International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

“Maybe we did not learn that much academically, but we learn

more from experience” – Erasmus mobility and its potential for
transformative learning
Cosmin I. Nada a, *, Justyna Legutko b
a
Centre for Research and Intervention in Education (CIIE), Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Portugal
b
Department of Languages, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Linnaeus University, Sweden

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Mobility experiences in higher education are usually met with great enthusiasm and are often
Student mobility described as sources of (transformative) learning. At the same time, less optimistic perspectives
Erasmus are brought forward by scholars who question the intrinsic value of international mobility in
International exchange
terms of encouraging personal growth and the acquisition of an intercultural and international
Experiential learning
Transformative learning
mindset. In this article, retrospective accounts of Erasmus alumni, gathered several years after
their sojourn, are analysed to understand the extent to which engaging in an international ex­
change during one’s university years can have long-lasting and transformative learning effects.
The findings indicate that participating in an Erasmus exchange can indeed enhance personal
growth and lead to transformative learning. Such an experience can give rise to significant
changes in young people’s future decisions that may involve, for instance, more internationally
oriented aspirations, a better understanding of cultural diversity, or an interest in engaging with
new international experiences, as a result of the initial Erasmus exchange.

Introduction

Engaging in an international mobility during university is usually an experience regarded by higher education students and em­
ployers alike as a positive, enriching and valuable learning experience (Bracht et al., 2006; Engel, 2010). The literature on interna­
tional education suggests that moving and studying abroad is remarkable in many ways, and that such experiences offer students
learning opportunities that may not be available to those who remain in their home countries (Kennedy, 2010). Morgan (2010), for
instance, argues that travelling has an implicit educative benefit, while Murphy-Lejeune (2003, p. 101) glorifies life abroad as an
“extensive natural learning situation which stimulates many more aspects of learners’ personalities than are usually catered for in
educational institutions”. Indeed, the benefits to higher education students of engaging in an international mobility experience are well
documented. They include, for instance: personal growth (Cankaya, Liew, & De Freitas, 2018); developing intercultural competences
(Gill, 2007); and increased tolerance and acceptance of other values and cultures (Brown & Graham, 2009). In this sense, short-term
international study experiences not only favour the acquisition of discipline-based knowledge, but also the acquisition of “intangible
personal characteristics or soft skills” (Cushing et al., 2019, p. 213).
Particularly in the case of the Erasmus programme, numerous positive outcomes are associated with a sojourn abroad. Launched

* Correspondence to: Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Rua Alfredo Allen, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal.
E-mail address: cosmin@fpce.up.pt (C.I. Nada).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2022.03.002
Received 4 August 2021; Received in revised form 16 December 2021; Accepted 6 March 2022
Available online 9 March 2022
0147-1767/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C.I. Nada and J. Legutko International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

more than 30 years ago, the Erasmus programme is considered to be a key promoter of European integration, and is often regarded as a
European success story (Engel, 2010). Erasmus is also linked to wider policy reforms targeted at the achievement of the goals
established in the Europe 2020 strategy, the strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training, and the EU
Youth Strategy. European cooperation over policy in this area pursues the following four common objectives: to make lifelong learning
and mobility a reality; to improve the quality and efficiency of education and training; to promote equity, social cohesion and active
citizenship; and to enhance creativity and innovation, including entrepreneurship, at all levels of education and training (Council of
the European Union, 2009). Continuous investment in, and growth of, the Erasmus programme is central to the achievement of these
ambitious objectives. Indeed, the importance of mobility – and specifically of the Erasmus programme – is strongly emphasised in the
new set of objectives set for the European Education Area by the European Commission, that are to be achieved by 2025 (European
Commission, 2020). Policymakers expect the Erasmus programme to strengthen the sense of European identity through education and
culture (European Commission, 2017), and to equip European citizens with the skills they need to increase their employability and
contribute to Europe’s economic growth (European Commission, 2014).
The academic literature corroborates such expectations, indicating that the Erasmus experience can play an important role in
boosting employability (Engel, 2010). In a study on the impact of Erasmus mobility on young people’s careers, 89% of the students
surveyed considered their Erasmus stay worthwhile in terms of personal development (Engel, 2010). Indeed, the research literature
provides significant evidence on the positive impact of Erasmus on various competences (Juvan & Lesjak, 2011). According to Engel
(2010, p. 2), “reports on the Erasmus experience by students often tell about an outstanding experience having a long-lasting impact on
their lives and making them discover a new European identity”. Asoodar, Atai, and Baten (2017, p. 93), for instance, found that one of
the most valued outcomes of the Erasmus experience for young people was ‘becoming (more) independent’, alongside other outcomes
such as improving communication skills in the local language and ‘becoming (more) self-confident’. Similarly, Mastora, Pan­
agopoulou, and Raikou (2020) found that participation in an Erasmus mobility experience accelerated students’ knowledge acquisition
and skills development, while strengthening their path to adulthood. Other positive outcomes associated with the Erasmus experience
are linked to socialising with new cultures, increasing one’s skills and competences, and learning and improving one’s knowledge of
foreign languages (Amendola & Restaino, 2017). In sum, the Erasmus programme is tasked with promoting values important to the
European Union and is credited with contributing to the development of relevant competences and skills and, consequently, boosting
the employability of young Europeans.
In addition to these positive outcomes linked to personal development and the acquisition of competences, some empirical studies
suggest that an international sojourn can have transformative potential (Brown, 2009; Brown & Brown, 2009), and may stimulate the
occurrence of transformative learning (Kumi-Yeboah & James, 2014; Ritz, 2010). Initially applied to the context of adult education
(Mezirow, 1990), the theory of transformative learning has become increasingly used to assess the impact of living in a foreign culture
(Morrice, 2014; Taylor, 1994; Wee, 2019), as well as to interpret the changes international students undergo during their sojourns
abroad (Kelly, 2010; Nada, Montgomery, & Araújo, 2018). Nevertheless, evidence on the transformative potential of international
experiences remains limited. As observed by Erichsen (2011, p. 111), even though more attention is given to perceptions and learning
experiences within international contexts, “the process is difficult to describe, interpret, and conceptualise”. With regard to the
Erasmus programme, evidence on this topic is particularly scarce. Apart from a few conference proceedings and doctoral theses (e.g.
Maciejewska, 2018; Nielsen, 2020), the link between an Erasmus sojourn and its potential transformative outcomes remains largely
unexplored. In fact, Maciejewska (2018, p. 353) observes that “there is no research demonstrating what really takes place in the area of
personal development of a mobile student, particularly as regards ‘deeper’ effects of mobility experiences in the sphere of personal
development, such as possible changes to mental habits, patterns, attitudes or upheld values”. In this context, the present paper seeks
to contribute to a wider understanding of the Erasmus student experience by analysing the retrospective accounts of Erasmus alumni
about their (potentially) transformative international sojourns.
The idea of this research endeavour focused on the Erasmus programme emerged in the wake of the 30-year anniversary of this
mobility scheme. Studies and evaluations conducted on the Erasmus programme often rely on quantitative data (Sigalas, 2010a), and
even when mixed-methods are used (Engel, 2010; European Commission, 2014), the qualitative component tends to be underde­
veloped. For this reason, this qualitative study sought to understand what we can learn about the Erasmus programme, more than 30
years after it launch, from the very young people who benefited from it.

Challenging the positive outcomes of the international experience

Despite the positive outcomes referred to above, some researchers have questioned the enthusiasm that often marks academic and
policy debates around international student mobility. In fact, Stronkhorst (2005) warned more than 15 years ago that the benefits of
international student mobility were being taken for granted by policymakers and higher education practitioners. Starting from the
issue of formal learning during an international exchange, Forsey, Broomhall, and Davis (2012, p. 134) noted that such exchanges can
be perceived as breaks “from serious study”; as periods during which students prioritise having “fun, travel, or making new friends”. In
terms of learning from the actual experience of being immersed in a different cultural context (which, as mentioned above, has been
shown to foster personal growth and the acquisition of soft skills and diverse competences), Chwialkowska (2020) warns that as yet,
there is little understanding of the effectiveness of exchange study programmes in developing cross-cultural competences. According to
Otten (2003), positive learning outcomes do not emerge automatically from exposure to different cultures. Similarly, Chang, Yuan, and
Chuang (2013, p. 272) note that “physically being abroad merely provides an opportunity; the learning and positive outcomes will
really occur when people have deeper engagement with the new culture and are willing to reflect on their own responses to the given
experience”. And while Peacock and Harrison (2009) identified evidence of improved cultural understanding and awareness in

184
C.I. Nada and J. Legutko International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

students’ accounts, the subjects’ engagement with issues of cross-cultural communication and global awareness remained somewhat
superficial. In this sense, evidence regarding international exchanges contains discrepancies, with empirical studies simultaneously
contradicting and supporting the learning outcomes generated by periods of study abroad.
These observations bring the debate regarding the learning outcomes that may or may not be associated with the experience of
studying abroad to the level of interactions between local and international students. According to Shaw (2009), the available evidence
indicates that the presence of students with diverse cultural backgrounds is not enough to obtain the benefits often associated with
international student mobility. For such benefits to materialise, interaction between different students is required – and in this regard,
the findings of previous research are not as promising. Kimmel and Volet (2012, p. 227) note that the “the paucity of intercultural
interactions among students from culturally diverse backgrounds at university and off campus is widely documented in the literature”.
Nevertheless, more recent research on this topic has called for a more qualitative understanding of the “local/international dichotomy”
(Nada & Araújo, 2017, p. 184), in order to avoid essentialist conceptualisations of different cultural groups. According to Dunne (2013,
p. 567), the problem with most research conducted in this field is that the concept of ‘culture’ is defined merely in terms of its
relationship with the nationality of students, according to a “passport approach” in which only “contact between students of different
nationalities is designated as intercultural contact”. Clearly, such an approach fails to consider the fact that many cultural differences
exist not only between but also within cultures (Carroll & Ryan, 2007). In addition, Chao, Kung, and Yao (2015, p. 84) note that,
regardless of their level of multicultural exposure, individuals who hold essentialist beliefs will “turn their backs on foreign ideas and
hold onto their own cultures vehemently”. In this sense, other elements of the international experience should be taken into account,
particularly with regard to the ability to reflect upon one’s experience and to make sense of it. In this paper, students’ reflexive
processes are placed at the core of the analysis in order to understand the ways in which being exposed to different cultural contexts has
– or has not – led to (transformative) learning outcomes.
With regard to the Erasmus programme in particular, conflicting evidence is also an issue, especially in relation to its policy aims of
constructing a European identity and increasing understanding of different European cultures. For instance, based on a quantitative
study of outgoing and incoming Erasmus students at nine English universities, compared with a sample of ‘sedentary’ students, Sigalas
(2010a) raises doubts about the effectiveness of short-term mobility schemes such as Erasmus in fostering European identity. At the
same time, he questions the transformative potential of such international experiences by arguing that “no miraculous transformations
can be expected within a single year” (Sigalas, 2010a, p. 261). A different study by the same author (Sigalas, 2010b) raises questions as
to the capacity of the Erasmus mobility programme to enhance young people’s support for the EU, indicating that the data collected
contradicts not only the ‘conventional wisdom’ on the topic, but also the expectations that the European Commission holds for the
Erasmus programme. Other studies report similar results, highlighting that the Erasmus experience does not appear to render students
more supportive of the EU and its ideals. In this context, Wilson (2011, p. 1134), found “no evidence that Erasmus students increased
either their diffuse or their specific support for the EU”. In an attempt to interpret such findings, Sigalas (2010a) advances the pos­
sibility that students who engage in Erasmus already have a fairly well-developed sense of European identity that can hardly be
strengthened further. At the same time, the fact that these studies were conducted within a somewhat Eurosceptic national context may
also have had an impact on the results.
As shown above, scientific debates around the learning and transformative outcomes of international student mobility in general –
and of the Erasmus experience in particular – are marked by discrepancy and contrasting evidence. In this context, the objective of this
paper is not to ‘take sides’ by confirming or rejecting particular hypotheses linked to experiences of short-term study abroad. Instead,
the objective is to contribute to this discussion by listening to the accounts of Erasmus alumni directly, encouraging them to retro­
spectively reflect upon their experiences, and providing a qualitative description of learning in international contexts.

Methods

To explore the learning and transformative outcomes of the Erasmus experience, this article relies on the qualitative accounts of
Erasmus alumni. Involving the programme’s alumni as research participants, as opposed to students currently undertaking mobility
experiences, promotes a retrospective approach and analysis of the Erasmus experience. In this sense, the research participants were
encouraged to reflect upon their past experiences and to make sense of them in the current circumstances of their lives. According to
Wilson (2011), the effects and impact of the Erasmus experience are usually assessed soon after the actual sojourn has taken place
while the long-term impacts remain largely unexplored. This paper seeks to address this gap by looking into the ways in which Erasmus
alumni make sense of their international experience several years later.
In addition, listening to Erasmus alumni rather than to students who are currently engaged in an international experience is also an
appropriate strategy to explore transformative learning processes. As observed by Mezirow (1990), learners may not be fully aware of
their ongoing learning processes. Rather, awareness of how one has changed as a result of the experience might emerge at a later point,
especially after returning home, when students have had “an opportunity to assess the transformations that have occurred in oneself
while away” (Madison, 2006, p. 11). Retrospective reflection upon one’s experience is key to the transformative learning processes that
can result from international exposure, requiring “the sojourner to look at his or her world from a different point of view” (Taylor,
1994, p. 155). Consequently, it is within the accounts of Erasmus alumni – who were encouraged to think about their international
experiences several years later – that the transformations that took place during such international experiences are acknowledged,
identified, and reflected upon. As observed by Nielsen (2020, p. 191), “the different changes in outlook do not follow a clear linear and
rational notion of ‘transformative learning’ as the result of a sudden experience, but rather appear to be the result of reflection over
time that contributes to how one views oneself, others and life in general”.
In order to gain a deeper understanding of how Erasmus alumni make sense of their international experience years after the

185
C.I. Nada and J. Legutko International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

exchange, semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine young people in their 20s and early 30s from different European
countries (Croatia, Estonia, France, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK) who ‘went on Erasmus’ between 2011
and 2015. The interviews took place in 2019 and were conducted orally, in English, by the first author of this paper. As explained
above, the interview guide was designed with the objective of encouraging young people to reflect upon their Erasmus experience
retrospectively and included questions about the learning outcomes associated with an international sojourn, such as:

• Do you consider that your Erasmus was a transformative experience? If yes, how did you become aware of your transformations?
• Do you find valuable the kind of competences and learning that you acquired through your Erasmus experience? Why?
• Is this a type of learning that you could have acquired if you were in your home country?

The research participants were selected on a convenience basis, given that the researchers were, at the time, immersed in an
institutional context where numerous Erasmus alumni were present. In the participant selection process, the maximum variation
technique was used (Moore-Cox, 2013; Patton, 2002), which resulted in a gender-balanced participant set that contained Erasmus
alumni coming from nine countries, and who were engaged in Erasmus mobility at least once (four research participants studied
abroad twice and referred to both Erasmus experiences during the interviews). The main requirement for young people to become
eligible participants of this study was to have completed an Erasmus mobility of at least one semester abroad in the last decade.
In this study, to acknowledge the value of the research participants’ knowledge of their own experiences (England, 1994), their
accounts were placed at the centre of the process of data collection and analysis, recognising that they are the ones who know the
‘whole iceberg’ and not just its tip (Larson, 1997). Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim, and anonymity was ensured
using fictitious names. The transcribed data were subjected to qualitative content analysis (Schreier, 2012). Given that the study
sought to collect insights on the learning outcomes of living and studying abroad, as recounted by the research participants themselves,
inductive content analysis was conducted (Schamber, 2000). The transcribed material was read and reread multiple times, and the
development of the coding framework was guided by our interest in understanding how Erasmus alumni describe the effects of their
exchange retrospectively, and the extent to which those descriptions involve accounts of transformative learning, as depicted in
previous studies involving international students (Brown & Brown, 2009; Nada et al., 2018; Ritz, 2010). In line with our qualitative
approach, our objective is to generalise towards theory rather than towards populations (Bryman, 2012). Therefore, focusing on a
relatively small number of research participants allowed us to conduct a detailed analysis of each participants’ account and of the way
in which the different accounts complemented (or contradicted) each other.
The content analysis included a priori defined categories such as transformations, learning outcomes and benefits of studying
abroad, and also a posteriori categories to allow the analytical dimensions to emerge directly from the data, in order to, in turn, do
justice to the participants’ voices (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). As a means to achieve high trustworthiness of the analysis, the coding
procedure was iterative and focussed on following closely the text and ensuring that participants’ statements clearly fitted into one of
the existing or emerging (sub-)categories. In this paper, two main categories will be explored in detail:

Descriptions of transformative learning and personal growth, consisting of the following sub-categories

a. Signs of personal growth (improvements in adaptability, independence, confidence, self-efficacy, openness).

b. Signs of hardship (visible through the idea of ‘toughening up’ and being brave).
c. Transformations (as noticed by participants themselves and by friends and family).
d. Transformation as a process (accounts of experiential learning, the development of new reference frameworks and the impact of being away
from ‘home’).

Descriptions of a developing international mindset, consisting of the following sub-categories

a. Europeanness (feelings of a supra-national, European identity).

b. Towards an international mindset (transcendence of national boundaries and closeness to people from different countries).
c. New future plans (impact of the exchange on future life decisions).

Results and discussion

Category One: Transformations, personal growth and new reference frameworks

While every interviewee’s mobility experience was different, their retrospective accounts were all characterised by descriptions of
personal growth and diverse transformations. Changes in attitudes and the emergence of new personal goals came about not only as a
result of experiential learning, but also through being confronted with unfamiliar situations. One sign of personal transformation
became apparent through the link between the Erasmus experience and a perceived change in attitudes and personal choices.
As shown below, students often report feelings of confidence, independence, self-efficacy, openness and adaptability. This aligns
with the results of previous research, which indicates that international experiences can enhance the development of diverse com­
petences (Juvan & Lesjak, 2011) and soft skills (Cushing et al., 2019).

186
C.I. Nada and J. Legutko International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

Going to another country, trying to fit into another system, it just makes you more tough, more open to things, more adaptable
[…] adaptable is a very, very big word that I would say Erasmus makes you. (Janica)
I became less stressed about things: ‘Ok, I managed to live in another country that I did not know, I arrived [there] and I did
everything myself’. Now if I have to travel, no stress at all! So, adaptable is the right word. (Charlotte)
Both Janica, a Croatian student in France, and Charlotte, a French student in Norway and the UK, report an increase in adaptability.
In addition, Charlotte describes the feeling of becoming more independent – a quality that simultaneously boosts her self-confidence.
She claims that her anxieties linked to travelling and the stress associated with living in a foreign context have diminished through her
experience of an international exchange, which provided a point of comparison. This led to the relativisation of certain aspects of her
life that previously might have appeared daunting or problematic. Such realisations are consistent with previous research findings. In
fact, sojourns abroad have often been associated with an increase in independence and confidence (Brown & Graham, 2009; Gill,
2007). In her ethnographic study, Brown (2009, p. 509) found that international students often described changes in “personal at­
titudes to life”, in particular an increase in self-efficacy, as noted here by Charlotte. It is worthy of note that the interviewees still
attribute such personal transformations to the Erasmus exchange years after its end.
These observations regarding personal growth were accompanied by more nuanced insights. For instance, some interviewees
acknowledged that they had learned to be more disciplined, using such expressions as “toughen up” or “survive” to underline the
hardships they went through while studying abroad.
You have to learn how to get around, and how to survive there as well. (Santiago)
And also you toughen up, like you learn the street smarts when you are there alone, you learn [how] to survive. (Donata)
In fact, “necessity for survival” is an important factor in the transformative learning process (Brown & Graham, 2009; Taylor,
1994), since it directly challenges students’ previous ways of life. Brown (2009) notices that hardship can lead to increased self-efficacy
among international students; likewise, the realisation that one can survive in unfamiliar and challenging situations empowered our
research participants who, like other fellow Erasmus students before them (see, for example, Asoodar et al., 2017), described their
experiences in terms of increased self-confidence and independence.
Other interviewees report having gained more courage to take ‘bold’ decisions and engage in endeavours that they might not have
considered under different circumstances.
I have come a long way and I can really reflect on the impact it had in my life, so I think it gave me the courage to do all the
crazier things afterwards. […] I made these very bold decisions without giving it a second thought, and I haven’t regretted
anything. (Donata)
[Erasmus] put me in a place where I had to step out of that box, and that opened my eyes, because to that point, I didn’t realise
that I could do all those things. (Gerhard)
I needed to discover a lot about myself [during Erasmus] that the entire rest of my life then got built on. (Liidia)
In these statements, the interviewees’ newly gained self-confidence is clearly visible. Courage and spontaneity are at the centre of
the reflections of Donata, a Lithuanian student who went on exchange to Italy. Meanwhile, Gerhard – a Dutch student who went on
exchange to the UK – emphasises openness, and the fact that the Erasmus experience allowed him to become aware of (life) options that
were previously unknown to him. Liidia, an Estonian student who went on exchange to Italy, highlights that the Erasmus experience
was so powerful that it ended up shaping her plans and future trajectory. All these interviewees underline that their future decisions
have been influenced, in one way or another, by their Erasmus experience. Such changes in personal goals have been reported in other
programmes for study abroad (Strange & Gibson, 2017). DeGraaf, Slagter, Larsen, and Ditta (2013), for example, documented stu­
dents’ views about spending a semester abroad, and identified changes in both lifestyle choices and personal goals as a result of
studying abroad. Direct exposure to and experience of a new environment prompts reflection (Gill, 2007) which, in turn, becomes the
foundation for new personal goals.
These findings are particularly relevant within the framework of a certain scepticism regarding the potential of short-term expe­
riences to generate long-lasting changes in Erasmus students (Sigalas, 2010a). Among our research participants, the impact of their
international experience on their life aspirations, decisions and goals is clearly visible – even several years after the Erasmus exchange.
Furthermore, it is noteworthy that participants did not only explain how they noticed their transformations by themselves, but also
report on changes being noticed by family members and friends who did not embark on the Erasmus journey. For instance, Gerhard
said that his mother noticed an increase in his confidence and maturity, while Donata and Karolina observed that their relationships
with friends had fundamentally changed:
I was “Skyping” with my mom and my mom could see how comfortable I was […] how [much] more mature than I was before
[…] I was very unhappy and insecure and unconfident in high school. (Gerhard)
[When] I got home, my friends were saying that I changed a lot as a person [...] they could not relate to me anymore. (Donata)
I definitely changed, because I can see it with my friends as well. […] You just do not have that many things in common […]
anymore. (Karolina)
Besides Gerhard’s observations linked to personal development, another key ingredient in the process of transformation can be seen
in Donata’s statements; namely, the formation of new reference frameworks. Donata acknowledges that her friends “could not relate to
her anymore” after she returned to Lithuania. This is a topic picked up by Janica, who also “suddenly realised that [she] did not fit [in]

187
C.I. Nada and J. Legutko International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

anymore” after returning to her home environment. The discrepancy between the home and foreign environments emerges from the
absence of a shared experience between the person who went abroad and the people who were “left behind”. According to Mezirow
(1997), changes in subjects’ pre-existing frames of reference are a key element in the emergence of transformative learning. A sojourn
abroad can initiate this process of change when it places students in an environment in which previous frames of reference are often
challenged and put into perspective (Taylor, 1994). According to Morgan (2010), living in an unfamiliar place can disrupt one’s
worldview and lead to transformative learning. The excerpts above illustrate how Erasmus alumni have created new reference
frameworks in order to relate to their new environments. In other words, a paradigm shift has taken place, because the individual’s
previous way of life was deemed no longer useful in the foreign country. These changes became more visible upon returning from the
Erasmus exchange and being confronted once again with the ‘home’ environment.
The road to such a paradigm shift comes through experiential learning. In fact, a recurrent theme in most interviews was the
impression that it would have been impossible to have such a transformative experience without embarking on an international ex­
change and having this first-hand experience of living in a foreign country. The interviewees describe a shared impression that personal
growth would have taken a different character – or might even have been non-existent – had it not been for their Erasmus exchange. In
this sense, active participation and experiential learning were underlined by many interviewees as having been a key element in their
personal growth.
Maybe we did not learn that much academically, but we learn more [through] experience [of] the way things work in different
countries and different cultures. (Janica)
I do not think it is an experience you can do in any other way, because it’s like full immersion [into the] life of a local. (Arianna)
These descriptions of experiential learning correspond with the characterisation by Mezirow (1997, p. 10) of transformative
learning as “learner-centred, participatory, and interactive”. Several interviewees trace their perceived learnings, changes, and the
qualities they developed, back to their experiences abroad, claiming that they would not have been possible if they had remained in
their home countries:
I think the best thing I got from […] my Erasmus [is] the open-mindedness that I couldn’t have developed otherwise, just
staying in my home country. (Arianna)
At home, I would not have been exposed to anything else. […] It is great to try out different things and meet people with
different interests. (Megan)
Here, being immersed in a foreign context is described as a crucial condition, provided by the Erasmus exchange, that can foster
personal growth and provide opportunities for new experiences and transformative learning. Indeed, distance from home was
considered key to enhancing personal growth and transformation in Brown’s study (2009). According to Montuori and Fahim (2004, p.
254), international experiences “present opportunities for exploring values, traits, attitudes, and identity that may not have surfaced,
or certainly may not have become as explicit and centre stage, if the individual had stayed at home”. This is also in line with the
findings of Madison (2006), in which in-depth reflection about the act of leaving home is seen as a valuable and positive experience.
Even though our research participants describe a certain alienation from home, they are adamant about a newly gained closeness to
their peers from other countries.

Category Two: Towards an international mindset

With regard to young people’s views towards Europe and feelings of a European identity, our data show how the Erasmus expe­
rience had transformed them. Many interviewees highlight the opportunity to get to know and interact with peers from various other
European countries as key in changing their own self perceptions in terms of cultural and national identity. Charlotte notices that living
abroad and interacting with very different people had led her to find elements of “similarity between cultural experiences” (Touraine,
2000, p. 175), and hence changed the way she perceived cultural differences:
I mean it does not matter where they come from, their backgrounds, their social backgrounds, their country, whatever […] you
could not feel like ‘Ok, I was French, she was Greek, my friend is German’. We were all young people having fun and being
friends together! And I think this you cannot realise if you stay in your [own] country. (Charlotte)
In this statement, Charlotte refers to a certain transcendence of national boundaries by recognising commonalities between “all
young people”. Once again, transformation emerged from the act of leaving one’s home country and having the opportunity to
interact, at first hand, with cultural diversity. After the Erasmus exchange, previous ways of life tend to be replaced by reference
schemes against which new experiences are assessed. Indeed, a sojourn abroad has the potential to transform one’s worldview
(Walters, Charles, & Bingham, 2017) or to become the catalyst for a paradigm shift (Taylor, 2008) in which old ways of thinking are
replaced.
Donata further develops, through the use of a colour metaphor, on this closeness one gains with people from other countries who,
despite their differences, have in common the experience of being abroad.
When you are at home, you are only exposed to one type of environment. […] Even Europe is just one colour, but then it has a lot
of shades. So basically, you only see one colour if you are in your own country! (Donata)
This metaphor illustrates why students feel more distanced from their home environment after being abroad. Both Donata and
Charlotte recount how their mobility experiences encouraged them to think beyond their respective home countries. Such broadened
perspectives can also be linked to the development of a global mindset, a necessary element of global citizenship (Lilley, Barker, &

188
C.I. Nada and J. Legutko International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

Harris, 2015). These statements echo signs of transformation and show that our research participants gained new reference frame­
works – in this case linked to a more global and a “multinational frame of reference” (Brown & Graham, 2009).
Furthermore, this newly developed multinational frame of reference is visible in their accounts of an international and multi­
cultural lifestyle. Many interviewees expressed their desire for an ‘international life’ as a result of the Erasmus experience:
After that [Erasmus exchange], I never stopped being international. (Gerhard)
When I came back, I just wanted to go abroad again. (Arianna)
I was ready to live an international life after this [exchange]. (Liidia)
As shown above, this international mindset translated into concrete decisions that the interviewees took in their future academic
and professional careers, confirming that the transformative outcomes of the Erasmus sojourn can be long-lasting, and can influence
future aspirations and life decisions. Janica, for instance, acknowledges that if she had undertaken her Erasmus exchange earlier, she
would have done her Master’s degree abroad. Meanwhile, Santiago, a Spanish student who went on exchange to Turkey, decided to
study international relations as a result of his Erasmus experience. In their professional lives, both Janica and Arianna applied for and
completed internships abroad.
Beyond statements that pointed to a multinational frame of reference, the experiences of the Erasmus alumni interviewed relate in
different ways to the aims of the Erasmus+ programme, which explicitly seeks to strengthen European identity (European Commission,
2017). While both Janica and Charlotte agreed that young people across borders share many similarities in terms of interests and
values, a more critical voice came from Donata, who acknowledges that this “similarity between cultural experiences” (Touraine,
2000, p. 175) identified by her colleagues might not be enough to compensate for national differences:
I think it was the first time […] I really felt the European, let’s say, sense of belonging, because you talk with Polish people,
Greek people, whatever, and you have the same interest, we are all young people. (Charlotte)
Wow, I really have a lot of similarities with my Greek peers, of course differences as well, but in a very – I would say – communal
way, like we all are a community sharing some values! (Janica)
I mean, yes, of course, we are people, we are the same, [but] we were brought up in different environments. These are facts. That
is what makes it more difficult for me to get along with some people than others. […] From my personal experience, I really
noticed that I would get along with some certain nationalities better than others, due to our cultural backgrounds. (Donata)
These contrasting statements illustrate that the link between the Erasmus experience and a sense of a shared European identity is
not straightforward. This phenomenon has also been studied quantitatively, and a spectrum of results emerged. Some studies have
found that the Erasmus exchange has a positive effect on the sense of European identity (Engel, 2010); others, no significant effect (Van
Mol, 2018); while others perceived a negative effect (Sigalas, 2010a). The qualitative accounts of our research participants comple­
ment this spectrum of quantitative results, illustrating how individual differences and attitudes determine whether and how European
identity can be pronounced. Regardless of whether or not Erasmus contributes directly to the sense of a European identity, the data
show that having the opportunity to interact with different cultures is an important aspect of international experiences that holds
transformative potential and may lead to a wider understanding of cultural differences and commonalities. According to De Wit, 2002,
the individual development that takes place during an international experience is linked to a “confrontation with other cultures, but
also, and perhaps even more, with the home culture”. In other words, students not only learn more about other cultures, but they end
up becoming more aware of their original culture, which is long known for its capacity to remain hidden from its own participants
(Hall, 1959).

Conclusion

In summary, the transformative journeys described by our research participants began with a sojourn abroad and continued
through a process of personal growth and gaining new reference frameworks (a crucial element for transformative learning), to
adopting an international mindset which, in turn, translated into concrete personal decisions and changes in personal goals. A process
of transformation is visible in the acquisition of a more international mindset, and the ways in which this influenced future decisions
and aspirations. The significance of their reflections originates from their retrospective nature: due to the methodological decision to
involve Erasmus alumni, all interviewees were able to reflect critically upon their experiences and to make sense of their international
journeys and careers several years after their mobility experiences.
As revealed above, most participants highlighted the personal learning outcomes of their Erasmus experience, rather than the
academic learning opportunities, which were somehow perceived as being less memorable within the framework of their international
sojourn. Across the set of participants, personal growth and the development of diverse soft skills and competences were highlighted as
the main outcomes of the Erasmus experience. Aside from growing in confidence and developing a first sense of what it means to live
abroad, interviewees described a feeling of alienation from their home environment, while feeling somehow closer to their peers from
other countries. The implications of such transformations for European identity, however, are less straightforward. The interviewees
provide accounts of transcending national boundaries, and the ability to think about one’s experience on a supra-national level.
Awareness of the similarities between different cultures appeared in most interviews, yet a few critical voices underlined that, despite
such similarities, cultural differences cannot be ignored. Therefore, the participants transcended national boundaries in their re­
flections while, at the same time, becoming more aware of the importance of their own culture.
These findings add to previous evidence on the transformative potential of mobility (Brown, 2009; Brown & Brown, 2009;

189
C.I. Nada and J. Legutko International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

Kumi-Yeboah & James, 2014; Nada et al., 2018; Ritz, 2010). Even if their implications for a stronger sense of ‘Europeanness’ are
unclear, a change is evident in the interviewees’ processes of reflection and reference frameworks. Given that all of the interviews took
place several years after the participants’ actual exchange experiences, these data suggest that such changes can have a long-term
effect. Both the impact of longer-term study sojourns (Morrice, 2014; Nada et al., 2018) and the impact of shorter term interna­
tional experiences (less than one year abroad) have been documented by previous research (Chwialkowska, 2020; Strange & Gibson,
2017). Our study complements these findings by indicating that shorter-term international experiences can result in significant
changes in people’s lives in terms of career plans and opportunities, personal growth, and intercultural competences. This was clearly
depicted in the retrospective accounts of the Erasmus alumni that we interviewed. However, more comprehensive research on the
Erasmus programme that uses the theory of transformative learning as analytical lens is needed, to better understand the impact of this
experience on young people’s personal transformations and identity reconfigurations.
Despite reservations expressed in previous research regarding a potential tendency for international students to remain within
familiar circles and not to expose themselves to new opportunities (Chwialkowska, 2020; Kimmel & Volet, 2012), a somewhat opposite
experience was reported by our research participants, who enthusiastically describe encounters with peers from different cultures.
Indeed, most participants were very adamant about the value of their international mobility experiences and advocated strongly for
Erasmus to be provided to a greater number of young people.
Even though our data provide a fairly positive view of the outcomes of international mobility, caution should be applied when
interpreting these findings. Certainly, different students will perceive their Erasmus sojourns differently and will attach different
meanings to their experiences. In this sense, “allowing individual narratives space further allows us to recognise that if something is
happening among a group of people, the same thing is not happening to each person” (Scutt & Hobson, 2013, p. 22). Differences
between individual students should prompt higher education institutions from both the home and the host countries to provide
guidance and support throughout the Erasmus mobility, given that not all students may translate their international experiences
directly into learning (Chwialkowska, 2020). Indeed, the challenges faced by international students are numerous (Nada & Araújo,
2018, 2019) – and having to deal with such challenges without institutional support might end up affecting the overall quality of their
mobility experience, potentially jeopardising its (transformative) learning potential.

Declaration of interest statement

Declarations of interest: none.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT), under CEEC Individual 2018 (grant
no. CEECIND/00433/2018). This work was also supported by the Portuguese Government, through the FCT, under CIIE’s multi-annual
funding [grants no. UID/CED/00167/2013, UIDB/00167/2020, and UIDP/00167/2020].

References

Amendola, A., & Restaino, M. (2017). An evaluation study on students’ international mobility experience. Quality & Quantity, 51(2), 525–544. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11135-016-0421-3
Asoodar, M., Atai, M. R., & Baten, L. (2017). Successful erasmus experience: Analysing perceptions before, during and after Erasmus. Journal of Research in
International Education, 16(1), 80–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240917704331
Bracht, O., Engel, C., Janson, K., Over, A., Schomburg, H., & Teichler, U. (2006). The professional value of Erasmus mobility: Final report. International Centre for
Higher Education Research (INCHER). Kassel: University of Kassel.
Brown, L. (2009). The transformative power of the international sojourn: An ethnographic study of the international student experience. Annals of Tourism Research,
36(3), 502–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2009.03.002
Brown, L., & Brown, J. (2009). Out of chaos, into a new identity: The transformative power of the international sojourn. Existential Analysis, 20(2), 341–362.
Brown, L., & Graham, I. (2009). The discovery of the self through the academic sojourn. Existential Analysis, 20(1), 79–94.
Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Cankaya, E. M., Liew, J., & De Freitas, C. P. P. (2018). Curiosity and autonomy as factors that promote personal growth in the cross-cultural transition process of
international students. Journal of International Students, 8(4), 1694–1708. https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v8i4.225
Carroll, J., & Ryan, J. (2007). Teaching international students: Improving learning for all. Routledge.
Chang, W.-W., Yuan, Y.-H., & Chuang, Y.-T. (2013). The relationship between international experience and cross-cultural adaptability. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 37(2), 268–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2012.08.002
Chao, M. M., Kung, F. Y., & Yao, D. J. (2015). Understanding the divergent effects of multicultural exposure. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 47, 78–88.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.03.032
Chwialkowska, A. (2020). Maximizing cross-cultural learning from exchange study abroad programs: Transformative learning theory. Journal of Studies in International
Education, 24(5), 535–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315320906163
Council of the European Union. (2009). Council conclusions of 12 May 2009 on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (‘ET 2020′ ).
〈https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A52009XG0528%2801%29〉.
Cushing, D. F., Pennings, M., Willox, D., Gomez, R., Dyson, C., & Coombs, C. (2019). Measuring intangible outcomes can be problematic: The challenge of assessing
learning during international short-term study experiences. Active Learning in Higher Education, 20(3), 203–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417732259
De Wit, H. (2002). Internationalization of higher education in the United States of America and Europe: A historical, comparative, and conceptual analysis. Greenwood
Publishing Group.
DeGraaf, D., Slagter, C., Larsen, K., & Ditta, E. (2013). The long-term personal and professional impacts of participating in study abroad programs. Frontiers: The
Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 23(1), 42–59. https://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v23i1.328
Dunne, C. (2013). Exploring motivations for intercultural contact among host country university students: An Irish case study. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 37(5), 567–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.06.003

190
C.I. Nada and J. Legutko International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

Engel, C. (2010). The impact of Erasmus mobility on the professional career: Empirical results of international studies on temporary student and teaching staff
mobility. Belgeo. Revue Belge de Géographie, 4, 351–363. https://doi.org/10.4000/belgeo.6399
England, K. V. (1994). Getting personal: Reflexivity, positionality, and feminist research. The Professional Geographer, 46(1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-
0124.1994.00080.x
Erichsen, E. A. (2011). Learning for Change: Transforming International Experience as Identity Work. Journal of Transformative Education, 9(2), 109–133. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1541344611428227
European Commission. (2014). The Erasmus Impact Study, Effects of mobility on the skills and employability of students and the internationalisation of higher
education institutions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
European Commission. (2017). Strengthening European Identity through Education and Culture. 〈https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/
communication-strengthening-european-identity-education-culture_en.pdf〉. Accessed December 15, 2021.
European Commission. (2020). Achieving the European Education Area by 2025—Communication. 〈https://ec.europa.eu/education/resources-and-tools/document-
library/eea-communication-sept2020_en〉. Accessed December 15, 2021.
Forsey, M., Broomhall, S., & Davis, J. (2012). Broadening the mind? Australian student reflections on the experience of overseas study. Journal of Studies in
International Education, 16(2), 128–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315311407511
Gill, S. (2007). Overseas students’ intercultural adaptation as intercultural learning: A transformative framework. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International
Education, 37(2), 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920601165512
Hall, E. T. (1959). The silent language (3rd ed.). CT: Fawcett.
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1049732305276687
Juvan, E., & Lesjak, M. (2011). Erasmus Exchange Program: Opportunity for professional growth or sponsored vacations. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 23
(2), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2011.10697003
Kelly, D. (2010). Student learning in an international setting. New Directions for Higher Education, 2010(150), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.393
Kennedy, P. (2010). Mobility, flexible lifestyles and cosmopolitanism: EU postgraduates in Manchester. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36(3), 465–482.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13691830903426838
Kimmel, K., & Volet, S. (2012). Understanding motivation, engagement and experiences of intercultural interactions at university: A person-in-multiple contexts
perspective. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 27(2), 227–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-011-0084-3
Kumi–Yeboah, A., & James, W. (2014). Transformative learning experiences of international graduate students from Asian countries. Journal of Transformative
Education, 12(1), 25–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344614538120
Larson, C. L. (1997). Re-presenting the subject: Problems in personal narrative inquiry. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(4), 455–470. https://
doi.org/10.1080/095183997237034
Lilley, K., Barker, M., & Harris, N. (2015). Exploring the process of global citizen learning and the student mind-set. Journal of Studies in International Education, 19(3),
225–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315314547822
Maciejewska, M. (2018). Opportunities of transformative student learning–The case of the Erasmus+ programme. SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION.
Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, 1, 350–360. 〈https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2018vol1.3301〉.
Madison, G. (2006). Existential Migration. Conceptualising out of the experiential depths of choosing to leave “home. Existential Analysis, 17(2), 238–260.
Mastora, V., Panagopoulou, N., & Raikou, N. (2020). Erasmus student mobility and Emerging Adulthood: Implications on students’ development. Educational Journal
of the University of Patras UNESCO Chair, 7(2), 87–99. https://doi.org/10.26220/une.3379
Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative and emancipatory learning. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1997(74), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.7401
Montuori, A., & Fahim, U. (2004). Cross-cultural encounter as an opportunity for personal growth. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 44(2), 243–265. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0022167804263414
Moore-Cox, A. (2013). Decision makers’experiences of collaborating with research teams on federally funded health research initiatives: An interpretive descriptive qualitative
study. A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies, McMaster University.
Morgan, A. D. (2010). Journeys Into Transformation: Travel to An “Other” Place as a Vehicle for Transformative Learning. Journal of Transformative Education, 8(4),
246–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344611421491
Morrice, L. (2014). The learning migration nexus: Towards a conceptual understanding. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, 5(2),
149–159. https://doi.org/10.3384/rela.2000-7426.rela9044
Murphy-Lejeune, E. A. (2003). An Experience of Interculturality: Student Travellers Abroad. In G. Alred, M. Bryam, & M. Fleming (Eds.), Intercultural Experience and
Education (pp. 101–112). Multilingual Matters LTD.
Nada, C. I., & Araújo, H. C. (2017). The multicultural experience of international students in Portugal: A narrative approach. Journal for Multicultural Education, 11(3),
176–188. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-09-2016-0049
Nada, C. I., & Araújo, H. C. (2018). Migration and education: A narrative approach to the experience of foreign students in Portugal. London Review of Education, 16(2),
308–324. https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.16.2.10
Nada, C. I., & Araújo, H. C. (2019). ‘When you welcome students without borders, you need a mentality without borders’ internationalisation of higher education:
Evidence from Portugal. Studies in Higher Education, 44(9), 1591–1604. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1458219
Nada, C. I., Montgomery, C., & Araújo, H. C. (2018). ‘You went to Europe and returned different’: Transformative learning experiences of international students in
Portugal. European Educational Research Journal, 17(5), 696–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904118765334
Nielsen, N. (2020). The Erasmus Learning Journey: Students’ Experiences from a Mobility Period Abroad [PhD Thesis]. Department of Education, Stockholm
University.
Otten, M. (2003). Intercultural learning and diversity in higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 7(1), 12–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1028315302250177
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (Third). SAGE Publications.
Peacock, N., & Harrison, N. (2009). “It’s so much easier to go with what’s easy”: “Mindfulness” and the discourse between home and international students in the
United Kingdom. Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(4), 487–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315308319508
Ritz, A. A. (2010). International students and transformative learning in a multicultural formal educational context. The Educational Forum, 74(2), 158–166. https://
doi.org/10.1080/00131721003608497
Schamber, L. (2000). Time-line interviews and inductive content analysis: Their effectiveness for exploring cognitive behaviors. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, 51(8), 734–744. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(2000)51:8<734::AID-ASI60>3.0.CO;2-3
Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 170–183). Sage publications.
Scutt, C., & Hobson, J. (2013). The stories we need: Anthropology, philosophy, narrative and higher education research. Higher Education Research & Development, 32
(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.751088
Shaw, J. (2009). The diversity paradox: Does student diversity enhance or challenge excellence? Journal of Further and Higher Education, 33(4), 321–331. https://doi.
org/10.1080/03098770903266018
Sigalas, E. (2010a). Cross-border mobility and European identity: The effectiveness of intergroup contact during the ERASMUS year abroad. European Union Politics,
11(2), 241–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116510363656
Sigalas, E. (2010b). The role of personal benefits in public support for the EU: Learning from the Erasmus students. West European Politics, 33(6), 1341–1361. https://
doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2010.508912
Strange, H., & Gibson, H. J. (2017). An investigation of experiential and transformative learning in study abroad programs. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of
Study Abroad, 29(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.36366/frontiers.v29i1.387

191
C.I. Nada and J. Legutko International Journal of Intercultural Relations 87 (2022) 183–192

Stronkhorst, R. (2005). Learning outcomes of international mobility at two Dutch institutions of higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 9(4),
292–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315305280938
Taylor, E. W. (1994). Intercultural competency: A transformative learning process. Adult Education Quarterly, 44(3), 154–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/
074171369404400303
Taylor, E. W. (2008). Transformative learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 119, 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.301
Touraine, A. (2000). Can we live together?: Equality and difference. Stanford University Press.
Van Mol, C. (2018). Becoming Europeans: The relationship between student exchanges in higher education, European citizenship and a sense of European identity.
Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 31(4), 449–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2018.1495064
Walters, C., Charles, J., & Bingham, S. (2017). Impact of short-term study abroad experiences on transformative learning: A comparison of programs at 6 weeks.
Journal of Transformative Education, 15(2), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344616670034
Wee, D. (2019). Generation Z talking: Transformative experience in educational travel. Journal of Tourism Futures, 5(2), 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-02-
2019-0019
Wilson, I. (2011). What should we expect of ‘Erasmus generations’? Journal of Common Market Studies, 49(5), 1113–1140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
5965.2010.02158.x

192