EU-China Student and Academic Staff Mobility: Present Situation and Future Developments

Abstract

Abstract

The objective of this study was to provide comprehensive information about student and academic staff mobility between the European Union (EU) and China as well as the main strategies and policies in place to promote mobility. Based on quantitative and qualitative data provided by national authorities and various stakeholders consulted throughout the research process, the study aimed at taking stock of the situation and identifying trends regarding EU-China learning mobility over the past ten years. It also aimed at drawing recommendations to improve current and future mobility actions between the two regions.

Introduction

In the last ten years cooperation between the European Union (EU) and China has significantly developed. In 2003, an EU-China comprehensive strategic partnership was launched, followed in October 2006 by a Communication entitled ‘EU-China: Closer Partners, Growing Responsibilities’ spelling out a new vision for cooperation with China based increasingly on mutual gains. 2 In 2011 there were over 24 sectoral dialogues and agreements ranging from environmental protection to industrial policy to education and culture. Sectoral dialogues constitute an effective tool for further widening and deepening EU relations with China, for exploring new areas of common interest, and exchanging know-how. 3

As a result of policy dialogues in the fields of education, training, culture and multilingualism, the promotion of learning mobility was identified as one of the top priorities by both China and the European Commission (EC). It was also recognised that comprehensive information about mobility flows, trends and obstacles was needed in order to further promote mobility. In 2010, the EC (Directorate-General Education and Culture) and the Chinese Ministry of Education (MoE) agreed to jointly conduct a study on EU-China academic exchanges and students and academic staff mobility.

The key objective of the study was therefore to provide a clear picture of the situation in terms of learning mobility between China and the EU, taking into account quantitative and qualitative aspects. Learning mobility was defined as transnational mobility for the purpose of acquiring new skills, excluding of labour mobility. 4

The study measured the state and progression of EU-China student and academic staff mobility in the past ten years, highlighting key trends and obstacles to be removed in order to improve current and future mobility actions between the two regions. It also formulated recommendations based on policy approaches that have proven successful to develop student and staff mobility between the two regions.

The study was jointly carried out by two research teams, one based in Renmin University of China and one led by GHK Consulting (Brussels). Both teams followed a similar methodological approach consisting of a combination of desk research and stakeholder consultation at EU and national level, to collect the following data:

• Statistical data on learning mobility between the EU and China (incoming and outgoing mobility) provided by national authorities. 5 Student mobility at BA, Master and PhD level was the main focus of the study. Data on academic staff was collected whenever possible.

• Information on the main policies and strategies in place at EU and national level to promote learning mobility and cooperation between the EU and China.

• Qualitative data on learning mobility (e.g. main incentives and obstacles) through direct consultation with students, academic staff and staff from higher education institution (HEI) international cooperation departments. 6

The purpose of this paper is to provide a broad overview of the main findings emerging from this research.

Learning Mobility Flows between the EU and China Student Mobility

Student ‘mobility’ is not measured in a consistent way across the 27 EU Member States. In most cases official data report on Chinese students using citizenship as a measure of mobility, whilst only twelve Member States provided data on ‘genuine’ mobility (using criteria such as prior residence). 7 Temporary mobility periods (less than one year) were often excluded from the data collected.

The data provided by the national Ministries in the EU suggest there were between 118,700 and 119,638 Chinese students studying in the EU in 2010—about six times more than in 2000. This inflow was higher than inflows received by other large receiving countries such as Australia, Canada, Korea and New Zealand, although these countries have also seen higher growth in Chinese student numbers since the beginning of the decade. 8 Whilst the United States received a total number of 110,246 Chinese students in 2008, 9 US statistics indicate that the number of students from China further increased to reach 127,628 in 2010. 10

Based on the available data in each Member State, the highest number of Chinese students were found in the UK (40% of total), France (23%) and Germany (20%), followed by the Netherlands (4%), Italy, Ireland, Sweden (3% respectively), Finland, Cyprus and Denmark (between 1% and 2%). In terms of flow size, according to data from the MoE in China, more than 42,600 Chinese students travelled from China to study in the EU in 2008. The UK accounted for 65% of all entrants from China in the EU in 2008, followed by France (10%) and Germany (9%).

The number of Chinese students studying in the EU as a whole is increasing, particularly in Finland, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden. However growth is slowing down in some countries including the UK, Ireland, Belgium (NL), and declines were also reported in Germany and Denmark. The main reasons for dropping numbers involve stricter regulations/control, stronger competition from emerging ‘receiving’ countries outside the EU, rising tuition fees and changes in data collection methods. 11

The fields of study attracting the highest shares of Chinese students, which are ranked either first or second, are economics/business, science and technology/engineering. The overall percentage of female Chinese students in the EU is slightly higher than male students at 53% female compared to 47% male, which reflects the higher ratio of female students in tertiary education in China. The average age of incoming Chinese students—between 21 and 23 years old—reflects the predominant level at which Chinese students are studying. Generally, most Chinese students study of at the undergraduate level while in most countries less than 10% study at doctoral (PhD) level.

Where available, data indicate that Chinese students in the EU are more likely to be enrolled in full degree programmes. 12 For instance, 89% of Chinese students in Denmark and 90% of Chinese students in Finland were full degree students in 2010.

According to national authorities in France, Germany and the UK, about 80% of Chinese students are free movers (not coming under a mobility programme/agreement) and between 80% and 90% are self-funded. In Germany, around half of free-movers would come from 21-1 Universities. 13 Those studying for short periods in the EU (‘credit’ mobility) are often funded through scholarships in the host country. A small proportion of students coming to the EU in 2008 (6%) were supported by the China Scholarship Council. 14

An increasing number of Chinese students would return to their home country after graduation: the number of returnees from overseas or ‘Haigui’ 15 was 42,000 in 2006 according to the MoE. 16 However, job prospects for returnees are getting scarcer as employers tend to favour work experience over international degrees and because domestic graduates are catching up with Haigui in the competition for jobs. This might impact outward mobility to Europe and return trends in the coming years.

Regarding mobility from the EU to China, according to data collected by the Chinese MoE, a total of 22,668 EU students were studying in China in 2009. The country sending the highest number of students to China is France, with nearly 5,500 degree students studying in China, followed by Germany and the UK in 2009. Overall, the figure of EU students to China has nearly doubled in the past five years, increasing from 11,700 to 22,600 from 2005 to 2009. 17

In contrast to incoming Chinese students in the EU who are generally full-degree students, EU students studying in China are mostly non-degree students (90%) participating in short-term mobility programmes. They generally study in the fields of economics/business and languages. However there is a steady increase in the number of degree students.

The outbound-inbound ratio (number of incoming Chinese students for every European student outgoing to China) is 1:5 for the EU as a whole. The flows of students between the two regions strongly differ, not only in terms of volumes but also the type of mobility. Net ‘importers’ of Chinese students include the UK and Ireland which receive over 14 Chinese students for every outgoing student to China. However, when comparing inbound and outbound flows, it is important to bear in mind that the number of Chinese students enrolled in tertiary education surpasses the number of European students and represents currently 1.6 times the number of European students in higher education (UNESCO Institute for Statistics).

Mobility of Academic Staff

Based on the figures available on the mobility of academic staff, which is not collected on a systematic basis by European Member States, there were about 6,700 academic staff of Chinese nationality working in the EU during the period 2008 to 2009. 18 There were mainly based in German and UK HEIs. According to the Chinese MoE, the general characteristics of academic staff going to Europe are as follows: they are generally 30-40 years old, predominantly male and focused on engineering. Most of them come from institutions located in Beijing or Shanghai. Their number is steadily increasing, and they mostly travel to Europe for short-term periods.

The collection of data relating to the numbers of academic staff from the EU going to China is even scarcer. Based on available data in five countries on academic staff travelling to China under mobility schemes, there were only 156 EU academics in China in 2008. However, with the growing number of cooperation programmes and the improving competitiveness of Chinese research and development at elite universities it is likely that the number of academic researchers going to China will increase in the future.

Key Trends and Future Mobility Flows

Mobility flows are influenced by a variety of factors of a complex, multidimensional nature. Based on elements emerging from the research findings as well as the body of existing studies and forecasts on international mobility flows, a broad picture of future student mobility flows between the EU and China can be drawn.

One of the strongest incentives for outbound mobility from China so far has been the limited capacity of Chinese universities, which is the result of the massification of tertiary education in China. The number of tertiary students has been multiplied by four, growing from 7 million in 2000 to 27 million in 2008. 19 However the declining absolute number of young Chinese people of student age means that the demand for tertiary education is expected to decline from 2013. 20 This will have an impact on the total pool of prospective students seeking education overseas. The increasing capacity in higher education in China is also likely to reduce the demand for education abroad in the long term, although by 2020 Chinese universities would still not be able to meet domestic demand. The willingness to study abroad among students should remain strong, supported by the MoE internationalization strategy and the high value placed on overseas education. More and more families can also afford to pay for education abroad. This will sustain important outward flows.

However, high expectations of returning graduates in terms of job prospects are increasingly challenged by reality. So far, dimmer employment prospects for returning graduates have not reduced the flow of Chinese students wanting to study abroad. However, students are likely to think more carefully about where and what they will study abroad to ensure that it will benefit their career prospects.

Although ‘push’ factors are crucial to explain why students seek education abroad, mobility is also governed by ‘pull factors’ that include quality (or students’ perceptions of quality), cultural ties, language issues, or the presence of a Diaspora. 21 Choices to study abroad will be based on increasingly sophisticated decision making—students have more information at their disposal, for instance to compare quality and reputation. A British Council and Economist Intelligence Unit study (2008) 22 showed that Chinese students are seeking value for money on the international education market and are price sensitive.

Global competition for attracting Chinese students will also increase due to new competitors such as Asian countries, attracting largest shares of students. 23 One significant development has been the trend for international students to study closer to home, as more attractive options become available in their regions. 24 Although the EU as a whole hosts the largest inflows of Chinese students today, the growth in terms of incoming students since 2000 has been moderate compared with countries such as New Zealand, Australia and Korea. 25 EU countries’ positioning to attract Chinese students will have to become increasingly sophisticated on the global education market.

Policies and Programmes Supporting Learning Mobility between the EU and China: Main Developments, Trends and Challenges EU-China Policies and Programmes

Since 1978, when China commenced its reforming and opening up, international cooperation in the education sector has moved rapidly forward, with more and more Chinese students studying abroad, an increasing number of foreigners studying in China, and expanding cross-border academic cooperation. And since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, the internationalization of higher education has further expanded.

The race for ‘talents’ has been clearly recognised as a decisive factor which not only enhances the country’s economic and technological development but also international competitiveness. Chinese universities have opened up to cooperation with institutions abroad, increasing the number of incoming foreign students, while the Chinese government has made important financial investments to support international exchanges in education in the form of scholarships. 26 This has contributed to the modernisation of higher education in China, with the adaptation of teaching contents and methods to address the needs of today’s labour market, and to respond to the growing demand for high quality education in the country.

Reflecting the rapid development of bilateral trade and economic relations, cooperation between the EU and China has expanded over the past decade to cover a variety of areas, including education and culture. Since 2003, sectoral policy dialogues in the fields of education and training, culture and multilingualism have taken place regularly, supporting increased participation of China in the Erasmus Mundus programme. 27 Erasmus Mundus is a co-operation and mobility programme with non-EU countries that supports top-quality master programmes as well as mobility of students and higher education staff towards and from non-EU countries. Erasmus Mundus II (2009-2013) has extended the scope of the programme to the doctoral level. It also supports European students in order to ensure a fair treatment vis-à-vis third-country students. Since 2004, more than 2,800 Chinese students and 320 scholars were selected to take part in joint master courses and doctorates under Erasmus Mundus (the highest country total). 28 Building long term links between EU and Chinese researchers, mobility from the EU to China is also encouraged by programmes such as the Science and Technology Fellowship, which is the pilot phase of an EC action in China aiming at building bridges between the EU and the People’s Republic of China in the science and technology domain, and the EU-China European Studies Centres Programme (ESCP), which was set up to encourage the continued development of European Studies in Chinese higher education and to support the existing European studies centres in China.

Joint EU-China initiatives in the field of higher education have multiplied in the past decade. Examples include the China-Europe International Business School located in Shanghai, the Europe-China Clean Energy Centre (EC2) in Beijing supporting the field of energy and sustainable development, and the International Institute for Clean and Renewable Energy (ICARE), a joint project co-financed by Europe Aid aiming at educating post-graduate students in the field of clean and renewable energy and at training professionals.

In 2011, the Europe-China Year of Youth’s aimed at promoting intercultural dialogue and strengthening mutual understanding between European and Chinese youth; encouraging young people to support the development of EU-China relations; achieving extensive impact in Europe and China and ensuring that cooperation between policy makers as well as between youth organisations is sustainable beyond 2011. 29

Remarkably, the Chinese government has made substantial financial investments to support international exchanges in education in the form of scholarships, even though the majority of Chinese students still go abroad at their own expense. Key programmes supporting incoming and outgoing mobility between China and Europe include the Chinese Government Scholarship programme which provides both full scholarships and partial scholarships to international students and scholars (in accordance with educational exchange agreements or understandings reached between Chinese government and governments of other countries, organisations and education institutions). The Post-graduate Study Abroad Program, a national scholarship programme aims to create a platform for the training and exchanges of talents with an international vision by promoting cooperation and exchanges between top Chinese universities and their counterparts abroad and establishing sustainable academic relationships between them. Other key programmes include the China/UNESCO- the Great Wall Fellowship programme which is set up by the MoE for candidates recommended by UNESCO, and the China-EU language exchange programme ‘EU Window’ which should provide opportunities for 200 European school teachers of Chinese language as well as 400 school headmasters from Member States to enhance their Chinese proficiency and the understanding of Chinese culture between 2008 and 2013. 30 Generally, China-EU cooperation and exchange is extremely active in the subjects of economics, engineering, natural science and law.

EU Member States’ Policies and Programmes

Based on the analysis of the bilateral agreements in place and the main international strategy documents in all Member States, it is clear that China has become a strategic country in terms of cooperation in the field of higher education in the EU 27. All Member States have some form of cooperation agreement with China. Starting in the mid-90s, cooperation activities have gathered momentum since 2001.

Member States are pursuing different objectives and have different underlying rationales for engaging in higher education cooperation with China. These different objectives are often interlinked, with more than one objective addressed by the overall national strategy or even within a single programme:

• Promoting mutual understanding and mutual learning;

• Attracting excellence and increasing academic competitiveness;

• Enhancing the skills and employability of students;

• Tightening economic ties;

• Attracting large numbers of students to generate revenue—the ‘market approach’;

• Strengthening the national labour market and addressing skills needs.

An increasing number of programmes and initiatives aim to encourage Chinese students to choose Europe as a study destination. The main initiatives put in place by Member States to support learning mobility with China include:

• Scholarships supporting inward and outward mobility—most national programmes focus on supporting Chinese students to come to Europe. Most were created relatively recently and target graduates or post-graduates. Public-private partnerships are common for this type of programme, with the support of major industry players complementing government’s funds (e.g. Thales Programme in France).

• Institutional cooperation such as joint programmes/degrees and other partnerships—cooperation between HEIs has increased significantly, boosting mobility flows between Europe and China. Bilateral agreements are also increasingly complemented by multilateral agreements between several HEIs, including Erasmus Mundus partnerships. In France and Germany the priority is now to increase the share of mobile students taking part in organised mobility and decrease the number of ‘free-movers’.

• Increasing provision of transnational education—France, Germany and the UK have set up offshore campuses in China. HEIs, such as Nottingham, have set up objectives in terms of sending out their students to their campus in China, resulting in increasing outward flows to China. The Sino-German School for Postgraduate Studies and the French Ecole Centrale in Beijing are flagship initiatives of higher education export to China.

• Promoting education opportunities—five countries (France, Finland, Germany, Netherlands and UK) opened branches of their national education agencies in China. These agencies provide direct outreach and also gather valuable market intelligence. They can be the single entry points for prospective students and oversee registration and admission procedures (e.g. CampusFrance and DAAD). The British Council has deployed important marketing efforts as well as training and support to Chinese agents involved in recruiting students.

• Providing comprehensive support services to Chinese students to enhance the quality of mobility from pre-departure to post-return. The set up of alumni networks (such as Alumni UK Network or Club France) contribute to supporting students’ integration into the labour market and provide valuable feedback on the experience and situation of former mobile students.

Main Challenges and Obstacles to Learning Mobility between the EU and China

Based on the findings which emerged from the research and the stakeholder consultation carried out in the context of the study, the main challenges and obstacles to learning mobility between the EU and China are related to financial support, language preparation, lack of information, legal and administrative issues and lack of support services.

Funding was the most commonly cited obstacle in relation to incoming mobility to the EU. Not only lack of scholarships but also cost of living and rising fees are part of the problem. Overall, over 90% of Chinese students pursuing studies abroad would be self-financed. The introduction of fees for international (non EU-EEA) students is a rising trend in the EU with adverse consequences, at least in the short term, on the attractiveness of HEIs as host universities. Students and their families are seeking value for money but high fees are not necessarily a deterrent factor as long as the quality of education and the likely returns are perceived as making the investment worthwhile. 31 On the EU side, financial issues seem to have a limited impact on the mobility of European students to China, compared with factors such as lack of language proficiency and awareness.

The lack of information concerning education opportunities in the EU ranked high among the factors mentioned as obstacles to incoming mobility to Europe. 32 Findings suggest that information and promotion play an increasing role in determining study destination choices. Countries, where no major marketing initiatives have been undertaken or with no education agency based in China, are clearly less known to Chinese students. The use of university rankings by Chinese students is not to the advantage of many European HEIs. 33

For European students and staff, a combination of lack of awareness about study opportunities in China, poor knowledge of Chinese culture and concerns about the valorisation or recognition of their mobility experience and about the quality of education contributes to the low interest in taking part in learning mobility to China.

Language is still a barrier for mobility toward non-English speaking countries, however the increasing provision of courses and degrees taught in English all over Europe has clearly helped HEIs to increase the enrolment rates of Chinese students. On the other hand, proficiency in Chinese is obviously an obstacle for European students, although, once again, English courses are increasingly provided by Chinese universities, contributing to the growth in the number of EU students in China.

Administrative issues such as visas, residence and work permits are also a concern for Chinese students, putting EU countries at a disadvantage with countries such as Australia. The economic downturn has also led certain Member States to tighten regulations to prevent economic migration.

Finally, the lack of support for Chinese students, before and during their mobility period, is still a concern, especially in countries where comprehensive campuses and student halls of residence are not common. In addition, cases of Chinese students unable to enrol in any HEI at the end of preparatory language courses in their host country revealed the need for a review of the pre-registration and admission system and for additional support services. 34

Conclusions

EU-China learning mobility flows have significantly expanded in the past ten years, with six times more Chinese students in the EU today than in 2000. Student flows in some Member States are today overwhelmingly unbalanced. In the UK, the largest receiving country, mobility is almost a one-way traffic. There are concerns that such disequilibrium might not be sustainable in the long term and that EU countries are missing out on the benefits that exchange and mutual learning can bring. Mobility flows are also ‘qualitatively’ unbalanced in the sense that inward and outward flows belong to different types of mobility: whilst most Chinese students come to Europe to pursue a degree, staying in the EU for at least one year or two years, European students go to China for short periods and do not pursue a degree in China.

This is now starting to change, with outward mobility to China steadily increasing. Trends suggest that outward mobility of EU students and scholars to China will further increase in the coming years, boosted by a growing number of cooperation programmes, the availability of courses and degrees in English and the improving competitiveness of Chinese research and teaching at elite universities.

Current trends also suggest that outward flows towards China are shifting toward a better balance between degree and non-degree short-term mobility (e.g. language course). Given the rate at which China is developing its higher education system, one could expect to see more temporary mobility—a sign of a more mature higher education system—from China to the EU in the future, and more ‘degree’ mobility from the EU to China. These trends are slowly changing the dynamic between Europe and China from unidirectional mobility to a more reciprocal type of mobility which can allow for mutually beneficial exchange. The nature of mobility flows between the two regions is likely to be increasingly characterised by brain circulation. The high return rates of Chinese graduates to China are also evidence of the fact that ‘talents’ and skills are circulating between China and Europe.

However, there are still a number of obstacles hindering mobility flows and there could be even greater challenges ahead, as the economic crisis and related budget cuts are impacting higher education systems in the EU. Member States’ cooperation strategies with China in the area of education pursue different objectives, driven by various imperatives that are sometimes difficult to reconcile, such as attracting the brightest whilst trying to boost numbers to bring economic gains. One of the main challenges will be to find a balance between quantity and quality, making sure that increasing the number of mobile students is not coming at the expense of the quality of learning mobility.

The fact that EU countries are introducing or significantly increasing tuition fees for international students is raising concerns about the negative impacts on the attractiveness of European HEIs in the long term. 35 Research findings indicate that tuitions costs would not discourage prospective students as long as the quality of education and its likely returns are perceived as a worthwhile investment. Fees up to a certain level are therefore not an issue in itself. A more worrying fact is that the perception of the ‘quality’ of education in the EU is partly being undermined by a number of factors. There are concerns that in order to meet ambitious student recruitment targets some institutions have accepted Chinese students who do not have the language and academic ability to cope with their degree course. 36 The lack of serious quality standards and selection criteria could damage the reputation of European HEIs and be detrimental to the attractiveness of EU education in the longer term. Ultimately student recruitment from China will succeed or fail depended largely upon personal recommendations and reported experience: the quality and prestige of qualifications would the main reason cited by Chinese students for selecting an institution. 37 Rising fees and increasing competition between HEIs will make students increasingly focused on value-for-money and quality. In order to foster sustainable mobility flows between the EU and China, countries or higher education institutions’ positioning to attract Chinese students, will therefore have to be envisaged against the backdrop of an increasingly competitive international education market, in which students are seeking value for money, quality and institutional reputation to ensure their investment brings the expected returns.

Recommendations

Based on the research findings, a number of actions that could be taken to address the issues and obstacles highlighted throughout the study are briefly presented below.

Improving data collection on learning mobility to support evidence-based policy making

Recommendation 1: Measuring genuine mobility of students and staff. The limitations of the existing data on the mobility of students and staff should be addressed by Member States—in particular by using indicators to measure genuine mobility and collecting data on the mobility of staff.

Recommendation 2: Improving knowledge and understanding of mobility through surveys, alumni networks and programme monitoring that provide valuable ‘qualitative’ information.

Enhancing the attractiveness of education in the EU—improving quality, support and information to foster mobility from China

Recommendation 3: Focusing on quality rather than numbers. The quality of education provision and the academic credentials of incoming students should not be undermined by short-term strategies focused on raising numbers. Attention should be paid to balancing costs and quality.

Recommendation 4: Providing effective support before, during and after mobility. To enhance the benefits of the study period in the EU, measures should be taken to better prepare students with language training and tests before departure, to provide support to better integrate in the host country/institution as well as help returnees seeking to get employment on the Chinese labor market.

Recommendation 5: Improving the conditions of admission of Chinese nationals in the EU for the purpose of learning mobility. Member States should ensure that they have fully implemented Directive 2004/114/EC 38 on the conditions of admission of third-country nationals for the purposes of studies, pupil exchange, unremunerated training or voluntary service, in particular regarding the facilitation of admission of students taking part in EU mobility programmes and the establishment of fast-track admission procedures for study purposes.

Recommendation 6: Protecting students against rogue providers/agents. Transparent information and quality labels or charters should be developed to help students identify reliable providers and agents.

Recommendation 7: Improving the provision of information on education opportunities in Europe. Better promotion of existing tools and portals, pooling of resources and joint initiatives could leverage the impact of the EU and Member States’ promotion efforts.

Recommendation 8: Promoting alternative university rankings based on criteria taking into account dimensions such as teaching quality, employability of students and social equity to improve the perception of EU education by Chinese students.

Recommendation 9: Designing sustainable and competitive European programmes. Attention should be paid to increasing consistency and sustainability of future programmes to send a clear signal and build long term cooperation with Chinese HEIs.

Balancing mobility flows—supporting outward mobility of European students and staff

Recommendation 10: Raising awareness about China and providing more targeted information. Targeted information campaigns at higher education level have proven successful and should be encouraged.

Recommendation 11: Improving the provision of Chinese language teaching. Languages are one of the key barriers to outward mobility to China and efforts to provide Chinese language teaching should be pursued.

Recommendation 12: Encouraging mobility with short-duration programmes. Summer courses and short placements should be further developed to support first mobility experience to China.

Recommendation 13: Supporting initiatives at school level. School twining for instance, can improve knowledge and familiarity with China from an early age.

Recommendation 14: Designing programmes that allow for reciprocal participation of Chinese and European students. There is a need for more support to outward mobility and programmes that allow for mutual exchange, for instance through co-funded projects.