over 1% of those young people who wish to participate in a mobility-based voluntary action (such as the European Voluntary Service, for example). (“Expert groups say: Make periods of learning abroad a rule, rather than the exception”, 2008) The European Commission puts the enhancement of social inclusion and reducing social and gender inequalities to the forefront. Mainstreaming has been central ever since the start of the SOCRATES Programme (Bertran, Pijl & Watkins, 2000). The enhancement of participation for persons with a disability is an important element within this principle. Currently, in the Lifelong Learning Programme – the successor of SOCRATES since 2007 – working with underrepresented and disadvantaged groups is being explored through the European inclusion initiative. Within this initiative, 13 European countries are working together to make the Lifelong Learning Programme more accessible (“About Inclusion”, 2011). Figures from the European Commission regarding international mobility and students with a disability show that “during the academic year 2006/2007 over 140 students with disabilities participated in Erasmus This represents 0.09% of all Erasmus students. Although an increase compared to the previous years has been observed, the number is still exceptionally low.” (“Exchange Ability”, n.d.). 257 students with a disability received an additional grant for taking part in the Erasmus Programme in 2009-2010. This only represents 0.12% of all the students taking part (European Commission, 2012b). When comparing the figures of 2009-2010 with of 2006-2007, we can see a small increase. Still, figures show that students with a disability are underrepresented in international mobility, despite the objective of reducing social inequalities and despite the efforts regarding to international mobility in higher education. Besides the figures, is a lack of research and knowledge, particularly in Europe, in relation to their international experiences. Overall, the voice of students with a disability is missing. An on information resources regarding international mobility and students with a disability can be on the LINK website.
likely to have an international experience during their studies. When we turn this reasoning around, we could conclude that students with a lower socio-economic background are less likely to go abroad and are thus being disadvantaged. The figures on participation of students with a disability in international exchange show that they are being underrepresented as well (European Commission, 2012b). Linking this to the statement of King (2010), it could mean that students with a disability and a low socio-economic background are even more disadvantaged. Alongside to this factor, González, Mesanza and Mariel (2010) say that the level of education in a country determines the degree in which international exchanges are being promoted. When a country has a low level of education, students are being less stimulated to go abroad. Furthermore, we found literature on the choice of country for going abroad. King (2010) referred to the influence of quality, cost of education and colonial links among others. González, Mesanza and Mariel (2010) equally point out that cost of living in the country of destination and the distance from home are relevant factors. Our participants referred to the quality of education as influential. However, the decision on which country to go wasn’t dealt with explicitly in our research. Differences in motivation to go international? Although we a lot of similarities in the reasons to go with what you would generally expect from students wanting to go abroad, we found differences as well. some of our participants took into account a number of factors in relation to their disability. Some mentioned that they chose to go to a country with a more positive attitude towards persons with a disability and with a higher degree of accessibility. Here they referred to northern countries. Nevertheless, one participant told to be pleasantly surprised by the South of France. Secondly, one participant chose to go to Spain because of the positive effect of the warm climate and low stress on her chronic illness. Thirdly, some of our participants highlighted the fact that they wanted to prove that they could go and that they felt as if they needed a significant amount of motivation to do it. This assumption was something that we focussed on: Why do our participants feel they need to be extra motivated and need to prove that they can go abroad?