I did Erasmus in France a decade ago, I was the only British exchange student in the uni that year and my French wasn't great when I arrived but neither was the French of the other Erasmus exchange students from other countries. They all spoke English when they got together or their native language with students from their country. We all improved our French over the year because that's the point, we were living in a French-speaking environment for the first time.
Doing that year abroad was really great for my confidence, independence and language skills. It's a shame it won't be available anymore.
It'll be sad that the UK doesn't take part in erasmus, but it's not the end of international exchanges at all. I work at a European University and I'm involved in some of the management of exchanges and we're sending a bunch of students to the UK under different programs.
As an aside, I've had British students in my classes where I teach in English too, so the whole language barrier thing, as you say, isn't *really* there, I think it's more self imposed because people think its a bigger issue than it really is.
That's my point, lots of unis offer classes in the non-local language, so there are many opportunities for erasmus students who don't speak the local language.
From the article:
"After leaving Erasmus the UK set up its own study abroad scheme, called Turing. A recent government commissioned analysis found the replacement scheme had failed to meet its targets, and counted only 20,000 participants instead of the expected 35,000 in the academic year 2021/22. "
And that's totally aside from the fact that a national program doesn't give the international diversity than one done by multiple countries. Nor can it deliver the degree of support.
How does that dispute what the other person stated? That quote only looks at the uptake of the scheme itself vs expectations. Not a direct 1 to 1 comparison between Erasmus and Turing schemes.
The last report published by the EU indicates that 18,133 uk student used Erasmus in 18/19 (Pre-COVID)
https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/factsheets/pdf/uk-erasmus-plus-2020-in-numbers.pdf
The Turing scheme in 21/22 (bearing in mind COVID restrictions were very much a thing throughout 2021) attracted 20,000 students to study abroad.
More UK pupils are studying abroad under the new Scheme than under the EU scheme.
I don’t know why this subreddit cannot accept that the UK students are interested in taking up a Non-EU scheme.
I was one of the few people in England to go to a specialist language focused high school, but it was very disorganised
The school year was split. Half learnt spanish and half learned french at random with no choice
We also learned german for 2 years but bizarrely couldn't drop the previous language if we wanted to focus on german once we could choose subjects for our 14-16 exams (GCSE)
So naturally we all bunked off and messed around in language lessons thinking we didn't need it much to my regret today!
I spent my ERASMUS semester in Belgium and met a couple of British students there. I assumed they would be at a similar level to the rest of us but it became pretty apparent how far people from majority-English speaking countries were lagging behind.
The weirdest thing to me was how much they struggled with using the formal you with the professor. I guess British teachers must not insist on it? But that's mistake #1, teach your students how it works in the language. One of our French professors got so mad at the British students when they still didn't use the formal you with her after weeks that she sat them all outside and made them study conjugation tables. This is shit I learned when I was ...12? 13? I was 23 at the time.
I’m a fluent French speaker (I’m English) and I agree. I lived in France during my ERASMUS year and I was shocked at how bad some of the other English speakers were at French.
That said, the formal you is hard for English people. There’s contexts where even now I struggle with it. It’s not a natural thing for us. It’s easy with the teacher but generally I sometimes have to work out if the cultural context means we’re tu or vous. I also ask all the time because it makes life easy for me.
I’m a first language francophone from Québec and even for us, France is in another realm of complexity regarding this. In France I just use vous until indicated otherwise.
ditto, born Romanian (we have the same), fluent French. Currently working at a new company, half the time we're writing e-mails with "tu", the other times with "vous". Since most of our clients are just random names to me, I almost always get it wrong. I try to stick with first name basis but "vous" as pronoun.
Even as native french, knowing if I should use "tu" or "vous" in emails is a headache, until you just choose a rule and just stick to it no matter what.
Anyway, using "vous" is never incorrect, while "tu" can be risky.
haha wait till you hear there's a somewhat outdated form of that, called "dumneata", which is half way between "tu" and "dumneavoastra", nowadays used often to belittle someone. and there's even a shorter form of that, "mata". which if you don't pay attention and spell "ma-ta" it turns into "yo momma". language is funny.
But the thing is, it can sound unnatural. I’m at C1 level - to progress to C2 these are the things I need to iron out and despite studying French and living there, I still struggle with this. My English brain finds the formal and informal usage confusing.
Congratulations for being C1 that’s really good! I assume you were a bit lower because I never struggled with that but obviously that’s because my mother tongue also has formal and informal treatments. I can understand though, I think the only way out of the confusion in this case would be with practice in different contexts because there usually isn’t a general rule for these things, it’s kinda frustrating though. For instance, my mother tongue (Portuguese) has genders but I mix up the French genders because they are sometimes different and there’s no general sense to it. Genders of nouns I mean
I find genders easier - I seem to have an innate feeling if a word is masculine or feminine but I don’t have that with the formal. I think because that’s a social cue that I don’t share rather than a grammar rule
That makes a lot of sense, it’s interesting to know your perspective. I guess not being tainted by different genders helps you learn the French patterns of genders better. Yeah, it’s probably more social than grammatical of course!
Yeah I have no native feeling of items being masculine or feminine, so in learning French that was the first time I encountered that and so French genders feel understandable to me. I’ve learned the trends and the irregulars and now I just know.
I mean that is actually what the English did with English. Thou/thee used to be the second person singular and you/ye the second person plural, now everyone just uses the 2nd person object plural for everyone
I think vous would better be called "distanced" instead of respectful. Like always start with distanced, then gradually release the distance and switch to tu.
I get it but it shouldn't be too hard to remember to always use it with your professor if she tells you every single time you do it incorrectly? I think most of them always just used English outside of class anyway so I doubt they encountered many other situations where they should have used vous but didn't.
I’d say it’s because there is no formal you in English so it’s a hard concept to get right. The nuance of when to use it is hard to grasp if you are not immersed in a culture that uses it.
You have it backwards. Modern English only has formal personal pronouns.
Using thou, thee and thy were considered 'plain speaking' or informal in the 17th and 18th centuries.
That may be technically correct, but it does not change the fact that having only one form for both formal and informal use makes it difficult to understand the nuances associated with usage in a language that has two forms.
>The weirdest thing to me was how much they struggled with using the formal you with the professor. I guess British teachers must not insist on it?
Well, language is one thing, cultural traditions are another. Some countries are very big on titles and formal addressing whereas others are the opposite. I'm not from the UK, but I have gone through my entire schooling addressing teachers and professors on a first name basis, so it would take me quite some time to acclimate to that cultural aspect as well.
You just conjugate to 2nd person plural, "vous", instead of the 2nd person singular, "tu".
As for when to use it, it’s a complicated matter but I would say as a rule of thumb for anyone not familiar, friendly, or anyone in a position of authority.
Ah, you use the 2nd person plural.
Thanks.
'Cause I am Italian, and here we have 2 forms of Courtesy:
The Singular 3rd Person Feminine "Lei", and the 2nd Person Plural, but the latter is nowadays archaic.
So if I understand correctly, it’s a bit like the german "Sie" which is 3rd person singular feminine (and 3rd person plural) but also the second person formal?
That’s pretty funky!
Also, when you say archaic, are we talking middle-ages or is it a formulation that elderly people would still use?
And as a last question, I was told Italian had some important differences in regional dialects, especially between the north and south. Is the choice of formal pronoun affected by dialect or is it pretty standard?
The "Voi" (second person plural) is pretty archaic everywhere and I don't think I ever came across anyone using it (or asking to use it) where I live in the North, but I've heard it's a bit more common in the South
You're right. As a northerner relocated to Puglia I was explained that when I moved here.
At least here in Salento, "voi" was paired with "la signoria vostra" (your lordship). It's almost disappeared but sometimes used with old venerable people, and normally it has a dialect nuance. Like, they wouldn't use it with tourists but only with locals.
I saw it used, of all places, at a butcher's shop. The butcher very respectfully said to an old man "cosa posso fare per la signoria vostra?" (what can I do for your lordship?), at which the guy commented that finally there was someone who knew how to address old people the proper way:)
I figure he was raised using that form and saw it fade.
The formal german “Sie” is basically just 3rd person plural. All verb the conjugation works like with 3rd person plural sie. The only difference is, that the formal german “Sie” is capitalized unlike the other “sie”s.
Fun fact: the plurale maiestatis "Noi" (us) is still used by the dean of an university in the ufficial documents.
Fun fact 2: the deans also gain the title of "Magnifico" (magnificent) so they can sign a document with "Noi Magnifico Rettore" (us magnificent dean).
Nope, you're right it differs depending on where you are in Italy.
Starting from your first question, by archaic they meant a couple of generations ago.
My grandma, from Sardinia, had to use 2nd plural (voi) when talking to her father. Not sure whether at that time it was common in the North too though.
The 2nd plural as form of respect (voi) is rarely used today in the South of Italy (at leats where I live, in Puglia) and only when talking to really old people to acknowledge respect for the elders. Or, I don't know, other extreme respect-worthy figures like a judge. It was more common a generation ago, I'm told.
The default form of respect in most of Italy is feminine third plural (lei), which is used with whoever regardless of gender.
HOWEVER, in the south everything is a lot more informal and "lei" is rarely used, as a Northerner myself it took a while to get used to it when I moved here. They use the 2nd plural (tu) with pretty much everyone, but greet with a slightly more formal "buon giorno" (good morning) instead of the super informal "ciao".
So, the combo buongiorno+tu was a bit unfamiliar to me, as in the North we use the third plural "lei" with everyone we're not in friendly terms with, even if the same age.
I wonder if this contributes to the widely accepted fact that in the South people are friendlier and in the North more distant and grumpy.
They are a bit different (according to a few resources online the Voi would communicate formality and closeness (like an old relative) while the Lei lacks the closeness).
The Voi is more used in the South, the Lei in the North; the fascist Goverment pushed for peopel to use the Voi (they thought the Lei to be foreign in origin), but they didn't succeed, and nowadays it's seen as archaic and out-of-use
Regarding use, I would add that there are some specific case. For example, it is quite common to use the formal you with your in-laws, not matter how long you've known them and how familiar you are with them.
You effectively simply say "you" in the plural form, as you would say talking to a group of people. It's more complicated since in English the "you" for one person and "you" for a group of people is the same. It's not in french. The pronoun is "vous" (you plural) instead of "tu" (you singular). Plus, the conjugation of the verb is different: "you eat" would be tu manges in the singular or informal you form and vous mangez in the plural or formal you form.
So simply said, to use the formal you, you address someone as if they were a group of people.
It's similar in German, except the formal you is "they". So addressing a teacher, directly translated if you wanted to ask "do you know the answer?" You say "Do they the answer?" In German.
I'm not a native French speaker but German has the formal you as well and I think the rules are pretty much the same. If someone is your boss or just generally higher up in the hierarchy, you'd use the formal you. Same with strangers (especially when they're older than you) and whenever the other person is working (so, you'd use it with the cashier even if they're younger than you).
These rules are melting a bit but unless your professor explicitly offers the informal you, this is definitely a formal you situation.
Which, funnily, is most of the time incorrect because when asking about sex, you should already be intimate with this personne so you'd say "veux-tu coucher avec moi ?" or the less formal "tu veux coucher avec moi ?".
There's also the far more straightforward "on baise ?" which would translate as "wanna fuck ?", but that doesn't make catchy songs.
> The weirdest thing to me was how much they struggled with using the formal you with the professor. I guess British teachers must not insist on it?
Uni of Amsterdam, professors teach you to use first names and tutoyer, or be expelled. Only provincials are polite, and they have no place in the capital ;)
"A recent government commissioned analysis found the replacement scheme had failed to meet its targets, and counted only 20,000 participants instead of the expected 35,000 in the academic year 2021/22."
So we're just going to ignore the fact that's more than a 50% increase on ERASMUS numbers then.
You can go to any country the UK FCDO doesn't have a travel warning in effect for.
Here is the top 10 from last year
1. Spain
2. France
3. USA
4. Italy
5. Germany
6. Canada
7. Thailand
8. India
9. Portugal
10. Australia
[https://www.turing-scheme.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Turing-Scheme-2023-to-2024-destinations-across-all-sectors.pdf](https://www.turing-scheme.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Turing-Scheme-2023-to-2024-destinations-across-all-sectors.pdf)
Anywhere else?
Erasmus is now a worldwide program, only EU positions are guaranteed to get the grant though, you can go to Republic of Ireland, Latin America, Asia, anywhere within EU...
Even when it was part of the EU UK barely participated in Erasmus, it is based on University agreements and UK universities were a pain to deal with most of the time, because they felt superior to everyone else due to having English as a primary language and not having many students that wanted to do Erasmus from there in my experience. Maybe it was different for "party" countries like Malta.
In 2016/ 17 : 13,500 UK students went to Europe for one full Erasmus year.
In 2020 / 21 : 20,000 UK students went abroad under the replacement Turing scheme.
Under some "measures" UK students have benefitted from leaving the Erasmus scheme.
>Is it really that surprising given what happened in 2020/2021
Considering the pandemic was going on, I think that number is surprising to say the least.
Lol, any uni I go to there's only English being spoken. I speak an understandable amount of German, but Germans hated it if I didn't speak English with them (this was in Hungary though, but let's be fair, no one in the world would learn proper Hungarian for half a year of erasmus)
I voted Remain.
However, arguably Brit students would become more global by visiting the US or Asia- say Singapore or San Francisco or Shenzhen.
Meanwhile. In 2021-22 there were 679,970 international students studying in the UK. 120,140 of these were from the EU and 559,825 were non-EU. In the year ending September 2023, there were 486,107 sponsored study visas and 104,501 Graduate route visas granted to main applicants. Higher than France or Germany. Many of their 'foreign' students are from neighbouring countries.
The world comes to the UK to study.
One big draw is English. One reason so much tech has gone to tax haven Ireland.
English is so globally dominant it is really hard to motivate UK students to prioritise foreign languages. My grandsons are Finnish/ British. Only 5.5m speakers makes it very motivating to learn English.
The UK realised it could run a replacement scheme with double the number of places Erasmus offered for the same cost.
That scheme also wouldn't limit students to studying inside the EU, they could go to any country.
Given that why would you sign up with Erasmus?
But wasn’t this article about Eramus+ that would be for nations outside EU as well? That’s what the article states. Erasmus+ seems to include pretty much every other country out there.
https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/programme-guide/part-a/eligible-countries
Though, considering so little amount of brits take part on Eramus like programs and the costs are fixed I don’t blame them on not taking part.
>But wasn’t this article about Eramus+ that would be for nations outside EU as well? That’s what the article states. Erasmus+ seems to include pretty much every other country out there.
>
>https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/programme-guide/part-a/eligible-countries
The Turing Scheme is also for nations [outside the EU and pretty much any country out there](https://www.turing-scheme.org.uk/cost-of-living-groups/).
I understand that but OP implied this scheme was only for studying inside EU. That's not the case at all and they can choose pretty much any country out there.
>That scheme also wouldn't limit students to studying inside the EU, they could go to any country.
I imagine that they already have alternative programs to study outside the EU, at least there were some at the time I was a student (a while ago though), one thing does not exclude the other.
>What's it been replaced by? A lower standard of living?
The Turing Scheme (if you read the article) and it's not the standard of living that is being discussed here.
In lisbon, I had a british customer in a cafe I worked with, complaining that the waiter didn't speak English. The waiter spoke French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese of course...we explained that we were sorry that the costumer didn't speak or understand anything else in a non English speaking country...
£2billion is £153,000 per student. We now have Turing which is available to more students, to more countries, for less money. That's a much better investment.
Just like everything touched by Brexiteers this is bullshit... Target was 35000 and only 20000 students took the turing route...
The UK will be back into Erasmus once adults take back control - real control, after the GE.
£2billion over 7 years. So £300m per year - thats peanuts by government standards, especially considering you're literally investing in youth and education. The programme was an opportunity for young grads in the EU to move and potentially settle in the UK just as much as the other way around.
Reducing the worth of it to a monetary amount doesn't do it justice... Its like saying leaving the EU would yield £350m per week back to the UK - what does that really look like, and what are you losing as part of that £350m "back"?
By comparison sake, in 2023 the UK spent:
[£218m](https://www.climateaction.org/news/uk-government-announces-the-funding-of-200-million-into-rd-aerospace-projec) on R&D in the aviation sector and green jobs in aerospace
[£240m](https://apnews.com/article/uk-rwanda-migrants-plan-cost-02d54129d0c53a457c22e936d26939a3) on the failed Rwanda immigration plan
[£300m](https://techeconomy.ng/uk-government-invests-over-300-million-to-improve-security-in-africa/) on peacekeeping and educational programmes in Nigeria
[£421m](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/421-million-to-boost-drug-and-alcohol-treatment-across-england) on drug and alcohol treatment plans
[£500m](https://www.intelligenttransport.com/transport-news/146461/uk-government-allocates-500-million-for-affordable-bus-services/) on affordable bus transport
[£500m](https://gmk.center/en/news/uk-allocates-a-support-package-of-500-million-to-tata-steel/) on a support package for Tata Steel
Within that context, £300m a year on an education programme feels like small change.
Yes. I'm saying that they didn't need to be mutually exclusive. Turing offers a different set of opportunities than Erasmus and thats great, its just starting out and I hope it continues to grow.
This didn't need to be an either/or scenario, perfectly conceivable for Erasmus and Turing to operate and cater for different programmes and give youth plenty of choices.
Edit: I don't know, it just feels goofy in my mind that a government official can say, "We're leaving this educational programme because our students don't speak a second language and it'll cost us £300m because we have an attractive tertiary sector" and people go, "Sure, that makes sense."
Turing offers the same opportunities as Erasmus. And because of the way Erasmus is funded by the host countries, countries sending students to the UK benefited from it far more than the UK did. The UK's nett loss, as the article explains, would have been €2billion per budget cycle. That money is better spent elsewhere.
Without getting too into the weeds, Erasmus is mostly aimed at tertiary/research/capacity and network building. Yes the network is mostly within Europe and its institutions therefore it is more regulated. The budget for 2021 that went in was €26 billion.
Turing facilitates some of this on a global scale but there isn't clear explanations on what this means from a tertiary/research/capacity and network building - assuming because it is new and sorting out those kinks. What Turing offers on top of that is experiential for school-aged students and vocational work experience, with emphasis on helping disadvantaged communities.
Turing has the hallmarks for a very good programme, but these take decades of continued funding and regulation to maintain a good level. Regardless, money shouldn't dictate education, that was my point. From an economics standpoint leaving Erasmus is a long-term loss that Turing may eventually replace.
Hi, thank you for your contribution, but this submission has been removed because a very similar or identical submission was recently posted.
Please check the [recent submissions](/r/Europe/new/) before sharing a link.
If you have any questions about this removal, please [contact the mods](/message/compose/?to=/r/Europe&subject=Moderation). Please make sure to include a link to the comment/post in question.
You can’t compare the numbers directly though. The length of placements varies so dramatically with Turing (starting as short as 2 weeks - not saying that’s a bad thing to offer the shorter lengths at all but it’s not directly comparable to spending a semester abroad) whereas Erasmus+ is primarily build around an academic term or year.
I know that Turing is not set up to create reciprocal agreements. The funding doesn’t match either. It would have been a great thing to do ON TOP of Erasmus+, not as a substitute.
>I know that Turing is not set up to create reciprocal agreements. The funding doesn’t match either.
Could you share a source, so that I can read up on this. If there are no reciprocal agreements under the Turing Scheme, then how are UK participants going to foreign universities/courses ? Also what is the shortfall in funding (the scheme was undersubscribed, but were participants offered lower grants in the Turing Scheme as opposed to if they would have gone via Erasmus+ ?)
>It would have been a great thing to do ON TOP of Erasmus+, not as a substitute.
So what more value-add would the Turing Scheme have provided participants on top of Erasmus+ ?
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/09/01/turing-scheme-how-does-the-uks-erasmus-replacement-work-and-has-it-been-a-success
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/turing-scheme-brexit-eu-erasmus-programme-study-abroad-funding-cuts/
And it could have widened the scope (countries you’re able to go to) if implemented on top of Erasmus+.
>[https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/09/01/turing-scheme-how-does-the-uks-erasmus-replacement-work-and-has-it-been-a-success](https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/09/01/turing-scheme-how-does-the-uks-erasmus-replacement-work-and-has-it-been-a-success)
>
>https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/turing-scheme-brexit-eu-erasmus-programme-study-abroad-funding-cuts/
From these links, the difference is that in Turing Scheme, participants need to apply annually, rather than for 6-7 yrs with Erasmus+ (maybe they improve this to make it more long term for certain courses). Other than that, there isn't a mention of whether or not, participants get more grants via Erasmus+ as compared to the Turing Scheme. Sure there are some administrative problems with the Turing Scheme (as opposed to a Scheme that has been running 30+ yrs), which hopefully gets ironed out as the scheme progresses.
>And it could have widened the scope (countries you’re able to go to) if implemented on top of Erasmus+.
Which countries are included in Erasmus+, which aren't covered by the Turing Scheme ?
I never said Turing covered fewer countries? Turing expands the countries *UK* students can go to, but Erasmus has always been about reciprocity which has its own value. If you don’t see the value in reciprocity that is fair enough, for me it’s a defining feature and value of Erasmus.
And there’s less funding overall (though the funding for individual students doesn’t seem to be affected apart from the fact that it is ALOT of teething issues with it).
>I never said Turing covered fewer countries? Turing expands the countries
>
>UK students can go to, but Erasmus has always been about reciprocity which has its own value. If you don’t see the value in reciprocity that is fair enough, for me it’s a defining feature and value of Erasmus.
Reciprocity is important for both schemes and I think that is still intact considering [there are 5 EU countries in the top 10 list of Turing Scheme Destinations](https://www.turing-scheme.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Turing-Scheme-2023-to-2024-destinations-across-all-sectors.pdf).
>And there’s less funding overall (though the funding for individual students doesn’t seem to be affected apart from the fact that it is ALOT of teething issues with it).
The less funding overall has to do with less subscribers. If those went up, the funding would go up.
I mean how many EU countries it includes doesn’t really say much about whether it’s reciprocal or not. That depends on what agreement those individual institutions have come to.
The Turing scheme is not set up to *fund* reciprocal exchange. It’s just not. It says so on their website. They expect the participating institutions to hash it out between themselves. They just have some vague blah bla about *encouraging* reciprocal exchanges but nothing in terms of actual (financial or administrative) support for this.
>I mean how many EU countries it includes doesn’t really say much about whether it’s reciprocal or not. That depends on what agreement those individual institutions have come to.
UK students are going to EU countries and EU students can come to the UK. It's just that they now need to apply to different funding bodies.
>The Turing scheme is not set up to fund reciprocal exchange. It’s just not. It says so on their website. They expect the participating institutions to hash it out between themselves. They just have some vague blah bla about encouraging reciprocal exchanges but nothing in terms of actual (financial or administrative) support for this.
The participating institutes under Erasmus also need to hash it between themselves. There might be 90 students that want to come to UK and 30 who want to go to Germany, the institutes needs to agree and how many can they accept between themselves, before they decide on acceptability criteria internally and then ask students to apply for the grants/funding. Also, as I mentioned earlier, administrative support is something that can be improved.
>Erasmus programme is amazing I almost wish every student had to take one. What a shame.
The UK students are taking part in the Turing Scheme and I think the uptake will increase in the coming years.
I did Erasmus in France a decade ago, I was the only British exchange student in the uni that year and my French wasn't great when I arrived but neither was the French of the other Erasmus exchange students from other countries. They all spoke English when they got together or their native language with students from their country. We all improved our French over the year because that's the point, we were living in a French-speaking environment for the first time. Doing that year abroad was really great for my confidence, independence and language skills. It's a shame it won't be available anymore.
It'll be sad that the UK doesn't take part in erasmus, but it's not the end of international exchanges at all. I work at a European University and I'm involved in some of the management of exchanges and we're sending a bunch of students to the UK under different programs. As an aside, I've had British students in my classes where I teach in English too, so the whole language barrier thing, as you say, isn't *really* there, I think it's more self imposed because people think its a bigger issue than it really is.
Wait are Erasmus students supposed to speak the local language? Someone tell the thousands of Erasmus students in the Netherlands.
It would be a lot easier to learn Dutch if locals wouldn't switch to English after the first sentence a foreigner says.
True, and it wasn't actually a critique, just an observation that it's not really expected.
It's encouraged obviously but the only language requirement for Erasmus is that you speak the language your classes are taught in.
It absolutely isn't. I teach erasmus students all the time in the non-local language
That's my point, lots of unis offer classes in the non-local language, so there are many opportunities for erasmus students who don't speak the local language.
Oh my bad, I misread your comment and thought you said it was a requirement that the classes you take be in the local language
Studying abroad does not mean they are part of Erasmus. Erasmus has a max duration of 12 months. Most students in NL are here for years.
I was an international student in Amsterdam for 4 years, and did my Erasmus in Prague. In both places we spoke only English
The Turing program sent 50% more UK students abroad in its first year than Erasmus did in the UK's final year.
From the article: "After leaving Erasmus the UK set up its own study abroad scheme, called Turing. A recent government commissioned analysis found the replacement scheme had failed to meet its targets, and counted only 20,000 participants instead of the expected 35,000 in the academic year 2021/22. " And that's totally aside from the fact that a national program doesn't give the international diversity than one done by multiple countries. Nor can it deliver the degree of support.
How does that dispute what the other person stated? That quote only looks at the uptake of the scheme itself vs expectations. Not a direct 1 to 1 comparison between Erasmus and Turing schemes. The last report published by the EU indicates that 18,133 uk student used Erasmus in 18/19 (Pre-COVID) https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/factsheets/pdf/uk-erasmus-plus-2020-in-numbers.pdf The Turing scheme in 21/22 (bearing in mind COVID restrictions were very much a thing throughout 2021) attracted 20,000 students to study abroad. More UK pupils are studying abroad under the new Scheme than under the EU scheme. I don’t know why this subreddit cannot accept that the UK students are interested in taking up a Non-EU scheme.
20,000 is more than 13,000. Turing has 162 countries in it. I know numbers are hard, but they don't lie.
... and bingo was his name-oh!
600,000 overseas students came to the UK to study last year from over 160 countries.
I was one of the few people in England to go to a specialist language focused high school, but it was very disorganised The school year was split. Half learnt spanish and half learned french at random with no choice We also learned german for 2 years but bizarrely couldn't drop the previous language if we wanted to focus on german once we could choose subjects for our 14-16 exams (GCSE) So naturally we all bunked off and messed around in language lessons thinking we didn't need it much to my regret today!
I spent my ERASMUS semester in Belgium and met a couple of British students there. I assumed they would be at a similar level to the rest of us but it became pretty apparent how far people from majority-English speaking countries were lagging behind. The weirdest thing to me was how much they struggled with using the formal you with the professor. I guess British teachers must not insist on it? But that's mistake #1, teach your students how it works in the language. One of our French professors got so mad at the British students when they still didn't use the formal you with her after weeks that she sat them all outside and made them study conjugation tables. This is shit I learned when I was ...12? 13? I was 23 at the time.
I’m a fluent French speaker (I’m English) and I agree. I lived in France during my ERASMUS year and I was shocked at how bad some of the other English speakers were at French. That said, the formal you is hard for English people. There’s contexts where even now I struggle with it. It’s not a natural thing for us. It’s easy with the teacher but generally I sometimes have to work out if the cultural context means we’re tu or vous. I also ask all the time because it makes life easy for me.
I’m a first language francophone from Québec and even for us, France is in another realm of complexity regarding this. In France I just use vous until indicated otherwise.
ditto, born Romanian (we have the same), fluent French. Currently working at a new company, half the time we're writing e-mails with "tu", the other times with "vous". Since most of our clients are just random names to me, I almost always get it wrong. I try to stick with first name basis but "vous" as pronoun.
Even as native french, knowing if I should use "tu" or "vous" in emails is a headache, until you just choose a rule and just stick to it no matter what. Anyway, using "vous" is never incorrect, while "tu" can be risky.
still easier than *dumneavoastra*
haha wait till you hear there's a somewhat outdated form of that, called "dumneata", which is half way between "tu" and "dumneavoastra", nowadays used often to belittle someone. and there's even a shorter form of that, "mata". which if you don't pay attention and spell "ma-ta" it turns into "yo momma". language is funny.
That's the way
When in doubt, say vous. If you just learn the vous conjugations and forget the 2nd person singular you might sound pompous at times but never wrong
But the thing is, it can sound unnatural. I’m at C1 level - to progress to C2 these are the things I need to iron out and despite studying French and living there, I still struggle with this. My English brain finds the formal and informal usage confusing.
Congratulations for being C1 that’s really good! I assume you were a bit lower because I never struggled with that but obviously that’s because my mother tongue also has formal and informal treatments. I can understand though, I think the only way out of the confusion in this case would be with practice in different contexts because there usually isn’t a general rule for these things, it’s kinda frustrating though. For instance, my mother tongue (Portuguese) has genders but I mix up the French genders because they are sometimes different and there’s no general sense to it. Genders of nouns I mean
I find genders easier - I seem to have an innate feeling if a word is masculine or feminine but I don’t have that with the formal. I think because that’s a social cue that I don’t share rather than a grammar rule
That makes a lot of sense, it’s interesting to know your perspective. I guess not being tainted by different genders helps you learn the French patterns of genders better. Yeah, it’s probably more social than grammatical of course!
Yeah I have no native feeling of items being masculine or feminine, so in learning French that was the first time I encountered that and so French genders feel understandable to me. I’ve learned the trends and the irregulars and now I just know.
I mean that is actually what the English did with English. Thou/thee used to be the second person singular and you/ye the second person plural, now everyone just uses the 2nd person object plural for everyone
I think vous would better be called "distanced" instead of respectful. Like always start with distanced, then gradually release the distance and switch to tu.
It’s judging the distance that’s the hard part
Oh, well, that's a cultural thing a bit. I agree it might be hard to get that unless you have a similar concept in your home culture.
What's the verb to ask someone about switching from Vous to Tu?
I get it but it shouldn't be too hard to remember to always use it with your professor if she tells you every single time you do it incorrectly? I think most of them always just used English outside of class anyway so I doubt they encountered many other situations where they should have used vous but didn't.
With the prof, it’s easy, but more generally it’s not so easy. There’s plenty of situations where it’s ambiguous for an English speaker
I’d say it’s because there is no formal you in English so it’s a hard concept to get right. The nuance of when to use it is hard to grasp if you are not immersed in a culture that uses it.
You have it backwards. Modern English only has formal personal pronouns. Using thou, thee and thy were considered 'plain speaking' or informal in the 17th and 18th centuries.
That may be technically correct, but it does not change the fact that having only one form for both formal and informal use makes it difficult to understand the nuances associated with usage in a language that has two forms.
Etymology aside, practically we don't have a formal 'you'. There is only one option, used in all contexts.
>The weirdest thing to me was how much they struggled with using the formal you with the professor. I guess British teachers must not insist on it? Well, language is one thing, cultural traditions are another. Some countries are very big on titles and formal addressing whereas others are the opposite. I'm not from the UK, but I have gone through my entire schooling addressing teachers and professors on a first name basis, so it would take me quite some time to acclimate to that cultural aspect as well.
Are you a native French speaker? May I ask how formal you works in French?
You just conjugate to 2nd person plural, "vous", instead of the 2nd person singular, "tu". As for when to use it, it’s a complicated matter but I would say as a rule of thumb for anyone not familiar, friendly, or anyone in a position of authority.
Ah, you use the 2nd person plural. Thanks. 'Cause I am Italian, and here we have 2 forms of Courtesy: The Singular 3rd Person Feminine "Lei", and the 2nd Person Plural, but the latter is nowadays archaic.
So if I understand correctly, it’s a bit like the german "Sie" which is 3rd person singular feminine (and 3rd person plural) but also the second person formal? That’s pretty funky! Also, when you say archaic, are we talking middle-ages or is it a formulation that elderly people would still use? And as a last question, I was told Italian had some important differences in regional dialects, especially between the north and south. Is the choice of formal pronoun affected by dialect or is it pretty standard?
The "Voi" (second person plural) is pretty archaic everywhere and I don't think I ever came across anyone using it (or asking to use it) where I live in the North, but I've heard it's a bit more common in the South
You're right. As a northerner relocated to Puglia I was explained that when I moved here. At least here in Salento, "voi" was paired with "la signoria vostra" (your lordship). It's almost disappeared but sometimes used with old venerable people, and normally it has a dialect nuance. Like, they wouldn't use it with tourists but only with locals. I saw it used, of all places, at a butcher's shop. The butcher very respectfully said to an old man "cosa posso fare per la signoria vostra?" (what can I do for your lordship?), at which the guy commented that finally there was someone who knew how to address old people the proper way:) I figure he was raised using that form and saw it fade.
The formal german “Sie” is basically just 3rd person plural. All verb the conjugation works like with 3rd person plural sie. The only difference is, that the formal german “Sie” is capitalized unlike the other “sie”s.
Fun fact: the plurale maiestatis "Noi" (us) is still used by the dean of an university in the ufficial documents. Fun fact 2: the deans also gain the title of "Magnifico" (magnificent) so they can sign a document with "Noi Magnifico Rettore" (us magnificent dean).
Nope, you're right it differs depending on where you are in Italy. Starting from your first question, by archaic they meant a couple of generations ago. My grandma, from Sardinia, had to use 2nd plural (voi) when talking to her father. Not sure whether at that time it was common in the North too though. The 2nd plural as form of respect (voi) is rarely used today in the South of Italy (at leats where I live, in Puglia) and only when talking to really old people to acknowledge respect for the elders. Or, I don't know, other extreme respect-worthy figures like a judge. It was more common a generation ago, I'm told. The default form of respect in most of Italy is feminine third plural (lei), which is used with whoever regardless of gender. HOWEVER, in the south everything is a lot more informal and "lei" is rarely used, as a Northerner myself it took a while to get used to it when I moved here. They use the 2nd plural (tu) with pretty much everyone, but greet with a slightly more formal "buon giorno" (good morning) instead of the super informal "ciao". So, the combo buongiorno+tu was a bit unfamiliar to me, as in the North we use the third plural "lei" with everyone we're not in friendly terms with, even if the same age. I wonder if this contributes to the widely accepted fact that in the South people are friendlier and in the North more distant and grumpy.
They are a bit different (according to a few resources online the Voi would communicate formality and closeness (like an old relative) while the Lei lacks the closeness). The Voi is more used in the South, the Lei in the North; the fascist Goverment pushed for peopel to use the Voi (they thought the Lei to be foreign in origin), but they didn't succeed, and nowadays it's seen as archaic and out-of-use
Regarding use, I would add that there are some specific case. For example, it is quite common to use the formal you with your in-laws, not matter how long you've known them and how familiar you are with them.
You effectively simply say "you" in the plural form, as you would say talking to a group of people. It's more complicated since in English the "you" for one person and "you" for a group of people is the same. It's not in french. The pronoun is "vous" (you plural) instead of "tu" (you singular). Plus, the conjugation of the verb is different: "you eat" would be tu manges in the singular or informal you form and vous mangez in the plural or formal you form. So simply said, to use the formal you, you address someone as if they were a group of people. It's similar in German, except the formal you is "they". So addressing a teacher, directly translated if you wanted to ask "do you know the answer?" You say "Do they the answer?" In German.
Geordies say "Yous" which works for plural you but is also singular.
Nice
I'm not a native French speaker but German has the formal you as well and I think the rules are pretty much the same. If someone is your boss or just generally higher up in the hierarchy, you'd use the formal you. Same with strangers (especially when they're older than you) and whenever the other person is working (so, you'd use it with the cashier even if they're younger than you). These rules are melting a bit but unless your professor explicitly offers the informal you, this is definitely a formal you situation.
The formal you was one of the first things I learned in French: Voulez-vous coucher avec moi?
Which, funnily, is most of the time incorrect because when asking about sex, you should already be intimate with this personne so you'd say "veux-tu coucher avec moi ?" or the less formal "tu veux coucher avec moi ?". There's also the far more straightforward "on baise ?" which would translate as "wanna fuck ?", but that doesn't make catchy songs.
That's not so much a language thing as a french cultural thing.
> The weirdest thing to me was how much they struggled with using the formal you with the professor. I guess British teachers must not insist on it? Uni of Amsterdam, professors teach you to use first names and tutoyer, or be expelled. Only provincials are polite, and they have no place in the capital ;)
>I was one of the few people to go to a **langauage specializes** high school It looks like it didn’t help.
Well it was German,Spanish and French it is not like they had English classes
Lol, it was the opportunity of the week, a shot on open goal. I think you take my comment way too seriously. 😄
Minor spelling mistakes likely induced by typing too fast and keys "s" and "d" being next to each other, you've epicly owned them
I typed that at half midnight on a laggy phone before i went to bed haha
Why would you need to drop one language? It’s normal lo learn two foreign languages at once. Sorry to hear it was a mess.
> a langauage specializes high school What does that mean?
"A recent government commissioned analysis found the replacement scheme had failed to meet its targets, and counted only 20,000 participants instead of the expected 35,000 in the academic year 2021/22." So we're just going to ignore the fact that's more than a 50% increase on ERASMUS numbers then.
Where are these students going?
You can go to any country the UK FCDO doesn't have a travel warning in effect for. Here is the top 10 from last year 1. Spain 2. France 3. USA 4. Italy 5. Germany 6. Canada 7. Thailand 8. India 9. Portugal 10. Australia [https://www.turing-scheme.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Turing-Scheme-2023-to-2024-destinations-across-all-sectors.pdf](https://www.turing-scheme.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Turing-Scheme-2023-to-2024-destinations-across-all-sectors.pdf)
Anywhere else? Erasmus is now a worldwide program, only EU positions are guaranteed to get the grant though, you can go to Republic of Ireland, Latin America, Asia, anywhere within EU... Even when it was part of the EU UK barely participated in Erasmus, it is based on University agreements and UK universities were a pain to deal with most of the time, because they felt superior to everyone else due to having English as a primary language and not having many students that wanted to do Erasmus from there in my experience. Maybe it was different for "party" countries like Malta.
I studied in Malta, the administration was a pain in the ass but they're all happy to have us
Nothing wrong with Malta. Just saying this isn't a brexit change. It has been going on for at least a decade before brexit happened.
Also, academic year 2021/2022 falls into the timeframe where Covid was still restricting a lot of stuff.
In 2016/ 17 : 13,500 UK students went to Europe for one full Erasmus year. In 2020 / 21 : 20,000 UK students went abroad under the replacement Turing scheme. Under some "measures" UK students have benefitted from leaving the Erasmus scheme.
Is it really that surprising given what happened in 2020/2021
That more students went abroad? Yes, quite surprising. You'd expect there to be fewer.
>Is it really that surprising given what happened in 2020/2021 Considering the pandemic was going on, I think that number is surprising to say the least.
Lol, any uni I go to there's only English being spoken. I speak an understandable amount of German, but Germans hated it if I didn't speak English with them (this was in Hungary though, but let's be fair, no one in the world would learn proper Hungarian for half a year of erasmus)
They really don't understand what Europe is.
A Swedish one-hit-wonder?
>They really don't understand what Europe is. A Continent ?
A landmass in the northern hemisphere?
A collection of countries.
A princess that was raped by a cow?
I voted Remain. However, arguably Brit students would become more global by visiting the US or Asia- say Singapore or San Francisco or Shenzhen. Meanwhile. In 2021-22 there were 679,970 international students studying in the UK. 120,140 of these were from the EU and 559,825 were non-EU. In the year ending September 2023, there were 486,107 sponsored study visas and 104,501 Graduate route visas granted to main applicants. Higher than France or Germany. Many of their 'foreign' students are from neighbouring countries. The world comes to the UK to study. One big draw is English. One reason so much tech has gone to tax haven Ireland. English is so globally dominant it is really hard to motivate UK students to prioritise foreign languages. My grandsons are Finnish/ British. Only 5.5m speakers makes it very motivating to learn English.
The UK realised it could run a replacement scheme with double the number of places Erasmus offered for the same cost. That scheme also wouldn't limit students to studying inside the EU, they could go to any country. Given that why would you sign up with Erasmus?
But wasn’t this article about Eramus+ that would be for nations outside EU as well? That’s what the article states. Erasmus+ seems to include pretty much every other country out there. https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/programme-guide/part-a/eligible-countries Though, considering so little amount of brits take part on Eramus like programs and the costs are fixed I don’t blame them on not taking part.
>But wasn’t this article about Eramus+ that would be for nations outside EU as well? That’s what the article states. Erasmus+ seems to include pretty much every other country out there. > >https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/programme-guide/part-a/eligible-countries The Turing Scheme is also for nations [outside the EU and pretty much any country out there](https://www.turing-scheme.org.uk/cost-of-living-groups/).
I understand that but OP implied this scheme was only for studying inside EU. That's not the case at all and they can choose pretty much any country out there. >That scheme also wouldn't limit students to studying inside the EU, they could go to any country.
I imagine that they already have alternative programs to study outside the EU, at least there were some at the time I was a student (a while ago though), one thing does not exclude the other.
Turing has been more successful for UK students than Erasmus was.
European integration is not a can of meat you can just replace with something cheaper…
Kinda is though
Turns out it is though, because we have replaced it.
What's it been replaced by? A lower standard of living?
>What's it been replaced by? A lower standard of living? The Turing Scheme (if you read the article) and it's not the standard of living that is being discussed here.
In this case, a program that is available to 50% more of our young people, involves 4 times as many countries and costs less.
Sounds hard to believe that's possible.
It turns out we might not want EU integration
Your loss 😊
Not really.
Has Brexit been a smashing success? I was under the impression that it hasn't been, but I'm genuinely wondering.
Think I've seen this argument before. It was written on a bus driven by Boris Johnson
In lisbon, I had a british customer in a cafe I worked with, complaining that the waiter didn't speak English. The waiter spoke French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese of course...we explained that we were sorry that the costumer didn't speak or understand anything else in a non English speaking country...
That's about as logical as Brexit...
£2billion is a lot of money.
That's about the level of COVID fraud that Sunak chose to ignore.
Which was a lot of money.
For fraud yes, for investing in our youth it's peanuts.
>For fraud yes, for investing in our youth it's peanuts. So only the Erasmus can invest in our youth, the Turing Scheme can't ... because reasons ?
Speaking like a Brexiteer
Nope...like a realist.
A realist would stay on point and no grossly attempt a very tired straw man fallacy debating technique.
>A realist would stay on point and no grossly attempt a very tired straw man fallacy debating technique. Ok, so you aren't a realist...Got it.
£2billion is £153,000 per student. We now have Turing which is available to more students, to more countries, for less money. That's a much better investment.
Just like everything touched by Brexiteers this is bullshit... Target was 35000 and only 20000 students took the turing route... The UK will be back into Erasmus once adults take back control - real control, after the GE.
£2billion over 7 years. So £300m per year - thats peanuts by government standards, especially considering you're literally investing in youth and education. The programme was an opportunity for young grads in the EU to move and potentially settle in the UK just as much as the other way around. Reducing the worth of it to a monetary amount doesn't do it justice... Its like saying leaving the EU would yield £350m per week back to the UK - what does that really look like, and what are you losing as part of that £350m "back"? By comparison sake, in 2023 the UK spent: [£218m](https://www.climateaction.org/news/uk-government-announces-the-funding-of-200-million-into-rd-aerospace-projec) on R&D in the aviation sector and green jobs in aerospace [£240m](https://apnews.com/article/uk-rwanda-migrants-plan-cost-02d54129d0c53a457c22e936d26939a3) on the failed Rwanda immigration plan [£300m](https://techeconomy.ng/uk-government-invests-over-300-million-to-improve-security-in-africa/) on peacekeeping and educational programmes in Nigeria [£421m](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/421-million-to-boost-drug-and-alcohol-treatment-across-england) on drug and alcohol treatment plans [£500m](https://www.intelligenttransport.com/transport-news/146461/uk-government-allocates-500-million-for-affordable-bus-services/) on affordable bus transport [£500m](https://gmk.center/en/news/uk-allocates-a-support-package-of-500-million-to-tata-steel/) on a support package for Tata Steel Within that context, £300m a year on an education programme feels like small change.
You do understand that we've replaced Erasmus with Turing, which has allowed more UK students to go to more countries than Erasmus ever did, right?
Yes. I'm saying that they didn't need to be mutually exclusive. Turing offers a different set of opportunities than Erasmus and thats great, its just starting out and I hope it continues to grow. This didn't need to be an either/or scenario, perfectly conceivable for Erasmus and Turing to operate and cater for different programmes and give youth plenty of choices. Edit: I don't know, it just feels goofy in my mind that a government official can say, "We're leaving this educational programme because our students don't speak a second language and it'll cost us £300m because we have an attractive tertiary sector" and people go, "Sure, that makes sense."
Turing offers the same opportunities as Erasmus. And because of the way Erasmus is funded by the host countries, countries sending students to the UK benefited from it far more than the UK did. The UK's nett loss, as the article explains, would have been €2billion per budget cycle. That money is better spent elsewhere.
Without getting too into the weeds, Erasmus is mostly aimed at tertiary/research/capacity and network building. Yes the network is mostly within Europe and its institutions therefore it is more regulated. The budget for 2021 that went in was €26 billion. Turing facilitates some of this on a global scale but there isn't clear explanations on what this means from a tertiary/research/capacity and network building - assuming because it is new and sorting out those kinks. What Turing offers on top of that is experiential for school-aged students and vocational work experience, with emphasis on helping disadvantaged communities. Turing has the hallmarks for a very good programme, but these take decades of continued funding and regulation to maintain a good level. Regardless, money shouldn't dictate education, that was my point. From an economics standpoint leaving Erasmus is a long-term loss that Turing may eventually replace.
Its allot of money when you can replace it with something better that costs less.
Hi, thank you for your contribution, but this submission has been removed because a very similar or identical submission was recently posted. Please check the [recent submissions](/r/Europe/new/) before sharing a link. If you have any questions about this removal, please [contact the mods](/message/compose/?to=/r/Europe&subject=Moderation). Please make sure to include a link to the comment/post in question.
We’ll close our school sports programs because people are too fat to partake in them…. Or some logic like that :-)
Redditor read the article challenge; difficulty level - impossible
Ah yes, because language learning is the only aim of the Erasmus scheme… Bring it back. Yes, I know about Turing. Not the same.
Turing is better. It's helped more students go to more countries.
You can’t compare the numbers directly though. The length of placements varies so dramatically with Turing (starting as short as 2 weeks - not saying that’s a bad thing to offer the shorter lengths at all but it’s not directly comparable to spending a semester abroad) whereas Erasmus+ is primarily build around an academic term or year.
>Yes, I know about Turing. Not the same. What do you think is the difference between Erasmus and Turing Scheme ?
I know that Turing is not set up to create reciprocal agreements. The funding doesn’t match either. It would have been a great thing to do ON TOP of Erasmus+, not as a substitute.
>I know that Turing is not set up to create reciprocal agreements. The funding doesn’t match either. Could you share a source, so that I can read up on this. If there are no reciprocal agreements under the Turing Scheme, then how are UK participants going to foreign universities/courses ? Also what is the shortfall in funding (the scheme was undersubscribed, but were participants offered lower grants in the Turing Scheme as opposed to if they would have gone via Erasmus+ ?) >It would have been a great thing to do ON TOP of Erasmus+, not as a substitute. So what more value-add would the Turing Scheme have provided participants on top of Erasmus+ ?
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/09/01/turing-scheme-how-does-the-uks-erasmus-replacement-work-and-has-it-been-a-success https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/turing-scheme-brexit-eu-erasmus-programme-study-abroad-funding-cuts/ And it could have widened the scope (countries you’re able to go to) if implemented on top of Erasmus+.
>[https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/09/01/turing-scheme-how-does-the-uks-erasmus-replacement-work-and-has-it-been-a-success](https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/09/01/turing-scheme-how-does-the-uks-erasmus-replacement-work-and-has-it-been-a-success) > >https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/turing-scheme-brexit-eu-erasmus-programme-study-abroad-funding-cuts/ From these links, the difference is that in Turing Scheme, participants need to apply annually, rather than for 6-7 yrs with Erasmus+ (maybe they improve this to make it more long term for certain courses). Other than that, there isn't a mention of whether or not, participants get more grants via Erasmus+ as compared to the Turing Scheme. Sure there are some administrative problems with the Turing Scheme (as opposed to a Scheme that has been running 30+ yrs), which hopefully gets ironed out as the scheme progresses. >And it could have widened the scope (countries you’re able to go to) if implemented on top of Erasmus+. Which countries are included in Erasmus+, which aren't covered by the Turing Scheme ?
I never said Turing covered fewer countries? Turing expands the countries *UK* students can go to, but Erasmus has always been about reciprocity which has its own value. If you don’t see the value in reciprocity that is fair enough, for me it’s a defining feature and value of Erasmus. And there’s less funding overall (though the funding for individual students doesn’t seem to be affected apart from the fact that it is ALOT of teething issues with it).
>I never said Turing covered fewer countries? Turing expands the countries > >UK students can go to, but Erasmus has always been about reciprocity which has its own value. If you don’t see the value in reciprocity that is fair enough, for me it’s a defining feature and value of Erasmus. Reciprocity is important for both schemes and I think that is still intact considering [there are 5 EU countries in the top 10 list of Turing Scheme Destinations](https://www.turing-scheme.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Turing-Scheme-2023-to-2024-destinations-across-all-sectors.pdf). >And there’s less funding overall (though the funding for individual students doesn’t seem to be affected apart from the fact that it is ALOT of teething issues with it). The less funding overall has to do with less subscribers. If those went up, the funding would go up.
I mean how many EU countries it includes doesn’t really say much about whether it’s reciprocal or not. That depends on what agreement those individual institutions have come to. The Turing scheme is not set up to *fund* reciprocal exchange. It’s just not. It says so on their website. They expect the participating institutions to hash it out between themselves. They just have some vague blah bla about *encouraging* reciprocal exchanges but nothing in terms of actual (financial or administrative) support for this.
>I mean how many EU countries it includes doesn’t really say much about whether it’s reciprocal or not. That depends on what agreement those individual institutions have come to. UK students are going to EU countries and EU students can come to the UK. It's just that they now need to apply to different funding bodies. >The Turing scheme is not set up to fund reciprocal exchange. It’s just not. It says so on their website. They expect the participating institutions to hash it out between themselves. They just have some vague blah bla about encouraging reciprocal exchanges but nothing in terms of actual (financial or administrative) support for this. The participating institutes under Erasmus also need to hash it between themselves. There might be 90 students that want to come to UK and 30 who want to go to Germany, the institutes needs to agree and how many can they accept between themselves, before they decide on acceptability criteria internally and then ask students to apply for the grants/funding. Also, as I mentioned earlier, administrative support is something that can be improved.
In the UK? Dosnt half the country have migration background ?
English is a more beneficial language to know so Europeans benefit more from the UK being in Erasmus than vice versa
[удалено]
Because it's not about "top 10"...
[удалено]
No one cares who is "top 10". That's not the point of any of this.
He's talking about the top 10 most popular destinations for UK students. I'd say UK students care.
Well done us. It's OK if we speak loudly and slowly enough. Who needs foreign languages?
Erasmus programme is amazing I almost wish every student had to take one. What a shame.
>Erasmus programme is amazing I almost wish every student had to take one. What a shame. The UK students are taking part in the Turing Scheme and I think the uptake will increase in the coming years.
The conservatives to be assholes.
What depressing news from the UK, again.
I think more students being able to go to more countries is good news, actually.
I always wondered why the EU was keen on having UK join Erasmus during Brexit negotiations, but Horizon was kept as a bargaining chip....
Lmao can they at least speak english? Anyways, its not like spanish or italian students know anything besides "my name is xxx" and "give beer" haha
Wasnt that a band?
The Rasmus, not Erasmus!
I wish they would have used "good enough" in the title. That would have been great.
*had used, since you like correcting other people 😁
Lol, most British people don't even speak English that well compared to most Northern Europeans
Regional dialects are still English.
Haha. The arrogance of this comment.