ISTP  -  Formation  d’Ingénieurs  sous  Statut  Salarié  de 
l’Ecole Nationale Supérieure Des Mines de Saint Etienne 

Luciole Association 

OVE - Observatory of Student Life 

UNMFREO - l’Union Nationale des Maisons Familiales 
Rurales d’Education et d’Orientation  

AFJ  und  AKSB  -  Arbeitsstelle  für  Jugendseelsorge  der 
deutschen 
der 
Arbeitsgemeinschaft  katholisch-sozialer  Bildungswerke 
in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 

Bischofskonferenz 

und 

France 

France 

France 

France 

France 

Germany 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
AJA - Youth Exchange organisations 

Germany 

Association of German bishops, Catholic office in Berlin  Germany 

Au-Pair Society e.V. 

Germany 

Auswaerts Zuhause - Jugendwohnen mit Zukunft 

Germany 

-  Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft 

BAGF 
der  Freien 
Wohlfahrtspflege  [Federal  Association  of  Voluntary 
Welfare Services] 

Germany 

-  Bundesvereinigung 

der  Deutschen 
BDA/BDI 
Arbeitgeberverbände  /  Bundesverband  der  Deutschen 
Industrie 

Germany 

Catholic Youth Social Work BAG KJS 

DAAD - German Academic Exchange Service 

DASV 
Organisations 

-  Association  of  Archeological  Student 

Germany 

Germany 

Germany 

Deutsches  Studentenwerk  -  Association  of  German 
Student Organizations 

Germany 

EKD - Protestant Church of Germany 

Forum Universities and Churches 

German Bologna experts 

Go.for.europe 

IJAB  -  International  Youth  Service  of  the  Federal 
Republic of Germany 

Germany 

Germany 

Germany 

Germany 

Germany 

IN  VIA  Deutschland  -  Katholischer  Verband  für 
Mädchen- und Frauensozialarbeit  

Germany 

JUGEND für Europa - Youth in Action National Agency 
Germany 

Germany 

Katholische 
Freiwilligendienste 

Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft 

Germany 

VDP - Verband Deutscher Privatschulverbände e. V. 

Germany 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
Ver.di Jugend 

VIJ - Verein für Internationale Jugendarbeit 

Germany 

Germany 

Leargas - Youth in Action National Agency Ireland 

Ireland 

Leargas Youth Work Service 

Ireland 

 ExisT - Volontari Europei [Former Evs Volunteers] 

Confprofessioni  -  Italian  Confederation  of  Liberal 
Professions 

Consiglio Nazionale degli Studenti Universitari 

Intercultura Italy 

Lithuanian Youth Council 

NAPO - Dutch Au Pair Organisation 

NUFFIC  -  Netherlands  Organisation  for  International 
Cooperation in Higher Education 

Italy 

Italy 

Italy 

Italy 

Lithuania 

Netherlands 

Netherlands 

ANSA – Association of Norwegian Students Abroad  

Norway 

YS - Confederation of Vocational Unions 

European Youth Parliament (EYP)- Regional Delegation 
of Azores 

Norway 

Portugal 

Student  Council  of  Higher  Education  of  the  Slovak 
Republic 

Slovakia 

International  Programme  Office  for  Education  and 
Training 

Sweden 

SFS - The Swedish National Union of Students 

Swedish National Council of Adult Education 

British Council 

BUTEX  -  British  Universities  Transatlantic  Exchange 
Association 

Sweden 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

CILT - National Centre for Languages 

United Kingdom 

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
FINE  -  European  Federation  of  Nurse  Educators  UK 
Collaboration 

United Kingdom 

HEURO 
Association 

-  Higher  Education  European  Officers 

United Kingdom 

NASUWT - Teachers' Union 

United Kingdom 

NUS SCOTLAND - National Union of Students Scotland United Kingdom 

Scottish Qualifications Authority 

UK Higher Education Europe Unit 

UK Team of Bologna Experts 

Education institutions (e.g. Universities, VET schools) 

University of Graz 

Haute Ecole de Namur 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

Austria 

Belgium FR 

Ghent University International Relations Office 

Belgium NL 

International Centre Aarhus University 

Unviersity College South 

Tallinn University - Tallinna Ülikool 

TU Dortmund University 

University College Cork 

University of Limerick 

Il Liceo Scientifico Statale di Montecorvino Rovella  

Liceo Classico "Carducci" Nola Napoli 

Liceo Scientifico Statale di Melito 

Liceo Scientifico Statale Filippo Brunelleschi 

L'Istituto "C. A. Dalla Chiesa" di Afragola 

Denmark 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Germany 

Ireland 

Ireland 

Italy 

Italy 

Italy 

Italy 

Italy 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
 
Serrato  Istituto  Tecnico  Industriale  "F.  Giordani"  di 
Napoli 

Italy 

Rotterdam Law Network 

Students from Hogeschool van Amsterdam 

i2i Goteborg Technical College 

Lund University Department of Health Sciences 

University of Gothenburg 

Aston University 

ESOL  Cambridge,  English  for  Speakers  of  Other 
Languages 

Kingston University 

Oxford Brookes University 

Swansea University 

University of Glasgow 

University of Strathclyde 

University of Sussex 

University of Warwick 

Political Groups 

Netherlands 

Netherlands 

Sweden 

Sweden 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

United Kingdom 

ESP  and  SSU  Varmland  -  European  Social  Democratic 
Party and the Swedish Social Democratic Youth League, 
Varmland  

Sweden 

Businesses 

CATT Innovation Management GmbH, Austria 

Austria 

DGB - The Confederation of German Trade Unions 

Germany 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
 
 
DGU - German Social Accident Insurance 

Germany 

DIHK - German Chamber of Industry and Business 

Germany 

ZDH - Central Association of German Crafts 

Germany 

La'Met Education 

Netherlands 

It should be noted that the names of individuals contributing to the Green Paper consultation 
have not been individually named in this report for confidentiality reasons. 

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
 
Annex 3: Response Charts for the Online Questionnaire 

Response statistics for Green Paper on Promoting the Learning Mobility of Young People  

Consultation period: 15 July – 15 December 2009 

2798 responses received.  

Profile of the respondent 

Do you reply as an individual or on behalf of an organisation? 

Individual 

Organisation 

If you answer as an individual please specify 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

2206 

532 

(78.8%)  

(19%)  

(78.8%)  

(19%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

EN 

37 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
Pupil 

Student in higher education 

Trainee/Apprentice 

Teacher 

Trainer 

Reseacher/Scientist 

Policy maker 

Other 

184 

657 

90 

389 

94 

400 

70 

479 

(8.3%)  

(29.8%)  

(4.1%)  

(17.6%)  

(4.3%)  

(18.1%)  

(3.2%)  

(21.7%)  

(6.6%)  

(23.5%)  

(3.2%)  

(13.9%)  

(3.4%)  

(14.3%)  

(2.5%)  

(17.1%)  

If answering on behalf on an organisation please specify 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

Public organisation 

Non-govermental organisation (NGO) 

Business/Enterprise (micro, small, medium or large) 

Association 

259 

71 

45 

80 

EN 

(9.3%)  

(2.5%)  

(1.6%)  

(2.9%)  

(48.7%)  

(13.3%)  

(8.5%)  

(15%)  

38 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
National authority 

Regional/Local authority 

Other 

Gender 

Female  

Male 

Your age category 

Less than 35 years 

Between 35 and 44 years 

Between 45 and 54 years 

Between 55 and 64 years 

EN 

12 

36 

71 

(2.3%)  

(6.8%)  

(13.3%)  

(0.4%)  

(1.3%)  

(2.5%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1719 

986 

(61.4%)  

(35.2%)  

(61.4%)  

(35.2%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1758 

386 

367 

143 

(62.8%)  

(13.8%)  

(13.1%)  

(5.1%)  

(62.8%)  

(13.8%)  

(13.1%)  

(5.1%)  

39 

EN 

 
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
65 years and over 

25 

(0.9%)  

(0.9%)  

What is your country of residence? 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

BE Belgium 

BG Bulgaria 

CZ Czech Republic 

DK Denmark 

DE Germany 

EE Estonia 

GR Greece 

ES Spain 

FR France 

EN 

118 

35 

63 

15 

211 

27 

71 

218 

279 

(4.2%)  

(1.3%)  

(2.3%)  

(0.5%)  

(7.5%)  

(1%)  

(2.5%)  

(7.8%)  

(10%)  

(4.2%)  

(1.3%)  

(2.3%)  

(0.5%)  

(7.5%)  

(1%)  

(2.5%)  

(7.8%)  

(10%)  

40 

EN 

 
  
  
 
 
  
  
  
  
IE Ireland 

IT Italy 

CY Cyprus 

LV Latvia 

LT Lithuania 

LU Luxembourg 

HU Hungary 

MT Malta 

NL Netherlands 

AT Austria 

PL Poland 

PT Portugal 

RO Romania 

SI Slovenia 

SK Slovak Republic 

FI Finland 

EN 

21 

545 

29 

28 

26 

10 

29 

8 

36 

42 

81 

45 

164 

77 

15 

34 

(0.8%)  

(19.5%)  

(0.8%)  

(19.5%)  

(1%)  

(1%)  

(0.9%)  

(0.4%)  

(1%)  

(0.3%)  

(1.3%)  

(1.5%)  

(2.9%)  

(1.6%)  

(5.9%)  

(2.8%)  

(0.5%)  

(1.2%)  

(1%)  

(1%)  

(0.9%)  

(0.4%)  

(1%)  

(0.3%)  

(1.3%)  

(1.5%)  

(2.9%)  

(1.6%)  

(5.9%)  

(2.8%)  

(0.5%)  

(1.2%)  

41 

EN 

 
  
SE Sweden 

UK United Kingdom 

IS Iceland 

LI Liechtenstein 

NO Norway 

TR Turkey 

Other 

30 

149 

1 

1 

32 

164 

91 

(1.1%)  

(5.3%)  

(0%)  

(0%)  

(1.1%)  

(5.9%)  

(3.3%)  

(1.1%)  

(5.3%)  

(0%)  

(0%)  

(1.1%)  

(5.9%)  

(3.3%)  

I. PREPARATION FOR A PERIOD OF LEARNING MOBILITY 

How  important  are  the  following  issues  in  order  to 
increase learning mobility? 

Please note that 1 = Very important and 5 = Not important 

Information 

1 

2 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1654 

502 

(59.1%)  

(17.9%)  

(59.1%)  

(17.9%)  

42 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
  
3 

4 

5 

Motivation 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Funding 

1 

EN 

158 

122 

286 

(5.6%)  

(4.4%)  

(5.6%)  

(4.4%)  

(10.2%)  

(10.2%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1557 

550 

212 

148 

248 

(55.6%)  

(19.7%)  

(7.6%)  

(5.3%)  

(8.9%)  

(55.6%)  

(19.7%)  

(7.6%)  

(5.3%)  

(8.9%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1493 

(53.4%)  

(53.4%)  

43 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
2 

3 

4 

5 

Portability of grants and loans 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

620 

206 

148 

254 

(22.2%)  

(22.2%)  

(7.4%)  

(5.3%)  

(9.1%)  

(7.4%)  

(5.3%)  

(9.1%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

828 

834 

535 

225 

170 

(29.6%)  

(29.8%)  

(19.1%)  

(8%)  

(6.1%)  

(29.6%)  

(29.8%)  

(19.1%)  

(8%)  

(6.1%)  

Visa procedures (international mobility) 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

EN 

44 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

757 

749 

614 

279 

214 

(27.1%)  

(26.8%)  

(21.9%)  

(10%)  

(7.6%)  

(27.1%)  

(26.8%)  

(21.9%)  

(10%)  

(7.6%)  

Administrative issues (insurance, social security etc.) 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Linguistic preparation 

EN 

749 

880 

606 

266 

165 

(26.8%)  

(31.5%)  

(21.7%)  

(9.5%)  

(5.9%)  

(26.8%)  

(31.5%)  

(21.7%)  

(9.5%)  

(5.9%)  

45 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

787 

864 

630 

282 

143 

(28.1%)  

(30.9%)  

(22.5%)  

(10.1%)  

(5.1%)  

(28.1%)  

(30.9%)  

(22.5%)  

(10.1%)  

(5.1%)  

Reception structures (housing etc.) 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

EN 

821 

907 

563 

279 

135 

(29.3%)  

(32.4%)  

(20.1%)  

(10%)  

(4.8%)  

(29.3%)  

(32.4%)  

(20.1%)  

(10%)  

(4.8%)  

46 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
Integration during the stay abroad 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Recognition and validation after return 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

929 

907 

432 

267 

146 

(33.2%)  

(32.4%)  

(15.4%)  

(9.5%)  

(5.2%)  

(33.2%)  

(32.4%)  

(15.4%)  

(9.5%)  

(5.2%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1267 

670 

308 

203 

233 

(45.3%)  

(23.9%)  

(11%)  

(7.3%)  

(8.3%)  

(45.3%)  

(23.9%)  

(11%)  

(7.3%)  

(8.3%)  

47 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Exchange of existing good practices through ICT 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Other 

1 

2 

3 

4 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

636 

821 

605 

304 

163 

(22.7%)  

(29.3%)  

(21.6%)  

(10.9%)  

(5.8%)  

(22.7%)  

(29.3%)  

(21.6%)  

(10.9%)  

(5.8%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

217 

86 

128 

54 

(7.8%)  

(3.1%)  

(4.6%)  

(1.9%)  

(7.8%)  

(3.1%)  

(4.6%)  

(1.9%)  

48 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
5 

135 

(4.8%)  

(4.8%)  

There are several European internet portals that provide 
existing  mobility 
information  and  guidance  on 
opportunities  and  related  issues.  How  useful  are  they  to 
you? 

Portal on Learning Opportunities throughout the European Space PLOTEUS: http://ec.europa.eu/ploteus/ 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

Youth portal: http://europa.eu/youth/ 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

350 

674 

123 

1239 

(12.5%)  

(24.1%)  

(4.4%)  

(44.3%)  

(12.5%)  

(24.1%)  

(4.4%)  

(44.3%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

602 

819 

(21.5%)  

(29.3%)  

(21.5%)  

(29.3%)  

49 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

116 

864 

(4.1%)  

(30.9%)  

(4.1%)  

(30.9%)  

Study in Europe: http://www.study-in-europe.org/ 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

478 

694 

118 

1074 

(17.1%)  

(24.8%)  

(4.2%)  

(38.4%)  

(17.1%)  

(24.8%)  

(4.2%)  

(38.4%)  

Euraxess - Researchers in motion: http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

253 

562 

155 

(9%)  

(20.1%)  

(5.5%)  

(9%)  

(20.1%)  

(5.5%)  

50 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Don't know the portal 

1319 

(47.1%)  

(47.1%)  

Your Europe: http://ec.europa.eu/youreurope/ 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

Euroguidance: http://www.euroguidance.net/ 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

308 

585 

144 

1243 

(11%)  

(20.9%)  

(5.1%)  

(44.4%)  

(11%)  

(20.9%)  

(5.1%)  

(44.4%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

260 

540 

154 

1290 

(9.3%)  

(19.3%)  

(5.5%)  

(46.1%)  

(9.3%)  

(19.3%)  

(5.5%)  

(46.1%)  

51 

EN 

 
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Eurodesk: http://www.eurodesk.eu/edesk/ 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

EURES - European Job Mobility Portal: eures.europa.eu/ 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

487 

634 

143 

1023 

(17.4%)  

(22.7%)  

(5.1%)  

(36.6%)  

(17.4%)  

(22.7%)  

(5.1%)  

(36.6%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

514 

654 

165 

966 

(18.4%)  

(23.4%)  

(5.9%)  

(34.5%)  

(18.4%)  

(23.4%)  

(5.9%)  

(34.5%)  

52 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs: http://www.erasmus-entrepreneurs.eu 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

539 

605 

181 

1005 

(19.3%)  

(21.6%)  

(6.5%)  

(35.9%)  

(19.3%)  

(21.6%)  

(6.5%)  

(35.9%)  

EU support for training and mobility for SMEs:  

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/entrepreneurship/craft/craft-skills_training/skills_training_main_en.htm 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

326 

455 

139 

1309 

(11.7%)  

(16.3%)  

(5%)  

(11.7%)  

(16.3%)  

(5%)  

(46.8%)  

(46.8%)  

EN 

53 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Other 

Very useful 

Fairly useful 

Not useful 

Don't know the portal 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

150 

76 

40 

320 

(5.4%)  

(2.7%)  

(1.4%)  

(5.4%)  

(2.7%)  

(1.4%)  

(11.4%)  

(11.4%)  

Which  of  the  following  benefits  of  learning  mobility  do 
you consider most important? 

Please note that 1 = most important and 5 = least important 

Added knowledge and/or skills in the area of specialisation 

1 

2 

3 

4 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1293 

695 

340 

184 

(46.2%)  

(24.8%)  

(12.2%)  

(6.6%)  

(46.2%)  

(24.8%)  

(12.2%)  

(6.6%)  

54 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
5 

168 

(6%)  

(6%)  

Foreign language skills 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Personal development 

1 

2 

3 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1362 

733 

233 

141 

225 

(48.7%)  

(26.2%)  

(8.3%)  

(5%)  

(8%)  

(48.7%)  

(26.2%)  

(8.3%)  

(5%)  

(8%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1716 

507 

120 

(61.3%)  

(18.1%)  

(4.3%)  

(61.3%)  

(18.1%)  

(4.3%)  

55 

EN 

 
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
4 

5 

101 

247 

(3.6%)  

(8.8%)  

(3.6%)  

(8.8%)  

Strengthened European identity 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Intercultural skills 

1 

2 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

764 

808 

577 

284 

221 

(27.3%)  

(28.9%)  

(20.6%)  

(10.2%)  

(7.9%)  

(27.3%)  

(28.9%)  

(20.6%)  

(10.2%)  

(7.9%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1166 

817 

(41.7%)  

(29.2%)  

(41.7%)  

(29.2%)  

56 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
3 

4 

5 

308 

184 

192 

(11%)  

(6.6%)  

(6.9%)  

(11%)  

(6.6%)  

(6.9%)  

Enhanced future employability 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Other 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1073 

817 

374 

198 

205 

(38.3%)  

(29.2%)  

(13.4%)  

(7.1%)  

(7.3%)  

(38.3%)  

(29.2%)  

(13.4%)  

(7.1%)  

(7.3%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

EN 

57 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

129 

46 

34 

14 

61 

(4.6%)  

(1.6%)  

(1.2%)  

(0.5%)  

(2.2%)  

(4.6%)  

(1.6%)  

(1.2%)  

(0.5%)  

(2.2%)  

Do you think European, national and regional initiatives and programmes should focus even more strongly on providing mobility 
support to disadvantaged groups? 

Yes 

No 

I don't know 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1922 

298 

476 

(68.7%)  

(10.7%)  

(17%)  

(68.7%)  

(10.7%)  

(17%)  

II. THE STAY ABROAD AND FOLLOW-UP 

EN 

58 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
"The  lack  of  full  and  easy  validation  and  recognition  of  a  learning  or  training  period  abroad  is  still  a  significant  obstacle  to 
mobility" - do you agree with this statement? 

Strongly 

Somewhat 

Not at all 

I don't know 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1060 

1265 

288 

104 

(37.9%)  

(45.2%)  

(10.3%)  

(3.7%)  

(37.9%)  

(45.2%)  

(10.3%)  

(3.7%)  

III. A NEW PARTNERSHIP FOR MOBILITY 

Many actors can play a role in promoting the learning 
mobiiity of young people. How 
important do you consider each actor's role? 

Please note that 1 = Very important and 5 = Not important. 

European Union and its institutions 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

EN 

59 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

National governments 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Regional governments and authorities 

EN 

1578 

516 

232 

131 

213 

(56.4%)  

(18.4%)  

(8.3%)  

(4.7%)  

(7.6%)  

(56.4%)  

(18.4%)  

(8.3%)  

(4.7%)  

(7.6%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1252 

705 

314 

192 

173 

(44.7%)  

(25.2%)  

(11.2%)  

(6.9%)  

(6.2%)  

(44.7%)  

(25.2%)  

(11.2%)  

(6.9%)  

(6.2%)  

60 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Local authorities 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

888 

766 

527 

263 

169 

(31.7%)  

(27.4%)  

(18.8%)  

(9.4%)  

(6%)  

(31.7%)  

(27.4%)  

(18.8%)  

(9.4%)  

(6%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

755 

688 

623 

307 

207 

(27%)  

(24.6%)  

(22.3%)  

(11%)  

(7.4%)  

(27%)  

(24.6%)  

(22.3%)  

(11%)  

(7.4%)  

61 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Education and training institutions 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Businesses 

1 

2 

3 

4 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1688 

433 

186 

116 

222 

(60.3%)  

(15.5%)  

(6.6%)  

(4.1%)  

(7.9%)  

(60.3%)  

(15.5%)  

(6.6%)  

(4.1%)  

(7.9%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

644 

810 

596 

321 

(23%)  

(28.9%)  

(21.3%)  

(11.5%)  

(23%)  

(28.9%)  

(21.3%)  

(11.5%)  

62 

EN 

 
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
5 

190 

(6.8%)  

(6.8%)  

Professional associations and networks 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Other 

1 

2 

3 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

806 

766 

549 

251 

200 

(28.8%)  

(27.4%)  

(19.6%)  

(9%)  

(7.1%)  

(28.8%)  

(27.4%)  

(19.6%)  

(9%)  

(7.1%)  

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

167 

43 

49 

(6%)  

(1.5%)  

(1.8%)  

(6%)  

(1.5%)  

(1.8%)  

63 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
4 

5 

17 

54 

(0.6%)  

(1.9%)  

(0.6%)  

(1.9%)  

"Mobility opportunities for "multipliers" (teachers, trainers, youth workers, etc.) ought to be given additional support and prominence 
in European programmes" - do you agree with this statement? 

Strongly 

Somewhat 

Not at all 

I don't know 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1682 

813 

87 

126 

(60.1%)  

(29.1%)  

(3.1%)  

(4.5%)  

(60.1%)  

(29.1%)  

(3.1%)  

(4.5%)  

Do you consider mobility targets ("x percent of mobile apprentices by 2020", etc.) a useful tool in defining a mobility strategy? 

Yes 

No 

EN 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

1378 

677 

(49.2%)  

(24.2%)  

(49.2%)  

(24.2%)  

64 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
I don't know 

642 

(22.9%)  

(22.9%)  

If yes, at what level would targets be most useful? 

Number  of  requested 
records 

% Requested records  %  of 
records 

total number 

European level 

National level 

Sectoral level (schools, higher education, etc.) 

Institutional level (school, company, etc.) 

Other 

514 

291 

336 

201 

8 

(37.3%)  

(21.1%)  

(24.4%)  

(14.6%)  

(0.6%)  

(18.4%)  

(10.4%)  

(12%)  

(7.2%)  

(0.3%)  

EN 

65 

EN