ERASMUS in the BALTIC COUNTRIES 2007-2013 a Statistical Overview

Lifelong Learning Programme ERASMUS in the BALTIC COUNTRIES 2007-2013 A Statistical Overview

2014

1 Contents

Erasmus Key Figures for the Years 2007-2013 �� 8

Introduction �� 9

Erasmus Student Mobility �� 10 1.1. General overview of student mobility ��10 1.1.1. Outgoing Erasmus Student Mobility �� 10 1.1.2. Incoming Student Mobility �� 12 1.1.3. Grants �� 13 1.1.4. Grants for Students with Special Needs �� 13 1.2. Erasmus Student Mobility for Studies ��14 1.2.1. Introduction �� 14 1.2.2. Outgoing student mobility for studies �� 14 1.2.3. Incoming Student Mobility for Studies �� 15 1.2.4. Subject Areas �� 16 1.2.5. Study Grants �� 17 1.3. Erasmus Student Mobility for Placements ��18 1.3.1. Introduction �� 18 1.3.2. Outgoing Student Mobility for Placements �� 18 1.3.3. Incoming Student Mobility for Placements �� 19 1.3.4. Placement Sectors �� 20 1.3.4. Placement Sectors ��22

Erasmus Staff Mobility ��23 2.1. General Overview of Staff Mobility ��23 2.2. Staff Mobility for Teaching Assignments ��24 2.2.1. Introduction �� 24 2.2.2. Outgoing Staff Mobility for Teaching Assignments �� 25 2.2.3. Incoming Staff Mobility for Teaching Assignments �� 25 2.2.4. Subject Areas �� 26 2.2.5. Grants for Teaching Assignments �� 28 2.3. Erasmus Staff Mobility for Staff Training ��29 2.3.1. Introduction �� 29 2.3.2. Outgoing Staff Mobility for Staff Training �� 29 2.3.3. Incoming Staff Mobility for Staff Training �� 29 2.3.4. Grants for Staff Training �� 30

Erasmus Intensive Language Courses (EILC) ��32 3.1� incoming EILC Participants ��33 3.2. Outgoing EILC Participants ��33

Erasmus Intensive Programmes (IPs) ��35 4.1� number of IPs ��35 4.2. Participation in IPs ��36

2 3 List of annexes

Erasmus Programme Budget ��38 Annex 1 Estonian Higher Education institutions’ participation in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 ��61 Examples of Best Practices ��40 Annex 2 6.1. Students’ Testimonials ��40 Latvian Higher Education institutions’ participation in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 ��62 6.1.2. Mr Kārlis Musts (Baltic International Academie, Latvia): ��40 Annex 3 6.1.1. Ms Pille-Riin Lillepalu (Viljandi Culture Academy of the University of Tartu, Estonia): ��40 Lithuanian Higher Education institutions’ participation in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 ��63 6.1.3. Ms Giedrė Pranaitytė (Vytautas Magnus University): �� 41 6.2. Staffs’ Testimonials ��42 Annex 4 6.2.1. Ms Mairita Folkmane (Daugavpils University) �� 42 Outgoing student percentage from total student number per HEI in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 ��64 6.2.2. Ms Sirje Virkus (Institute of Information Studies in Tallinn University) �� 43 Annex 5 6.2.3. Ms Aušrinė Packevičiūtė (Lithuanian Sports University) ��44 Outgoing-incoming Erasmus students per host-home country in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 ��67 6.3. Most Active/Attractive HEIs ��45 6.3.1. Tartu Art College (TAC) �� 45 Annex 6 6.3.2. Daugavpils University (DU) ��46 Outgoing staff percentage from total staff number per HEI in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 ��69 6.3.3. Vilnius University ��46 Annex 7 6.4. Best Practice in Intensive Programmes ��48 Outgoing-incoming Erasmus staff per host-home country in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 ��71 6.4.1. “Brass & Jazz eliminates boundaries between the classics and jazz” ( Jāzeps Vītols Latvian Annex 8 Academy of Music) ��48 Outgoing Erasmus special needs students and staff in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 ��73 6.4.2. “Summer University in Sustainable Rural Tourism“ (Kuressaare College of Tallinn University of Technology) �� 49 Annex 9 6.4.3. “Contemporary Past“ (Vilnius Academy of Arts) �� 49 Outgoing- incoming students for Erasmus Intensive Language Courses per host countries in 2007-2013 ��76 6.5. Best Practice in Erasmus Intensive Language Courses ��51 Annex 10 6.5.1. Erasmus Intensive Latvian Language Course (University of Latvia) �� 51 Erasmus Intensive Programmes partner countries in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 ��78 6.5.2. Erasmus Intensive Language Week – EILW in Estonia (Tallinn University of Technology (TUT), Estonian Business School and Estonian Academy of Security Sciences) �� 52 6.5.3. Erasmus Intensive Latvian Language Course (Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences (LEU)) �� 53

Other National Initiatives ��54 7.1. Erasmus Student Network (ESN) in Baltic countries ��54 7.1.1. ESN Estonia �� 54 7.1.2. ESN Latvia �� 55 7.1.3. ESN Lithuania �� 55 7.2. Survey - Erasmus students’ satisfaction with different aspects of Erasmus mobility in Latvia ��56 7.3. Survey – Satisfaction of participants of the Erasmus programme in Latvia ��56 7.4. Survey of foreign students who studied under the Erasmus programme in Lithuania ��57 7.5. Erasmus for Lithuanian Schools ��58 7.6. Europe Makes School (EMS) in Estonia 2013 - 2014 ��58

4 5 List of Charts

Chart 1: Outgoing Erasmus Students per Home Country: 2007-2008 to 2012-2013 �� 10 Chart 39: Teachers Participating in IPs per Host Country from 2007–2008 �� 37 Chart 2: Outgoing Erasmus Students per Study Cycle in the Baltic Countries: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 11 Chart 40: Erasmus Funds for Mobility Actions per Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 38 Chart 3: Share of Mobility for Studies vs. Placements in the Baltic Countries: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 11 Chart 41: Share of EU Budget and National Co-Funding per Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 38 Chart 4: Erasmus Students as a Proportion of the Student Population in the Participating Countries: Chart 42: Budgets per Country for Erasmus Intensive Language Courses: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 39 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 11 Chart 43: Budgets per Country for Erasmus Intensive Programmes: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 39 Chart 5: Number of Incoming Erasmus Students from 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 12 Chart 6: The Balance of Outgoing vs. Incoming Erasmus Students: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 12 NOTE: Source for all charts - data from HEI’s annual reports to National Agencies of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Chart 7: Average EU Monthly Grant per Student Mobility from 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 13 Chart 8: Total Number of Students (Mobility for Studies) from 2007–2008 by Home Country �� 14 Chart 9: Incoming Student Mobility for Studies per Home Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 15 Chart 10: Incoming vs. Outgoing Mobility for Studies per Home Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 15 Chart 11: Student Mobility for Studies by Subject Areas: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 16 Chart 12: Student Mobility for Studies by Subject Areas per Country �� 17 Acronyms Chart 13: Average Monthly Grant for Mobility for Studies per Home Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 17 Chart 14: Outgoing Students on Placements per Home Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 18 Chart 15: Incoming Placements per Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 19 Chart 16: Balance of Incoming vs. Outgoing Placements: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 19 Chart 17: Economic Sectors of Placements: Increase-Decrease 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 20 Chart 18: Student Mobility for Placements: Economic Sectors per Country �� 21 ECTS – European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System Chart 19: Average Monthly Grant for Placements per Home Country 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 22 Chart 20: Growth in Staff Mobility: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 23 EE – Estonia Chart 21: Outgoing Staff Mobility per Home Country: 2007–2008 – 2012–2013 �� 23 – Erasmus Intensive Language Courses Chart 22: Staff as Proportion of the Staff Population in the Participating Countries: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 24 EILC Chart 23: Outgoing Teaching Assignments per Home Country from 2007–2008 �� 25 EUC – Erasmus University Charter Chart 24: Incoming Teaching Assignments per Country between 2007–2008 and 2012–2013 �� 26 Chart 25: Outgoing and Incoming Staff Teaching Assignments per Country �� 26 HEI – Higher Education Institution Chart 26: Erasmus Staff Mobility for Teaching by Subject Area: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 27 LLP – Lifelong Learning Programme Chart 27: Staff Mobility for Teaching Assignments by Subject Area and by Country �� 28 Chart 28: Average Grant per Teaching Assignments: 2007–2008 – 2012–2013 �� 28 LT – Lithuania Chart 29: Outgoing Staff Mobility for Staff Training per Home Country from 2007–2008 �� 29 Chart 30: Incoming Staff Training Visits per Country: 2007-2008 to 2012–2013 �� 30 LV – Latvia Chart 31: Outgoing-Incoming Staff Mobility for Staff Training by Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 30 IP – Intensive Programmes Chart 32: Average Total Grant for Staff Training per Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 31 Chart 33: Number of EILC Course Organising Institutions (OI) between 2007–2008 and 2012–2013 �� 32 SM – Erasmus Student Mobility Chart 34: Incoming EILC Participants per Coordinating Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 33 Chart 35: Outgoing EILC Participants per Coordinating Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 34 SMP – Erasmus Student Mobility for Placements Chart 36: Number of applied IPs between 2007 and 2013 �� 35 SMS – Erasmus Student Mobility for Studies Chart 37:Number of IPs per Coordinating Country between 2007–2008 and 2012–2013 �� 36 Chart 38: Students Participating in IPs per Host Country from 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 �� 36 ST – Erasmus Staff Mobility STA – Erasmus Staff Mobility for Teaching Assignment STT – Erasmus Staff Mobility for Training

6 7 Erasmus Key Figures for the Introduction Years 2007-2013 In 1981 the European Commission started a pi- The feedback from participants shows that most of- lot-student mobility action in Europe, which became ten the exchange period exceeded expectations. Peo- a predecessor to the Erasmus programme launched ple are less aware that the Erasmus programme pro- in 1987. During the first academic year 11 European moted the internationalisation of the European Higher 35 516 Student mobilities • Average student monthly grant: countries with almost 3 244 students participated in Education system. Most of the goals of the Bologna of which: the programme. In 1995 Erasmus was merged with process are tightly related with fostering student mo- other educational and training programmes and was bility. This cooperation process, started in 1999 with Eur 497 named the Socrates programme. In 2000 the pro- the goal of creating a European Higher Education Area • 26 573 students studying abroad gramme was prolonged to Socrates II. In 2007 a new (EHEA), and major progress was made in harmonising • Top sending countries: Turkey, Germany, programme called the Lifelong Learning Programme university degree structures and increasing the com- France • 8 943 students doing traineeships grew from the previous Socrates. patibility of Higher Education systems. Bologna Minis- (placements) abroad ters also set the goal that by 2020 at least 20 % of all • Top receiving countries: Germany, Spain, The Erasmus programme is one of the most famous graduates from the EHEA should have spent a period of Finland success stories of Europe. In 2013 the programme had time studying or training abroad. reached as many as three million students. Thanks to personal or indirect contact with Erasmus students, The Erasmus Charter enabled HEIs to participate most people associate the programme mainly with in the programme as a quality assurance not only for student mobility. During recent academic years more the European Commission but also for other HEIs. The than 200 000 students per year have had the possi- Erasmus programme has significantly contributed to • Top sending countries: Poland, Latvia, 16 069 Staff Mobilities bility to develop their professional and language skills, the internationalisation process of the HEIs, mainly of which: Turkey gain international experience and broaden their hori- through the system of inter-institutional agreements zons. and development of the curricula. More and more it has • Top receiving countries: Germany, Finland, • 10 135 teaching assignments Lithuania been emphasised that student mobility and exchange abroad Student mobility contributes to individuals’ per- of teachers must be the rule not the exception. Eras- sonal development and thus equips individuals with a mus mobility is a core element of the European Com- • 5 934 staff training periods abroad wide range of competences and skills – from foreign mission’s strategy to combat youth unemployment, languages to adaptability and greater intercultural featuring prominently in the Europe 2020 strategy for awareness. In these ways, mobility encourages labour growth and jobs and as a central part of the flagship market mobility later in life. initiative ‘Youth on the Move’.

Placements in companies and workplaces abroad This brochure provides a statistical analysis of the have been supported through Erasmus since 2007 and implementation of the Erasmus Programme’s decen- have accounted for the largest increases in the num- tralised mobility actions in the 3 participating Europe- Higher Education Institutions ber of students in recent years; grants have already an countries in the Baltic Area and covers the overall sent students/staff on Erasmus mobility in: 78 been awarded to nearly 6 000 students to undertake performance of all the different types of actions fund- Intensive Language Courses for placements. ed by the Lifelong Learning Programme (Student and 133 Intensive Programmes with: Staff Mobility, Intensive Programmes, Erasmus Inten- Teachers and other staff, such as university inter- sive Language Courses) in the period 2007–2013. national relations officers, can also benefit from EU • 3 929 students 1 433 support to teach or be trained abroad, and Higher Ed- Cooperation between Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania Erasmus students ucation Institutions (HEIs) have the opportunity to in- goes back a long time: from the year 2004 common • 1 214 teachers vite staff from companies to come and teach in their strategies and events were developed and implement- institutions. ed. Nevertheless – each country has its own strengths and strides, which were noted in European contexts.

8 9 Erasmus Student Mobility Chart 2: Outgoing Erasmus Students per Study Cycle in the Baltic Countries: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

5554 5427 5144 Bachelor 4603 4278 3755 Master 1.1. General overview of student mobility 1068 1019 1138 Doctoral 702 763 900 100 130 119 167 138 130 39 44 74 96 128 0 Short study 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 1.1.1. Outgoing Erasmus Student Mobility

Chart 3: Share of Mobility for Studies vs. Placements in the Baltic Countries: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

The Baltic countries started the Erasmus Pro- of the LLP in 2007. It exceeded 4 557 for 2007–2008; SMS gramme in 1999–2000 and reached 710 students – while 6 831 students went abroad to study or train in SMP which is 0.7 % of total European students of the same 2012–2013, which represents an increase of 49.9 %. 4752 4855 4658 Chart 3 shows the share of Erasmus student mo- 4271 year. This year’s growth can be explained by the impact of 3955 4082 bility for studies versus placements in the Baltic coun- Since inception of the Lifelong Learning programme, national and institutional co-funding. tries. The countries with the highest share of place- 1981 2173 Lithuania has sent the highest number of students, or The highest increase of outgoing students was 1653 1406 ment students were Latvia (29 %) followed by Estonia 1128 19 151, followed by Latvia with 10 674, and then Esto- noted in Estonia (23 %), followed by Latvia (22 %) 602 (26 %) and Lithuania (23 %). nia with 5 691 Erasmus student participants. and Lithuania (14 %). The number of Erasmus stu- There has been a steady increase in the number of dents increased in all countries with the exception of 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 student mobility periods every year since the beginning the last year for Latvia (-2 %) and Lithuania (-0.6 %). As absolute numbers for Student Mobility reflect to countries. a large extent the size of the participating countries, Latvia was the best performing country in terms of we can try to obtain relative terms by calculating the Chart 1: Outgoing Erasmus Students per Home Country: 2007-2008 to 2012-2013 outgoing Erasmus student mobility as a proportion of proportion of the number of Erasmus students to the the total student population (2.6 %), followed by Lith- 3550 total student numbers in each country. 3417 3529 uania (2.5 %), and then Estonia (2.0 %). Chart 4 compares the Erasmus students’ data with 3000 3002 The list of outgoing Erasmus student mobility as a the student numbers in the Baltic countries. The num- 2653 proportion of the total student numbers for each insti- ber of Erasmus students as a proportion of the whole tution in the Baltic countries can be found in Annex 4. Lithuania 2194 2194 1959 student population was on average 2.4 % in the Baltic 1736 Latvia 1449 1187 1092 1153 Chart 4: Erasmus Students as a Proportion of the Student Population in the Participating Countries: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 939 1029 717 761 Estonia 3.8

3.4 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 3.1 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.5 Estonia Average 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.7 Latvia Average constituted 16 % of participants, and Doctoral stu- 1.5 81% of students participating in Eras- dents were 2 % while 1 % of participants were reg- mus mobility (studies and placements) were Bachelor istered in education institutions offering short-cycle Lithuania Average students. Students enrolled in Masters Programmes higher vocational education courses (only in Latvia).

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

10 11 Germany is the most popular destination among (6 %) and Portugal with 2 139 incoming students (6 1.1.3. Grants Baltic students in the period 2007–2013 with 3 635 %). incoming students (10 % share), followed by Spain The trends in the distribution of outgoing Erasmus with 3 073 incoming students (9 %) and then Finland student within European countries can be found in An- with 2 516 students (7 %), France with 2 153 students nex 5. Erasmus grants are designed to cover part of the In the total period of the LLP programme the aver- additional costs of living abroad and travel. Erasmus age monthly grant – including zero-grants – received students do not pay tuition fees at their host institu- by students (including both studies and placements) tion abroad. The institution can decide on the exact was EUR 497. This average is the effect of the different 1.1.2. Incoming Student Mobility monthly grant it pays to students within a range set conditions for study mobility (EUR 452 on average) and by the European Commission and National Agency in placement mobility (EUR 542 on average). the respective country. In all three countries, national Chart 7 below shows the development of the aver- Constant growth in the number of incoming Eras- Lithuania (24 %). co-financing is a huge support for Institutions and al- age EU monthly grant since the academic year 2007– mus students for studies and placements is notable in Chart 5 shows the trends in the incoming Erasmus lows increasing the Erasmus grant given by the Euro- 2008. all Baltic countries during the period from 2007–2008 student numbers since the academic year 2007–2008. pean Union or numbers of outgoing students. to 2012–2013. The highest annual growth was in Latvia (37 %) followed by Estonia (27 %) and then

Chart 5: Number of Incoming Erasmus Students from 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 Chart 7: Average EU Monthly Grant per Student Mobility from 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

2326

1877 Estonia SM 633 1540 Estonia SM 600 585 570 1374 535 522 534 1274 1224 Latvia SM Latvia SM 553 503 512 1051 1084 479 372 463 372 427 850 1134 436 767 Lithuania SM Lithuania SM 708 619 892 330 526 480 650 392

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Chart 6: The Balance of Outgoing vs. Incoming Erasmus Students: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 1.1.4. Grants for Students with Special Needs

Outgoing

Ingoing 19151 Chart 6 shows the balance in the different countries Erasmus also actively supports the participation tion of students with special needs in higher education in terms of incoming and outgoing Erasmus students. of students with special needs by offering a supple- in general. The number of outgoing Erasmus students 10674 9392 The best balance between incoming and outgoing mentary grant. During the period from 20007-2008 to per country and institution who received supplemen- 5691 5302 4074 students was recorded in Estonia (48 %), followed by 2012–2013 35 students with special needs received tary grants in the LLP programme can be found in An- Lithuania (33 %) and Latvia (28 %). additional funding. Most of them were for student mo- nex 8. Estonia Latvia Lithuania bility for studies. Lithuania sent out the highest number of students Students with special needs represented only 0.1 % with special needs or 28 (80 % share), followed by Es- of the total number of Erasmus student mobility in the tonia with 5 (14 %), and Latvia, which sent 2 students Turkey jumped in the programme and was the best then France with 1 995 students (11 %), Spain with Baltic countries. Although this is a relatively low figure (6 %). sending country to the Baltic countries with 2 617 1 924 students (10 %) and Poland with 1 685 students in absolute terms, it reflects the limited low participa- students sent to the Baltic countries (14 % share), (9 %) coming to the Baltic countries. followed by Germany with 2 109 students (11 %) and

12 13 1.2. Erasmus Student Mobility for Studies 1.2.3. Incoming Student Mobility for Studies

1.2.1. Introduction As could be expected with growth in the outgoing numbers between years, all Baltic countries saw an in- The average growth in mobility for studies from crease in the number of incoming Erasmus students 2007–2008 is 16 % – up from 1 890 students in 2007– Erasmus offers students the possibility of spend- Of students participating in Erasmus mobility for for studies. The highest annual growth rate was in 2008 to 3 976 in 2012–2013. Chart 9 shows the trends ing part of their degree studying abroad at another studies in Baltic countries 83 % were Bachelor stu- Latvia (36 %), followed by Estonia (28 %) and then by in the incoming numbers since 2007–2008. HEI for three to twelve months. Student Mobility for dents. Students enrolled in Masters Programmes Lithuania (24 %). Studies, which is the most common action under the constituted 15 % of participants, Doctoral students Programme, aims to provide students with the oppor- were 1 %, and 0.4 % of participants were registered tunity of studying in another country, to promote co- in education institutions offering short-cycle higher Chart 9: Incoming Student Mobility for Studies per Home Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 operation between institutions and help enrich their vocational education courses (in Latvia only). Here educational environment and to contribute to building the picture is quite different from the share we can a pool of well-qualified, open-minded and internation- observe under the student mobility for placements, 1983 ally experienced young people. where Doctoral students and short-cycle students are more active (see 1.3.1 below). 1603

1328 Estonia SM 1196 1124

990 1074 1.2.2. Outgoing student mobility for studies 930 Latvia SM 919 728 727 658 Lithuania SM 591 546 During the LLP programme, out of the 35 516 Eras- Chart 8 below shows the total number of students 536 mus students from the Baltic countries, 26 573 study – by home country – since the academic year 2007– 401 418 354 mobilities were supported. This represents a 75 % 2008. share. 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Chart 8: Total Number of Students (Mobility for Studies) from 2007–2008 by Home Country

Chart 10: Incoming vs. Outgoing Mobility for Studies per Home Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

2580 2639 2392 2425 2470 2277 Estonia SMS 1446 1399 1269 1384 Outgoing SMS 1106 14783 Latvia SMS 968 Icoming SMS 725 788 770 789 595 551 Lithuania SMS 7572 8224

4218 4527 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 3355 stantial imbalance in terms of incoming and outgoing

Estonia Latvia Lithuania Erasmus student numbers for studies as their mobility during the LLP programme period had higher numbers The annual growth rate was the highest in Estonia in numbers in 2008–2009 and 2011–2012, Lithuania, of outgoing students than incoming. Only Estonia had or 31 %, followed by Latvia with 15 % and Lithuania also, had a decrease twice: in 2009–2010 and 2012– Chart 10 above shows the balance between in- 7 % higher numbers of incoming Erasmus students for with 13 %. The annual growth was not positive dur- 2013 and Latvia sent fewer students in 2012–2013 in coming and outgoing Erasmus students for studies in studies and that is the best balance between the Baltic ing the LLP programme period: Estonia had a decrease comparison with the previous year. individual countries. Latvia and Lithuania had a sub- countries.

14 15 Chart 12: Student Mobility for Studies by Subject Areas per Country 1.2.4. Subject Areas

As in the rest of Europe, students of social scienc- to participate actively, though in proportionately lower 32 Estonia es and business and law made up the biggest share Not known or unspecified numbers. 29 of those on mobilities from the Baltic countries in the 25 Latvia LLP programme period or 45 %. The second biggest 402 Chart 11 below shows the increase and decrease in Services share was made up of students of humanities and arts 364 the number of Erasmus students in different subject 149 (21 %). Students of engineering, manufacturing and Lithuania areas since 2007–2008 while Chart 12 shows the to- 911 Health and Welfare construction (12 %); science, mathematics and com- tal numbers of Erasmus students per subject and per 336 puting (8 %); and health and welfare (5 %) continue country. 136 239 Agriculture and Veterinary 106 Chart 11: Student Mobility for Studies by Subject Areas: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 83 2055 Engineering, Manufacturing and Construction 617 2012-2013 2011-2012 2010-2011 2009-2010 2008-2009 2007-2008 523

Science, Mathematics and Computing 1194 6 550 9 319 1 Not known or unspecified 6 9 Social Sciences, Business and Law 6965 55 3507 252 1437 232 142 2568 Services 154 Humanities and Arts 135 1658 0 1418

261 380 269 Education Health and Welfare 264 403 213 124 218 158 37 93 General Programmes 0 75 69 4 Agriculture and Veterinary 70 47 74

552 555 Engineering, Manufacturing and Construction 600 525 470 1.2.5. Study Grants 493

365 385 Chart 13: Average Monthly Grant for Mobility for Studies per Home Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 Science, Mathematics and Computing 379 330 304 300

1859 2124 Lithuania SMS Latvia SMS Estonia SMS 2141 Social Sciences, Business and Law 1951 1917 1917

1126 1048 989 The average monthly grant for mobility for studies Humanities and Arts 876 819 650 629 was EUR 452. 786 The average monthly study grant ranged from EUR 144 513 497 512 499 158 474 452 476 410 in Lithuania to EUR 490 in Estonia (see Chart 13 Education 167 437 146 408 below – Estonian data for 2012–2013 not presented.). 161 353 357 131 344 346 343 349 It should also be pointed out that all the Baltic coun- 0 0 tries supplement the EU monthly grant with national, 0 General Programmes 0 regional and institutional funds and the numbers pre- 0 41 sented show the total average monthly grant students receive in individual countries. 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

16 17 1.3. Erasmus Student Mobility for Placements 1.3.3. Incoming Student Mobility for Placements

All Baltic countries had an increase in the number The average annual growth in mobility for place- 1.3.1. Introduction of incoming Erasmus students for placements, except ment from 2007–2008 is 36 % – up from 172 students Estonia in 2009–2010, when the number of incoming in 2007–2008 to 758 in 2012–2013. Chart 15 shows mobilities decreased by 7 %. the trends in the incoming numbers since 2007–08

Erasmus also benefits students who want to do ported through Erasmus since 2007 and are increas- traineeships in companies abroad. Grants enable stu- ingly popular. By 2012–2013, grants have already been dents to spend a period of three to twelve months do- awarded to nearly 9 000 students for this purpose. Chart 15: Incoming Placements per Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 ing a placement abroad. Having working experience Of students participating in Erasmus mobility for in a company – or an organisation – abroad allows placements 75 % were Bachelor students. Students students to develop specific skills that are valued and enrolled in Masters Programmes constituted 17 % of adapted to the requirements of the labour market, and participants and 5 % were Doctoral students, while 3 thus boosts students’ employability. It also strength- % of participants were registered in education insti- 343 Estonia SMP ens cooperation between HEIs and companies. tutions offeringshort-cycle higher vocational educa- 274 Placements in companies abroad have been sup- tion courses (only in Latvia). 215 Latvia SMP 212 165 200 178 117 154 109 122 Lithuania SMP 73 100 108 114 79 61 1.3.2. Outgoing Student Mobility for Placements 38

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Since its inclusion in the Erasmus Programme, 2012–2013). Placements represented a 25 % share placements abroad have grown rapidly and today the of all Erasmus student mobility during the LLP pro- annual number of placements is almost four times big- gramme. Chart 16: Balance of Incoming vs. Outgoing Placements: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 ger than the number of placements in 2007–2008. Chart 14 shows the number of students going on Of 35 516 students 8 943 chose this option and Erasmus student mobility for placement. Lithuania went on placements abroad. This represents an av- sent the most students abroad for placements or 4

erage annual increase of 32 % between years (up 368 (49 % share), followed by Latvia with 3 102 place- Outgoing SMS 4368 from 602 students in 2007–2008 to 2 173 students in ments (35 %), and then Estonia with 1 473 (16 %). Icoming SMS

Chart 14: Outgoing Students on Placements per Home Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 3102

1473 1168 775 719

Estonia SMP 1059

911 Estonia Latvia Lithuania 837 Latvia SMP 750 725 748 73 575 575 Chart 16 shows the imbalance in terms of incom- around four times as many placement students as they 467 Lithuania SMP 364 ing and outgoing Erasmus students for placements. received and in Estonia the imbalance is half that of 261 343 322 219 241 All Baltic countries had higher numbers of students the neighbouring countries – it sent out twice as many 210 214 122 going abroad for placements than coming to their placement students as it received. 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 respective countries. Lithuania and Latvia sent out

18 19 1.3.4. Placement Sectors Chart 18: Student Mobility for Placements: Economic Sectors per Country

Estonia Most students went to placements in the accom- by the human health and social work activities sector, 15 modation and food service sectors; this made up the that shares 12 % with 1 043 trainees, professional, Activities of Extra-Territorial Organisations and Bodies 8 Latvia biggest share (20 %, or 1 740 trainees). This econom- scientific and technical activities sector (10 % or 885) 1 Activities of Households as Employers; Undifferentiated Goods- and 1 ic sector overtook the numbers of students sent for the and arts, entertainment and recreation sector (9 % or 1 Lithuania education sector (13 %, with 1 130 trainees), followed 780 trainees). Services-Producting Activities of Households... 1 446 Other Service Activities 216 33

Chart 17: Economic Sectors of Placements: Increase-Decrease 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 329 Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 219 232

483 2012-2013 2011-2012 2010-2011 2009-2010 2008-2009 2007-2008 Human Health and Social Work Activities 417 143

38 524 1 Activities of Extra-Territorial Organisation and Bodies 6 Education 231 2 4 375 Activities of Households as Empoyers; Undifferential 02 0 62 1 Goods- and Services-Producing Activities of Households... 0 Public Administration and Defence; Compulsory Social Security 15 0 13 117 166 127 Other Service Activities 124 83 270 78 Administrative and Support Service Activities 215 250 36 134153 Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 115 96 32 543 235 Professional, Scientific and Technical Activities 289 194 229 53 Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 178 142 65 42 363 Real Estate Activities 24 173 305 Education 146 3 103 40 16 134 12 Public Administration and Defence; Compulsory Social Security 30 Financial and Insurance Activities 50 20 2 22 10 124 133 213 93 Administrative and Support Service Activities 106 Information and Communication 134 53 12 43 182 155 202 564 Professional, Scientific and Technical Activities 193 99 Accommodation and Food Service Activities 864 54 312 14 9 17 Real Estate Activities 18 104 4 7 Transportation and Storage 116 54 42 46 Financial and Insurance Activities 63 1420 Wholesale and Retail Trade; Repair of Motor Vehicles and Motorcycles 60 9 42 88 98 6 Information and Communication 65 4662 31 169 386 Construction 70 358 65 Accommodation and Food Service Activities 240 313 295 148 87 40 59 Water Supply; Sewerage, Waste Management and Remediation Activities 31 Transportation and Storage 24 39 35 13 18 20 19 52 Wholesale and Retaip Trade; Repair of Motor Vehicles and 27 12 Electricity , Gas, Steam and Air Conditioning Supply 10 20 Motorcycles 10 12 59 6068 131 Construction 60 31 Manufacturing 73 26 58 33 Water Supply; Sewerage, Waste Management and Remediation 7 18 4 3 19 Activities 3 Mining and Quarrying 0 16 2 17 Electricity, Gas, Steam and Air Conditioning Supply 1015 7 183 9 Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing 47 77 58 8 60 Manufacturing 30 38 29 2 1 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 0 Mining and Quarrying 0 1 1 72 72 38 Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing 32 38 16

20 21 1.3.4. Placement Sectors Erasmus Staff Mobility

The average monthly grant for placements was EUR 542. Students received very different monthly grant for placements ranged from EUR 460 for stu- grants depending on their home country and home dents from Latvia to EUR 626 for students coming from 2.1. General Overview of Staff Mobility higher education institution. The average monthly Lithuania.

Staff mobility aims to enrich the experience of par- Chart 19: Average Monthly Grant for Placements per Home Country 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 ticipating staff, to contribute to the internationalisa- increase of 7 % on average. Although both staff mo- tion and modernisation of higher education through bility for teaching and staff mobility for training grew cooperation among higher education institutions and between years, the increase in staff training was con- Lithuania SMP Latvia SMP Estonia SMP staff, and to encourage student mobility. siderably higher or 13 % versus 4 % for teaching as- It has become a very popular action within the Eras- signments, and that includes the 8 % decrease in staff mus Programme since its introduction in 1997. With the training numbers in 2008–2009. creation of the Lifelong Learning Programme in 2007, The share of teaching assignments was 63 %, while staff mobility was extended to include staff training as staff training accounted for 37 % of all staff mobilities. 827 well as the possibility for HEIs to invite staff from com- Chart 20 gives an overview of the growth of staff mo- panies to come and teach at their institutions. Since its bility since 2007–08. It shows the share of Erasmus 663 launch, a total of more than 16 000 staff mobilities for staff mobility for teaching versus training in the Baltic 617 607 587 572 teaching and training have been supported. countries. The country with the highest share of train- 556 568 556 532 547 506 505 In total 16 069 staff mobilities were supported during visits was Latvia (53 %) followed by Estonia (38 464 ing the LLP programme with a constant year-on-year %) and Lithuania (23 %). 390 397

317 Chart 20: Growth in Staff Mobility: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

1810 1773 1787 1685 STA 1580 1500 1332 1347 STT 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 1000 790 725 740

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Chart 21: Outgoing Staff Mobility per Home Country: 2007–2008 – 2012–2013

1348 Chart 21 shows the to- 1310 1297 1300 tal number of staff mobili- 1280 1179 988 Estonia ST ties from each participat- 1128 1044 ing country. Lithuania send the most staff abroad, or 7 838 Latvia ST 692 783 250 (45 % share), followed by Latvia with 5 937 (37 547 Lithuania ST 464 485 463 491 %), and then Estonia with 432 2 882 (18 %). 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

22 23 As absolute numbers reflect to a large extent the bilities (also 9 %) and Lithuania with 1 203 mobilities 2.2.2. Outgoing Staff Mobility for Teaching Assignments size of the participating countries, we could try to ob- (7 %) and Poland (1 188 mobilities or 7 %) and Spain tain relative terms by calculating the proportion of the with 913 mobilities or 6 % share. The distribution of number of Erasmus staff to the total HEIs’ staff num- outgoing staff mobilities between host countries can Lithuania had the highest number of Erasmus by Latvia with 2 791 (28 %) and Estonia with 1 792 bers in each country. be found in Annex 7. teaching assignments or 5 552 (55 % share), followed teaching assignments (18 %). Chart 22 compares the Erasmus staff data with the Poland was the country with the highest numbers staff numbers in these countries. Unfortunately, Esto- of incoming Erasmus staff visits to the Baltic coun- nia does not collect such data, so this chart concerns tries, with 2 066 incoming staff (17 % share), followed only Lithuania and Latvia. The number of Erasmus staff by Latvia with 1 465 (12 %), Turkey with 1 118 (9 %), Chart 23: Outgoing Teaching Assignments per Home Country from 2007–2008 as a proportion of the whole staff population was on and then Germany with 979 (8 %) and Lithuania with average 18.3 % in Latvia and 5.1 % in Lithuania. 843 staff visits (7 %). The list of outgoing Erasmus staff mobility as a pro- During the LLP programme, five staff members with portion of the total staff numbers for each institution special needs grants participated in Erasmus mobility in the Baltic countries can be found in Annex 6. for staff visits, all from Lithuania. 999 986 The most popular destinations for Erasmus staff 932 928 886 821 Estonia STA mobility were Germany with 1 484 mobilities (9 % 587 share), followed by Finland with 1 423 incoming mo- 552 395 525 Latvia STA 342 390 337 284 306 296 307 262 Lithuania STA Chart 22: Staff as Proportion of the Staff Population in the Participating Countries: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Latvia

Lithuania 25.2 22.5 19.2 17.1 15.2 10.6

6.5 4.6 4.8 4.8 5.4 4.7 All Baltic countries experienced a decrease in the However, outgoing staff mobility for teaching has number of outgoing Erasmus mobility for teaching over been growing during the period of the LLP programme. 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 several years in the LLP programme period. Estonia The highest relative increase in outgoing numbers had decreases in 2009–2010 and 2010–2011 (-3 % was in Latvia (49 %), followed by Estonia (19 %) and and -11 %), Latvia had fewer mobilities only in 2008– Lithuania (8 %). 2009 (-13 %) and Lithuania had decreased numbers 2.2. Staff Mobility for Teaching Assignments each year from 2010–2011 (-1 %, -6 % and -5 % respectively).

2.2.1. Introduction 2.2.3. Incoming Staff Mobility for Teaching Assignments Staff mobility for teaching assignments enables Since its introduction in the year 2000 the number staff from higher education institutions and enter- of teaching assignments has grown constantly. Eras- prises to spend a teaching period from a minimum of mus staff mobility for teaching assignments was 293 one day (or at least five teaching hours) and up to six in 2000–2001; the current 1 810 staff represents a All Baltic countries had an increase in the number of ments from 2007–2008 was 51 % – up from 1 341 weeks at a higher education institution in another par- 517 % growth over a twelve-year period. A total of incoming Erasmus teaching assignments in total. The visits in 2007–2008 to 2 030 in 2012–2013. Chart ticipating country in Europe. It should be noted, that 10 135 teaching assignments have been supported highest growth rate was in Latvia (56 %), followed by 24 shows the trends in the incoming numbers since all numbers of staff mobility for teaching assignments since in the beginning of the LLP programme in 2007. Lithuania (52 %) and then by Estonia (43 %). 2007–2008. include numbers of invited staff from enterprises. The average growth in mobility for teaching assign-

24 25 Chart 24: Incoming Teaching Assignments per Country between 2007–2008 and 2012–2013 Chart 26: Erasmus Staff Mobility for Teaching by Subject Area: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

2012-2013 2011-2012 2010-2011 2009-2010 2008-2009 2007-2008

1000 12 861 8 814 7 Estonia SM Not known or unspecified 7 658 19 691 618 38 513 Latvia SM 592 455 411 81 395 79 350 412 Services 82 Lithuania SM 288 356 367 358 87 65 236 0

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 141 183 Health and Welfare 178 164 164 119

31 The flow between outgoing and incoming Erasmus most equal and in Estonia there were more of incoming 32 staff mobility for teaching assignments in the partic- mobility. The share of incoming teaching assignments 27 Agriculture and Veterinary 49 ipating countries remains balanced during the entire from the total incoming – outgoing numbers was al- 57 50 period of the LLP programme. In Lithuania the outgo- most the same in all countries – 53 % in Estonia, 50 % ing mobility for teaching assignments was higher than in Latvia and 45 % in Lithuania. 195 201 the number of incoming, in Latvia – numbers were al- Engineering, Manufacturing and Construction 202 181 174 137 Chart 25: Outgoing and Incoming Staff Teaching Assignments per Country 148 154 Science, Mathematics and Computing 169 144 Outgoing STA 118 114 Icoming STA

5552 630 554 4616 552 Social sciences, Business and Law 501 505 587 2791 2742

1792 2017 487 489 452 Humanities and Arts 461 396 357 Estonia Latvia Lithuania

85 87 104 Education 91 82 2.2.4. Subject Areas 75

0 0 0 Teachers from social sciences, business and law and computing (8 %). General Programmes 0 spent the greatest number of periods abroad on teach- 0 23 ing assignments. These accounted for 33 % of all as- Chart 26 below shows the increase and decrease in signments supported. This was followed by teachers of the number of Erasmus teaching assignments in dif- humanities and arts (26 % share) and then teachers in ferent subject areas since 2007–2008 while Chart 27 engineering, manufacturing and construction (11 %), shows the total numbers of Erasmus teaching assign- health and welfare (9 %) and science, mathematics ments per subject and per country.

26 27 Chart 27: Staff Mobility for Teaching Assignments by Subject Area and by Country 2.3. Erasmus Staff Mobility for Staff Training Lithuania Latvia Estonia

29 Not know or unspecified 41 21 2.3.1. Introduction 208 Services 126 60 559 In addition to teaching assignments, the Programme in a company or an organisation, such as a Higher Edu- Health and Welfare 209 181 was opened up from the academic year 2007–2008 to cation Institution, in another participating country. 165 Agriculture and Veterinary 57 allow both administrative and academic staff to par- Staff mobility for training continues to increase in 24 709 ticipate in different forms of training abroad, such as popularity. Out of the 16 069 staff mobilities 5 934 Engineering, Manufacturing and Construction 165 216 job-shadowing or attending job-related conferences were staff training periods. This represented an in- 575 Science, Mathematics and Computing 188 and workshops. Erasmus staff mobility for staff train- crease of 70 % up from 790 in 2007–2008 to 1 347 in 84 1819 ing offers an opportunity to go on training for a period 2012–2013. Social sciences, Business and Law 1087 423 of between one week (five working days) and six weeks 1242 Humanities and Arts 691 709 227 Education 227 70 19 General Programmes 0 2.3.2. Outgoing Staff Mobility for Staff Training 4

2.2.5. Grants for Teaching Assignments Staff from Latvian Higher Education Institutions They were followed by staff from Lithuania with 1 698 spent the most periods abroad for training with 3 (29 %) and Estonia with 1 090 (18 %). The average grant, which combines the EU grant 747 grant for teachers from Lithuania to a EUR 553 146 staff training periods (a 53 % share) supported. and complimentary national grant for a teaching as- grant for teachers from Estonia. signment was EUR 612 per visit. It varies from a EUR Chart 29: Outgoing Staff Mobility for Staff Training per Home Country from 2007–2008

Chart 28: Average Grant per Teaching Assignments: 2007–2008 – 2012–2013

Lithuania STA Latvia STA Estonia STA 728 713 Estonia STT

519 443 424 Latvia STT 855 393 420 836 825 350 809 311 793 196 180 771 180 210 184 Lithuania STT 167 179 167 170 658 637 580 579 545 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 513 503 518

436 428 400 324 2.3.3. Incoming Staff Mobility for Staff Training

All Baltic countries had a total increase in the num- of incoming mobilities -18 % in Estonia, -11 % in Latvia ber of incoming Erasmus staff for training, except in and -10 % in Lithuania. Estonia also experienced a 2 % 2008–2009 when there was a decrease in the number decrease in 2011–2012. 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

28 29 Chart 30: Incoming Staff Training Visits per Country: 2007-2008 to 2012–2013 Chart 32: Average Total Grant for Staff Training per Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

Lithuania SMP Latvia SMP Estonia SMP 428

353 Estonia SM 253

213 192 1018 981 Latvia SM 157 183 964 123 923 146 117 142 940 112 854 60 89 Lithuania SM 53 72 786 22 38 636 577 534 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 509 522 512 487 500 459 402 324

Chart 31: Outgoing-Incoming Staff Mobility for Staff Training by Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

Outgoing STA 3146 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Icoming STA

1698 1505

1090

702 546

Estonia Latvia Lithuania

As we can see in Chart 31 the Baltic countries sent balance – staff training remains more balanced with a more staff on Erasmus staff training than theyre- 39 % share of total incoming-outgoing staff in Estonia ceived. But, if compared with teaching assignments and a 47 % share in Lithuania.

2.3.4. Grants for Staff Training

Staff going abroad for training received an average 612). The average grants varied greatly between coun- grant of EUR 663. Staff training grants are on average tries, ranging from EUR 867 for Lithuanian staff to EUR higher than the grants for teaching assignments (EUR 526 for staff from Estonia.

30 31 Erasmus Intensive Language 3.1. Incoming EILC Participants

Courses (EILC) The EILC are available for students who have been selected for an Erasmus study or a placement period. prepare incoming students for their Erasmus study or Comenius Assistants may also participate in the EILC if placement mobility period through a linguistic and cul- there is a surplus of places. The aim of the courses is to tural introduction to the host country and institution.

Since 1996, Erasmus has financed specialised most widely taught languages English, German, French Chart 34: Incoming EILC Participants per Coordinating Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 courses in the less widely used and taught languag- and Spanish (Castilian). es for students going abroad as part of the Erasmus The number of Intensive Language Courses sup- Programme1. The aim of Erasmus Intensive Language ported has grown tremendously since their launch and Lithuania Incoming Latvia Incoming Estonia Incoming Courses (EILC) is to prepare incoming students for is very popular in the Baltic countries. Some 78 courses 120 111 108 111 their study mobilities or company placement through were organised in three countries from 2007–2008, 103 106 106 101 100 a linguistic and cultural introduction to the host coun- an increase of 60 % from 10 organising institutions 87 try. EILCs are organised in the countries where these in 2007–2008 up to 16 in 2012–20132. The highest 81 74 languages are used as teaching languages at higher number of courses were organised in Lithuania (40) 72 68 education institutions and are not organised for the followed by Estonia (34) and Latvia (22). 53 55

36 37

Chart 33: Number of EILC Course Organising Institutions (OI) between 2007–2008 and 2012–2013

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

The highest total increase in number of partic- The highest proportion of incoming students par- 7 ipants was in Latvia (89 % up from 53 students in ticipating in a language course was in Estonia, where 6 6 6 2007–2008 to 100 students in 2012–2013), followed 11 % of incoming students took part, followed by Lat- Estonia Approved OI 6 6 6 5 5 by Lithuania (48 %) and Estonia (43 %). On the other via (9 %) and Lithuania (6 %). hand Latvia had the greatest decrease in the number Germany was the country with the highest num- Latvia Approved OI 4 4 of incoming students in 2009–2010 (-34 %) and Esto- bers of students that participated in EILC organised 3 3 3 nia had the highest increase in the same year (54 %). by Baltic countries, with 350 incoming students (23 Lithuania Approved OI 2 2 2 2 Lithuania received the highest number of stu- % share), followed by Italy with 150 (10 %), Poland dents or 598, which represents a 39 % share of all and France with 117 and 115 students (8 %), and then students participating in the EILC scheme in the Baltic Spain and Turkey with 114 students (7 %) each. The 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 countries. Estonia received the second highest number distribution of incoming students for EILC between of students (582, which is a 38 % share), followed by host countries can be found in Annex 9. Latvia with 349 students (23 % share).

3.2. Outgoing EILC Participants

Some 1 433 students from the Baltic countries In absolute numbers, Lithuanian students were by 1. Between 1996 and 1999 a pilot phase took place, under the name “Intensive Language Preparation Courses” (ILPC). EILCs were (re) launched in 2001 and then in 2004 the name “Erasmus Intensive Language Courses” was introduced. participated in an EILC course. This represents 4 % of far the most active participants in EILC courses with 2. The participating EILC countries are: Belgium (Flemish Community), Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, the total number of outgoing students participating in 621 participants during the LLP programme period. Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden the Programme. This constitutes about 3 % of all mobile Lithuanian and Turkey.

32 33 Erasmus Intensive Programmes

Erasmus students. The second highest participation to learn before studies was Italian – 252 students (IPs) was from Estonia with 498 participants (9 %) and then went for EILC in Italy (18 % share), followed by Dutch Latvia with 314 students (3 %). and Portuguese (14 % each with 198 students in The highest percentage increase in participation Dutch-speaking Belgium and 194 students in Portu- was among Estonian students with an increase of gal). Finland and Sweden were also among the top 5 Erasmus also funds Intensive Programmes (IPs), the multinational learning of specialist topics; provide 106 % between the first and the last year. Lithuania countries popular for EILC participation (82 students, which are short subject-related programmes of study students with access to academic knowledge that is was the only country with decreased numbers in EILC 6 % each). The distribution of outgoing students for (of between ten days and six weeks in length), bring- not available in one Higher Education Institution alone; participation with -21 % from 99 outgoing students in EILC between host countries can be found in Annex 9. ing together students and teaching staff from Higher allow learning about course content and new curricula 2007–2008 and 78 students in 2012–2013. Education Institutions from at least three European approaches; and to test teaching methods in an inter- The most popular language for Erasmus students countries. These short study programmes encourage national classroom environment.

Chart 35: Outgoing EILC Participants per Coordinating Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013 4.1. Number of IPs

Lithuania Outgoing Latvia Outgoing Estonia Outgoing Since the 2007–2008 academic years, IPs have country and Chart 37 – IPs that has been funded since been managed individually by the countries partici- 2007. The numbers have varied somewhat from year to pating in the Lifelong Learning Programme. They have year but there has been a steady increase in the num- 133 also experienced strong growth during this time. A to- ber of funded IPs since the beginning of the Lifelong 120 120 tal of 133 Intensive Programmes were organised in Learning Programme, except Lithuania in 2012–2013, the Baltic countries from 2007–2008 to 2012–2013. which was due to lack of funding. 104 102 Chart 36 below shows the number of applied IPs per 99 99

89 83 78 Chart 36: Number of applied IPs between 2007 and 2013 71 64 22 59 22 52 49

40 42 16 Estonia Applied(eligible) 29 16 13 12 12 Latvia Applied(eligible)

9 9

7 8 Lithuania Applied(eligible) 6 8

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 5 4 4 2 2

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

The highest number of courses (81) was organised of courses organised. Latvia organised 44 courses fol- by Lithuania, representing 61 % of the total number lowed by Estonia (38).

34 35 Chart 37:Number of IPs per Coordinating Country between 2007–2008 and 2012–2013 The number of teachers participating in IPs in- year-on-year increase. Teachers represented 24 % of creased from 91 in the academic year 2007–2008 to participants in IPs. 295 in 2012–2013, which constitutes an average 29% Lithuania Latvia Estonia

15 Chart 39: Teachers Participating in IPs per Host Country from 2007–2008 12

10 10 10

8 Lithuania Teachers Latvia Teachers Estonia Teachers 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 185 3 2 2 169

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 126

97 96 4.2. Participation in IPs 64 61 63 61 54 51 41 40 37 32 19 Overall 3 929 students and 1 214 teachers par- 2012–2013 (Note: Estonian data for 2012–2013 is not 18 ticipated in Intensive Programmes in the three Baltic available). Out of the total number of participants, stu- countries during the period from 2007–2008 until dents represented 76 %. 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Chart 38: Students Participating in IPs per Host Country from 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

Lithuania Students Latvia Students Estonia Students The highest number of partners in an IP was from Estonia – 41 partners. Italy had almost the same num- Finland with 64 partner institutions, the Netherlands ber with 40 partnerships. Distribution of IPs partner- with 47, followed by Germany with 42. Lithuanian in- ship per countries can be found in Annex 10. 569 stitutions were very active in IP projects in Latvia and 497

407

355 345

212 200 175 159 169 139 151 150 110 117 92 82

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

36 37 Erasmus Programme Budget Lithuania used the biggest budget for Erasmus mo- Erasmus Intensive Language Courses with 0.7 %. bility actions – EUR 49 360 260 or 44 % share of the 78 Erasmus Intensive Language Courses spent EUR Baltic countries in the LLP period, followed by Latvia 747 405 from 2007–2008 until 2012–2013 in the The Erasmus Programme experienced a sharp in- staff mobility as well as Intensive Programmes (IPs) with EUR 43 226 072 (39 %) and Estonia with EUR Baltic countries. The average grant per course was crease in its budget at the onset of the Lifelong Learn- and Erasmus Intensive Language Courses (EILCs). 18 948 157 (17 %). This amounts to 96.5 % of total EUR 9 582 and the average cost per student was EUR ing Programme in 2007. The funding for the Erasmus Chart 40 below shows the evolution of the budget budget spend in the Baltic countries for Erasmus activ- 489. The total grant spent on the 133 Intensive Pro- Programme under the Lifelong Learning programme (in EUR) for Erasmus mobility actions per country since ities from 2007–2008 until 2012–2013. grammes organised during the same period was EUR 3 for the seven-year period 2007-2013 was estimated at 2007 until 2013. It should be noted, that in the Baltic The remainder of the funding went to finance Inten- 259 005. Each Intensive Programme received on aver- some EUR 3.1 billion. Most of the Erasmus budget ap- countries national co-funding shares are from 9 % (in sive Programmes, which used 2.8 % of the budget and age EUR 24 504. proximately 96 % of the total Erasmus budget is used Estonia) to 49 % (in Latvia) of the total budget. To- to fund mobility actions run by the LLP National Agen- tal contribution of national co-funding per country is cies in each country. These actions include student and shown in Chart 41. Chart 42: Budgets per Country for Erasmus Intensive Language Courses: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

Chart 40: Erasmus Funds for Mobility Actions per Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

88033,94 Estonia Total 81393,88 67717,80 9482537,11 9462412,52 60586,14 70309,51 7811641,09 65096,70 8125613,59 8310051,72 Latvia Total

6168004,32 8184207,11 8113895,43 8043878,78 35457,00 34441,00 35369,00 Estonia Total 28357,00 30546,00 35854,00 6415085,11 6690277,12 32060,00 Lithuania Total 5778728,82 20960,00 18920,00 15720,00 Latvia Total 12408,00 14175,00 3895369,00 3193937,00 3433479,00 2667642,00 2821980,00 2935750,00 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Lithuania Total

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Chart 43: Budgets per Country for Erasmus Intensive Programmes: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

Chart 41: Share of EU Budget and National Co-Funding per Country: 2007–2008 to 2012–2013

488128,67 426661,26 Estonia Total

Funding Mobility, EUR National 15 588 281,39 Latvia Total 278908,62 Funding Mobility, EUR EC 213716,85 216171,76 217439,81 210766,57 33 771 978,96 142502,06 141051,82 158546,87 Lithuania Total 81319,21 134016,58 21 189 361,41 106583,26 123116,37 90225,90 125858,92 57785,84 1 661 793,00 46205,00

22 036 710,97 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

17 286 364,00

National co-funding for EILC was provided only in Estonia Latvia Lithuania Estonia (24 % share) and Lithuania (54 % share), and of total IPs budget in Lithuania during the LLP pro- only Lithuania co-funds IPs. This accounted for 14 % gramme.

38 39 Examples of Best Practices unstable situation in Greece at that time, I chose the spectacularly beautiful and diverse it is, while bond- Technological Educational Institute of Athens as my ing with my fellow students and future friends from hosting university, and, I must add, it’s a decision that I all around the world. Meanwhile I was staying in touch do not regret in the least. with other Latvians by attending events at the Latvian With the help of my coordinators I dealt with all the embassy and the many other gatherings. 6.1. Students’ Testimonials necessary paperwork and was soon packing my bags By the end of my first semester I understood that for my five-month stay in Athens. Met by the unusual- Greece was not going to let me go and would make me ly hot Mediterranean climate and hardly believing my return again, so I had to extend my stay here for a sec- luck, I was standing in front of my new residence – one ond semester and, eventually, also through most of the 6.1.1. Ms Pille-Riin Lillepalu (Viljandi Culture Academy of the greenest buildings in the city, with the oldest summer, enabling me to explore the country even more of the University of Tartu, Estonia): Latin dance club in Athens- Folie, lying just at the foot closely and, luckily, saving me from the small ice age of it. I was greeted there by the owner and his family that had taken over the rest of Europe at the time. and throughout my stay at his home he showed me the In conclusion I can just say that I will probably re- environment, where nobody has any expectations for renowned meaning of Greek hospitality and their way member this year in Greece as the best one of my life. you. But the most important motivation to go for Eras- of life, giving me great insight into Greek culture, his- It has really broadened my outlook, allowed me to gain mus was the desire to learn and see new perspectives tory and cuisine. greater independence and many dear friends around of making theatre and open the door to international As the months passed, alongside learning how to the world that I will always remember, alongside the theatre for herself and maybe then even for others. go for a coffee break for two hours, I studied the Greek picturesque landscapes, magnificent architecture and All the expectations were fulfilled. She finds the language and attended my university courses which, people that I learnt to fall in love with at this cradle of host institution to be very high quality, the graduates despite the frequent disruption by the protests, were democracy and western culture. I would urge all other there were competitive and independently thinking, quite interesting and engaging. I took every chance students to go through this life changing experience – professional young producers, who also want to mat- I had to travel around the country, discovering how ERASMUS. “– optimistically concludes Kārlis Musts ter and make a difference. The teachers were not only • Erasmus student at Amsterdam School of Arts, professionals in their field, but were also famous for Netherlands for 5 months. their work and collaborate with the biggest theatres in • Elected as the 3 millionth Erasmus student from the world. On the other hand, she learned to love her Estonia. own home university again. Amsterdam – was for her a total inspiration with its hectic atmosphere, amazing architecture and spectacular amounts of culture. 6.1.3. Ms Giedrė Pranaitytė (Vytautas Magnus University): Ms Pille-Riin Lillepalu doesn´t think of herself as She hopes that thanks to her exchange period at one of the usual Erasmus students - she was only an least some people she has been in contact with will exchange student at her host university. She values start to look more towards Eastern Europe as an in- this experience even more – she became more inde- teresting destination to develop cultural relations. She time at the University of Bergen (Norway) as an Eras- pendent and made amazing Dutch friends. She felt that believes the connections have a great influence on her mus student. I was impressed by the competence of she had “blended” in with locals and discovered a lot and on her actions in the future, so she could be one of Norwegian scholars who not only analysed some theo- thanks to her local schoolmates and the crazy work the small but important chain links in the cultural rela- retical insights but encouraged their students to relate hours at school. She wanted to discover the weakest tions between Estonia and The Netherlands. “But why their knowledge to individual researches and practical and strongest sides of herself and she thought that of- not with the rest of the world? Dream big, right?” – she activities. As a consequence, I came to the conclusion ten the only possibility to do that is in a totally different hopes to make her aspirations a reality. that a valuable scholarly analysis is inseparable from • Erasmus student at University of Bergen, Norway direct involvement in political events and processes. for 5 months During my PhD studies I decided to do an Erasmus • Elected as the 2 millionth Erasmus student from 6.1.2. Mr Kārlis Musts (Baltic International Academie, Latvia): internship at the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy in Lithuania Berlin, Germany. My major objective was to combine • Erasmus internship at Institute for Cultural Diplo- academic knowledge with some practical skills in the macy in Berlin, Germany for 3 months realm of diplomacy. Three months spent in the capi- • Erasmus student at Technologiko Ekpedeftiko “Already during my first year of studies at the Baltic tal of Germany taught me to deal courageously with Giedrė Pranaitytė evaluates her Erasmus Exchange Idrima (T.E.I.) Of Athens, Greece for 8 months. International Academies graphics design department I unexpected challenges. As an intern, I took part at the studies from the professional perspective - “Due to high knew that I had to use the wonderful opportunity that international symposium on cultural diplomacy “Cul- academic results, I was given a chance to spend some was offered by the ERASMUS programme. Despite the ture, Globalisation and International Relations over the

40 41 Next Two Decades”. It was extremely beneficial for me ence: Dilemmas of the Past, Challenges of the Present the interest of the students from other countries about dents feel confident that their education is competitive to find out how such a large event had to be organised and Perspectives of the Future” at the Historical Hall a region, which is new and unknown to them. in their field. Undoubtedly, it was of value to become and what difficulties might sometimes occur on the of Vytautas Magnus University where the Cabinet of I am very glad of the experience obtained during acquainted with the culture, art and nature of Turkey. way. I was more than happy to visit some important the Ministers of Lithuania used to hold meetings until the Erasmus mobility programme, as I am interested I am very grateful and satisfied with the experience political and historic locations such as the German Re- 1940. It should be emphasised, however, that namely in how the study process takes place in other countries I acquired within the Erasmus mobility programme.” – ichstag and the Federal Foreign Office as well as listen my personal experience as an Erasmus intern at the in order to better understand what we need to do to Mairita Folkmane warmly remembers moments of her to a variety of insightful speeches made by important Institute for Cultural Diplomacy served as a source of improve our study quality, as well as making our stu- visit. political figures, skilled diplomats and leading scholars. inspiration to bring all those people together and write In addition, I was asked to write an academic article one more article about the development of cultural di- about Lithuanian cultural diplomacy. plomacy in Germany. At the same time I encouraged Having returned back from Germany, I decided to all students present at the conference to forget their apply my newly developed skills in practice and or- doubts and participate in the Erasmus programme in ganised a special conference “Celebrating the 20th order to discover new horizons for the future.” Anniversary of the Restoration of Lithuanian Independ- 6.2.2. Ms Sirje Virkus (Institute of Information Studies in Tallinn University)

6.2. Staffs’ Testimonials • has been participating in Erasmus as a teacher/ staff already from the year 2000 • Erasmus 25 teacher/staff ambassador for Estonia

6.2.1. Ms Mairita Folkmane (Daugavpils University) She has been involved in Erasmus already since 1999, when the programme possibilities opened for Estonia. In the beginning Sirje Virkus acted as an Eras- “One of the aims of my visit was popularisation mus departmental coordinator of the TU establish- of Latvian traditional and contemporary ceramics. ing Erasmus bilateral agreements with more than 15 The ceramic industry is strongly developed in Turkey, universities. She has been a lecturer in many partner therefore it was important to launch an exchange of universities since 2000. She was one of the most ac- experience with Turkish colleagues and establish links tive and efficient promoters of the internationalisation of cooperation in arts between the Department of Art process of Tallinn University (TU). Sirje Virkus was also and Design of Daugavpils University and visual arts in- a board member of the university’s fund for interna- stitutions in Turkey. tionalisation – the most important decision-making In my opinion, the language barrier is the biggest ob- body in the university, regarding international activi- stacle, as it turned out that the Turkish students have ties. It is important to note that she was one of the quite poor English skills, our lectures were translated, main contributors to the university’s strategy for in- which, of course, made the work and communication partner institutions, and supported the development ternationalisation (2008–2015). Chapters concerning difficult. However, those, who speak English, were in- of intercultural competencies. In addition, many good real and virtual mobility include many of her ideas and terested regardless of the differences in our climate friends have been acquired in this process. Thus, Eras- suggestions. and culture and possible obstacles they might cause. mus activities have been very beneficial both profes- Erasmus mobility has supported various activities From our discussions, I could make a conclusion that sionally and personally. One important outcome of the in partner universities: teaching, research as well as Turkish students are more interested in other Europe- Erasmus mobility scheme has been that the Institute • Erasmus lecturer in Mehmet Akif Ersoy personal development. It has helped to develop many an countries as far as they have much more informa- of Information Studies has become much more visible University, Turkey professional contacts and develop other European tion about them. However, the information that accom- internationally. Erasmus has helped to perceive Eu- joint research and development projects together. It modation and food are cheaper in Latvia and nature is ropean issues and developments more personally, to has widened knowledge in many professional fields beautiful, and culture is highly developed may arouse feel these through personal contacts and experienc- and about modern teaching and learning methods in es. Erasmus activities have been and will be crucial in

42 43 achieving the internationalisation aims of Tallinn Uni- she has built a wide professional network. Her contacts 6.3. Most Active/Attractive HEIs versity and the Institute of Information Studies. have opened new horizons for the university. It has The biggest challenges for preparing and imple- opened new partnership possibilities for the university. menting mobility were connected with finding a suita- She strongly recommends all of her colleagues to take ble timeframe for mobility, because of teaching activ- part in the Erasmus mobility scheme as she regards ities at the home institution. Thanks to Sirje Virkus´s this experience as highly valuable. 6.3.1. Tartu Art College (TAC) participation in a broad range of international activities

The Estonian Ministry of Education and Research Agreement on Good Practices concerning internation- together with the Archimedes Foundation voted TAC alisation of Estonia’s higher education institutions is 6.2.3. Ms Aušrinė Packevičiūtė (Lithuanian Sports University) the most successful higher educational institute for signed and steps are taken on every level to provide - started participating in Erasmus during Master studies and continued as Erasmus lecturer international relations in Estonia in 2009. In 2010 the international guests and home students/staff with EC selected TAC for one of the Erasmus success sto- pleasant academic and personal experiences. ries in the category of ‘Erasmus decentralised actions Student mobility: The selection process is transpar- ‘positive effect on the internationalisation processes of ent and thoroughly explained. The placement process For Aušrinė Packevičiūtė, Lecturer from the Depart- Packevičiūtė was one of the Erasmus visiting teach- the HEIs’. is closely followed by the coordinator and each trainee ment of Applied Biology and Rehabilitation at Lithuani- ers from 14 European Universities who contributed to Tartu Art College (TAC) offers courses in seven fields will be provided with a Europass certificate. TACs´ pri- an Sports University, the first taste of an international the success of this international course for successive of art. During the 2009-2010 academic years, 303 stu- ority is to increase the number of incoming students. academic experience was during her Master studies. three years (2012 – 2014). dents studied at TAC, including seven foreign students, A team of advisors is set up for providing information Being confined to the wheelchair due to her severe “During these teaching visits I learned that the Nor- while 26 Estonian students went abroad. The college before arrival and compiling an individual study plan. physical disability, Aušrinė did not allow her physical dic countries not only have an advanced training sys- first took part in the Erasmus Programme in 2003 and Staff exchanges: The greatest impact of Erasmus condition to prevent from taking advantage of oppor- tem of professionals in adapted physical activity, but by 2011 was the most successful educational institute activities is the visible increase in interest in studying/ tunities provided through the Erasmus programme. As also have developed an excellent infrastructure for the in Estonia in terms of international relations with the teaching/being trained abroad, the Ministry’s award for the first year Master student, Aušrinė spent her Eras- organisation of adapted physical activities for people highest percentage of outgoing students and person- the extra high Erasmus percentages and appraisal by mus study period at the KU Leuven University in 2006 from different age and social groups. In Lithuania, we al supervision provided in English, Russian or Finnish the delegation of culture attaches residing in Estonia. together with other international students following still have to make a long walk to reach recognition to support international students. From year to year TACs´ staff has been asked to share their Erasmus ex- the course in the European Master’s Degree on Adapted of this important profession. Such international pro- the TAC has been the number one educational institu- periences with staff of other schools. The rector has Physical Activity (EMDAPA). Master’s studies in Lithua- grammes as the EUDAPA not only help to train students, tion in Estonia considering the percentage of outgo- emphasised internationalisation as a priority in the nia and Belgium helped her to develop competencies but also to achieve a wider publicity in the community ing Erasmus students. The small size of the institution development strategy as contacts with colleagues in the area of physical activity for people with different and to build sustainable international relations”, says (with about 92 staff members) enables an individual abroad and joint exhibitions are the foundation of disabilities and to extend her knowledge in research Aušrinė Packevičiūtė reflecting on her Erasmus teach- approach and close cooperation between all units. The sharing best practices. theory and methods applied to this broad domain. ing visits to Finland. From 2008, Aušrinė Packevičiūtė started to work Participation in the Erasmus staff mobility helped as a lecturer at the Department of Applied Biology Aušrinė Packevičiūtė to discover new interactive work- and Rehabilitation, teaching different courses relat- ing methods with students and renew her passion for ed to the integration of the disabled through adapted teaching. physical activity and taking part in research activities. When HAAGA-HELIA University of Applied Sciences in Finland invited Lithuanian Sports University to set up the Erasmus partnership and take part in running the intensive three month course European University Di- ploma in Adapted Physical Activity (EUDAPA), Aušrinė

44 45 6.3.2. Daugavpils University (DU)

DU has been participating in the Erasmus Lifelong The academic staff mobility programme expands Learning Programme (LLP) since the academic year and improves the range and content of the courses of- of 1999/2000. It was one of the first higher education fered in Daugavpils University. It enables the students, institutions of Latvia to become involved in this EU ed- who do not participate in Erasmus mobility, to bene- ucation cooperation programme. fit from the knowledge and experience, obtained by Initially DU put a greater emphasis on Erasmus ac- the academic staff of the university during their visit tivities for students — study and practice mobility pro- to partnership higher education institutions. Academ- grammes; however, quite soon the academic staff was ic staff mobility promotes the exchange of knowledge also involved in the teaching activities for the teachers and pedagogical experience and strengthens the link of higher education institutions and the staff of invited with partnership higher education institutions in Eu- companies and foreign higher education institutions. rope. The contribution of foreign guest teachers is also Before joining the Erasmus programme, several of importance. They always bring something new to the faculties of Daugavpils University had already estab- higher education institution - both for the content of lished cooperation with higher education institutions studies and the teaching methods. The guest teachers in the Baltic States and other foreign countries. When also encourage the lecturers, personnel and students joining Erasmus, the international cooperation reached of Daugavpils University to participate in Erasmus mo- a new quality, because the availability of grants helped bility by showing their example. Quite often students educational programmes. conditioned the university to become the first in the to organise more frequent experience exchange visits, decide to go for Erasmus mobility to the universities Student exchanges have tremendous impact on Baltic States to coordinate an Erasmus Mundus Master common projects, as well as organise mobility pro- of the guest teachers, who have been giving lectures academic quality and curricula reform. In 2010 the course. grammes for students, teachers and administrative at the University of Daugavpils. Similarly, guest teach- university offers more than 450 courses in English The programme has fostered the shift of attitudes personnel. ers also attract large numbers of Erasmus students to (compared to 50 in 1999). This provides fair academic from national to European and Global priorities as well In 2013 Daugavpils University had concluded 88 bi- Daugavpils University. Useful contacts obtained as a choice for incoming students and allows putting local as significant structural change at the university. It lateral agreements in various fields of study with Euro- result of the mobility activities of teachers have helped and international students in the same classroom. gave birth to such structures supporting student mo- pean higher education institutions from 21 countries. to implement new projects within the framework of the The most recent influence of mobility extends to the bility as the mentor/buddy system, the Erasmus facul- Since 1999/2000 approximately 180 representatives Lifelong Learning Programme both in the capacity of emerging programmes that provide mobility windows ty coordinators’ system as well as strengthened stu- of the academic staff and administrative personnel leading project managers and participants in coopera- or those that offer courses only in English during one dent support services and lately, through placement have participated in Erasmus teaching mobility pro- tion partnership and also by actively involving the local out of four years of Bachelor level programmes in or- activities, high-quality career guidance. These new grammes. students of Daugavpils University. der to ensure academic offer for incoming students structures and active implementation of ECTS tools and provide local students with adequate language and their guiding philosophy had great influence in ful- skills in their own subject area. Active participation ly solving issues on the recognition of study periods in placement activities saw a great movement of re- abroad. newing existing curricula in order to integrate student The internationalisation strategy of the university 6.3.3. Vilnius University placements and provide them with strong academic puts great emphasis on the Erasmus programme on content and relevance. the one hand, while on the other hand the strategy Thanks to the Erasmus programme three new joint itself is dictated by the priorities and activities promi- programmes were emerging at three different fac- nent in the Erasmus programme but extended beyond ulties of the university, while several joint modules the European geographical area. Vilnius University has always seen participation in mented. The university joined the Erasmus programme have already been integrated. These activities have the Erasmus programme as both a goal in itself and as in 1999 and at that time could boast only 9 incoming a means to reach higher level of internationalisation and about 40 outgoing students while in 2009 these of the university. Participation in the programme has numbers have grown to 226 and 479 respectively. Par- allowed the strategy of internationalisation, which was ticipation in the programme has allowed finding new outlined as early as 1995, to be developed and imple- reliable partners that led to involvement in other EU

46 47 6.4. Best Practice in Intensive Programmes 6.4.2. “Summer University in Sustainable Rural Tourism“ (Kuressaare Col- lege of Tallinn University of Technology)

6.4.1. “Brass & Jazz eliminates boundaries between the classics and jazz” ( Jāzeps Vītols Latvian Academy of Music) The goal of the International Summer University in Sustainable Rural Tourism was to promote international networking between higher education institutions in teachers worked with students to enable the jazz the field of tourism: cooperation in teaching sustain- students to attend the classical music workshops and able rural tourism; integration of sustainable tourism vice versa – to enable the students of academic music topics into the study programme, as well as gathering to acquire the nuances of jazz playing. Improvisation and sharing international know-how and experiences classes, a course on jazz history and record produc- for developing a module in sustainable and rural tour- tion and individual classes were also included in the ism. programme. The students played music in various en- In August of 2009, 2010, and 2011 three 12–14-day- sembles, participated in three jam sessions, and also long summer schools took place on a holiday farm in played during the closing banquet, sponsored by the Saaremaa, Estonia, which enabled closer contact with Embassy of the Netherlands. Project participants per- a practical side of rural and nature tourism. Under the formed during several concerts at the Riga Festival. supervision of lecturers from Estonia, Finland, Latvia, One noteworthy event was the concert of the teachers France, and the USA international groups of tourism involved in the Brass & Jazz project. During the final students improved their knowledge and skills in sus- concert of the project all the students, the most inter- tainable tourism; learned about the perception of na- In each summer school group work tasks were per- esting ensembles, the teachers as well as the Big Band ture and cultural heritage, tourism and visitor man- formed where students presented their ideas for de- established particularly for this concert took part. agement issues in protected areas; event management veloping sustainable rural tourism in Saaremaa. In the In 2011 the Erasmus Intensive Programme Brass Again in 2012 – Brass & Jazz took place for the sec- in rural tourism; adventure tourism in the countryside, summer university of sustainable rural tourism held in & Jazz broke down the boundaries between the aca- ond year, joined by a new partner. This time, too, an ex- and innovations in rural tourism. 2011 22 students from 5 countries participated. Five demic and jazz study programmes. It was a pilot music tensive and intensive programme was provided for the Each day of the summer school was divided into thematic package tours were prepared by student project, where almost 90 jazz and academic students young musicians – the teachers involved in the project an academic and a practical part: in the morning there teams (a so-called bread expedition, a market and fes- and academic staff from musical higher education in- led group and individual classes, improvisation prac- were lectures and seminars but after lunch there was tival of local food and products, a cycling tour, a hike stitutions of Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Switzer- tice, brass ensembles and jazz combo, students were more practical active learning (field trips to enterprises around North-Saaremaa, and a training trip of photo land and Sweden experienced so far unprecedented invited to participate in a big band, and the coopera- of rural tourism, hikes in the countryside, workshops tourism around the islands). The participants kept intensive courses. The key task of this project was to tion with the organisers of Riga Festival was continued. with local tourism entrepreneurs, and preparation for their summer school diaries, which were presented change the musical environment, encouraging testing group projects). electronically immediately after the event. the talent of each student in another area. As a result Participants share their impressions: of this the young musicians acquired new knowledge ‘Brass & Jazz gave me the opportunity to feel the taste of jazz and experience and learned new skills, the teachers music and try improvisation. It was interesting to play academic invited for the project shared their experience widely music together with the jazz students. Thus we learned from each 6.4.3. “Contemporary Past“ (Vilnius Academy of Arts) while complying with an iron-tough regime, and also other and enriched our experience.’ enjoying the great atmosphere. ‘Brass & Jazz programme was interesting for me not only because of the great teachers, participating in the project, but also Interest for Brass & Jazz was extremely high among because of the interesting musical repertoire. It was a wonderful The Contemporary Past project received award in different subjects, the cross-disciplinary aspect and the students. In line with the programme name, over and invaluable experience therefore such projects should be or- ten days participants were involved in intensive work ganised more often.’ the Quality Competition organised by the Lithuanian the theme of contemporary forms of the past rep- both during workshops and concerts from nine o’clock ‘We had an intensive study plan, during which we acquired a Education Exchanges Support Foundation as the best resentations remained the core of each project. All in the morning to ten o’clock in the evening; no one, lot of new knowledge with great teachers. It was exciting to learn IP project of 2008–2009. The programme brought the projects encompassed lectures, artist talks, film the nuances of jazz music with which I had not been previously however, complained of exhaustion. All students par- together students and teaching staff from Finnish, screenings, workshops and a final public presentation familiar. This experience will enable me to combine both styles Lithuanian, Romanian and Swedish higher education of works created by the students. Some of the activi- ticipated in warm-up classes, which were led by var- and find new creative ideas in the future. I got real satisfaction, ious teachers in turn. Both jazz and academic music while participating in this intensive summer course.’ institutions. The programme was divided into sepa- ties were open to the public. rate projects. Although each of them was focusing on The project New Art Forms in Memorial Building

48 49 6.5. Best Practice in Erasmus Intensive Language Courses

6.5.1. Erasmus Intensive Latvian Language Course (University of Latvia)

Since 2001 the University of Latvia has organised The students appreciate the importance of the EILC twice a year – in January and August. During the language courses, as they allow them to adapt more first years there were a small number of students in easily in the new environment where they will have to the courses, as Latvia still had not acquired its identifi- spend their study period if compared to those who do cation among European students. not take part in the courses. Already before the start of The courses are conducted for four weeks in an the study year they have got to know Latvia a little, the intensive regime. Every working day there are four local traditions and culture, and are able to orientate academic hours. They are followed by a language lab- themselves in the city. oratory where the students can apply the acquired knowledge in practice. The lessons are held also out- One of the participants shares their impressions: side the university premises as the students visit the ‘When I applied for the Erasmus student exchange pro- Occupation Museum and other museums where while gramme, I very much wanted to attend the intensive Latvian language courses to better prepare for the new circumstances. getting acquainted with the exhibitions they practise Already in Germany I bought the Latvian language textbook. In or- (2009) was dedicated to commemorational projects The project Counterstrategies for Greenwashing the language. der to be sure that I would be able to attend the courses, I applied realised in Europe and elsewhere, with particular focus (2013) investigated artistic projects and cultural ini- During a month the students acquire the language to three HEIs that organise EILC. Luckily, I got the confirmation of on contemporary solutions for suggestive memorials. tiatives dealing with ecology and environment-related up to the B1 level so that they are able to continue enrolment in the courses from the University of Latvia. Working on their memorial projects students concen- topics from the critical vantage point of tracking the their studies. For example, the course participants af- Of course, we studied not only the Latvian dictionary, but also learned a lot about Latvian culture. Our teachers told us about trated on mass deportations of Lithuanians to Siberia concept/idea of sustainability, its socio-economic and ter four weeks of training are able to tell about them- such events as the “White Night” and “Riga City Festival”. In addi- before and after the Second World War. political contexts. Participants destroyed myths of selves in Latvian – what they do, where they live, etc. tion, we sang Latvian folk songs and talked about the traditional The project Moving Images as a Fluid Memory sustainability and tried to find sound ways to contrib- They can independently do the shopping telling the dishes. In the afternoon the lessons continued or a variety of ac- (2011) dealt with the issues of memories and past ute to environmental wellbeing. shop assistant what they want to buy, and are also tivities were held such as tours of the Old Town and the Art Nou- representations. Its main medium was moving images able to ask which transport should be used to reach veau district, as well as visits to museums. On weekends there were one-day tours when we visited Sigulda, Cēsis, Latvian Ethno- including a vast variety of expressions (fiction film, ex- a certain destination. The students learn spelling and graphic Open-Air Museum, etc. perimental film, documentary, video installation, etc.). the basics of grammar, too. The objective of this course The teachers helped us to deal with social issues such as find- The main purpose of the project was to open discus- is not to prepare students to be able to follow their ing an apartment. They were always interested in our weekend sions about moving images as a memorial and to ex- studies in Latvian. plans to see if we needed any help. plore their power for sculpting in time. Participants share their impressions: A culture programme is also provided – visiting an Most Latvians are happy that I’m trying to speak their native ‘I learned a lot from just being outside of Copenhagen meet- language. When they understand that I am not a Latvian, they The project Tracking a Postcard (2012) focused on opera performance, excursions outside Riga. immediately switch to English, especially in hotels and in other message transfer in visual arts and referred to the his- ing students from other countries and a totally different academy with different views on the role of the artist and art. That gave me tourism-related places.’ toric mail road, which ran along the Curonian Spit in a clearer picture of what I come from and a general perspective to the 19th century and connected Königsberg and Riga. the art world in Europe, which is very amazing to get.’ The course linked communication by post to commu- ‘It totally changed my understanding of what a memorial can nication by visual representation and suggested the be. Before, I had a quite conventional view of memorials, whereas participants to reflect on travelling, be it a message now I have many questions: what’s the point of a memorial & what events or things should be memorialised? How can a memorial be travelling from a sender to a receiver, an idea, an ob- designed to create an experience?’ ject or a person.

50 51 6.5.2. Erasmus Intensive Language Week – EILW in Estonia (Tallinn Universi- 6.5.3. Erasmus Intensive Latvian Language Course (Lithuanian University of ty of Technology (TUT), Estonian Business School and Estonian Academy of Educational Sciences (LEU)) Security Sciences)

anian language but also in helping them to integrate in the local environment and teaching them skills of intercultural communication in the socio-cultural context of Lithuania. – states Ms Leonavičienė – EILC In 2012 the Erasmus Baltic joint seminar ERASMUS and innovative ideas in language teaching. coordinator since 2005 and Erasmus 25 teacher/staff INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE WEEK (EILW) – was carried There were all together 32 participants from 9 dif- ambassador for Lithuania – and concludes “I am very out in two different towns of Estonia – Tallinn and Pär- ferent European countries: Croatia, Czech Republic, happy that we have succeeded in forming a profes- nu. It was an Erasmus staff-training week for language Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Slove- sional and competent team of teachers and mentors. teachers and EILC organisers from the Baltic and other nia. Therefore it was a very heterogeneous/mixed and In our courses we use interactive teaching methods European countries. The event was organised by the interesting group with very different cultural back- and we focus on the development of communicative Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian National Agencies of grounds and environments. Despite that, the partici- skills, therefore, preparing Erasmus students for suc- the Lifelong Learning Programme and by three Esto- pants formed one harmonious and friendly language cessful studying in Lithuania. The courses enjoy re- nian HETs who are at the same time experienced EILC family. LEU has been winning the competition to organise markable success every year. We have established an organising institutions (OI-s) in Estonia. All the participants had an opportunity to give an EILC courses since 2005. Every year about 30 students EILC fan group on Facebook. Students return to visit The idea of organising such an event was raised by overview of themselves, to share experiences of their from different European countries enrol in the cours- Lithuania after their Erasmus studies. They become the real need to meet with other language teachers work, to learn some Estonian and to participate in sev- es offered at our institution. EILC courses have added ambassadors of our institution. We constantly receive face-to-face and EILC OIs from Europe to exchange ex- eral interesting lectures and presentations. Also, the greatly to the student and teaching staff mobility and thank-you letters from the former participants.’ periences, share practical tips and discuss future plans possibility to discuss actual issues with the represent- cooperation as well as to the development of Bilateral and possibilities. ative from European Commission was very valuable Agreements between LEU and other HEIs. Positive par- This Erasmus Staff Training Week was unique and and highly interesting for all participants. In conclusion ticipant feedback on EILC courses, when they return to special in more than one way, as it was targeted exclu- the Erasmus Intensive language Week was very suc- their home institutions, adds greatly to popularising Participants share their impressions: sively at the teachers and administrators of the EILC cessful. The feedback given by the participants (both Lithuania, the Lithuanian language and culture, and ‘Thanks for amazing moments. Really nice to know all of you. I hope one day we can meet again somewhere’ courses in Baltic and other nearby European countries; written and also from face-to-face) was only positive attracting more and more students to study in Lithua- ‘Carry with you a piece of Lithuania, a piece of our experi- it was organised by three different HEIs/EILC organising or very positive. The organisers were very satisfied at nian HEIs within the Erasmus programme. ence. We will miss you.’ institutions; took place in two very different settings in the end of the week and were glad that the partici- All of this positive impact of international cooper- ‘Everything was as I imagined it would be. I did my research Estonia; and was targeted at active participants who pants were like a big happy and friendly international ation would have been impossible without the active before coming and I checked whether my goals and education- were willing to share their experiences, best practices family! participation of some members of academic staff of al expectations would be met. To be more specific: I expected a quite organised community, kind people, a lot of nature and last, LEU. Since the year 2000 Ms Vilma Leonavičienė has but not least, competent and exceptional university staff (both been teaching Erasmus students Lithuanian Lan- academic and non-academic). And this is what I found. <..> My guage and Culture, ‘Every year the number of Eras- professor is exceptional and explained everything in a clear man- mus students is increasing, therefore, I teach one or ner. This course made me wants to continue studying Lithuanian two groups of Erasmus students every semester. My and I would not hesitate to attend again in the future, for the next level, if I had the opportunity.’ courses introduce Erasmus students to the Lithuanian ‘The programme itself was just amazing – a whole package language, culture and social context, which is abso- of teaching and cultural things, but just perfectly matched all lutely necessary for them to integrate in the life of the together. I met so many good people and extended my language country they come to study. Therefore, I see my mis- skills, and learned a bit of Lithuanian. An experience that I will sion not only in teaching Erasmus students the Lithu- never ever forget.’

52 53 Other National Initiatives 7.1.2. ESN Latvia

In 2013 two ESN sections were established in Lat- ESN Riga starts and completes every semester with 7.1. Erasmus Student Network (ESN) in Baltic countries via – ESN Jelgava and ESN Riga. Both of them have welcome and goodbye seminars. been working with most of the higher education insti- Trips and events have been organised for all incom- tutions in Latvia. ing exchange students to discover Latvia, the Baltic ESN Riga has organised different activities for for- States and our neighbouring countries, such as Swe- eign exchange students in Latvia and Latvian students den and Russia. 7.1.1. ESN Estonia going abroad. Besides the local activities, ESN Riga has Cultural events – have taken students to the Arab been active in ESN International and International pro- world, Spain, Italy and many other great places. jects to improve student mobility. At the beginning of ESN Riga has organised the Buddy System for in- each semester a Welcome Week for arriving students coming students to the University of Latvia. ESN Riga has been held to make sure they get to know their new has offered the international ESN Card to students al- home city and each other. lowing them discounts on services offered by the ESN and partners.

7.1.3. ESN Lithuania

A sub-division of the international voluntary stu- At the moment the organisation works in close dent organisation, ESN Lithuania has been taking care cooperation with the international relations depart- of the participants of international study exchange ments of the universities, Invest Lithuania and the For ESN in Estonia, the years 2007–2014 have been trips to different destinations both in Estonia and its programmes for more than a decade. At the moment Education Exchanges Support Foundation, where ESN a period of growing, developing and restructuring. Three neighbouring countries, and many more. One of the in- 14 ESN sections, located in higher education insti- increasingly contributes to the promotion of mobility International Clubs joined the already existing ESN Tar- ternationally recognised projects of Estonian sections tutions in Vilnius, Kaunas, Klaipeda and Siauliai, are programmes in the country in order to encourage lo- tu (established in 2000) and ESN Tallinn (2003): ESN has been the ESN Diary, in cooperation with the Archi- seeking to ensure high-quality, rich and socially re- cal students not to miss out on opportunities offered EBS in Estonian Business School (in 2008), ESN TU in medes Foundation, a nice memento including pictures sponsible exchanges for students in Lithuania. Active by Erasmus+ and other EU programmes. For those who Tallinn University and ESN TUT IC in Tallinn University of and stories of all their friends for the students to take volunteers working within sections are trying to en- have just returned from an exchange or who are willing Technology (both in 2009). In 2011, the first National back home with them. gage foreign students in various initiatives organised to work, learn and communicate within an intercultur- Board and ESN Estonia were established, bringing the ESN Estonia has also actively contributed to the throughout the semester seeking to bring guests clos- al environment without leaving Lithuania, ESN invites five sections closer together and helping them work on international level of ESN. In addition to participating er to the local community. Projects such as Erasmus in them to join and become a small but powerful part of common goals – making the Estonian experience as in the annual conferences and different international Lithuanian Schools, National Blood Donation Day, Mul- one of the most powerful youth organisations in the wonderful as possible for international students. meetings of the network, Estonia has had the pleasure tilingual Lithuania and many others were successfully field. All of this is aimed at one particular mission of It is safe to argue that active ESN sections and sup- of hosting some of them, such as two Northern Euro- accomplished under the idea of promoting tolerance, the organisation – to provide opportunities for cultural portive tutors are among the main reasons why inter- pean Platforms and a Council of National Representa- understanding and knowledge concerning other coun- understanding and self-development under the princi- national students find Estonia one of the best study tives. tries and their representatives here, in Lithuania. ple of SHS – Students Helping Students. destinations in Europe (both ESN Survey 2010 and In- Introduced in spring 2012, SocialErasmus has ternational Student Barometer give Estonia the high- opened a new dimension to the Estonian experience. est rank according to student ratings). By giving international students different volunteering opportunities, ESN has invited them to get even clos- While growing in number, ESN sections in Estonia er to Estonian society and to give something back. So have organised a large variety of events and activities far, there has been cooperation with the Tallinn Fam- for incoming students, such as National Evenings to ily Centre’s Day Care and Tartu Child Support Centre present different countries and their traditions; Lan- Playdates; with Let’s Do It! for environmental clean-up guage Cafés or the Buddy Network to help students activities; with visits to animal shelters; and also with become more familiar with the Estonian language; ESN several schools for Erasmus in Schools. Jam Sessions for all the musically talented students;

54 55 7.2. Survey - Erasmus students’ satisfaction with different 7.4. Survey of foreign students who studied under the Eras- aspects of Erasmus mobility in Latvia mus programme in Lithuania

In 2012 the National Agency of Latvia in coop- The overall findings of the survey suggest that stu- tion about the study environment in the host Lithua- eration with the Latvian ESN carried out a survey on dents are satisfied with the different aspects of mo- nian higher education institution, living conditions in Erasmus students’ satisfaction with different aspects bility. Mostly students were pleased with the work of Lithuania, local culture, lifestyle, etc. before arriving of Erasmus mobility in Latvia (organisation of mobili- Erasmus Coordinators in higher education institutions, in the country. Foreign students assessed integration ty, academic quality of mobility, social and aspects of but they also wished to have more extensive infor- into the university’s community/community life as only everyday life of mobility). mation regarding recognition, transfer of credits and mediocre. A total of 1149 outgoing students from 34 high- grades and the rights of an Erasmus student. The surveyed foreign students, who had a train- er education institutions and 375 incoming students An electronic version of the survey is available on eeship period in Lithuanian enterprises and organisa- from 28 higher education institutions participated in the National Agency web page www.viaa.gov.lv. tions, were positive in assessing their practical training the survey. The majority of the respondents were par- and its benefit. The foreigners were most positive in ticipants of study mobility (73% of outgoing and 63% assessing the work of administration staff, while the of incoming students). Aim of the research – to explore and generalise the worse assessment is related with possibilities to be- opinion of incoming foreign students, under the Eras- come familiar with new techniques, technologies and mus programme during 2007-2013, about Erasmus methods. A small number of respondents, who had credit studies and their organisation in Lithuania. traineeships in Lithuanian organisations, would sug- Data collected during research and their analysis gest that it would be appropriate to strengthen not allows generalising the views of surveyed foreign stu- only the field of studies, but also the practical train- dents towards partial studies in Lithuania and to give ing for foreign students in Lithuanian organisations, recommendations to institutions, organising Erasmus to improve cooperation between higher education 7.3. Survey – Satisfaction of participants of the Erasmus partial studies in Lithuania. institutions and organisations, and to implement the According to the survey data, foreign students dissemination of practical training under the Erasmus programme in Latvia have a good opinion about the professional knowledge programme in Lithuanian organisations. of Lithuanian lecturers, and a slightly worse opinion The overall satisfaction of foreign students sur- about their ability to convey it, i.e. lecturers’ didactic veyed, studying under the Erasmus programme, in competence. However, the most problematic situation Lithuania, is high. The majority of foreign students sur- In 2013 the National Agency of Latvia in coopera- possibilities are mostly used by already experienced in the context of competencies is related with lectur- veyed is satisfied with the acquired knowledge, expe- tion with TNS Latvia carried out a survey on the sat- representatives of the higher educational establish- ers’ knowledge of foreign languages. A large majority rience, and enjoyed the opportunity to communicate isfaction of participants of the Erasmus programme ments (with 10 or more years of service) who are able of foreign students, who took part in the survey, were and learn in an intercultural environment. Almost all of (academic and general staff). not only to learn from their colleagues abroad, but who positive in assessing the quality of Erasmus studies in the surveyed foreign students would recommend com- The general objective of the study was to find out also pass on their knowledge and skills to their foreign Lithuanian higher education institutions and the study ing to Lithuania for Erasmus studies or traineeship to the level of satisfaction of the target group with var- colleagues. period in general. They were also positive in assessing other students. ious aspects of participation in Erasmus mobility pro- The results of the survey show that respondents the flexibility of the study schedule. The assessment of An electronic version of the brochure is available on grammes and the benefits gained from them. Target are satisfied with the programme in general and allow technical means in higher education school and their the National Agency web page www.smpf.lt group: 304 participants of LLP Erasmus programme, concluding that the Erasmus exchange programme is availability to students was slightly worse than the who have been involved in the mobility programme a great benefit for the higher educational establish- quality of studies and the flexibility of the schedule. (academic or general) during the academic years ments in Latvia and their personnel, who share their Unfortunately, only every fifth student surveyed could 2011/2012 and 2012/2013. international experience with their colleagues and say you that the technical equipment in an institution The results of the survey allow concluding that students; participation in the programme allows intro- is “very good”, and only every third – that it is “good”. Erasmus coordinators in Latvia are well-informed in ducing changes in the work organisation of structural The assessment of the availability of technical means terms of the content of the programme, its goals, and units, in drafting studies programmes and new teach- was similar. Incoming Erasmus students were positive documents, and they are able to provide, and they do ing methods. in assessing the assistance of administration staff and provide quality information and support both during An electronic version of the brochure is available on the work of the international relations specialist and the preparation process and also if necessary – during the National Agency web page www.viaa.gov.lv mentor responsible for the programme. The majority the drafting of reports after the programme. Mobility of incoming foreign students have enough informa-

56 57 7.5. Erasmus for Lithuanian Schools

HEIs and secondary education institutions (schools). The initiative supports visits to Lithuanian schools by foreign Erasmus and degree students studying at Lithuanian HEIs, as well as by Lithuanian students who have been Erasmus students and/or act as Erasmus mentors. During their visits, students have the opportunity to implement small-scale educational projects focusing on the importance of student mobility, the traditions and languages of different countries, career orientation, etc. The participation of Lithuanian universities and col- leges in this initiative was quite high, about 40–45 % of them were involved, starting from 19 HEIs in 2011/2012 and following similar numbers in subsequent years. Each year, about 150 schools were visited by approximately 500 foreign and local students. Over the This is an initiative launched by the Lithuanian Na- past three years, a number of articles on the initia- tional Agency back in 2011. The main aims of this ini- tive were published in local media making it a well- tiative are to: make pupils aware of the possibility and known phenomenon and increasing the awareness of importance of student mobility; contribute to tolerance the Erasmus programme among various groups of the and intercultural understanding among Lithuanian pu- population. In the last year, the initiative was assigned pils; and support cross-sectoral cooperation between to ESN Lithuania. popularity among the schools from the very beginning and there was quite strong competition among schools to participate in the programme. Many participants were so enthusiastic about the programme that they visited more than one school. As the Estonian schools 7.6. Europe Makes School (EMS) in Estonia 2013 - 2014 were likewise very eager to participate in the EMS programme, there was no problem with finding two or more schools for a motivated exchange student. Preparation of the participating students is an important part of the EMS programme in Estonia. Prepara- EMS brings together exchange students from dif- school children participating in the project. However, tory meetings and a pedagogical seminar are held be- ferent European countries and Estonian schoolchildren all the projects carry a common purpose: to introduce and there is a concluding seminar and party at the end. fore the classroom activities to inform and instruct the for mutual cultural learning. The programme consists different European cultures in an exciting and fun way. Participating schools also receive certificates. participants about the EMS programme, the Estonian of many small projects, which are carried out by ex- In the last two years 30 exchange students have intro- The idea of EMS originally comes from Germany. In school system and teaching methods. These meetings change students to introduce their country and culture duced their home country and culture in 37 Estonian Estonia the EMS programme was initiated by Mai Beil- help to ensure the good quality of later classroom ac- in Estonian schools. In 2014 small projects took place schools. mann, who took part in the EMS programme in Ger- tivities, but are also a great opportunity to get to know in schools all over Estonia. The topics and content of EMS started with great success in 2013 with 12 many as an exchange student and on her return to the participants. the projects can vary depending on the interests of very motivated participants from 7 different countries, Estonia she founded the local EMS initiative. The EMS To keep the exchange students motivated through- the exchange student, the subject of the supervising who were very resourceful in finding interesting ways programme in Estonia is now coordinated by the Foun- out the process, they are awarded with certificates teacher, expectations of the school, and the age of to introduce their country to pupils. EMS won great dation for Science and Liberal Arts Domus Dorpatensis. (which confirms conducting a project at the school),

58 59 List of annexes Annex 1 Estonian Higher Education institutions’ participation in Erasmus programme 2007-2013

Erasmus ID HEI 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- Annex 1 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Estonian Higher Education institutions’ participation in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 EE HARJUMA01 International University Audentes EE TALLINN11 Academy Nord EE TALLINN18 The Institute of Theology of the Estonian Evangelical Lutheran Church Annex 2 EE TALLINN14 The Estonian Information Tehcnology College EE TALLINN01 Estonian Academy of Arts Latvian Higher Education institutions’ participation in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 EE TARTU01 Estonian University of Life Sciences EE TARTU03 Estonian Aviation Academy EE TALLINN03 Estonian Academy of Music and Theatre Annex 3 EE TALLINN02 Estonian Business School EE TALLINN16 Euroacademy Lithuanian Higher Education institutions’ participation in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 EE VORU01 Võru County Vocational Training Centre EE LAANE-V02 Lääne-Viru College EE TALLINN15 Estonian Entrepreneurship University of Applied Sciences Annex 4 EE TALLINN10 Estonian Academy of Security Sciences EE TALLINN17 Tallinn College of Business Administration Outgoing student percentage from total student number per HEI in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 EE TALLINN20 Tallinn School of Economics EE TALLINN19 Tallinn Pedagogical College EE TALLINN06 TTK University of Applied Sciences Annex 5 EE TALLINN04 Tallinn University of Technology Outgoing-incoming Erasmus students per host-home country in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 EE TALLINN12 Tallinn Health Care College EE TALLINN05 Tallinn University EE TARTU05 Tartu Art College (University of Applied Sciences) Annex 6 EE TARTU06 Tartu Health Care College EE TARTU02 University of Tartu Outgoing staff percentage from total staff number per HEI in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 EE TALLINN13 Estonian Maritime Academy EE TALLINN20 ECOMEN Institute of Economics and Management EE TARTU07 Tartu Thelogical Seminary Annex 7 EE TALLINN23 Estonian School of Hotel and Tourism Management

Outgoing-incoming Erasmus staff per host-home country in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 participate in programme not participate in programme

Annex 8 Outgoing Erasmus special needs students and staff in Erasmus programme 2007-2013

Annex 9 Outgoing- incoming students for Erasmus Intensive Language Courses per host countries in 2007-2013

Annex 10 Erasmus Intensive Programmes partner countries in Erasmus programme 2007-2013

60 61 Annex 2 Annex 3 Latvian Higher Education institutions’ participation in Lithuanian Higher Education institutions’ participation in Erasmus programme 2007-2013 Erasmus programme 2007-2013

Erasmus ID HEI 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- Erasmus ID HEI 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 LV DAUGAVP01 Daugavpils University LT ALYTUS01 Alytus College LV DAUGAVP02 Daugavpils Medical College LT KAUNAS01 Vytautas Magnus University LV JELGAVA01 Latvia University Of Agriculture LT KAUNAS02 Kaunas University of Technology LV JURMALA01 Latvian Christian Academy LT KAUNAS03 Kaunas University of Medicine LV JURMALA03 P.Stradins Medical College Of The University Of Latvia LT KAUNAS04 Lithuanian Sports University LV JURMALA05 The Social Integration State Agency LT KAUNAS05 Aleksandras Stulginskis University LV LIEPAJA01 Liepaja University LT KAUNAS06 Lithuanian Veterinary Academy LV LIEPAJA02 Medical College Of Liepaja LT KAUNAS07 V.A.Graiciunas School of Management LV REZEKNE02 Rezekne Higher Educational Institution LT KAUNAS08 Kaunas College LV REZEKNE03 State Border Guard College LT KAUNAS10 "ISM University of Management and Economics", JSC LV RIGA01 University Of Latvia LT KAUNAS11 Kolping College, Public Institution LV RIGA02 Riga Technical University LT KAUNAS12 Kaunas Technical College LV RIGA03 Riga Stradins University LT KAUNAS13 Lithuanian University of Health Sciences LV RIGA04 Art Academy Of Latvia LT KAUNO01 Kaunas College of Forestry and Environmental Engineering LV RIGA05 Jazeps Vitols Latvian Academy Of Music LT KLAIPED01 Klaipeda University LV RIGA06 Latvian Academy Of Sport Education LT KLAIPED02 LCC International University LV RIGA08 Latvian Academy Of Culture LT KLAIPED03 Klaipeda College LV RIGA09 Turiba University LT KLAIPED04 University of Applied Social Sciences LV RIGA10 Latvian Police Academy LT KLAIPED05 Klaipeda Business Higher School LV RIGA12 Latvian Maritime Academy LT KLAIPED06 Lithuanian Higher Naval School LV RIGA13 Ba School Of Business And Finance (Sbf) LT KLAIPED07 Public institution Lithuania Business University of Applied Sciences I LV RIGA14 The Stockholm School Of Economics In Riga LT KLAIPED07 Public institution Lithuania Business University of Applied Sciences II LV RIGA16 Higher School Of Management And Social Work "Attistiba" LT KLAIPED08 Klaipeda Business and Technology College LV RIGA27 Riga Teacher Training And Educational Management Academy LT KLAIPED09 Klaipeda State College LV RIGA28 Baltic International Academy LT MARIJAM01 Marijampole College LV RIGA29 Riga International School Of Economics And Business Administration LT PANEVEZ01 Panevezys College LV RIGA30 International Higher School Of Practical Psychology LT RIETAVA01 Zemaitija College LV RIGA31 Transport And Telecommunication Institute LT SIAULIA01 Siauliai University LV RIGA32 Information Systems Management Institute LT SIAULIA02 North Lithuania College, Public Institution LV RIGA33 The University College Of Economics And Culture LT SIAULIA03 Siauliai State College LV RIGA34 Riga Graduate School Of Law LT SIAULIA04 College of Management, Law and Languages of Siauliai Reagion LV RIGA35 Baltic Psychology And Management University College LT UTENA01 Utena College LV RIGA38 Riga Business College LT VILNIUS01 Vilnius University I LV RIGA40 Riga Building College LT VILNIUS01 Vilnius University II LV RIGA41 Latvia Culture College At Lac LT VILNIUS02 Vilnius Gediminas Technical University LV RIGA42 Riga 1st Medical College LT VILNIUS03 Vilnius Academy of Fine Arts LV RIGA43 The College Of Accounting And Finance LT VILNIUS04 Lithuanian University of Education LV RIGA44 Professional Education Competence Centre "Riga Technical College" LT VILNIUS05 Lithuanian Academy of Music and Theatre LV RIGA45 Alberta College LT VILNIUS06 Mykolas Romeris University LV RIGA46 Riga Medical College Of The University Of Latvia LT VILNIUS08 Vilnius Business College, Public Institution LV RIGA47 Red Cross Medical College Of Riga Stradiņš University LT VILNIUS10 Vilnius College LV RIGA48 Riga Higher Institute Of Religious Sciences LT VILNIUS11 Vilnius Co-operative College, Public Institution LV RIGA49 College Of Law LT VILNIUS12 Academy of Management and Business LV RIGA50 Riga Aeronautical Institute LT VILNIUS13 Vilnius Technical College LV RIGA51 Foundation "Christian Leadership College" LT VILNIUS14 Vilnius College of Construction and Design LV VALMIER01 Vidzeme University Of Applied Sciences LT VILNIUS14 Vilnius College of Technologies and Design LV VENTSPI01 Ventspils University College LT VILNIUS15 International School of Law and Business LT VILNIUS16 The General Jonas Zemaitis Military Academy of Lithuania participate in programme not participate in programme LT VILNIUS17 Institute of Mathematics and Informatics LT VILNIUS18 Center for Physical Sciences and Technology LT VILNIUS19 International Business School at Vilnius University, Public Institution LT VILNIUS20 European Humanities University, Public Institution LT VILNIUS23 Vilnius College of Design LT VILNIUS24 Kazimieras Simonavicius University, JSC

participate in programme not participate in programme

62 63 Annex 4 Outgoing student percentage from total student number per HEI in Erasmus programme 2007-2013

Estonia Latvia Erasmus ID 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Erasmus ID 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 EE HARJUMA01 1.4 1.4 LV DAUGAVP01 0.3 0.0 0.9 1.1 2.0 3.5 EE TALLINN11 0.2 0.1 0.4 LV DAUGAVP02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.9 10.6 EE TALLINN18 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.0 LV JELGAVA01 0.6 0.7 1.2 1.4 1.8 2.3 EE TALLINN14 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.7 0.8 LV JURMALA01 9.4 6.0 7.0 7.9 6.1 16.7 EE TALLINN01 5.1 5.1 6.8 6.7 5.6 8.9 LV JURMALA03 0.6 2.4 1.3 2.8 3.3 3.3 EE TARTU01 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.5 1.7 LV JURMALA05 EE TARTU03 0.6 0.9 2.7 3.6 3.6 4.2 LV LIEPAJA01 1.0 1.0 1.7 1.9 3.4 3.3 EE TALLINN03 5.7 5.3 5.6 5.6 5.8 4.8 LV LIEPAJA02 0.0 0.0 2 EE TALLINN02 1.8 1.2 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.6 LV REZEKNE02 1.8 2.5 3.5 5.3 6.1 5.2 EE TALLINN16 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.5 LV REZEKNE03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EE VORU01 3.9 5.5 3.8 2.5 4.6 3.3 LV RIGA01 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.1 EE LAANE-V02 0.4 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.6 LV RIGA02 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.4 EE TALLINN15 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 LV RIGA03 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.9 1.3 EE TALLINN10 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.5 LV RIGA04 6.0 8.6 7.0 7.9 6.6 7.4 EE TALLINN17 0.0 3.2 6.1 1.6 0.0 LV RIGA05 4.0 5.6 3.2 7.5 8.4 9.2 EE TALLINN20 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 LV RIGA06 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.5 EE TALLINN19 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 LV RIGA08 6.6 7.8 10.3 9.1 11.4 12.1 EE TALLINN06 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 2.1 1.7 LV RIGA09 1.0 1.2 1.6 2.2 2.8 2.3 EE TALLINN04 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 LV RIGA10 0.7 0.7 0.4 EE TALLINN12 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.0 1.7 2.2 LV RIGA12 1.2 1.1 1.3 2.7 1.7 7.1 EE TALLINN05 1.0 1.3 1.8 1.6 1.7 1.5 LV RIGA13 2.9 3.6 5.3 6.4 6.9 6.1 EE TARTU05 6.5 7.7 8.6 8.8 8.6 10.1 LV RIGA14 6.7 6.8 5.8 6.3 6.2 7.6 EE TARTU06 1.4 1.5 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.6 LV RIGA16 0.9 1.6 1.0 1.8 1.7 0.0 EE TARTU02 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.7 LV RIGA27 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.2 0.9 EE TALLINN13 0.5 0.4 0.9 1.1 1.4 LV RIGA28 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 1.4 1.3 EE TALLINN20 0.3 0.5 0.9 LV RIGA29 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.6 2.2 0.0 EE TARTU07 4.5 5.3 LV RIGA30 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 1.0 EE TALLINN23 0.0 0.0 LV RIGA31 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.8 1.2 LV RIGA32 2.3 2.8 2.9 3.0 2.8 5.1 LV RIGA33 0.5 0.7 1.3 1.5 2.4 2.9 LV RIGA34 2.6 0.0 2.5 1.1 3.0 3.3 LV RIGA35 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.1 2.3 4.4 LV RIGA38 0.2 1.5 1.5 2.6 3.7 3.5 LV RIGA40 0.0 0.6 1.2 1.4 2.0 1.9 LV RIGA41 0.0 0.7 1.3 0.8 LV RIGA42 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 LV RIGA43 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LV RIGA44 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.8 1.9 LV RIGA45 0.5 1.3 LV RIGA46 1.8 0.0 1.5 2.9 3.2 2.3 LV RIGA47 1.2 1.4 2.2 3.1 LV RIGA48 3.9 LV RIGA49 0.7 LV RIGA50 LV RIGA51 LV VALMIER01 5.9 5.9 7.7 7.7 10.5 9.0 LV VENTSPI01 4.5 4.6 4.8 5.0 6.2 4.7

64 65 Annex 5 Outgoing-incoming Erasmus students per host-home country in Erasmus programme 2007-2013

Lithuania Estonia Erasmus ID 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Outgoing students per country LT ALYTUS01 2.8 1.6 1.1 2.0 2.4 2.5 AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK LT KAUNAS01 3.5 3.6 2.8 2.7 3.2 3.0 5 0 9 9 0 1 2 0 5 0 4 1 6 3 3 0 9 21 15 93 50 82 62 35 10 54 38 12 16 18 51 LT KAUNAS02 1.8 1.3 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.5 103 2007- 2008 LT KAUNAS03 1.9 1.9 2.0 8 3 0 8 0 7 2 1 0 3 2 5 1 3 5 0 3 0 21 18 84 35 53 57 63 28 43 29 11 57 LT KAUNAS04 2.7 2.3 2.8 3.2 2.9 2.9 104 107 2008- 2009 LT KAUNAS05 2.2 1.6 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.0 4 0 0 0 4 0 7 0 8 5 0 2 6 45 28 16 26 85 33 70 39 20 59 49 22 10 52 42 15 65

LT KAUNAS06 2.1 1.8 1.9 109 118 2009- 2010 LT KAUNAS07 1.8 4.4 2.0 2.8 1.6 2.5 0 8 0 3 7 0 2 0 5 0 4 3

LT KAUNAS08 4.8 3.5 2.7 4.3 4.1 4.1 31 26 15 37 46 84 18 22 48 12 32 15 37 65 55 30 48 112 140 124 LT KAUNAS10 2.7 3.4 4.4 4.4 5.0 5.1 2010- 2011 5 0 3 7 0 8 0 7 0 4 3

LT KAUNAS11 3.2 2.7 1.4 2.7 1.7 1.9 32 23 11 10 45 36 73 14 28 52 22 48 16 11 63 67 28 59 131 136 150 LT KAUNAS12 0.8 0.4 0.9 0.8 0.7 1.2 2011- 2012

LT KAUNAS13 1.8 1.7 1.6 7 5 0 7 2 1 2 4 38 26 20 40 39 77 15 21 68 15 26 21 49 26 14 70 54 10 20 64 151 135 126 LT KAUNO01 5.5 2.9 2.2 2.5 3.5 4.7 2012- 2013

LT KLAIPED01 2.5 2.0 1.7 2.6 2.2 3.0 0 0 0 3 5 39 16 71 16 23 40 77 40 88 89 26 16 188 126 175 656 239 706 728 419 178 108 344 244 309 265 113 344 LT KLAIPED02 2.7 1.7 2.0 2.1 1.8 1.7 LT KLAIPED03 2.0 0.9 LT KLAIPED04 3.7 1.8 2.2 3.0 1.6 2.9 Incoming students per country LT KLAIPED05 1.9 2.1 1.4 3.4 4.4 n/a AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK LT KLAIPED06 2.5 2.1 1.0 1.4 1.5 2.2 2 7 2 4 1 5 3

LT KLAIPED07 1.9 0.7 32 13 12 24 78 10 40 62 64 10 55 20 16 16 53 25 10 36 19 LT KLAIPED07 1.5 2.6 4.6 5.3 2007- 2008

LT KLAIPED08 1.4 1.2 3 1 4 4 9 5 3 30 21 32 99 16 34 68 85 14 55 34 18 20 55 28 45 25

LT KLAIPED09 0.6 1.3 0.7 1.8 2008- 2009

LT MARIJAM01 1.1 0.3 0.4 1.2 2.2 2.5 8 1 5 3 2 2 1 6 3 25 19 35 93 10 49 51 22 75 30 40 16 54 23 67 23 104

LT PANEVEZ01 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.4 2009- 2010 LT RIETAVA01 2.1 1.3 1.5 2.7 3.2 3.3 5 1 6 4 1 2 4 30 15 35 11 64 51 99 21 70 38 61 23 56 31 14 60 22 126

LT SIAULIA01 3.5 2.7 2.9 3.4 3.6 3.9 2010- 2011 LT SIAULIA02 2.7 2.2 1.1 1.9 2.9 3.2 6 2 3 2 1 9 4 9 5 35 25 52 13 79 63 10 34 91 45 69 33 65 33 12 70 28 168 118

LT SIAULIA03 1.4 0.9 1.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 2011- 2012 LT SIAULIA04 3.4 4.5 3 4 1 1 4 7 30 17 20 60 23 72 13 42 55 69 33 86 23 12 18 89 23 214 101 137 117

LT UTENA01 1.4 2.9 1.2 1.3 2.7 3.4 2012- 2013 LT VILNIUS01 3.3 3.1 3.0 5 8 0 3 0 0 1 54 83 32 15 12 20 13 40 33 53 LT VILNIUS01 3.1 3.1 3.2 182 110 238 778 367 367 607 143 463 222 273 141 369 163 367 140 LT VILNIUS02 3.8 3.6 3.9 4.3 4.3 4.4 LT VILNIUS03 3.5 3.2 3.1 4.0 3.5 3.5 LT VILNIUS04 2.0 1.4 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.8 Latvia LT VILNIUS05 4.7 3.4 3.4 3.8 3.7 3.5 Outgoing students per country LT VILNIUS06 6.1 4.0 3.4 3.9 3.4 2.4 AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK LT VILNIUS08 2.1 2.7 1.2 3.0 3.0 3.6 2 0 0 3 7 0 1 3 1 7

LT VILNIUS10 4.2 2.4 1.8 2.6 3.3 2.7 35 64 11 24 67 16 94 91 83 58 10 72 64 50 24 38 40 45 12 11 52 202 LT VILNIUS11 4.2 3.9 3.0 2.7 4.0 3.5 2007- 2008 0 0 9 0 8 2 0 2 9

LT VILNIUS12 0.4 0.2 0.9 n/a 35 78 12 16 19 86 18 78 76 50 63 30 45 65 51 20 14 39 66 192 120 112 134 LT VILNIUS13 0.8 2008- 2009

LT VILNIUS14 1.3 0 0 1 4 1 9 1 45 60 14 15 24 40 94 13 13 84 70 67 35 62 79 83 17 25 22 87 228 100 162 120 161 LT VILNIUS14 1.2 1.7 2.1 3.2 3.1 2009- 2010

LT VILNIUS15 1.3 1.2 1.3 2.4 3.4 4.7 0 0 6 4 2 7 6 44 78 20 28 48 61 16 12 86 97 67 80 82 95 21 18 33 68 213 115 175 113 106 148 110

LT VILNIUS16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.2 2010- 2011 LT VILNIUS17 3.3 4.9 1.6 5 7 6 4 6 6 24 10 10 83 90 62 92 46 62 48 36 44 92 69 86 94 23 21 58 63 114 227 217 237 152 100

LT VILNIUS18 n/a 2011- 2012 LT VILNIUS19 2.6 2.4 2.7 3.5 4.4 5.4 4 9 5 48 57 51 12 35 69 81 69 93 16 36 12 86 26 79 89 96 11 80 28 20 58 60 239 195 110 111 100 164

LT VILNIUS20 4.5 4.4 2012- 2013 LT VILNIUS23 4.5 5.6 0 18 21 28 65 26 15 51 34 253 399 147 141 228 541 273 963 572 608 849 101 487 610 446 307 439 454 454 116 110 221 396 LT VILNIUS24 1301

66 67 Annex 6 Outgoing staff percentage from total staff number per HEI in Erasmus programme 2007-2013

Incoming students per country Latvia AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK Erasmus ID 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 7 7 0 3 1 6 5 1 4 4 5 4

17 LV DAUGAVP01 3.7 0.0 5.1 3.1 7.2 9.7 11 71 35 29 16 57 52 18 31 2007- 2008 LV DAUGAVP02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.8 18.4 0 5 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 5 2 0 2 8 6 6 2 7 3 LV JELGAVA01 5.3 5.6 5.7 6.6 6.0 6.7 16 18 74 12 45 10 36 26 66 11 63 12 38

2008- 2009 LV JURMALA01 41.2 25.7 8.7 68.8 39.6 50.0

0 8 0 0 5 0 0 LV JURMALA03 0.0 9.1 36.8 15.4 26.5 0.0 6 8 2 0 8 1 4 4 4 2 3 2 6 7 10 83 13 70 63 35 52 13 71 14 32

2009- 2010 LV JURMALA05 LV LIEPAJA01 7.7 7.0 9.1 11.9 8.3 9.6 0 3 0 1 0 0 2 5 0 3 8 1 7 6 5 5 12 12 16 20 87 18 84 16 69 42 53 13 65 32 10 55

2010- 2011 LV LIEPAJA02 0.0 0.0 13.8 LV REZEKNE02 31.4 23.1 25.7 34.1 49.3 49.3 0 1 0 0 6 0 9 0 6 7 0 2 9 2 4 22 12 73 12 12 36 38 42 85 16 82 20 15 11 132 136 102

2011- 2012 LV REZEKNE03 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 1.0 0.9 LV RIGA01 2.0 2.3 3.3 3.9 4.1 5.2 0 8 0 0 1 6 5 1 0 0 2 1 26 15 17 17 21 39 48 15 51 28 93 21 14 34 14 128 105 106 139 179

2012- 2013 LV RIGA02 0.4 1.0 1.3 3.2 3.3 5.5 LV RIGA03 4.6 4.8 3.3 6.5 11.5 9.5 0 8 1 9 0 0 0 74 60 43 13 77 68 20 47 11 87 25 33 22 15 77 44 134 590 136 494 375 212 419 426 117 437 LV RIGA04 6.2 13.6 22.0 34.5 45.7 35.2 LV RIGA05 54.0 41.0 31.3 43.5 41.1 43.2 LV RIGA06 14.4 9.4 13.6 22.4 14.4 15.6 Lithuania LV RIGA08 20.2 15.6 11.6 16.1 14.4 21.6 Outgoing students per country LV RIGA09 27.8 17.8 20.8 19.2 28.0 48.4 LV RIGA10 4.9 2.4 5.0 AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK LV RIGA12 23.4 28.1 34.8 22.7 29.2 41.7 0 0 5 0 0 0 9

88 18 49 81 20 43 33 38 57 79 56 30 34 99 LV RIGA13 34.9 24.5 29.5 47.2 60.4 55.7 114 332 255 158 219 166 147 118 142 143 120 2007- 2008 LV RIGA14 20.0 17.2 20.7 17.0 17.0 12.8

0 0 7 0 0 5 LV RIGA16 86.1 38.2 50.0 55.2 51.9 0.0 99 99 29 56 87 34 47 38 66 88 11 29 28 308 239 197 253 200 102 170 105 117 184 144 135 123 2008- 2009 LV RIGA27 7.2 9.9 9.7 9.5 14.6 17.5

0 0 0 3 LV RIGA28 1.9 2.1 3.9 5.5 8.8 14.1 90 96 25 53 98 30 67 63 26 16 52 24 99 85 14 58 41 286 223 201 191 193 169 146 208 146 147 152

2009- 2010 LV RIGA29 31.7 10.9 13.8 22.4 56.9 0.0 LV RIGA30 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 1 82 22 53 38 71 26 11 53 34 21 50 42 111 120 254 221 252 193 188 117 191 114 100 178 291 166 234 183

2010- 2011 LV RIGA31 2.5 3.3 2.8 2.9 4.2 6.3 LV RIGA32 31.9 25.7 20.3 39.2 67.7 76.3 0 1 69 40 25 66 45 14 70 24 10 85 49 80 22 57 44 126 138 264 197 314 203 188 119 176 112 146 296 138 260 172

2011- 2012 LV RIGA33 17.1 19.4 28.1 23.3 31.3 39.6 LV RIGA34 104.0 12.5 60.9 112.5 70.4 129.6 5 0 2 79 88 50 26 86 55 18 94 20 81 20 57 54 130 234 142 282 157 191 174 199 106 116 104 129 255 159 257 159

2012- 2013 LV RIGA35 8.0 12.0 13.6 28.6 40.9 31.8 LV RIGA38 3.9 8.2 13.2 6.7 23.3 13.3 0 0 7 51 32 54 97 507 634 184 363 654 222 622 378 172 419 228 613 490 834 896 281 243 888 1678 1277 1404 1216 1126 1052 1376 1153 LV RIGA40 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.6 15.5 14.1 LV RIGA41 0.0 3.3 6.5 8.1 LV RIGA42 0.0 0.0 4.5 0.0 28.1 10.9 Incoming students per country LV RIGA43 0.0 0.0 38.1 15.0 25.0 30.0 AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK LV RIGA44 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 8.1 8.1 LV RIGA45 0.0 19.0 19.0 0 3 5 9 9 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 7 7 5 31 15 14 49 10 84 56 64 19 82 12 13 15 118 117 137 164

2007- 2008 LV RIGA46 31.3 0.0 24.6 16.1 47.5 0.0 LV RIGA47 3.8 2.5 11.5 9.0 0 9 3 0 0 0 0 1 2 8 4 20 23 17 54 21 13 11 21 72 57 16 10 19 18 12 120 124 156 152 104 157

2008- 2009 LV RIGA48 44.4 LV RIGA49 0.0 0 0 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 4 6 22 18 13 62 35 18 16 28 92 70 24 22 11 26 28 116 127 152 122 124 229

2009- 2010 LV RIGA50 LV RIGA51 0 2 2 4 0 2 0 0 0 2 8 15 40 12 53 43 14 18 24 17 95 30 18 34 10 114 192 176 101 110 155 249

2010- 2011 LV VALMIER01 31.3 17.2 21.7 15.9 23.3 19.8 LV VENTSPI01 7.4 6.5 12.3 11.6 10.8 14.2 5 2 8 5 0 1 0 0 2 0 3 17 40 17 64 54 20 19 26 24 20 13 20 16 130 252 184 119 152 157 105 402 2011- 2012 3 4 9 1 0 0 1 0 0 8 29 45 17 88 59 15 16 25 17 40 29 15 35 15 143 284 228 143 164 167 114 612 2012- 2013 4 3 0 0 2 4 8 86 90 20 37 90 98 21 23 36 89 134 181 370 741 222 121 583 617 140 890 624 121 148 1813 1063 1013

68 69 Annex 7 Outgoing-incoming Erasmus staff per host-home country in Erasmus programme 2007-2013

Lithuania Estonia Erasmus ID 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Outgoing staff per country LT ALYTUS01 6.3 3.3 4.4 3.2 3.3 5.3 AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK LT KAUNAS01 14.6 6.5 6.5 6.1 5.9 5.7 8 0 1 9 6 4 1 0 0 1 1 9 8 0 23 11 27 24 11 19 14 21 19 14 20 12 11 13 11 14 37 LT KAUNAS02 5.1 2.0 2.5 2.5 3.1 3.2 115 2007- 2008 LT KAUNAS03 4.2 2.9 3.4 9 0 0 3 3 0 4 2 2 0 0 8 2 4 4 9 LT KAUNAS04 19.4 8.8 10.0 11.4 9.7 9.4 12 17 61 18 13 26 87 19 40 24 15 11 19 10 21 16 26 2008- 2009 LT KAUNAS05 5.9 4.6 5.0 4.1 3.1 3.9 9 0 1 7 8 7 0 9 2 5 0 6 1 1 3 2 7 LT KAUNAS06 8.5 7.0 7.4 22 15 44 11 16 89 20 29 20 37 12 15 11 12 17 25 2009- 2010 LT KAUNAS07 8.8 6.7 1.6 3.4 6.7 1.0 4 0 3 7 6 2 7 1 6 0 0 0 7 8 2 7 5 1

LT KAUNAS08 6.6 4.3 5.1 6.9 5.5 6.1 15 11 10 53 27 75 21 20 29 26 12 14 16 37 LT KAUNAS10 8.1 4.9 2.7 8.0 4.7 2.7 2010- 2011 9 0 6 8 9 6 4 2 3 3 0 0 0 9 4 3 4

LT KAUNAS11 11.9 7.5 7.0 1.5 6.1 1.4 16 13 53 17 91 23 15 29 26 30 24 10 16 11 19 28 LT KAUNAS12 2.8 1.5 2.9 0.0 2.6 0.8 2011- 2012

LT KAUNAS13 2.9 2.4 1.9 9 2 7 9 1 3 6 5 0 0 5 3 3 5 6 19 20 15 44 11 24 79 35 17 25 31 40 18 18 23 13 21 30

LT KAUNO01 1.9 6.1 4.8 3.8 8.3 4.8 2012- 2013

LT KLAIPED01 8.0 3.8 3.4 3.0 2.1 3.8 2 5 0 6 83 52 18 52 75 58 38 58 18 22 18 97 53 76 91 13 73 28 17 86 107 282 129 536 132 162 144 168 183 LT KLAIPED02 5.5 2.0 0.7 1.0 0.8 1.9 LT KLAIPED03 4.1 6.5 LT KLAIPED04 2.8 3.0 2.3 2.8 3.7 2.4 Incoming staff per country LT KLAIPED05 6.7 5.3 9.0 7.2 6.6 n/a AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK LT KLAIPED06 7.6 10.4 5.8 8.6 11.3 5.0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 8 8 1 0 8 1 5 0 2 6 0 8 4 2 10 11 85 13 34 24 LT KLAIPED07 4.6 6.5 31 15 11 16 18 18 LT KLAIPED07 4.8 4.6 6.9 5.9 2007- 2008 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 1 0 LT KLAIPED08 10.1 4.6 9 4 2 0 4 6 6 7 0 9 2 0 1 17 15 39 12 18 15 21 26 28 32 17

LT KLAIPED09 3.4 7.7 0.0 3.0 2008- 2009 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 LT MARIJAM01 0.6 0.8 0.8 2.1 0.9 4.5 9 3 5 4 7 2 2 7 0 2 3 15 14 17 47 25 81 15 19 40 43 35 18 17 20 22

LT PANEVEZ01 3.4 1.6 2.6 3.9 4.3 3.7 2009- 2010 LT RIETAVA01 5.6 3.1 9.6 2.3 5.8 4.5 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 1 0 4 3 6 2 7 6 28 16 20 16 21 83 15 10 14 38 82 28 30 11 24 26 11

LT SIAULIA01 9.9 7.9 7.8 6.8 7.8 7.4 2010- 2011 LT SIAULIA02 2.7 0.0 1.0 4.2 3.7 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 6 9 7 0 3 3 9 2 6 5 6 12 11 16 27 39 18 85 13 11 28 95 10 48 26 17

LT SIAULIA03 5.3 2.6 4.6 4.4 4.2 4.1 2011- 2012 LT SIAULIA04 9.3 5.3 0 0 0 4 3 6 6 1 1 1 1 5 7 5 6 1 11 13 18 11 23 34 35 23 97 15 21 50 80 48 13 49 16

LT UTENA01 3.3 5.2 4.1 8.0 10.2 8.5 2012- 2013 LT VILNIUS01 4.5 3.1 3.8 5 1 5 0 0 3 9 78 83 76 34 22 17 73 33 56 10 21 50 46 60 25 18 LT VILNIUS01 3.5 3.0 3.2 129 221 110 449 101 216 352 203 140 101 LT VILNIUS02 14.3 7.4 7.3 7.0 7.2 6.1 LT VILNIUS03 2.2 2.4 3.0 2.3 2.6 3.9 LT VILNIUS04 5.3 3.4 3.8 3.6 4.4 4.6 Latvia LT VILNIUS05 8.5 5.3 5.3 5.6 7.3 8.6 Outgoing staff per country LT VILNIUS06 13.0 6.6 7.6 6.0 5.8 4.9 AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK LT VILNIUS08 6.1 3.9 7.8 8.8 5.3 6.9 7 0 3 0 9 9 7 1 0 3 2 6 1 7

LT VILNIUS10 8.7 5.9 5.3 7.4 8.0 7.5 20 21 36 88 34 26 42 47 33 15 25 24 20 68 19 34 20 70 141 LT VILNIUS11 2.8 3.7 9.9 3.8 6.0 3.9 2007- 2008 9 0 9 0 6 3 3 0 0 0 0 6 4 5

LT VILNIUS12 3.4 3.4 n/a 24 16 26 90 10 35 33 62 27 18 19 16 32 59 14 22 21 17 106 LT VILNIUS13 7.3 2008- 2009

LT VILNIUS14 3.8 0 4 0 9 0 5 0 0 6 2 9 3 3 9 30 29 11 21 74 14 43 46 48 36 18 32 30 59 31 31 21 21 138 LT VILNIUS14 3.5 5.7 3.7 4.6 4.9 2009- 2010

LT VILNIUS15 2.4 4.8 2.2 6.6 2.9 1.4 0 0 5 6 0 0 8 3 7 6 20 26 27 11 19 94 20 82 55 69 43 23 12 39 28 21 78 45 35 11 49 19 183

LT VILNIUS16 1.1 0.0 0.0 3.6 2.4 2.2 2010- 2011 LT VILNIUS17 7.9 5.0 5.3 6 9 2 8 0 1 4 9 24 35 54 11 34 17 95 65 76 34 25 12 71 10 34 23 96 34 30 11 14 45 41 101 249

LT VILNIUS18 n/a 2011- 2012 LT VILNIUS19 7.4 9.3 6.4 6.5 4.1 3.7 7 9 6 8 6 9 0 2 4 33 23 26 35 14 80 73 74 67 25 63 30 31 32 36 10 22 11 13 64 31 102 112 242

LT VILNIUS20 5.4 2.2 2012- 2013 LT VILNIUS23 22.7 20.4 1 3 57 15 41 36 59 13 47 15 56 25 38 163 137 472 179 174 220 199 151 150 134 171 549 109 361 314 376 240 124 249 LT VILNIUS24 1059

70 71 Annex 8 Outgoing Erasmus special needs students and staff in Erasmus programme 2007-2013

Incoming staff per country Estonia AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK Outgoing student with special needs number per HEI Outgoing staff with special needs number per HEI 0 0 0 1 0 0 9 3 0 3 3 5 2 8 0 7 0 0 3

21 Erasmus ID 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- Erasmus ID 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- 12 13 64 10 22 13 90 12 17 46 12 28 13

2007- 2008 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 EE HARJUMA01 EE HARJUMA01 0 0 1 3 0 0 1 1 6 9 2 0 5 2 6 0 0 1 8 0 0 9 21 17 18 61 12 16 87 12 12 65 13

2008- 2009 EE TALLINN11 EE TALLINN11 EE TALLINN18 EE TALLINN18 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 5 3 5 0 6 6 5 3 3 38 11 21 10 18 40 11 13 18 17 20 14 61 10 17 12 111

2009- 2010 EE TALLINN14 EE TALLINN14 EE TALLINN01 1 EE TALLINN01 0 2 3 0 0 0 1 9 2 8 6 7 0 8 9 4 9 5 5 26 11 16 20 61 18 20 14 19 17 11 84 37 112

2010- 2011 EE TARTU01 EE TARTU01 EE TARTU03 EE TARTU03 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 7 0 9 6 8 5 5 7 30 16 12 37 25 58 11 30 14 21 23 10 15 12 65 109 117

2011- 2012 EE TALLINN03 EE TALLINN03 EE TALLINN02 1 EE TALLINN02 1 0 0 7 4 5 2 1 5 2 2 0 40 18 15 13 14 11 10 15 11 32 31 74 19 27 16 16 30 20 118 134 108

2012- 2013 EE TALLINN16 EE TALLINN16 EE VORU01 EE VORU01 6 7 3 3 1 0 1 79 71 36 86 98 94 37 29 14 99 54 96 78 42 29 61 13 27 56 107 125 358 176 627 507 268 EE LAANE-V02 EE LAANE-V02 EE TALLINN15 EE TALLINN15 Lithuania EE TALLINN10 EE TALLINN10 EE TALLINN17 EE TALLINN17 Outgoing staff per country EE TALLINN20 EE TALLINN20 AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK EE TALLINN19 EE TALLINN19 EE TALLINN06 EE TALLINN06 0 5 0 6 4 0 0 4 7 32 28 19 30 32 34 51 86 42 16 17 48 91 18 11 78 60 35 11 15 51 51 106

2007- 2008 EE TALLINN04 1 1 EE TALLINN04 EE TALLINN12 EE TALLINN12 0 0 4 2 0 0 1 34 34 16 13 45 39 27 62 82 55 14 23 57 92 23 18 78 12 29 14 12 63 53 102 124

2008- 2009 EE TALLINN05 1 EE TALLINN05 EE TARTU05 EE TARTU05 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 32 19 15 11 36 26 40 74 86 78 10 19 70 14 18 73 12 30 19 10 81 52 111 111 126

2009- 2010 EE TARTU06 EE TARTU06 EE TARTU02 EE TARTU02 0 0 3 0 0 1 7 46 45 37 12 37 25 39 92 74 58 17 20 75 33 28 94 13 33 13 12 50 110 113 104 106

2010- 2011 EE TALLINN13 EE TALLINN13 EE TALLINN20 EE TALLINN20 9 7 9 9 5 0 1 6 6 40 47 33 30 30 30 82 98 73 19 34 78 23 25 81 28 22 11 52 119 109 105 127

2011- 2012 EE TARTU07 EE TARTU07 EE TALLINN23 EE TALLINN23 8 4 2 0 1 9 33 32 38 14 42 24 50 85 53 15 11 24 63 26 28 99 15 34 10 10 95 49 105 109 119 103 2012- 2013 0 0 3 17 62 91 20 27 17 28 65 89 70 217 205 158 220 653 176 220 470 511 359 137 391 635 137 128 640 485 189 523 307

Incoming staff per country AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 9 1 5 4 5 8 0 11 26 21 16 11 19 30 21 85 19 37 64 19 40 24 19 136 134 2007- 2008 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 7 9 5 0 9 8 3 9 9 2 24 25 29 14 16 38 28 22 15 33 40 70 12 109 200 2008- 2009 0 3 2 0 0 0 5 8 9 6 4 8 5 20 20 18 10 79 34 24 16 34 56 49 12 24 13 31 71 14 191 138 2009- 2010 0 8 2 0 0 0 5 4 5 6 9 30 13 25 19 23 39 72 20 32 42 48 18 30 22 12 20 14 28 184 218 119 2010- 2011 1 0 0 1 9 5 4 1 2 2 9 28 33 17 18 27 17 26 16 38 66 12 29 41 58 12 27 33 19 249 256 158 2011- 2012 3 0 0 7 3 4 8 2 1 31 10 22 29 27 27 27 57 14 46 36 38 33 27 11 18 10 19 21 37 243 357 260 2012- 2013 7 0 0 0 4 11 27 82 42 17 82 20 82 38 62 60 146 138 105 212 400 144 161 224 255 171 107 132 105 710 162 1059 1356

72 73 Latvia Lithuania Outgoing student with special needs number per HEI Outgoing staff with special needs number per HEI Outgoing student with special needs number per HEI Outgoing staff with special needs number per HEI Erasmus ID 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- Erasmus ID 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- Erasmus ID 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- Erasmus ID 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 LV DAUGAVP01 LV DAUGAVP01 LT ALYTUS01 LT ALYTUS01 LV DAUGAVP02 LV DAUGAVP02 LT KAUNAS01 1 3 1 4 3 LT KAUNAS01 LV JELGAVA01 LV JELGAVA01 LT KAUNAS02 2 1 LT KAUNAS02 LV JURMALA01 1 LV JURMALA01 LT KAUNAS03 LT KAUNAS03 LV JURMALA03 LV JURMALA03 LT KAUNAS04 LT KAUNAS04 2 1 1 1 LV JURMALA05 LV JURMALA05 LT KAUNAS05 LT KAUNAS05 LV LIEPAJA01 LV LIEPAJA01 LT KAUNAS06 LT KAUNAS06 LV LIEPAJA02 LV LIEPAJA02 LT KAUNAS07 LT KAUNAS07 LV REZEKNE02 LV REZEKNE02 LT KAUNAS08 LT KAUNAS08 LV REZEKNE03 LV REZEKNE03 LT KAUNAS10 LT KAUNAS10 LV RIGA01 1 LV RIGA01 LT KAUNAS11 LT KAUNAS11 LV RIGA02 LV RIGA02 LT KAUNAS12 LT KAUNAS12 LV RIGA03 LV RIGA03 LT KAUNAS13 LT KAUNAS13 LV RIGA04 LV RIGA04 LT KAUNO01 LT KAUNO01 LV RIGA05 LV RIGA05 LT KLAIPED01 LT KLAIPED01 LV RIGA06 LV RIGA06 LT KLAIPED02 LT KLAIPED02 LV RIGA08 LV RIGA08 LT KLAIPED03 LT KLAIPED03 LV RIGA09 LV RIGA09 LT KLAIPED04 LT KLAIPED04 LV RIGA10 LV RIGA10 LT KLAIPED05 LT KLAIPED05 LV RIGA12 LV RIGA12 LT KLAIPED06 LT KLAIPED06 LV RIGA13 LV RIGA13 LT KLAIPED07 LT KLAIPED07 LV RIGA14 LV RIGA14 LT KLAIPED07 LT KLAIPED07 LV RIGA16 LV RIGA16 LT KLAIPED08 LT KLAIPED08 LV RIGA27 LV RIGA27 LT KLAIPED09 LT KLAIPED09 LV RIGA28 LV RIGA28 LT MARIJAM01 LT MARIJAM01 LV RIGA29 LV RIGA29 LT PANEVEZ01 LT PANEVEZ01 LV RIGA30 LV RIGA30 LT RIETAVA01 LT RIETAVA01 LV RIGA31 LV RIGA31 LT SIAULIA01 LT SIAULIA01 LV RIGA32 LV RIGA32 LT SIAULIA02 LT SIAULIA02 LV RIGA33 LV RIGA33 LT SIAULIA03 LT SIAULIA03 LV RIGA34 LV RIGA34 LT SIAULIA04 LT SIAULIA04 LV RIGA35 LV RIGA35 LT UTENA01 LT UTENA01 LV RIGA38 LV RIGA38 LT VILNIUS01 1 LT VILNIUS01 LV RIGA40 LV RIGA40 LT VILNIUS01 1 1 LT VILNIUS01 LV RIGA41 LV RIGA41 LT VILNIUS02 LT VILNIUS02 LV RIGA42 LV RIGA42 LT VILNIUS03 1 LT VILNIUS03 LV RIGA43 LV RIGA43 LT VILNIUS04 LT VILNIUS04 LV RIGA44 LV RIGA44 LT VILNIUS05 LT VILNIUS05 LV RIGA45 LV RIGA45 LT VILNIUS06 1 1 1 LT VILNIUS06 LV RIGA46 LV RIGA46 LT VILNIUS08 2 LT VILNIUS08 LV RIGA47 LV RIGA47 LT VILNIUS10 1 1 LT VILNIUS10 LV RIGA48 LV RIGA48 LT VILNIUS11 LT VILNIUS11 LV RIGA49 LV RIGA49 LT VILNIUS12 LT VILNIUS12 LV RIGA50 LV RIGA50 LT VILNIUS13 LT VILNIUS13 LV RIGA51 LV RIGA51 LT VILNIUS14 LT VILNIUS14 LV VALMIER01 LV VALMIER01 LT VILNIUS14 1 LT VILNIUS14 LV VENTSPI01 LV VENTSPI01 LT VILNIUS15 LT VILNIUS15 LT VILNIUS16 LT VILNIUS16 LT VILNIUS17 LT VILNIUS17 LT VILNIUS18 LT VILNIUS18 LT VILNIUS19 1 LT VILNIUS19 LT VILNIUS20 LT VILNIUS20 LT VILNIUS23 LT VILNIUS23 LT VILNIUS24 LT VILNIUS24

74 75 Annex 9 Outgoing- incoming students for Erasmus Intensive Language Courses per host countries in 2007-2013

Estonia Incoming students per country AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK Outgoing students per country 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 1

AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK 26 2007- 2008 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 13 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 5 0 0 0 1 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 2007- 2008 2008- 2009 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 3 0 6 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 2 3 0 15 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 0 1 0 2 0 0 16 2008- 2009 2009- 2010 0 6 1 0 2 2 0 2 0 4 0 5 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 2 0 7 1 4 0 22 15 4 2 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 3 0 4 1 0 1 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 0 5 3 0 2 6 0 3 6 5 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 2 0 7 1 1 9 0 10 16 13 1 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 2 1 9 2 0 1 0 2 3 1 21 10 2010- 2011 2011- 2012 0 0 0 4 0 5 7 0 3 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 9 0 3 0 7 2 6 0 11 12 14 16 13 2 0 0 1 0 4 0 1 1 6 1 0 5 1 0 8 0 2 0 0 1 0 3 3 1 0 1 2 0 28 13 16 2011- 2012 2012- 2013 0 4 2 0 2 9 0 4 4 9 0 3 0 7 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 7 0 5 0 4 3 1 6 0 12 16 2 2 1 0 0 4 2 0 6 5 0 0 6 0 0 0 4 1 2 1 7 2 1 11 11 31 22 36 10 25 16 19 122 2012- 2013 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 1 6 1 0 8 3 1 0 6 0 1 0 17 38 31 21 94 31 15 71 26 29 31 10 32 17 Lithuania Incoming students per country Outgoing students per country AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK 7 0 2 0 0 0 1 8 0 4 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 9 9 2 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 4 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 21 12 26 10 14 10 2007- 2008 2007- 2008 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 8 9 0 2 0 0 9 0 2 0 0 0 4 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 3 1 0 6 3 1 6 1 19 17 12 12 29 10 2008- 2009 2008- 2009 5 1 0 0 0 5 1 5 7 4 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 0 6 2 2 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 8 0 0 2 0 6 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 4 4 4 0 26 17 12 15 23 11 2009- 2010 2009- 2010 3 3 0 0 0 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 7 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 8 2 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 5 1 2 5 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 9 0 5 3 9 0 25 12 12 10 14 25 10 2010- 2011 2010- 2011 6 0 0 0 0 7 0 9 1 0 7 0 0 8 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 3 0 2 0 1 3 1 0 5 0 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 0 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 2 3 0 7 8 0 9 0 34 10 10 13 28 27 2011- 2012 2011- 2012 4 2 0 1 0 7 0 3 1 0 2 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 8 0 2 0 1 3 4 2 0 6 0 0 0 4 0 1 1 5 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 7 0 0 0 0 2 4 3 2 9 6 0 0 24 10 10 11 13 10 2012- 2013 2012- 2013 6 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 2 6 0 7 0 3 9 4 5 3 7 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 2 2 9 1 0 0 3 1 0 7 29 27 46 46 54 24 37 58 17 34 26 14 35 19 13 13 12 10 80 40 26 41 86 11 14 37 123 138

Latvia Incoming students per country AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK Outgoing students per country 6 0 0 0 0 5 2 2 6 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 1 0 7 0

AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK 19 13 2007- 2008 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 11 4 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 0 1 2 0 22 13 10 11 2007- 2008 2008- 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 4 0 1 2 0 0 0 21 1 0 0 0 0 4 1 3 4 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 2 2 4 4 2 0 1 1 1 22 11 15 17 2008- 2009 2009- 2010 0 0 0 0 2 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 4 2 0 5 0 2 0 3 0 0 16 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 3 3 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 13 13 12 17 12 16 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 0 0 0 3 2 0 5 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 3 0 0 7 7 0 2 9 2 0 0 0 12 11 4 2 2 1 0 5 0 1 7 3 6 5 0 2 1 0 7 0 0 6 0 0 1 4 1 0 0 2 0 20 15 11 2010- 2011 2011- 2012 0 9 0 1 1 0 4 0 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 5 0 0 2 1 0 5 0 2 3 3 2 0 18 4 1 1 1 2 5 1 2 9 1 5 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 2 1 22 17 13 23 2011- 2012 2012- 2013 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 6 2 2 1 2 0 0 15 17 5 5 2 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 5 0 5 8 2 6 32 23 17 37 10 39 23 10 13 56 17 21 58 19 69 105 2012- 2013 0 0 4 0 0 9 0 6 3 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 8 8 3 0 4 81 21 10 16 20 14 19 10 11 43 16

76 77 Annex 10 Erasmus Intensive Programmes partner countries in Erasmus programme 2007-2013

Estonia Partner country AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 2007- 2008 1 2 1 2 4 2 5 3 2 1 4 3 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 2008- 2009 1 3 1 2 4 1 6 3 1 2 3 2 2 1 2 5 2 2 2 1 2009- 2010 1 2 1 3 4 1 7 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 3 2 2010- 2011 1 3 2 1 1 7 2 1 4 1 2 1 4 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 1 2011- 2012 1 1 2 1 3 4 2 8 1 1 1 2 1 4 5 4 3 4 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 2012- 2013 6 7 7 9 1 3 7 2 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 16 12 12 13 10 14 19 20 33 10 10 22 14 12

Latvia Partner country AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK 1 1 1 1 1 2007- 2008 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2008- 2009 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 2 2 2009- 2010 2 2 4 4 2 1 3 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2010- 2011 1 1 8 5 1 1 2 5 2 1 6 1 1 1 1 2011- 2012 1 1 2 9 5 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 4 1 6 2 3 1 2012- 2013 1 5 3 0 2 4 0 3 1 4 0 1 5 3 9 2 3 8 0 1 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 12 25 16 12 13

Lithuania Partner country AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR UK 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 2007- 2008 1 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 3 1 1 2008- 2009 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 4 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 2 2009- 2010 3 1 3 1 3 3 2 1 1 5 1 2 7 2 2 1 2010- 2011 1 3 4 5 3 3 8 4 2 8 1 1 4 3 7 9 3 2 3 3 7 3 1 1 2011- 2012 3 2 3 5 2 3 3 3 7 3 1 5 2 7 1 3 7 3 3 3 2012- 2013 9 8 4 0 8 0 0 9 1 8 7 1 7 6 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 10 11 16 31 14 19 11 19 17 27 14

78 79 80