The HLITL project aims to define the different types of mobility and lift obstacles to mobility by attracting more students, particularly from students from disadvantaged backgrounds, such as students with physical disabilities, working/apprentice students, etc.
Funding: Erasmus+ Key Action 2
Project budget: 229.879 €
Length: 2 years
There are many reasons why students do not or cannot go on mobility, often due to working capacity issues, not knowing the benefits, or simply being intimidated by going to another country. Physical inability to go on mobility is also an obstacle. There are also many cases where students are unable to go on mobility because of employment obligations or strict university programmes. With the implementation of the new Erasmus programme, there is the possibility to adapt programmes and practices of higher education institutions, including a variety of lengths and mobility types.
The aim of the project How long is too long (hLitl) is to enable Higher Education leaders and Internationalisation managers to adapt and improve their mobility strategies, fostering mobility schemes with the greatest impact on key competences of students (multilingual, expression and digital competence as well as intercultural awareness, etc.), including mobility schemes mixing distant learning and physical mobility (blended learning) and broader mobility for all types of students.
To implement the project, some actions and activities have been settled: first, a “Literary Review” will be written to study and analyse what is currently made at the institutional level and proposed at the policy level. This will be completed by an analysis of the conditions of implementation of the different mobility schemes (technical, social, etc.) in order to have the largest patterns on our subject. Surveys will also be carried out during the first and second year of the project. This step is crucial to better understand the students’ needs and institutions’ strategies for mobility. During the second year of the project, a testing phase will be settled to analyse the impact of such typologies of mobility on the students’ key competences, and see which one is the most efficient. This will then be used for the development of institutional recommendations (in the form of a toolkit) and policies which will make it possible to propose and improve good practices at European and university level.
Partners: University of Versailles St-Quentin-en-Yveline, Eötvös Loránd University, University of Porto, University of Lodz, University of Marburg, ESN, EUF