Pupil mobility to become more prominent in Erasmus+

The European Parliament’s report on the mid-term evaluation of the Erasmus+ includes all the main points raised by EEE-YFU.

At the beginning of February 2017, the European Parliament adopted its report on the mid-term evaluation of the Erasmus+ programme, which was started in 2014 to support education, training, youth and sport in Europe by merging seven prior different programmes.

We are glad to acknowledge that the most important points raised by our organisation were taken on-board by Members of the European Parliament and reflected in the text of the report.

EEE-YFU, together with EFIL and OBESSU, raised the concern that with the previous “Comenius Programme” being integrated in the broader Erasmus+ framework, individual pupil mobility is now a less visible and certainly not prominent possibility offered as part of KA2 Strategic Partnership. We also pointed out that exchange organisations are left aside and under-recognised in Erasmus+, since mobility of secondary school students can be promoted only through partnerships among schools.

The European Parliament’s report:
– Calls on the Commission to strengthen the school education dimension of the programme, allowing for more mobility of pupils, simplification of funding and administrative procedures for schools and for non-formal education providers, with a view to encouraging non-formal education providers to become involved with partnerships with schools.
– Encourages the Commission to analyse the programme key actions and sectors that seem to be underfunded, such as KA2 Strategic Partnerships and school education.
– Continues to express concern that Erasmus+ is viewed by young people and the wider public primarily as a programme for higher education; recommends, therefore, that greater importance be attached to raising the profile of the different sectors that people can apply for, including school-level education.

The European Commission will have to take into account the report adopted by the European Parliament when conducting the mid-term evaluation of Erasmus+. We hope these calls for better representation of secondary-school mobility would not remain unheard.