NATIONAL REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION AND IMPACT OF THE ERASMUS+ PROGRAMME ITALY
Courtesy translation from the original text in Italian by: Marialuisa Silvestrini, Department of Youth and National Civic Service
The National Report on the implementation and impact of the Erasmus+ Program in Italy was drafted by the National Authorities and by the National Agencies responsible for the Program.
For the National Authorities:
Donatella Amatucci, Daniela Mechilli, Anna Brancaccio, Paola Castellucci – Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca (area scuola, università ed educazione degli adulti) - Ministry of Education, University and Research – SE/HE/AE.
Natalia Guido, Monica Lippolis - Ministero del Lavoro e delle Politiche Sociali (area formazione) - Ministry of Labour and Social Policies - VET
Lucio d’Amore, Vincenzo D’Antini – Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Dipartimento della Gioventù e del Servizio Civile Nazionale - Prime Ministers’ Office, Department of Youth and National Civic Service - Youth For the National Agencies:
Elena Bettini, Angela Miniati, Sara Pagliai, Lorenza Venturi, Luisella Silvestri - INDIRE (Istituto Nazionale Documentazione Innovazione Ricerca Educativa) – SE/HE/AE
Sveva Balduini, Franca Fiacco, Roberta Grisoni, Michela Volpi di INAPP (Istituto Nazionale Analisi Politiche Pubbliche) - VET
Giuseppe Gualtieri, Adele Tinaburri – ANG (Agenzia Nazionale Giovani)- Youth Contacts:
Donatella Amatucci - Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca Autorità Nazionale Erasmus+ area scuola, università ed educazione degli adulti e-mail: donatella.amatucci@istruzione.it
INDEX
SUMMARY 3
METHODOLOGY AND ROLE OF THE ACTORS 5
QUESTIONS/ANSWERS 6
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 30
SUMMARY
This document is the contribution from Italy to the Medium Term Evaluation Report on the implementation and impact of Erasmus +, as provided for by the EC Regulation 1288/2013 establishing the new Program.
The document, which is the result of a broad discussion and thorough analysis at national level among all the stakeholders involved, jointly presents the results of investigations and analysis of each field, with the aim of responding to the questions posed by the Commission.
A brief summary of the main findings of the Report appears here below. It deals with the relevant macro areas (effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence and complementarity, European added value, and sustainability) while challenges and proposals for changes appear in the conclusion.
Effectiveness
European programs designed to finance specific sectorial activities have historically been aimed at supporting the rapprochement among the different "Country systems", promoting mutual knowledge and facilitating the integration path. Consistently, in recent years Italian policies have aimed at achieving the goals outlined in the Europe 2020 Strategy, and the ET2020 Framework. In synergy with these strategic guidelines, projects implemented through the European Education, Training and Youth Programs have been the ideal starting point for identifying educational and training needs, and for experimenting innovative teaching strategies. Although the national trend towards achieving the EU 2020 goals is still unsatisfactory, Erasmus + remains extremely useful in helping to meet the needs and challenges of the national system that hinder the achievement of the European targets.
Therefore, in Italy Erasmus + as well as the previous LLP and Youth in Action Programs are considered to be of great importance for the implementation of the EU objectives, and as a forum for experimentation of good transversal practices, the implementation of which is supported and integrated through the use of other national and European financial instruments that ensure a greater strategic impact. Indeed, due to the scarcity of financial resources that has always characterized education, training and youth Programs in comparison to other sources of funding (e.g. Structural Funds), in Italy the impact in achieving the European objectives of innovation and quality of the systems has been marginal. Nonetheless, such programs are recognized as undoubtedly effective in achieving the specific goals of individual growth and internationalization of the different relevant environments.
Among the envisaged actions, mobility has proved to be the most effective as it affects individual skills, abilities and perspectives; while cooperation partnerships, more complex and less successful, are recognized as able to promote innovative systems and create synergies among qualitative experiences.
Merging several Programs in a single container was generally appreciated by the public at large because it offers an overview of the Erasmus + opportunities in all areas of interest. Nevertheless, the new architecture did not facilitate the implementation of inter-sectorial cooperation initiatives among fields which differ in terms of goals, users, and content, although the National Agencies have worked in that direction through joint communication and stakeholder supporting tools.
Efficiency in program implementation and resource management
The goal of simplification in managing the measures envisaged by Erasmus + has been partly achieved through new digital solutions for the application process and for the project management. Once the initial difficulties have been overcome, the new IT tools (e.g. Erasmus + Dashboard) have been generally
appreciated, despite they are not yet totally reliable. The unit cost system, introduced by Erasmus +, was also welcomed by the participants and proved to be useful in defining the budget, and for reporting. Still, some critical issues remain to be solved.
In Italy's view, the legal basis – which is strongly characterized by the relationship between the European Commission and the NAs - leaves the National Authorities at the margins of the implementation of the Program. This is in contradiction with the obligations and responsibilities for the proper administrative and accounting management attributed to the NAU.
In addition, since part of the control activities are delegated to an independent auditing body - whose work and work arrangements are still evolving – the role of NAU has been further weakened, while the financial burden payed by the member States has increased.
At the managerial level the efficiency of the Program is hampered by the poor communication existing among all the actors that should coordinate decisions within the European Program Committee. The mechanisms that allow synergy between the EACEA (European Executive Agency) and the NAs for the promotion and dissemination of the centralized actions are also to be completed. Such synergy is currently active only for the international sector of Higher Education.
Finally, it is generally shared the opinion that the efficiency of the measures of the Program will benefit from the expected budgetary increase that Italy will certainly be able to absorb: in particular, more funds should be made available for mobility. It would also be useful to review the resources allocated for operation, which are not adjusted to the increasing management obligations of the National Agencies.
The relevance of the Program to the needs of systems and individuals
Even further to the Eurosceptic spiral triggered by Brexit, and the issues related to immigration, globalization and socio-economic challenges, Erasmus + is considered useful to overcome cultural barriers and to keep alive the spirit of belonging to a democratic society that shares the ideals of peaceful coexistence among peoples. Therefore, social inclusion must be valued in all sectors. Moreover, considering the continuing economic crisis and unemployment (especially among youth), in Italy there is a need to strengthen the role the Program can play to support employability and to highlight the strategic value of the school-enterprise networks in promoting non-formal and informal learning experiences.
Internal and external coherence and complementarity with other instruments
Erasmus + actions have an impact on potential users of all ages, and of different backgrounds. Therefore, they can support the construction of positive synergies both within the Program, and with other financial instruments when the institutions involved so wish. However, at the moment operational and management rules – both at national and Community level – still lack harmonization able to be conducive to complementarity.
The European added value and sustainability of the Program
In Italy the European added value of Erasmus + is undeniable. The obligation to set up active and effective partnerships translates into an opportunity for cooperation both at national and European level, and leads to the progressive internationalization of the organizations involved in the projects. This value represents one of the most significant intangible results of the Program, which should be further emphasized to ensure the sustainability and impact on the results.
In this perspective, the need for a new transversal and permanent strategy for the promotion of, and information on the results achieved is considered as important as the previewed and expected increase in financial resources by all stakeholders.
METHODOLOGY AND ROLE OF THE ACTORS
The preparation of the National Report represented for Italy an opportunity for an overall analysis of the Program within each relevant field, as well as at national coordination level.
The NAUs did not deem necessary to entrust an external research institute for the collection and analysis of the data for their evaluation; they identified the National Agencies as the most suitable bodies to support in choosing suitable research strategies and to implement specific researches, in order to fully comply with the evaluation criteria established by the Commission.
The National Report was jointly drafted by the three NAUs, with the involvement of all relevant actors in the different sectors, in accordance with the methodological indications provided by the Commission in Ares (2016) 576506 of 02/02/2016. The Report contains the answers to all the questions put forward by the Commission, thus providing a complete picture for each examined evaluation criteria.
In June 2016 a dedicated Drafting Committee was established, consisting of NAUs’ and ANs’ experts. The Committee shared and approved its own roadmap and the methodology that led to the drafting of the Italian document.
The agreed methodology envisaged the collection of data and the analysis of documents, followed by selected activities specifically focusing on each field. Therefore, during the first phase each NAU worked individually in close collaboration with its AN, sharing research areas and strategies, and prepared a sector report useful for internal analysis within its respective administrative and policy context. Afterwards, starting from the results of the sectorial reports, a small group of representatives of National Authorities redrafted unitary response to each question by highlighting synergies and specificities and providing an overview of the implementation of Erasmus + in Italy as well as suggestions for future programming.
The elements behind the processing of the answers derive from (the analysis of the following):
• Surveys and research, online public consultations, meetings with national and regional stakeholders, seminars, focus groups and panel of experts on specific topics. These actions have allowed to acquire knowledge about: 1) the level of implementation of the Program in Italy; 2) the level of knowledge about the program; 3) stakeholders' perception of the positive aspects and the criticalities in order to assess the impact of European interventions at individual, institution and system level;
• Political and regulatory choices that have had a major impact on the education and training system in recent years, as well as the results of international skills surveys (PIAAC, PISA) that have allowed us to monitor Italy's progress towards the European goals supported by Erasmus + and by the previous LLP.
The final joint Report was shared and validated at political level, in order to ensure a strategic reading of the Program evaluation in support of the national development and innovation policies of the education and training systems. The overall analysis took also into account Erasmus + role in improving skills and key competences to support the processes of social inclusion and employability, and the support the Program can provide to national youth policies for employment.
Please refer to the Annexes for specific surveys and activities of the different areas. The Annexes are to be considered as an integral part of the Report.
Coordination for the drafting of the National Report was provided by NAU MLPS (01.07.2016 - 31.12.2016) and NAU MIUR (01.01.2017 - 30.06.2017).
QUESTIONS/ANSWERS 1° Question
To what extent have Erasmus+ and its predecessor programs contributed to the realization of the Erasmus+
specific objectives (as listed in point B.2 in annex 3) in your country? Are there differences across fields?
Please provide, where relevant, your assessment for each of the specific objectives and provide evidence and examples where possible.
Thanks to the number of projects financed, and of beneficiaries reached by LLP and YiA as well as Erasmus +, in Italy the European programs in the field of education, training and youth represent - for their respective fields of reference- an important tool for the innovation of the systems and for developing a European area of lifelong learning. Indeed, these Programs are perceived and appreciated as a successful example of European integration.
The general perception is that transnational experiences produce remarkable effects at the individual level on the intercultural dimension, on the development of specific skills, as well as on the development of the personality, autonomy, sense of responsibility and ability to team-working. All Program participants declare to be very satisfied, to have fully achieved the specific goals included in their projects, and that their expectations have been fulfilled.
The analysis and the detailed sectorial studies produced different results related to the specific objectives of the Program. Some clarifications are reported here below.
Objective (a)
Mobility enables individuals to acquire different skills in formal, non-formal and informal environments. It is generally perceived in all sectors as the tool which contributes to strengthen communication skills, including knowledge of foreign languages, relational skills at personal, interpersonal and social level, civic and citizenship skills, also developing one’s awareness about European citizenship.
The improvement of language skills is the most tangible result of the experience matured abroad by university students who, thanks to Erasmus+, are able to speak at least two foreign languages by the time of graduation. Moreover, this kind of learning experiences are generally more job-oriented compared to those at national level, with the result that jobs abroad are more easily accepted, according to data produced by Universities.
This is why academic institutions keep supporting their students’ applications to all possible projects and activities related to high level education offered by Erasmus+ and by other European and international Research Programs.
Even for school- and adult education students (hereinafter AE) participation in mobility projects means improving their linguistic, technological and relational skills. Nevertheless, the impact of the measure in these fields is still limited. Teachers and staff recognize that mobility contributes to increasing relational,
managerial and language skills, as well as teaching and technological skills, although it is not always possible to transfer the outcome at institution level.
For VET beneficiaries, internships abroad help to improve their professional, personal and interpersonal skills as well as entrepreneurial skills, and often represent an opportunity to enter the job market. In a recent survey, conducted by ISFOL / INAPP in collaboration with two of the Italian National Agencies Erasmus + (for VET and for Education), over 6,000 LdV trainees and about 2,000 Erasmus Placement trainees have been interviewed. The survey shows that around 60 % of the participants found employment upon return, and believe that their experience has been significant for their success.
Beneficiaries in the Youth sector agree that mobility is effective in strengthening European identity and in developing civic and citizenship skills. The results of the surveys carried out through the RAY network (see Annex YOUTH " Analysis and monitoring of Erasmus + Youth in Action: results and evidences from RAY- Italy”) highlight how mobility in Europe enables young people to more flexible attitudes and behaviors towards each other and towards different contexts in general, offering them the opportunity to make the most out of the skills they acquired. The interviewees point out that they can take decisions more rapidly, succeed in dealing with debates with sense of responsibility and self-confidence, and know how to cooperate in a group; even if they say they cannot deal with political issues at the same level.
Many youth workers claim to have strengthened their planning skills, built networks with other youth leaders, and learnt how to recognize their skills and abilities. Such positive effects also fall to their respective organizations and communities, with the effect of " contaminating local reality”. Among the skills acquired, 80% of the respondents feel more aware of being able to " contribute to the development of youth policies" and declare that they are utilizing their new knowledge and skills in their daily work. In addition, participants are more prone to search information about European affairs, to participate in voluntary activities, and to actively engage themselves at the civic level.
Objective (b)
In the school sector, the innovative thrust arising from the participation in European projects, coupled with a concrete will by the participating Institutes to overcome the old educational models, increases the ability to capture and accept external stimuli and promotes different experimental activities. Therefore, it is not by chance that 80% of the schools involved in the so called " Educational Avant-garde" movement are institutions that participated in Erasmus + and in previous European programs. " Educational Avant-garde", initially promoted by 22 schools of excellence (now 581) aims at bringing to scale the most significant innovation experiences of the school's organizational model. The seven reference points are: changing the school's transmitting model; exploiting ICT and digital languages opportunities to support new ways of teaching / learning / evaluating; creating new learning environments; reorganizing school time; connecting what acquired at school and the knowledge society; investing in "human capital" by rethinking the various relationships (inside/out, frontal teaching / peer learning, school / business, etc.); promoting sustainable and transferable innovation.
In the VET field, innovation takes place within a system as open as possible, to which Erasmus + has contributed through mobility and cooperation. With the transition from LdV to Erasmus +, the educational plans have changed and mobility actions have become systematic activities, fully integrated into the proposed programs.
In the Youth sector, participation in the Program has led to a greater understanding of the non-formal educational process and of the potential offered by the youth work. Youth workers’ mobility allows them to face a challenging international environment with different, mostly informal, educational and participatory methods, as well as to strengthen their project management skills through transnational networks.
Objective (c)
Regarding transnational mobility for lifelong learning, Erasmus+ (and LdV) offers a fertile ground for setting up innovative practices and experiments on transparency as well as on the recognition of skills and qualifications, as revealed by a number of surveys conducted by the AN for VET, aimed at exploring the level of knowledge and use of the transparency instruments (in particular ECVET). The added value, deriving from the social recognition of skills gained abroad, and the importance of directly involving the world of employment in the evaluation processes of these competencies also emerged during a Focus Group with enterprises organized by the NA for VET (see Annex VET).
In the Youth field, Youthpass is an increasingly recognized and exploited tool. Sectorial surveys show that more than 80% of the respondents have used the tool at the end of their project and have filled it in a largely participatory and reflective way, thus promoting self-awareness of what learnt (see Annex YOUTH).
However, the research carried out by the RAY network show that in the national context Youthpass is still little known and only in the Youth context. Therefore, further investment is needed to promote the recognition of this tool and its potential value also in other contexts.
In the HE sector, the recognition of credits gained during studies in an academic institution abroad is still subject to the evaluation of each University and to the arrangements in the mobility agreement. In this respect, the Italian commitment to give continuity to the intergovernmental process arising from the Bologna Declaration resulted in the participation in KA3 “CHEER Project” (“Consolidating Higher Education Experience of Reform: norms, networks and good Practices in Italy”). The Project (approved for 2014-2015 and refinanced for 2016-2018) is carried out by the Ministry of Education, University and Research in collaboration with the Conference of Rectors of the Italian Universities. It deals with the national recognition procedures with a view to create a system that - through a student centered approach - facilitates the use of European transparency and recognition tools (ECTS and Diploma Supplement) and assures quality and accreditation in order to harmonize national evaluation with the European system, according to the new Guidelines on Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG 2015).
Objective (d)
The Italian academic world has always responded with interest to the opportunities offered by the previous Erasmus Program and continued with the same enthusiasm when novelties were introduced in Erasmus +:
HE institutions have well accepted international mobility and the proposed transnational cooperation initiatives (see the high-level Italian response to the Call for the Joint Master's Degree), which are considered as an integral part of the curricula.
Moreover, the need to meet a more international student audience is pushing part of the Italian academic world to deliver university courses in English. An excellent example is the “Politecnico of Milano” which at the moment offers 16 courses in English. This strategy triggered all universities to do the same, whether they are large (e.g. the Politecnico of Torino), or small, e.g. the University of Macerata which set up master courses in International Relations, Tourism Management and Finance Policies in English.
Even in the VET field, the mobility actions offered by Erasmus + are steadily becoming part of the curricula of the institutions involved. For example, since 2016 the introduction of the VET Mobility Charter contributed to the process. The analysis of the strategies for internationalization and innovation of the various organizations applying for the Charter reveals the effort they are making in bringing mobility initiatives to scale. This is illustrated, inter alia, by what is stated in the specific section of the KA1 VET application form, concerning the European development plan and it is also reported by the independent experts involved in the evaluation of the applications. The strengthening of cooperation - due also to the creation of the “national consortium"- has further contributed to consolidating local and national partnerships with a view to bring to scale experiences and initiatives that, although qualitatively significant, would have remained isolated.
Also in the Youth sector participation in the Program has favorably enhanced the ability to develop further transnational contacts and partnerships, the ability to transfer good practices within one’s organization, and the overall increase of young people’ participation in the organization / group.
Objective (e)
In the Education and Training sectors both LLP and Erasmus + consider the improvement of teaching and learning of foreign languages and the promotion of linguistic and cultural diversity as priority themes, even if, in the transition from one Program to another, the specific priority assigned to foreign languages disappeared. Therefore, especially for KA2 VET, activities aimed at promoting foreign languages for job were reduced. On the contrary, in KA1 VET, a strong contribution to improving foreign languages competences has been guaranteed by transnational mobility and the introduction of OLS (Online Linguistic Support). The European Language Label is a valuable tool for supporting foreign language learning. Since 1998, it has continued to stimulate experimentation in the field of vocational language learning within VET.
Question 2
To what extent has the progress on the realization of the specific objectives contributed to the realization of the Erasmus+ general objectives (as listed in point B.2 in annex 3) in your country?
The scarcity of funding compared to other Community instruments, such as the Structural Funds, makes Erasmus+’ impact globally minimal in responding to EU2020 and ET2020 objectives. However, there is a common feeling on E+ and its predecessors’ contribution to keep alive the attention to the stimuli of the European Strategies, as they affect individual opportunities and institutions, and strengthen cooperation between education, training, youth and the business world. Indeed, the experiences gained through the Program (as already highlighted in the answer to question 1) have a positive influence on the general development of skills and are among the best practices for achieving the common goals to boost the competitiveness of European education and training systems.
In relation to skills, the latest international surveys (OECD-PISA) and the results of the national surveys on learning (see INVALSI report 2015/2016) show that on average in Italy students do not have good results yet; and, above all, there are considerable regional differences. In addition, according to the PIAAC 2013 survey, in our country language and mathematical competences of the adults (16-65 years old) are among the lowest in the OECD countries and vary greatly according to socio-demographic characteristics. Indeed, despite recent improvements, only 29.8% of the Italian population reached level 3 or above in literacy, and 28.9% in numeracy. Even the EU's 2015 figures on achieving the 2020 targets indicate that Italy is far from European averages: only 7.3% of adults attend lifelong learning activities and 25.3% of young people get a
tertiary education diploma when they reach the age of 30/34 years. Various LLP and Erasmus+ projects were put in practice in this context, including centralized actions, in order to improve competences for the different sectors. An example is the KA3 project “ICEE” (Innovation Cluster for Entrepreneurship Education) with MIUR as a partner. The project is focused on entrepreneurship education and explores the possible paths to ensure its feasibility before the end of the studies, in line with the European goal of promoting youth entrepreneurship experiences.
Mobility is the most attractive and popular action for all Erasmus+ fields, and it is a recognized brand associated with the European dimension in Education, Training and Youth. Nevertheless, the percentage of participants cannot be considered satisfactory vis-a-vis the EU2020 targets. In Italy, mobility is not accessible to everybody, because of the poor financial resources and – consequently – of the limited numbers of scholarships. This often imply additional personal financial commitments. For example, the number of universities which have access to funding is very high, but the percentage of those who participate in mobility is low. Every year, the VET and the Youth sector utilize all the available funds, but the Community budget for mobility is insufficient to meet the needs and expectations of the applicants. On the other hand, according to surveys among participants, although numerically irrelevant, mobility is able to ensure excellent results, even when projects involve young people with learning disabilities or disadvantaged (economic, social, physical, psychic). In these cases transnational experience is an effective re-motivational tool for learning, as well as a mean of first access to the job market.
With regard to the promotion of European values, mobility concretely contributes to the development of European citizenship and active citizenship. In this sense, Erasmus + has a specific impact on the perception of values in young people in terms of tolerance, solidarity, self-awareness, equality, individual freedom, peace and human rights. Young people feel a strong link to democratic principles and to a deep sense of responsibility for the development of their community and of the “sustainable development of Europe", showing a " sensitive” connection between the local and the European supranational level. Despite the positive experience of participating in the EU programs, youth show a sort of detachment from the European institutions and policies. Indeed, most beneficiaries tend to consider Erasmus + as the only relevant European intervention for young people.
Question 3
To what extent have Erasmus+ actions influenced policy developments in the domains of education and training, youth and sport in your country? Which actions were most effective in doing so? Are there marked differences between different fields?
The European Programs, starting from those before Erasmus +, aimed at supporting the rapprochement of the education and training systems, and fostering mutual knowledge. Their actions represent a key element in strengthening national policies and their orientation towards European strategic goals, to improve the quality of education and training, promote youth employment and social inclusion, in line with EU2020 and ET2020. Initiatives undertaken through participation in European projects are the ideal basis for identifying needs and experimenting with innovative teaching and training strategies, as well as non-formal and informal educational pathways. Therefore, they constitute a useful tool for consolidating Community guidelines in country systems and a forum for experimenting good transversal practices, whose implementation is supported/integrated by higher strategic impact European and national financial instruments.
In the Youth sector, European programs have represented an important tool for providing visibility and recognition to new professions, including the youth worker, which otherwise would be unknown, unexpressed and invisible. Thanks to the European youth programs a debate on the recognition of competences acquired in non-formal and informal learning contexts was promoted at national level, in line with OECD strategies.
Both in the Partnership and in the On the Job Training fields, transnational co-operation supported and anticipated the experimentation on the eight key competences within the Italian school system. The eight key competences were formally recognized by the Ministerial Decree (hereafter MD) no.139 in 2007. More recently, Law No.107 / 2015 (" The Good School" ) and the subsequent DM No.797 / 2015 enhanced the importance of training and provided teachers with a mandatory continuous training plan aimed at developing the key competences of their students. In this framework, Erasmus + contribution is to be considered as an essential instrument to increase the overall proportion of trained teachers, which in 2015 in Italy was still below the EU average (75% vs. 85%).
Regarding the work-based learning, Law no. 107/2015 made it compulsory for all students in the last three years of high schools (400 hours in Technical and Professional Institutes and 200 in Classical/Scientific High Schools). In this context, transnational mobility carried out through LLP / LdV and Erasmus + has acted as a pioneer of innovative experiences even when study courses, as in classical/scientific high schools, did not traditionally provide for such a method. In addition, an experimentation of the dual system began in Italy in January 2016: 60,000 young people will get formal qualification through training courses associated with apprenticeship contracts and work-based learning experiences (Law no. 107/2015).
With regard to the recognition of qualifications and the certification of competences, the experiments carried out in Italy under the LLP / LdV Program (mainly through the TOIs) and the Erasmus + Program (in particular with the KA1 Mobility Actions) contributed - through a bottom up approach - to the development of national reform processes. An important achievement through the experience of the LLP Program was the implementation of the Legislative Decree (hereinafter LD) no. 13/2013 for the " Definition of general rules and essential levels of performance for the identification and validation of non-formal and informal learning and the minimum standards of service of the national certification system". The aforementioned legislation also concerns the youth sector and, through the interest raised by the Youth Pass, the issue of recognizing the skills acquired through the National Civic Service was addressed at national level. Later, thanks to the enhancement of transversal experiences of Erasmus + instruments and devices, the MD 30/06/2015 (in collaboration with the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy and the Ministry of Education, University and Research) on the "Definition of an operational framework for the national recognition of regional qualifications and competences within the National Directory of Education and Training Titles and Qualifications" was approved. The MD set up a technical group entrusted with the finalization of a National Qualification Framework.
University students’ mobility and, more generally, the internationalization of higher education institutions is a consolidated reality that Italy systematically supports (DM No.635 / 2016) by allocating national financial contributions on the basis of achieved objectives and parameters, also in relation to the strategies for strengthening the international dimension of the educational offer. In addition, the international dimension of youth mobility towards non-European countries is favored by bilateral relations within the geopolitical strategies of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, with a particular focus on the Middle and Far East, the North African countries, the Sub- Saharan Africa and North America. Finally, in order to facilitate the access to Italian tertiary education for students and researchers coming from countries at risk, ad hoc
educational corridors have been opened and a Memorandum of Understanding was signed with the Rectors' Conference of the Italian Universities to promote recognition of skills in the absence of qualifications and certifications.
Question 4
What specific approaches (such as co-financing, promotion or others) have you taken in order to try to enhance the effects of Erasmus+ in your country? To what extent have these approaches been effective?
Can any particular points for improvement be identified?
The Erasmus + Program, as well as its predecessors, are well-known in Italy thanks to the numerous and diverse promotional activities carried out by the three National Agencies in co-operation with each other and with the constant support of National Authorities. Widespread participation in all Calls confirmed that the choices made by Italy in order to promote the Program have been effective in keeping the stakeholders' interest in its actions up to now. However, it should be noted that the rate of access to funding is gradually decreasing, due to the limited amount of EU available funds. It should be useful to allocate more financial resources to allow the implementation of those projects which cannot be sustained with EU resources even if approved with excellent quality scores.
In order to facilitate the transition from LLP to Erasmus + in the school sector (where changes have a major impact) in 2014-2015 Italy funded a specific National Training Plan which presented to stakeholders the content and potential of the new Program with the aim of increasing the number of beneficiaries. Through the collaboration provided by the Regional School Offices and with the support of the AN, a first group of experienced schools were trained to become trainers of other schools in their territory.
The commitment to foster and broaden the access to the Program resulted in a series of sectorial choices:
- support to the presentation of mobility projects involving a number of schools of the same territory (regional consortia), in order to have a wider and more significant relapse on the training of school staff, in line with the Country's educational system;
- participation in a KA3 experimental project - "IVO4All" - which aims at identifying good practices for inclusion and provide access to international volunteering for young people with fewer opportunities;
- support (through national funding from the Youth Policy Fund given to the NA through specific agreements with the NAU) to promotion, communication and information activities to provide visibility and information on the Program, particularly on the specific chapter "Youth", to enable an increasing number of young people know and grasp the opportunities that Europe, and hence Italy, offers to new generations;
- since 2016, allocating a percentage of the KA2 VET budget to small Strategic Partnerships, with the aim to promote applications regarding exchanges of good practice, extremely successful in LLP (Multilateral Partnerships). This choice met the expectations of the sectorial bodies, increasing motivation and encouraging the submission / approval of proposals;
- further reduction of the VET mobility ceilings for the 2017 Call, in order to increase the number of grants delivered, improve the Program impact on the beneficiary and their satisfaction rate. The choice followed the outcomes from the final financial reports, highlighting a significant return of funds, and could help to
increase the expected mobility targets for 2020. Indeed, due to the high ceilings, the 40% increase of the Erasmus + funds did not produce a proportional increase in participation during the first three years;
- support to mobility in higher education, in continuity with the LLP, through a co-financing from the national budget which, from 2014 to date, has been equal to € 149,181,402, plus a specific ESF co-financing for activating Internships at companies or training and research centers in European countries participating in the Program (currently € 24,058,775). Some universities also invest their own funds to integrate scholarships to facilitate the participation of their students in non-European mobility projects or courses for obtaining double titles. Finally, incoming students receive free Italian classes upon arrival in our country.
The adult sector gets visibility through the EPALE Platform, which is regularly co-financed by the national budget. A lot of stakeholders are involved and 50 EPALE ambassadors play the role of multipliers at the regional level in the field of adult education.
Question 5
Do you consider that certain actions of the program are more effective than others? Are there differences across fields? What are the determining factors for making these actions of the program more effective?
Mobility is generally considered to be the most effective Erasmus + action for achieving the specific objectives of the Program and it is the one that most influences individual characteristics (acquired skills, improved competences, transformation of organizational models). It is also considered to be more effective for students, teachers and staff’s training (for SE, HE and VET), as it has a major impact on the curriculum and the career prospects of the individuals involved, and provides opportunities to promote the youth field, and the professional figure of the youth worker. It also contributes to the process of internationalization of the institutions, through the involvement of both outgoing and incoming participants. The effectiveness of mobility is also confirmed in relation to innovation, self-awareness, market opening, employability and recognition of skills acquired in informal and non-formal contexts. Those who have the opportunity to study / work / learn abroad are perceived by the potential employer as the most attractive subject, and there are many opportunities offered to young people directly by foreign host companies, as emerged from interviews and sectorial focus group (see All.2_MIUR).
Mobility is also a form of training strategy that can provide excellent results for participants with learning difficulties or disadvantages. In these cases, overseas experience proves to be an effective tool to stimulate study, also in view of future professional integration, as well as of building and / or reinforcing self-esteem.
For the youth sector, the methodologies used in mobility, based on experiential learning by doing and peer learning, create a very favorable learning environment for cross-competences enhancement. Long-term mobility, such as the European Voluntary Service, also promotes the creation of autonomy paths for young participants.
In general at the management level, KA1 is considered more accessible, less difficult and simpler to organize in comparison with Strategic Partnerships. KA2, on the other hand, is less widespread because it is more complex, less known and penalized by the low rate of success of the proposals. Nevertheless, the beneficiaries of Strategic Partnerships consider this action be most effective on the quality of training, innovation and internationalization of the Educational systems. In academic, school and non-formal environments the measure strengthens a European area of lifelong learning, designed to integrate national policy reforms and promote innovative systems. The peculiarity of producing outcomes entails involving, in the same partnership, a variety of subjects from very different geographic contexts with multiple
competencies / experiences; it also permits to address themes and issues geared to meeting specific priorities and objectives of the different sectors.
Question 6
To what extent has the integration of several programs into Erasmus+ made the program more effective in your country? Do you see scope for changes to the structure of Erasmus+ or its successor program that could increase effectiveness?
Merging the different programs within a single regulatory framework has been an element of discontinuity with the past, and despite the initial disorientation it was generally appreciated by the audience as it offered an overview of the available funding opportunities and synergies between the various sectors. This is confirmed by the increasing interest in the program. Integration has also increased the visibility of Erasmus +, generated more public and political attention, contributed to the process of innovation and internationalization of national education and training systems, and to the achievement of ET2020 strategic objectives.
In order to measure the knowledge and effectiveness of the integrated Program, some surveys were conducted (see Annexes 2 and 3 MIUR) on education (school, university and adult) and training stakeholders. Those who already benefited from the Program and potential newcomers, while being aware of the new opportunities, complained about difficulties in accessing and using procedures, highlighting the need for a greater clarity in the structure and the management and financial rules that, at present, do not allow an effective coordination among the Agencies. In addition, the general perception is that Erasmus + is conceived for large organizations, with more qualified and experienced internal expertise, and more structural and economic resources, at the expense of smaller and less experienced institutions, as well as of some target groups (e.g. disadvantaged people).
At the same time, cross sectorial co-operation, which is one of Erasmus + strengths, enabled an inclusive process that broadened the audience of potential beneficiaries, provided greater opportunities and favored access to organizations that traditionally referred to other areas. The most striking example comes from the classical, scientific, and linguistic high schools that, with the new programming, have been able to design initiatives in the field of Education and Professional Training.
Given the specificity of the beneficiaries, it is more difficult to integrate the Youth sector, which highlights, on one side, the added value of the Erasmus + brand in the field of youth work and, on the other side, the difficult access for small youth organizations - privileged target groups in the 2007-2013 programming - as well as of young people with fewer opportunities.
Question 7
Is the size of budget appropriate and proportionate to what Erasmus+ is set out to achieve? Is the distribution of funds across the program’s fields and actions appropriate in relation to their level of effectiveness and utility?
In line with the inter-sectorial approach, keeping separate budget chapters by field proved to be functional to the effectiveness of the Program. It is therefore considered that this solution should be maintained in future operational management.
As far as the economic resources are concerned, although they were increased compared to the previous programming, they still remain insufficient to meet the growing demand for transnational mobility by young people and adults (in KA1 Mobility), as well as to allow educational and training experimentations (in KA2 Strategic Partnerships). In general, it can be said that the budget allocated to Italy does not guarantee access to the Program for all projects with an excellent evaluation.
More specifically, with regard to the resources for KA2, their scarcity does not produce a real impact on Education and Training systems, as well as on the Youth field. The solution to this phenomenon lies not only in a financial increase but in a rethinking of the action itself. The resources available for KA2 at a decentralized level should be used only to finance exchanges of good practice and networking, while the development of innovation should be financed through the allocation for KA2 at centralized level (Alliances for sectorial skills).
As far as sectorial specificities, please find below some additional considerations:
In the Education sector, the most significant change was related to the approved projects for schools, in particular for staff training, that moved from 60% in 2007 (first LLP year) to 11% in 2014 (first Erasmus + year). However, at the same time, the number of individuals in mobility within Erasmus+ increased dramatically: just in three years, the program financed 5,476 mobility grants in the school sector and 1,083 in the adult sector, compared to a total of 6,278 in Comenius LLP and 900 in Grundtvig.
Even with regard to HE, which has a high satisfaction level for KA1, the available resources are not sufficient to satisfy the demand: indeed, in KA103 all institutions received funding, but the requests for mobility were met only at 59%; in KA107 only 58% of institutions received funding and it is very difficult for candidates to receive funds for all the exchanges planned with the different countries within the same application.
In addition, it would be necessary to increase funding for apprenticeships for young people enrolled in the last year of university, in order to stimulate start-ups and partnerships with companies and to support transversal projects promoting links among school, university and job.
In VET sector, KA1 enables overseas mobility of approximately 8,500 learners every year (average data on contracts awarded in the three-year period 2014-2016). Therefore, it is clear that Erasmus + mobility remains reserved to a limited number of people compared to the audience of potential beneficiaries: to date, its figures do not allow to extend learning experiences abroad to all, as Europe claims for the educational sector as a whole. On the other hand, even at European level the target set for the mobility of initial professional qualifications in the group age 18-34 remains far from being met: in 2016 the European average values stand at 3% while the target is set at 6%. This is also confirmed by the low rate of financing provided: out of the requested €484 million for the period 2014-2016 for KA1 and KA2 only €101million were actually disbursed (about 1/5 of the demand).
In the Youth sector, in the first three years of the Program, 6,017 applications were submitted, 2,564 (about 42%) reached the minimum score of 60/100, but only 1,386 (approximately 23%) were funded. The total contribution paid was € 34,795,490.11, and the data shows that little more than half of the projects submitted received funding.
Further to the issues highlighted for the specific sectors, at a transversal level it must be highlighted that a more effective use of funds could be achieved by introducing simplifications in administrative-financial procedures and additional criteria to ensure equal access to all, even with the same available Community resources.
Question 8
What challenges and difficulties do you encounter while implementing the various actions of Erasmus+?
What changes would need to be introduced in Erasmus+ or its successor program to remedy these?
In view of the future EU perspectives, the National Agencies in agreement with the NAUs took the opportunity of the intermediate evaluation to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the Program. In all areas there are criticalities in the effectiveness of the actions, that negatively reflect on the Program implementation and on public perception.
Access to financing represents the major challenge for beneficiaries in all sectors. In Italy, the low rate of success, as highlighted in this Report, is due to the large number of applications submitted for both the actions and to the high financial request of each proposal. This problem occurs also in applications evaluated with very high scores. It is suggested:
- to increase globally the available financial resources;
- to establish additional constraints on the amount of funding for each project (e.g. to put a ceiling on the funding of KA1 projects, in order to encourage participation from small organizations, lacking the necessary financial and organizational skills, and enable them to compete effectively with large organizations and attract newcomers); sectorial specificities should be taken into account too;
- to limit the Strategic Partnerships in School, EDA and VET sectors to exchanges of good practices and networking, fixing a maximum funding, much lower than the current (e.g. € 150,000 in total); bigger educational and training innovation projects should be managed at central level;
- to clarify better the rules for funding of projects aimed at people with special needs.
Some criticalities also emerge regarding VET Mobility Charter, which contributed to a mature mobility awareness as an integral part of the internationalization of training offer, but also led to the perception of a program open to few expert bodies that, enjoying a " privileged access" to funding, acquire the bulk of the resources, and restrict access to small promoters and newcomers. On the contrary, the inclusive nature of the Program should be sustained and safeguarded, especially for VET, which is characterized by the presence of different providers and it is direct expression of the various stakeholders involved in the sector (vocational training centers, organizations of Social Parties, business training structures, entrepreneurial world, social cooperatives, NGOs, as well as traditional school institutions and universities). To address this situation, some solutions are possible including:
- to set a maximum ceiling on the percentage increase of the resources to be allocated to Mobility Card holders, and absolutely avoid that Card holders be the only potential beneficiaries of the VET program by 2020;
- to define stricter rules on the number of Cards to be awarded to each beneficiary (e.g. setting the rule that a cardholder can only have one and submit one design proposal as a promoter or partner).
Another critical issue is the significant digitization that took place with Erasmus +. Although highly appreciated, it creates difficulties for operational offices and beneficiaries since management tools are redundant and do not communicate with each other. In addition, the constant upgrading of their databases
is very time consuming since human resources are needed for data entry and control activities. Further insights and suggestions for improvement over IT tools are included in the answer 14.
The Program Guide is also considered to be difficult to use both for its setting and language. The specific characteristics of the different areas are not clear, therefore it would be useful to modify the structure of the document, clarifying the various opportunities offered to the different stakeholders.
Other challenges include ensuring participation in the Program of all strategic actors (e.g. business, socio- economic realities, etc.), promoting equal access to all national geographic areas and promoting an effective interaction between Erasmus + actions and EU and national policies aiming at achieving common objectives. In this respect, it would be highly desirable to reintroduce national priorities, able to support country-based strategies, as was the case with LLP.
Question 9
To what extent are the approaches and tools that are used for disseminating and exploiting the results of Erasmus+ and its predecessor programs in your country effective? Where can you see the possibilities for improvements?
Erasmus+ web and social communication are a reality and a constant presence in the Italian landscape. The website dedicated to all Erasmus + actions (www.erasmusplus.it), which is jointly implemented by the three National Agencies, is the main reference point for all stakeholders and beneficiaries, totaling 3,128,922 viewers (updated in March 2017 ). Social channels, managed autonomously by individual NAs, record a number of constantly growing fans/followers (in March 2017, about 36,217 Facebook fans and 11,722 followers on Twitter).
The choice of a common website proved to be effective for granting a unitary vision of Erasmus + and its tools, even if it made it difficult for the potential beneficiaries to recognize the specific features as it was in the previous programming. Nevertheless, the Erasmus+ Italian website is a useful tool for information and promotion and it contributes to the development and sharing of good practices, useful to make the opportunities offered by the EU cooperation visible to audience. In line with the recent " Strategy for the Dissemination and Exploitation of Program Results" of the EC, the section " Stories" is the space where the results of the Italian projects implemented by Erasmus + are most emphasized.
The EU Platform EPRP (Erasmus + Project Results Platform), which is a reference point for the dissemination and enhancement of European experiences, makes information on all projects funded in Europe available on a single website and it is useful to identify procedures and criteria for the definition of good practices and success stories in Erasmus + and in previous programs. Having a single platform also has an intrinsic and remarkable multiplier effect on the EU and national territory, with benefits in terms of management and costs. It also allows further dissemination of creative energies and resources at national level.
Nevertheless, there is room for improvement, in particular for young people who consider vis-à-vis relationships the most effective tool to promote their experiences.
Here below some suggestions to improve dissemination and valorization:
- strengthen the project search engine in the EPRP dissemination platform, by broadening the possibility for thematic, sectorial, target group analysis and to make inquiries, analyzes and summaries of undue interest;
- create common operational tools and/or guidelines to be used in the selection process to identify good practices;
- simplify IT tools and strengthen their interconnections instead of developing new ones Question 10
To what extent is the system of cooperation and division of tasks between the Commission, Executive Agency, National Agencies, European Investment Fund, National Authorities, Independent Audit Bodies, and Erasmus+ Committee efficient and well-functioning from the point of view of your country? What are the areas for possible improvement or simplification in the implementation of Erasmus+ or a successor program?
The legal basis of the current programming is strongly characterized by the relationship between EC and NAs; it reduces the role of National Authorities and is in contradiction with the responsibilities they incur in relation to the reliability of the entire process. Therefore, having in mind the previous experience in the past programming, it is suggested to review the modalities of communication among the various bodies involved in the Erasmus+ management and implementation both at the central and decentralized level, with a view to improve efficiency. It is essential that all actors be part of ongoing decisions and processes to avoid bottlenecks in the flow of information. In particular, the choices that have an impact on the country's strategies cannot involve only ANs excluding NAUs, as these last are formally responsible for the strategic policy address of the Program. In addition, until now the Erasmus+ Committee has not been the focal point of comparison on different strategic visions of the Program, and at most representatives of National Authorities are invited to share the Commission's proposals and decisions. For the future, it would be desirable to foresee more structured communication modalities among all the actors involved, in order to reach coordinated decisions.
At national level, Italy managed to overcome these weaknesses by assuring a continuous communication channel with ANs, and by sharing all relevant documentation, whether produced at the level of the Program Committee or during ANs technical meetings. We believe that this practice can be extended even at the highest level, with all strategic actors, through simple communications and/or by activating a common chat less formal than CIRCA. In addition, if programmatic documents were forwarded in due time for examination and analysis, this would enable a more efficient participation in the Committee's decision- making process. An excellent tool to circulate ideas and proposals at no cost could be webinars, even if they cannot replace the role of the Program Committee.
In addition, the absence of mechanisms that promote synergies between the EACEA and the National Agencies is to be highlighted, both in terms of general communication and for the enhancement of KA3 actions at the national level. However, in the Education field the improvement of cooperation with EACEA in promoting, informing and implementing centralized actions dedicated in particular to the international dimension of the higher education sector must be noted (KA1: Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degree, KA2 : Capacity Building for HE and Jean Monnet Actions).
As far as the VET sector is concerned, a more fluid and structured communication between DG EAC and DG EMPL would create an added value for the quality and effectiveness of the Program.
Finally, duties and responsibilities of the Independent Audit Body (IAB) - whose financial burden is borne by NAUs - should not be subject to constant adjustments or amendments, which are not always in line with nationally-signed contracts. Therefore, the “Guidelines for National Authorities in relation to the
responsibilities of the Independent Auditing Body” should be made stable in order to avoid that the EC's continuous demands for new activities to be undertaken have an impact on existing contracts, creating additional costs and additional managerial burdens.
Question 11
To what extent has the integration of several programs into Erasmus+ resulted in efficiency gains or losses for the implementation of the program in your country, both at the level of the National Agency/ies and on the beneficiaries' and participants' level? Do you see scope for changes to the structure of Erasmus+
It is shared opinion that the unification of several programs in a single container created a "common home"
under the "Erasmus" brand (see question 6). Thanks to the integration of the different sectors into a single Program, planning is more efficient and functional, all available opportunities are easily accessible at a glance, synergies are promoted, procedures for accessing funding are harmonized. Beneficiaries believe that the new approach allows more awareness about the procedures related to the different actions, as well as their correlation with the objectives of common European policies. In addition, the efforts made at EC level to harmonize procedures are appreciated, although there are still differences among the sectors.
Over the years, Agencies have consolidated and expanded their cooperation, including through joint information and promotional events, and the creation of a common website. The various joint activities are managed by an inter-agency coordination structure.
On the other hand, integration is incomplete and some specificities in implementation modes do not find adequate justification in practice. Some mechanisms hindered the potential synergies between sectors (e.g.
creating difficulties in recognizing the right AN when applying for "transversal" projects), and perceiving the Program as a tool largely oriented towards large organizations at the expense of smaller institutions.
Indeed, small size organizations encounter difficulties in participating in Erasmus+ calls, because they lack the necessary financial and organizational skills to be sufficiently competitive. All this continues to create confusion among the beneficiaries, not only those who gained experience through participation in previous programs, but also among those who approach Erasmus + with no previous expertise.
As far as the VET sector is concerned, notwithstanding the information effort, the communication campaigns and the numerous dissemination events set up by the AN, it is not sufficiently clear that the new Program does not include PLM / LLP (People in the Labor Market) any longer and activities for ITS (Superior Technical Institutes) are no longer related to VET, but to the Education sector. It is also very complex to clarify where the IFP sector ends and where the Adult Learning begins: indeed, many applications submitted in the two fields are borderline.
In general, improvements may include the following:
- standardize for the entire Program the definition of the target called "people with special needs" , which should include both physically and psychologically disadvantaged persons, and people with geographical, socio-economic disadvantages, etc. in order to avoid access discrimination in relation to the relevant sector (see the case of recipients of VET actions, repeatedly represented in the Program Committee);
- a rationalization of available Transparency Tools would be desirable, in line with the Skills' Strategy,
Question 12
Do you consider that the implementation of certain actions of the program is more efficient than others?
Are there differences across fields? What good practices of these more efficient actions of the program could be transferred to others?
Data show that KA1's efficiency is higher than other decentralized actions, particularly in achieving the results planned at national and EC level. The positive effects of some structural changes in the transition from the LLP to Erasmus+ had a significant impact on this action, with significant growth in the number of applications submitted and the number of loans granted .
For example, the possibility to clearly evaluate the impact of mobility on individuals is an added value.
Surveys and monitoring activities on privileged stakeholders underline how mobility enriched participants’
personal and professional life, and how their educational and professional perspectives have changed. It should also be remembered that mobility is most directly associated with the Erasmus brand and has contributed most to the realization of a European area of education and training.
In the field of school education and EDA, individual mobility projects became projects of the institute and their objectives and aims not only concern individuals but the school as a whole. Impact was much more significant than what was achieved with the On the Job Training of the previous Comenius Program. In particular, the analysis of the Participant Report 2014 data (drawn up upon return from mobility) and a specific Focus Group coordinated by the National Agency in 2015 (see Ann.5_Miur) highlighted how the European Development Plan (EDP) is important to raise awareness and stimulate sharing and collaboration within Italian schools.
As far as the VET field is concerned, bearing in mind that individual mobility has a rather diversified target (young people from educational institutions and Vocational Training Centers), and that experience is particularly significant since it offers a transnational educational, training and work settings, mobility is a milestone in individuals’ life and an important reference point in the development of their professional and personal project.
With reference to the mobility in the Youth sector, customer support activities facilitate the approach to young beneficiaries, encouraging the creation of trust relationships that also support the development and improvement of quality.
With regard to KA2, its testing in the medium term of programming highlighted some shortcomings in terms of efficiency and functionality. While on the one hand, for all sectors, the action promotes quality, innovation and internationalization, on the other hand, it finances a small number of projects with a consequent reduction of impact and effects. Another obvious limitation of this action is, in particular, the achievement of the mobility envisaged within it. In particular:
- KA2 has not been particularly efficient for the school sector and has failed to overcome the lack of mobility of KA1 students which, thanks to the LLP experimentation with Comenius Pupils mobility, had been highly appreciated in our country;
- for VET, as KA1 mobility is very successful, KA2 promoters have no specific interest in incorporating this experience into co-operation projects. For this reason, it is considered that this type of mobility for the VET sector should be eliminated within KA2 projects and attributed directly to KA1, in which it would find a more appropriate and coherent placement.
