The Bologna Process's Model of Mobility in Europe: The Relationship of its Spatial and Social Dimensions

Abstract

Cross-border mobility is among the pillars of internationality in higher education. Understood as central to educational and economic growth for individuals and societies, mobility also should facilitate social cohesion. Yet those who can afford spatial mobility are unevenly distributed; elites benefit in far greater measure. Policymakers in Europe aim to bolster the competitiveness and attractiveness of European higher education, especially through enhanced mobility of students and staff. Extending beyond the successes of Erasmus, the Bologna process defines a new model of mobility in higher education to foster spatial mobility, but how is the social selectivity of spatial mobility addressed? Based on a theory-guided content analysis of official Bologna policy documents, the authors examine the principles and standards of mobility. Which dimensions of mobility are mentioned in these declarations and communiqués from 1998 to 2012? To what extent are spatial mobility's social significance and selection processes reflected? The authors find that the dimensions, benefits and effects of spatial mobility have been mainly taken for granted, and both its social selectivity and its effects on social mobility understated. However, if the Bologna process is to facilitate social inclusion, inequalities must be addressed. The authors argue that if the 47 signatory countries to the Bologna process simply follow the principles espoused in this model, considerable disparities in participation in international exchange are likely to persist, reproducing social reproduction of dis/advantages.

Portuguese Scientists’ Migration: a study on the 2008 crisis aftermath

“…In fact, the Bologna process stresses the importance of mobility to the construction of the European Higher Education Area as a knowledge‐based society . “The more mobility, the better” is Bologna's motto (Powell & Finger, , p. 278).…”

“…Thus, it risks failing at its goal of promoting social integration through education. The nexus between mobility and social background means that ‘if the European model of mobility is to be achieved, social selectivity must be addressed’ (Powell & Finger, , p. 271) and one could add geographic selectivity. How has the Portuguese scientific system been profiting from the circulation promoted by European policies?…”

Explorando los contornos de una teoría de movilidad interna en la UE: un enfoque basado en la oportunidad de la ciudadanía europea y la necesidad de una «cultura europea de la movilidad»

“…12. See, among recent work and documents: Cairns (2010), European Commission (2010), Sigalas (2010), Wilson (2011), Teichler (2012, Powell and Finger (2013), Souto-Otero et al (2013), Raghuram (2013), Mitchell (2014. 13.…”

Integrating International Student Mobility in Work-Based Higher Education

“…HEIs in Germany, including those offering such programs, increasingly have to meet national political expectations regarding internationalization-and rising student demand for international mobility (Powell & Finger, 2013). According to the German federal and state science ministers, internationalization is a "key component when developing the profiles of German HEIs and, as an essential tool of quality development, a driver of higher education reform" (Gemeinsamen Wissenschaftskonferenz [GWK], 2013, p. 2, authors' translation).…”