Study reveals benefits, drawbacks of Turing mobility scheme

 The Turing Scheme – created to replace the opportunities for overseas placements offered by the Erasmus+ scheme after the United Kingdom left the European Union – made it possible for more disadvantaged students to take time out to study abroad, according to a new study.

The research, carried out by academics from the University of Oxford and University College London, found that the shorter month-long placements offered under Turing were more practical for students from a widening participation (WP) background compared with the 12-month opportunities offered by Erasmus+.

However, these benefits were undermined by the timing of funding applications and approvals, with timescales out of sync with the academic year and the possibility of securing time off from work, cheap flights and accommodation. This prevented many students from participating in the programme.

The findings of the research were unveiled by Rachel Brooks, a professor of higher education the Department of Education at the University of Oxford, and Johanna Waters, professor of human geography at University College London, at the “Access and Geopolitics: Next Steps in Tackling the Equity Crisis in Global Higher Education” research conference, hosted by the World Access to Higher Education Network (WAHEN) in Oxford.

Turing v Erasmus

The Turing programme, which was launched in 2021, was aimed at widening participation and provided additional funding for students from WP backgrounds. Its funding mechanism relied on annual bids from individual universities, which had discretion over how the scheme was administered.

It was the first time that such a scheme had linked the issue of mobility duration explicitly to widening participation.

The report’s authors analysed information contained about Turing on the webpages of 100 universities, analysed policy documents and conducted interviews with 17 international office staff based at 15 universities.

They found that the month-long duration of Turing placements was “undeniably more appealing to WP students than either a term-semester or year abroad”. Nevertheless, many interviewees stressed that even a month was “too long” for the most disadvantaged students.

One interviewee told the researchers: “The introduction of the [Turing] scheme changed the focus a little bit in terms of the recognition of the fact that not all students can go for a full year abroad, that not all students may have the financial means to do so, whether it’s a perception or whether it’s an actual barrier.”

The shorter mobilities were considered to offer “valuable” experience, though their relative value compared with longer periods overseas was still considered “lesser”.

A rise in the numbers of WP students taking up a placement was down to universities targeting that particular cohort, the evidence suggested.

Problems with timing

However, the objectives around widening participation were thwarted by the timing of funding decisions and the uncertainty facing universities over how long the Turing scheme might last, given its link to annual spending reviews. This made it difficult to promote the scheme to students or to guarantee placements and funding.

One university said: “We [the university] apply once a year. And we apply in Feb, well, March, April time … The results are announced in July. By that time, some of our students would have already gone because the academic calendar doesn’t align across the world.

“If … the scheme, that, in its ambition and its mission statement, states that it’s the students who are from disadvantaged or under-represented backgrounds that are the most important group for the government, that’s great, but … they also need time to plan … you can’t allocate money in July and expect that students will travel in September. It simply doesn’t work like this.”

Another said the scheme “does create this kind of ... conflicting message where we’re encouraging students to think big and travel far.

“But we’re also saying, ‘Oh, but we can’t offer you any guarantee of funding’ … and it just creates an unusual sort of messaging, and it’s difficult to send that message to students in the preparation programme because, on one hand, we’re talking about Turing as being this fantastic opportunity, but then we’re having to underpin it by saying, ‘Well, but it’s not guaranteed.

“We don’t know how much you’ll get. We don’t know when you’ll get it; it’s prioritised for WP, but we don’t know when or if you personally might receive it’.”

Other universities highlighted the practical difficulties for WP students of applying for the scheme. One international officer said: “Students from disadvantaged backgrounds need to be able to plan.

“They need some certainty around what their funding is going to be … and they need that many months in advance to be able to make plans to be able to get the cheapest rates for their travel, to be able to apply for visas and things like that.

“Not knowing that you’ve got funding until two months before you’re meant to go, those disadvantaged students have already dropped out of the process by then.”

Lessons for the future

In May, the UK government began “reset” talks with the EU which include a commitment to “work towards” rejoining Erasmus+, and it is likely that funding for the Turing scheme will be cut. There is currently no plan for the scheme beyond 2026.

Meanwhile, changes to the Erasmus+ programme since UK students were last eligible include more funding for disadvantaged students, widening access, and blended mobility options to address the challenges for those from a WP background.

Brooks told the conference: “Whatever happens in the future in relation to the UK international student mobility, there are lessons that can be learnt from Turing, despite some limitations, that can inform such future programmes.

“One of the advantages of the Turing scheme was a really clear and explicit core branding of the importance of widening access, which hadn’t been there previously, and which had incentivised universities to have specific ring-fenced schemes, for example, for students from widening participation backgrounds, and that had been quite a sea change from how they had approached allocating their money previously.

“The Turing experience has also underlined the importance of robust financial processes. There is no point in having money available for wider participation if it arrives too late.”

* The report authors will publish a book based on their research, titled Post-Brexit Student Mobilities in 2026.