Students taking part in the government’s post-Brexit replacement for the EU’s Erasmus+ student exchange scheme were forced to drop out because places were confirmed too late, while others failed to receive funding until after their return, according to analysis.
The first official analysis of the Turing scheme, which was announced by the then prime minister Boris Johnson and launched in 2021, found that four out of five universities (79%) had difficulties with the application process, which was overly complex, repetitive and “tedious”.
They also complained that the window for applications was too short and even after efforts were made to streamline the process, few thought there was any real improvement.
The number of participants in the first year of the scheme fell short of the government target – just over 20,000, compared with the original aim of 35,000, partly because of the impact of Covid at the time.
The analysis by IFF Research, which focused on the first year of the programme, also found that inadequate funding and problems with delivery had a disproportionate impact on students with fewer resources to fall back on, potentially creating barriers to participation.
It said: “There was a general view that some delivery issues raised had a greater impact on participants from a disadvantaged background and may have created barriers to many participating.
“Providers said that the timing of when application outcomes were confirmed [ie after many participants would have had to commit to their placement] meant some who could not afford the upfront cost or the risk of funding not being available down the line dropped out.
“Likewise, from the participant perspective, many described receiving the funds while already on placement, or even after they had returned.”
One of the government’s key claims for the Turing scheme was that it would enable more students from lower-income backgrounds – in schools, vocational training (VT), further education (FE) and university – to take up international study placements, compared with the Erasmus intake. It is also global, rather than being confined to Europe.
Schools, FE and VT settings were more positive about the scheme: nine out of 10 (89%) agreed the Turing scheme was “satisfactory” in providing placement opportunities. Fewer than half (45%) of higher education (HE) providers said it was satisfactory, and nearly a third (31%) said it was unsatisfactory.
Providers and participants said Turing scheme funding “went some way” towards covering costs, but additional funds were needed. Less than half (45%) of university students felt the funding covered at least half of their costs on placement, compared with 86% of FE-VT participants.
The report said: “This was particularly challenging for participants who needed upfront costs to secure housing or for initial travel, which could be expensive.
“Many described worrying a lot before funding was confirmed, and then struggling with day-to-day living costs while waiting for funding to come through.”
According to the government, more than 40,000 students will benefit from the Turing scheme in the 2023-24 academic year, 60% of whom are expected to come from disadvantaged backgrounds or underrepresented groups.
Robert Halfon, the minister for skills, apprenticeships and higher education, said: “The Turing scheme is a real game-changer for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, empowering them with transformative opportunities abroad, a chance to experience other cultures and learn vital skills for life and work.”
Geoff Barton, the general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said the benefits of studying abroad were not in doubt. “What is in question is whether the Turing scheme is offering better opportunities than the one it replaced – Erasmus+.”
