(2 rânduri libere, 11p)


Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

1 
 

 

ERASMUS+ PROGRAMME SEEN FROM THE EYES OF 

POTENTIAL BENEFICIARIES 

  - DIRECT RESEARCH CARRIED OUT WITH STUDENTS - 
 

Bogdan Vasile Nichifor, 

“Vasile Alecsandri” University of Bacau,  

bogdan.nichifor@ub.ro 

  

Laura Cătălina Ţimiraş,  

“Vasile Alecsandri” University of Bacau,  

timiras.laura@ub.ro  

 

 
Abstract  

The ERASMUS programme was evaluated from a lot of point of views. Depending on the interest 

of the evaluation, studies were conducted to uncover information related to subjects like: the 

scope of the programme, the type of participants in the programme, the factors motivating the 

students to be mobile, the cost and funding of student mobility, the study conditions during the 

study period, the recognition of achievements during the study period abroad on return, the 

socio-cultural effect of the mobility (like becoming more “European”), the personal development 

effects etc. Based on the results of a direct research take on the students of the Faculty of 

Economic Sciences of the "Vasile Alecsandri" University of Bacău, the paper presents a series 

of results with reference to: the knowledge held by the students with reference to the Erasmus + 

program, how they he perceives it, the reasons underlying the intention to benefit from the 

program, as well as those underlying the lack of interest in it. The research carried out was 

performed on a sample of 116 students from bachelor's degree studies - years II and III of studies 

selected according to non-probability criteria, so that the obtained results exclusively reveal 

their point of view. 

 

Keywords 
Erasmus+ programme; motivations; knowledge; interest 

 

JEL Classification 
M31  

 

 
Introduction 

ERASMUS is the European Union programme destinated for education and training 

and one of the best-known EU-level among higher education students. It was 

established in 1987 and it has a great impact on the possibility to study for more than 2 

million people. The programme is named after Erasmus of Rotterdam (1465-1536), an 

important philosopher, theologian and humanist. The acronym ERASMUS comes from 

the syntagma EuRopean Community Action Scheme for the Mobility of University 

Students. 

The birth of Erasmus programme was complicated, even if today it has a lot of 

supporters in all EU countries. Prior to the beginning of the programme, the European 

Commission had been supporting pilot student exchanges for six years before 

ERASMUS came into being. It proposed the original ERASMUS Programme in early 

1986, but the reaction from EU Member States varied: those with substantial exchange 

programmes of their own rejected the programme while the remaining countries were 

generally in favour of it. Because of the budgetary aspects of the programme, in 1987 

Erasmus was on the verge of being withdraw from the Commission actions, but after a 



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

2 
 

compromise between Member States, the programme was adopted. In its first year of 

official functioning, 3 244 students from 11 countries have been its beneficiaries. 

After its foundation, programme suffered some transformations, being part or combing 

other similar programmes. In this direction, the ERASMUS Programme, together with 

several other education and training programmes, was incorporated into the Socrates 

Programme which was established in 1995. Socrates was replaced with the Socrates II 

Programme in January 2000. That, in turn, was replaced by the Lifelong Learning 

Programme (2007-2013) from 2007. 

Erasmus + or Erasmus Plus is the new programme that combines all current EU 

programmes for education, training, youth and sport, which was launched in January 

2014. Currently, the programme has a budget of EUR 14.7 billion, with the objective 

to give 4 million Europeans the opportunity to study, train and gain experience abroad. 

The Erasmus + programme, which will run until 2020, brings together seven previous 

programmes and it is set to provide opportunities for various categories of people and 

organizations. These seven programmes are: 

• Lifelong learning programme 
• Youth in Action Programme 
• The Erasmus Mundus programme 
• Tempus 
• Alpha 
• Edulink 
• Cooperation programmes with the industrialized countries in the field of 

higher education 

The scope of Erasmus + programme is to contribute to meeting the objectives of the 

Europe 2020 strategy for growth, jobs, equity and social inclusion, as well as the 

ET2020 strategic framework for education and training. 

According to Commission, the programme aims to promote the sustainable 

development of partners in the field of higher education and to contribute to the 

achievement of the objectives of the EU youth strategy. It addresses the following 

topics: 

• Reducing unemployment, especially among young people; 
• Promoting adult education, especially in the area of new skills and the 

skills required on the labour market; 

• Encourage the participation of young people in the European democratic 
life; 

• Supporting innovation, cooperation and reform; 
• Reducing the rate of early school leaving; 
• Promoting cooperation and mobility with EU partner countries. 

Since 1997, the Romanian institutions of higher education have started to be part of 

cooperation within Erasmus programme. Until 2016, more than 75,000 students from 

higher education, 62,000 young people in youth exchanges, including the European 

Voluntary Service, 20,000 young people in initial vocational training and over 30,000 

teachers, auxiliary teachers, trainers and youth workers have benefited from the 

European Union programmes (Ghitulescu, 2017). 

 

 

Studies about Erasmus programme 

The ERASMUS programme was evaluated from a lot of point of views. Depending on 

the interest of the evaluation, studies were conducted to uncover information related to 

subjects like: the scope of the programme, the type of participants in the programme, 

the factors motivating the students to be mobile, the cost and funding of student 

mobility, the study conditions during the study period, the recognition of achievements 



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

3 
 

during the study period abroad on return, the socio-cultural effect of the mobility (like 

becoming more “European”), the personal development effects etc.   

From the point of view of categories of students who participate in the Erasmus 

programme, as study by Krzaklewska & Krupnick, completed in 2007, identified two 

such categories:  

• career oriented students - they most often come from disadvantaged 
groups they are students with family incomes low, generally girls, coming 

from the South, Center and Eastern Europe, they are older and their 

motivation is related to enrichment of academic knowledge, improvement 

the prospects for the future job etc. 

• b. experience-oriented students - they are generally men, Erasmus 
students, from Western and Northern Europe countries, younger, and the 

reasons cited are related of the need to have new experiences, to learn 

something about different cultures, meeting new people, being 

independent, living in a foreign country . 

Along with these categories of Erasmus students, the same authors, Krzaklewska & 

Krupnik, introduce some of the main motives which sit at the base of the mobility. 

Table 1 shows the categories and the main motivations for mobility.  

 

Table 1. Career-oriented and experience-oriented students and their motivations 

 
 Career - oriented Experience - oriented 

Reasons for going 

abroad indicated as 

important in survey 

• To improve academic 
knowledge 

• To enhance future 
employment 

prospects 

• To practice foreign 
language 

• To have new 
experiences  

• To learn about 
different cultures  

• To have fun  

• To meet new people  

• To be independent  

• To live in a foreign 
country 

Student groups who 

were more likely to 

belong to specific 

category 

• Non Erasmus 
exchange students  

• Females with lower 
family income 

coming from South 

(e.g. Spain) Central 

and East European 

Countries (e.g. 

Poland)  

• Older 

• Erasmus students  

• Males with higher 
family income 

coming from West 

and North European 

countries  

• Younger 

Quote  

With my Erasmus Program I 

had the opportunity to start an 

international work career 

(Bruno Fernandes) 

I always wanted to smell 

freedom and independence 

(Katerina Markova) 

 
Source: Krzaklewska, Ewa; Krupnik, Seweryn (2008), “The Role of the Erasmus Programme in Enhancing 

Intercultural Dialogue. Presentation of the Results from the Erasmus Student Network Survey 2007”. 

Proceedings of the 4th International Barcelona Conference on Higher Education, Vol. 6. Higher education 
for intercultural dialogue and multiculturalism. Barcelona: GUNI. Available at http://www.guni-rmies.net. 

 

In another study regarding the motivations of Erasmus student, one of the mentioned 

authors distinguishes four areas of motivation, which included 11 categories 

(Krzaklewska, 2008): 



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

4 
 

1. Academic (improving academic knowledge, studying in a different 
educational system, hoping that it will be useful for future 

employment/work); 

2. Linguistic (practicing a foreign language); 
3. Cultural (learning about different cultures, living in a foreign country); 
4. Personal (having new experiences, having fun, meeting new people, being 

independent, developing as a person) 

Other studies use push–pull framework of student mobility in studying the motivations. 

Push factors are elements that operate in the home country of the student whereby they 

stimulate the individual to study abroad; pull factors are elements of a host country that 

attract a student to study abroad. A combination of push and pull factors determines a 

student’s decision to study abroad then his/her destination choice (Lesjak et al, 2015). 

Gonzalez et al, 2011 find out that European student mobility is as a dual phenomenon: 

“ On the one hand, student mobility is influenced by economic variables, such as the 

price level of host countries or the geographical distance as a proxy for transport costs, 

and, … on the other hand, the observed tendency to choose countries whose climate is 

warm, above other considerations, brings into discussion the notion of student mobility 

as a leisure activity, as if European students collectively were trying to enjoy from the 

lifelong unique experience of living abroad”. 

Other studies regarding Erasmus mobility concentrated on the effect of the mobility on 

the beneficiaries. Again, the effects can be put in different categories (Dolga et al, 

2015):  

• effects on the professional and scientific development of exchange 
students (acquisition of scientific knowledge and skills, acquisition of 

professional knowledge and skills, acquisition of foreign language 

knowledge and skills, identification of academic / scientific and 

professional opportunities); 

• effects on certain aspects of the students’ personality (development of 
relational skills, personal system of values, self-confidence, the feeling of 

independence, the feeling of belonging to a group or a community, 

attitude towards work and study, attitude towards the chosen profession, 

attitude towards family); 

• effects on certain aspects related to the social life and the interpersonal 
relations of exchange students (interpersonal relations with foreigners, 

relations with locals – Romanians, interpersonal relations with family 

members and close friends); 

• effects on other aspects of the students’ life (eating habits, spare time 
habits, future career plans, future plan regarding family life 

• effects on level of agreement between the Erasmus programme and the 
needs of students and of the university 

More pragmatic studies focused on the relation between the mobility and transition to 

employment and early career. Teichler and Janson (2007), after participating in the 

study The Professional Value of ERASMUS Mobility. Final Report. Presented to the 

European Commission - DG Education and Culture (Bracht et al, 2006) conclude in 

2007 that “ERASMUS students view the study period abroad as leading to international 

mobility, international competences, and visibly international work tasks while hardly 

promising career enhancement as compared to formerly nonmobile students”. 

An interesting subject of study, in the context of Erasmus programme, was the existence 

and the formation of “European identity”. Mitchell studied, in 2012, Erasmus 

programme in terms of civic experiences. Her study identified and widely validated 

three assumptions: (a) Erasmus students engage insignificant contact with other 

Europeans and (b) they become more interested in Europe and other Europeans and  (c) 

self-identify as European. 



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

5 
 

Oborune (2013) study, based on Van Mol (2009) work came to the conclusion that 

“ERASMUS programme influences students European identity, but on the other hand, 

students who take part differ from non-mobile students - have more multicultural 

background, stronger national and European identity. The programme is a catalyst 

rather than promoter …”. 

This complex reality of Erasmus programme needs additional work, and in this 

direction our paper focuses on identifying and validating motivations and factors 

associated with Erasmus+ experience, from the point of view of the students of a 

Romanian university. 

 

 

Research methodology 

The research was carried out among the students from the bachelor's studies with 

frequency - years II and III, of the Faculty of Economic Sciences of the "Vasile 

Alecsandri" University of Bacău. The sample surveyed was 116 students, representing 

about 48% of the total. The sampling method used was an improbable one - all students 

attending the didactic activities were included in the sample in the first week of March 

2019 as long as they wished to participate in the study; which is why the research was 

exploratory, the results representing only the point of view of the investigated students. 

Despite their unrepresentative character, the results provide us with useful information, 

which are indicative in nature, on the investigated issue and can also be the basis for 

the formulation of hypotheses for extensive research, representative for the entire 

community of students as potential beneficiaries of the Erasmus + program. 

 

 

Research results 

Regarding the degree of knowledge of the Erasmus + programme by the investigated 

students, 100% stated that they had heard about it, but the opportunities offered are 

known to a small extent by those to whom they are addressed. 

Most of the students know that through the Erasmus + programme they can study 

abroad (over 79% have information about it) and, much less, they know that they can 

benefit from internships, vocational training, etc. abroad - about 40%. However, the 

other opportunities offered by the Erasmus + programme are little known. Thus, over 

60% of students have not heard that within the Erasmus + programme can benefit from 

the Erasmus Mundus joint master's program (EMJMD) or Erasmus + loans for the 

masters and over 50% of them have not heard that the programme offers financial 

support for individuals with special needs. Also, for the most part, those who have heard 

about the opportunities mentioned above (the Erasmus Mundus joint master's program, 

Erasmus + loans for the masters, financial support for people with special needs) 

offered by the Erasmus + programme, are not aware of extensive information.  

This low level of knowledge can only be partially attributed to the absence of students 

from Erasmus + presentations that are regularly held in the institution, in the context 

where, according to the data in the table below, there are no major differences between 

the declared level of knowledge of those who they participated, respectively of those 

who did not participate in such presentations. The biggest differences from this point 

of view are recorded in terms of the possibility to benefit from internships, vocational 

training abroad etc.: 50% of students who participated in Erasmus + presentations and 

only 28.5% of those who did not attend presentations have information about this 

opportunity. 

The differences in the level of knowledge of the different opportunities between those 

who participated and those who did not participate in presentations, appreciated by us 

as small, prove the existence of factors that affect the efficiency of the communication 

process, factors that can be held by students as well, in their quality of receivers (such 



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

6 
 

as inattention generated by total lack of interest / existence of other priorities, 

forgetfulness, etc.) but also by those who organize such presentations, in their capacity 

as broadcasters (such as unattractive presentations, the use of a specialized language 

not adapted to the audience, etc.). Also, it should be kept in mind that information about 

the Erasmus+ programme is also transmitted by other means - advertising materials, 

web pages, etc., showing a low degree of knowledge of the benefits of the program, 

attesting to a lack of efficiency of the entire communication process, as we have stated 

previously, the cases can be kept both by the transmitter and / or the receiver of the 

information. 

Considering that the low level of knowledge refers strictly to the 116 students 

investigated, it is necessary to verify this phenomenon at the level of numerous 

students, through representative research. If it is proven that the low level of knowledge 

of the program characterizes the entire student community, identifying the factors that 

affect the efficiency of the communication request is a priority in order to take measures 

to improve it and, implicitly, to increase the student’s interest in the Erasmus+ 

programme. 

 

Table 2. The structure of the students investigated according to the degree of 

knowledge of the different opportunities offered by the Erasmus+ programme, 

by total and by categories depending on whether they participated in Erasmus + 

presentations 

- % in total category -  

No. Opportunity 

I 
d

id
n

't
 h

e
a
r
 a

b
o

u
t 

it
 

I 
h

a
v

e
 h

e
a
r
d

, 
b

u
t 

I 

k
n

o
w

 n
o

th
in

g
 a

b
o

u
t 

it
 

I 
h

a
v

e
 h

e
a
r
d

 a
n

d
 I

 

h
a

v
e
 a

 m
in

im
u

m
 o

f 

in
fo

r
m

a
ti

o
n

 a
b

o
u

t 
it

 

I 
h

a
v

e
 h

e
a
r
d

 a
n

d
 

k
n

o
w

 q
u

it
e
 a

 l
o

t 

a
b

o
u

t 
it

 

Total 

Total investigated students 

1 Studies abroad 1.7 19.0 62.1 17.2 100.0 

2 
Internships (practice, vocational training, 

etc.) 
22.4 37.9 29.3 10.3 100.0 

3 
Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Program 
(EMJMD) 

63.8 22.4 8.6 5.2 100.0 

4 Erasmus + loans for masters 60.3 31.0 6.9 1.7 100.0 

5 
Financial support for people with special 
needs 

53.4 32.8 10.3 3.4 100.0 

Students who participated in Erasmus + presentations 

1 Studies abroad 3.3 16.7 60.0 20.0 100.0 

2 
Internships (practice, vocational training, 
etc.) 

13.3 36.7 36.7 13.3 100.0 

3 
Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Program 

(EMJMD) 
50.0 30.0 13.3 6.7 100.0 

4 Erasmus + loans for masters 46.7 40.0 10.0 3.3 100.0 

5 
Financial support for people with special 
needs 

50.0 30.0 16.7 3.3 100.0 

Students who do not participated in Erasmus + presentations 

1 Studies abroad 0.0 21.4 64.3 14.3 100.0 

2 
Internships (practice, vocational training, 

etc.) 
32.1 39.3 21.4 7.1 100.0 

3 
Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Program 

(EMJMD) 
78.6 14.3 3.6 3.6 100.0 

4 Erasmus + loans for masters 75.0 21.4 3.6 0.0 100.0 

5 
Financial support for people with special 

needs 
57.1 35.7 3.6 3.6 100.0 



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

7 
 

   

The students' perception of the Erasmus+ programme was evaluated by means of 

statements, indicating to what extent the respective statement describes the evaluated 

program. Thus, according to the results presented in table 3, as well as those of figure 

1, for the investigated students, the Erasmus+ programme is primarily a means of 

visiting other countries / places (the corresponding statement recorded the highest 

average score), but also: a means of knowing new cultures / customs, a means of 

practicing and improvement of English language proficiency, a starting point for those 

who wish to continue their studies abroad, a means of knowing education systems in 

other countries, a starting point for those who want to find a job / to establish abroad, a 

means of personal development, a means of connecting friends / socializing and, 

finally, a means of improving professional perspectives. 

 

Table 3 The structure of the students interviewed according to the extent to which 

they consider that different statements describe the Erasmus + program, 

evaluated on a scale from 1-Not at all, to 5 - To a great extent 

- % in total students -  

No. Statement 

N
o

t 
a

t 
a

ll
 

(1
) 

T
o

 a
 s

m
a

ll
 

e
x

te
n

t 
(2

) 

T
o

 s
o

m
e
 

e
x

te
n

t 
(3

) 

T
o

 a
 l

a
r
g

e
 

e
x

te
n

t 
(4

) 

T
o

 a
 g

r
e
a

t 

e
x

te
n

t 
(5

) 

I 
d

o
 n

o
t 

k
n

o
w

 

Total 

1 

It is a means of learning 

about education systems 

in other countries 

0.0 1.7 13.8 27.6 56.9 0.0 100.0 

2 

It is a means of improving 

professional prospects 

(CV improvement / 

employment advantage) 

0.0 5.2 19.0 31.0 44.8 0.0 100.0 

3 

It is a means of practicing 

and improving English 

language proficiency 

0.0 3.4 10.3 25.9 58.6 1.7 100.0 

4 

It is a means of personal 

development (increasing 

confidence in one's own 

strengths, ability to adapt 

to new situations) 

0.0 3.4 12.1 37.9 46.6 0.0 100.0 

5 

It is a means of learning 

about new cultures / 

customs 

0.0 1.7 8.6 27.6 62.1 0.0 100.0 

6 

It is a means of 

connecting friends / 

socializing 

0.0 3.4 15.5 39.7 41.4 0.0 100.0 

7 
It is a means of visiting 

other countries / places 
0.0 0.0 6.9 27.6 62.1 3.4 100.0 

8 

It is a starting point for 

those who want to 

continue their studies 

abroad 

0.0 0.0 10.3 36.2 50.0 3.4 100.0 

9 

It is a starting point for 

those who want to find a 

job / settle abroad 

0.0 0.0 22.4 24.1 50.0 3.4 100.0 



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

8 
 

4.16

4.19

4.28

4.29

4.40

4.41

4.42

4.50

4.57

3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6

It is a means of improving professional prospects (CV

improvement / employment advantage)

It is a means of connecting friends / socializing

It is a means of personal development (increasing confidence

in one's own strengths, ability to adapt to new situations)

It is a starting point for those who want to find a job / settle

abroad

It is a means of learning about education systems in other

countries

It is a starting point for those who want to continue their

studies abroad

It is a means of practicing and improving English language

proficiency

It is a means of learning about new cultures / customs

It is a means of visiting other countries / places

 
Figure 1. The average scores attesting the extent to which the interviewed 

students consider that different statements describe the Erasmus+ programme, 

evaluated on a scale from 1-Not at all, to 5 - To a great extent 

 

Referring to the experience and / or the intention to benefit from the Erasmus+ 

programme, out of the total of the investigated students only 3.4% had an Erasmus+ 

experience and all want to relive it. 22.4% of the students, not having an Erasmus+ 

experience, indicated their intention to access the program, but most - over 74%, are 

not interested in the program (they did not benefit and do not wish to benefit from it). 

(Figure 2) 

 

 
Figure 2. The structure of the students investigated according to the experience 

and / or the intention to benefit from the Erasmus+ programme (% in total 

students) 

 

Referring to the students who benefited from the Erasmus+ programme (through 

mobility of studies and internships), the main reasons underlying the decision to leave 

in such mobility were: the desire for personal development, bonding with friends / 

socializing and visiting other countries. All the beneficiary students declared 

themselves satisfied with the experience, confirmed by the intention to leave again in 

such mobility. 

Regarding students who have not benefited but intend to benefit from the Erasmus+ 

programme, the main reasons stated as underlying this intention are: improving 

professional prospects (approximately 70% of those who did not benefit but wish to 

benefit from the Erasmus+ programme indicated this reason among the first 3 most 

I was and I intend to 

go further, 3.4%

I haven't been, but I 

intend to go, 22.4%I was, but I don't 

intend to go 

anymore, 0.0%

I was not and I do 

not intend to go, 

74.1%



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

9 
 

important), the practice and improvement of the linguistic knowledge of English and 

personal development (both indicated by about 54% of the students) (Figure 3). 

 

 
Figure 3. The share of students who have indicated a certain reason as being the 

basis of the intention to go into Erasmus+ mobility, in total students who have 

declared that they have not been, but intend to go in mobility (% in total students) 
Note: each student has indicated maximum 3 reasons, the most important ones 

 

Being overwhelming (about 3 quarters of the total students interviewed), the students 

who neither benefited nor intend to benefit from the Erasmus+ programme indicated, 

in particular, the main reasons for the lack of this intention: the linguistic difficulties 

generated by lack of knowledge / insufficient knowledge of the language of the host 

country (approximately 53% of those who did not benefit and do not wish to benefit 

from the Erasmus + programme indicated this reason among the first 3 most important 

ones), fearing the academic demands of the host university (approximately 49%), 

linguistic difficulties arising from insufficient knowledge of English and the existence 

of other priorities (approximately 40% each) (Figure 4). 

 

 
Figure 4. The share of students who have indicated a reason as being based on the 

lack of intention to go into an Erasmus + mobility, in total students who stated 

that they were not and do not intend to go on a mobility (% in total students) 
Note: each student has indicated maximum 3 reasons, the most important ones 

 

 

Conclusions 
The main results of the research, representing exclusively the point of view of the 116 

students from the bachelor's degree studies - years II and III, of the Faculty of Economic 

7.69

7.69

23.08

30.77

30.77

38.46

53.85

53.85

69.23

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0

To learn about new cultures / customs

To make friends / socialising

To visit other countries / place

To identify possibilities for further study…

To find a job for me / settle abroad

To learn about other education systems

To practice and improve English…

For personal development

To improve professional prospects

11.63

13.95

13.95

18.60

20.93

32.56

39.53

39.53

48.84

53.49

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0

Fear of not being able to adapt to the…

I no longer apply for mobility because…

Longing for family / home

No interest to me

Fear of being alone among strangers

Lack of financial resources

Linguistic difficulties caused by…

I have other priorities right now

Fear of not being able to rise to the…

Language difficulties arising from the…



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

10 
 

Sciences of the "Vasile Alecsandri" University of Bacău, who were investigated, with 

reference to the information held and the way they perceive the Erasmus+ programme, 

the reasons for the manifestation and the lack of intention to benefit from it are 

presented as follows: 

- there is a relatively low level of knowledge of the opportunities offered by the 
Erasmus+ programme by the investigated students. In general, it is known that 

through the Erasmus+ programme you can benefit from studies abroad (over 

79% of the respondents said they have information about it) and, to a lesser 

extent, the program offers the opportunity to go to internships, vocational 

training, abroad etc. (approximately 40%). Other opportunities offered by the 

program: the Erasmus Mundus joint master's program (EMJMD), Erasmus + 

loans for the masters and financial support for people with special needs, 

however, record a very low level of knowledge, most of the respondents 

declaring that they have not heard of them; 

- referring to how the Erasmus+ programme is perceived, for the investigated 
students this is especially a means of knowing new cultures / habits, a means of 

practicing and improving the English language skills, a starting point for those 

who want to learn, a way to continue studies abroad, as well as a means to learn 

about education systems in other countries; 

- of the total investigated students, a low weight - 3.4% benefited from the 
Erasmus+ programme, the satisfaction gained as a result of this experience being 

confirmed by the unanimous intention to benefit from the program again; 

- 22.4% of the students did not benefit, but wish to benefit from the Erasmus+ 
programme, the main reasons indicated by them as being the basis of this 

intention being: improving professional perspectives, practicing and improving 

English language skills, personal development; 

- about 3 quarters of the total students interviewed have not benefited and do not 
wish to benefit from the Erasmus+ programme, the linguistic difficulties 

generated by the ignorance / insufficient knowledge of the language of the host 

country, the fear of the academic demands of the host university, the linguistic 

difficulties generated of the insufficient knowledge of the English language and 

the existence of other priorities, being the main reasons indicated to a greater 

extent by them as being the basis of the lack of interest. 

 

 

References  
Bracht Oliver, Engel Constanze, Janson Kerstin, Over Albert, Schomburg Harald, 

Teichler Ulrich (2006), The Professional Value of ERASMUS Mobility. Final 

Report. Presented to the European Commission - DG Education and Culture. 

Dolga L., Filipescu H., Popescu-Mitroia M.M., Mazilescu C.A. (2015), Erasmus 

Mobility Impact On Professional Training And Personal Development Of 

Students Beneficiaries, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 191, 1006 – 

1013. 

Ghitulescu Radu (2017), De 20 de ani în România, Programul Erasmus schimbă vieţi, 

deschide minţi, Market Watch, no. 195, available at 

http://www.marketwatch.ro/articol/15655/De_20_de_ani_in_Romania_Progra

mul_Erasmus_schimba_vieti_deschide_minti/ 

Krzaklewska, Ewa (2008), Students, Staff and Academic Mobility in Higher Education, 

Michael Byram & Fred Dervin (eds.), Cambridge Scholars Press. 

Krzaklewska, Ewa; Krupnik, Seweryn (2008), “The Role of the Erasmus Programme 

in Enhancing Intercultural Dialogue. Presentation of the Results from the 

Erasmus Student Network Survey 2007”. Proceedings of the 4th International 

Barcelona Conference on Higher Education, Vol. 6. Higher education for 



Studies and Scientific Researches. Economics Edition, Online first, 2019 http://sceco.ub.ro 

11 
 

intercultural dialogue and multiculturalism. Barcelona: GUNI. Available at 

http://www.guni-rmies.net. 

Kumar V., Aaker, D.A., Day G.S. (1999), Essentials of Marketing research, John Wiley 

& Sons, Inc., New York Chichester Weinheim Brisbane Singapore Toronto. 

Lesjak Miha,  Juvan Emil,  Ineson Elizabeth M.,  Yap Matthew H. T., Podovsovnik 

Axelsson Eva (2015), Erasmus student motivation: Why and where to go?, 

Higher Education, 70:845–865, Springer. 

Mazilescu Crisanta-Alina, Dolga Lia, Filipescu Hannelore Elfride, Popescu-Mitroi 

Maria Monica (2019), Erasmus +, o punte de legătură între universități și 

organizații, Eurostampa, Timisoara. 

Mitchell Kristine (2012) Student mobility and European identity: Erasmus study as a 

civic experience?, Journal of Contemporary European Research, Vol. 8 Issue 4. 

Oborune Karina (2013), Becoming more European after ERASMUS? The Impact of 

the ERASMUS Programme on Political and Cultural Identity, Epiphany: Vol. 6, 

No. 1. 

Rodrıguez Gonzalez Carlos,  Mesanza Ricardo Bustillo,  Mariel Petr (2011), The 

determinants of international student mobility flows: an empirical study on the 

Erasmus programme, Higher Education, 62:413–430, Springer. 

Teichler Ulrich, Janson Kerstin (2007), The Professional Value of Temporary Study in 

Another European Country: Employment and Work of Former ERASMUS 

Students, Journal of Studies in International Education, 11: 486. 

Van Mol, C. 2009. “The Influence of European Student Mobility on European Identity 

and subsequent migration aspirations. A Theoretical Framework on European 

Student Mobility” Working paper No. 1 Universiteit Antwerpen. 

http://www.guni-rmies.net/