Back to Erasmus+: the value of international exchange

Join the Policy Institute at King’s College London and HEPI on Tuesday 15 September, from 6.30pm to 7.45pm, at Bush House, London, for a free event exploring the future of higher education in England. Drawing on Professor Sir Chris Husbands’ report, New choices: Revisiting futures for higher education in England, the discussion will consider how financial pressures, generative AI, changing student expectations and declining public trust are reshaping the sector – and the choices universities and government need to make now to secure a sustainable future. Register here.

This blog was kindly authored by Professor Sascha Stollhans, Professor of Language Education and Linguistics & Pro-Dean for Student Education (Arts, Humanities and Cultures) at the University of Leeds.

As UK universities are preparing to re-join the Erasmus+ programme in 2027, now seems like a good moment to reflect on what the sector lost when the UK left the scheme back in 2021, and what roles universities need to play to make the renewed association a success.

For those of us working in UK universities, the absence of Erasmus+ after Brexit has never been an abstract policy issue. It has been tangible, practical and, at times, painfully visible. As a languages scholar and student education leader at a UK university, I have seen first-hand how profoundly Erasmus+ shaped international mobility, student experience and institutional culture.

Three aspects of that absence stood out to me in particular.

The most obvious loss was access to a long-established and well-understood framework with a forty-year history. Erasmus+ was not simply a funding stream; it was an ecosystem. Over decades, institutions across Europe built durable partnerships, shared expectations and administrative processes, and a common language for international exchange. And Erasmus+ was not just about study abroad. It supported work placements, traineeships, volunteering, staff mobility and teaching exchanges and it operated across education sectors.

The second impact has been a narrowing of outward mobility opportunities under the UK’s post-Brexit landscape. The Turing Scheme, while well-intentioned and designed as a broader, global scheme, operated on a fundamentally different logic. Institutions had to bid for funding allocations: reducing predictability and continuity.

There is evidence that participation in international mobility can improve academic attainment, employability and long-term career prospects. The reasons are not hard to see: language development, independence, resilience, intercultural competence and creativity are all fostered through time spent abroad.

A recent example illustrates this potential vividly. When broadcaster and football commentator Jacqui Oatley MBE, a University of Leeds alumna, came back to speak at the university in early 2026, she reflected on her compulsory year abroad as a German Studies student. She described it as

the start of me developing my own personality… my own layers of resilience

That story resonates because it is echoed by countless graduates across generations and disciplines. Opportunities to participate in international mobility can be transformational and should not be an optional extra, but rather something any student who wishes should be able to have access to.

The third loss, arguably one of the most underestimated ones, was reciprocity. One of the Erasmus+ scheme’s greatest strengths is its two-way nature. It allows universities not only to send students out, but to welcome large and diverse cohorts of European students in return.

That reciprocity enriches campuses and communities alike. Exchange students bring fresh ideas, skills and life experiences to classrooms, campuses and local communities. While UK campuses continue to benefit from being able to welcome good numbers of international students, Erasmus+ helped sustain this diversity in distinctive and inclusive ways. The decline in European exchange students since Brexit – also entangled with visa costs and regulatory barriers – has been felt across the sector.

Against this backdrop, news of renewed association with Erasmus+ has been received positively across UK higher education. International mobility can be genuinely life-changing, and the symbolic importance of reconnecting with a shared European framework should not be underestimated.

At the same time, it would be naïve to assume the road ahead is straightforward. Key details remain to be clarified, political uncertainty persists and universities now face the practical challenge of rebuilding and implementing the renewed association. To make this renewed association successful, universities will need to play an active and strategic role.

First and foremost, students must be encouraged, and supported, to participate. The UK has historically lower outward mobility rates than many of our European counterparts. If take-up remains uneven, Erasmus+ risks being perceived as unbalanced, undermining its long-term sustainability. Universities can act here. In my own faculty, for example, we offer dedicated modules that prepare students for international placements, addressing practical concerns, cultural adjustment and academic planning well in advance. Normalising mobility and placement opportunities as part of the curriculum will play a crucial role.

Second, we need to be far more intentional about how we talk about languages, cultures and international exchange. Public and media narratives have at times been rather negative and dismissive. Headlines such as “UK quit Erasmus because of Brits’ poor language skills” do real damage, reinforcing fatalism rather than aspiration. As a society, we need to get much better at valuing linguistic and cultural diversity. Universities have a responsibility not only to provide opportunities, but also to shape public narratives and tell enticing stories about curiosity, bridge-building and the intellectual and personal rewards of engaging with the wider world.

Widening access remains one of the greatest challenges in international education. International exchange should not be a luxury.  How do we ensure that students from all socioeconomic, cultural and academic backgrounds can benefit from these opportunities? This question should sit near the top of every institutional agenda. One of Turing’s stated aims had been to widen access to international mobility, particularly for students from underrepresented backgrounds. That ambition must not be lost.

The return of Erasmus+ offers UK universities a chance not merely to restore what was lost, but to rethink how international mobility fits into education, inclusion and civic life. That opportunity will only be realised through sustained institutional effort, supportive public narratives and a genuine commitment to internationalisation.