International Mobility in
Dutch Higher Education
Mapping
Mapping
Contents
1
Introduction and summary
7
1.1 Introduction 8
1.2 Mobility from a Dutch perspective 9
1.3 Mobility from an international perspective 11
1.4 Theme: Internationalisation between secondary school and university: the gap year 12
1.5 Reference guide 12
2
Diploma mobility to and from the Netherlands
13
2.1 Inbound diploma mobility
14
2.1.1 Developments in inbound diploma mobility 15
2.1.2 Countries of origin 5
2.1.3 Ratio of male to female students 20
2.1.4 Bachelor’s or master’s degree programmes 20
2.1.5 Fields of study 23
2.1.6 Higher education institutions 27
2.1.7 Students from Neso target countries 30
2.2 Outbound diploma mobility 36
2.2.1 Developments in outbound mobility 37
2.2.2 Destination countries 37
3
Credit mobility to and from the Netherlands
41
3.1 Inbound credit mobility 42
3.1.1 Developments in inbound mobility 43
3.1.2 Inbound credit mobility under the Erasmus Programme 43
3.2 Outbound credit mobility 48
3.2.1 Developments in outbound credit mobility 49
3.2.2 Ratio of male to female students 51
3.2.3 Fields of study 52
3.2.4 Higher education institutions 52
3.2.5 Work placement or study programme, or both 52
3.2.6 Outbound credit mobility under the Erasmus programme 56
3.2.7 Effects of experience gained abroad during the study programme 59
4
Total mobility
61
4.1 International students in the Netherlands 64
4.2 Dutch students abroad 68
5
Dutch mobility from an international perspective
71
5.1 The Netherlands’ position in the international student market 74
5.1.1 Patterns of international mobility 75
5.1.2 The position of the Netherlands 77
5.2 Developments in the Neso target countries 84
5.2.1 Inbound and outbound mobility 85
5.2.2 Brazil 86 5.2.3 China 89 5.2.4 India 90 5.2.5 Indonesia 91 5.2.6 Mexico 92 5.2.7 Russia 92 5.2.8 South Korea 93 5.2.9 Taiwan 94 5.2.10 Thailand 95 5.2.11 Vietnam 96 5.2.12 Conclusion 97 2 3
5.3 Credit mobility 100
5.4 Lecturer and researcher mobility 104
5.4.1 Mobility to the Netherlands 105
5.4.2 Mobility from the Netherlands 106
6
Internationalisation between secondary school
and university: the gap year
107
6.1 Introduction 108
6.2 Going abroad in the gap year 110
6.2.1 Trends in gap year mobility – figures 111
6.2.2 Reasons for taking a gap year abroad 111
6.2.3 Developments 113
6.3 Utilising the gap year in higher education 114
6.3.1 Participant gains 115
6.3.2 The role of the gap year in government policy and education institution policy 115
6.3.3 Relationship with internationalisation policy in Dutch education 117
6.3.4 Recommendations 118
Appendix 121
7.1 Nuffic programme mobility 122
7.1.1 Inbound mobility 123
7.1.2 Outbound mobility 123
7.2 Definitions and methods 126
7.2.1 Mobility as part of internationalisation 127
7.2.2 Types of mobility 127
7.2.3 Diploma mobility and credit mobility 127
7.2.4 Mobility source data 127
7.2.5 In short: what do we know, and what do we not know? 131
Abbreviations 134
Publication information 136
6 7
Introduction
and summary
1
1.1 Introduction
Nuffic has produced the annual Mapping Mobility report since 2010. The aim of the publication is to inform you of recent developments in the internationalisation of Dutch higher education. This report provides an update of recent developments in student mobility to and from the Netherlands and, where possible, offers additional information on other types of internationalisation. The publication therefore contains multiple diagrams and tables that reflect internationalisation developments. We also aim to put Dutch internationalisation into an international context. Every year we therefore analyse what is happening in other countries to gain insight into how the Netherlands is performing and to identify trends. Moreover, each year we explore one specific theme in greater depth. This year’s theme is ‘Internatio nalisation between secondary school and university: the gap year’.
The supply of data on mobility flows and other types of internationalisation continues to be a concern. We still frequently encounter problems in our endeavours to collect accurate data that can also be used for the purpose of international comparison. Issues relating to definitions and a lack of records mean that charting international mobility remains a matter of meticulously inter preting information and making careful decisions based on the available data. These issues are explained in greater detail in the appendix.
Key developments
• The number of international students is growing worldwide. This trend is also evident in the Netherlands, which is progressively catching up with the European outbound mobility average.
• Worldwide, Europe remains the hub for international student mobility although East Asia continues to grow in importance. • The number of Dutch students studying
abroad now reflects solid growth, partly on account of the later introduction of the bachelor’smaster’s degree structure and other Bologna measures in the surrounding countries. The implementation of portable student grants and loans has spurred Dutch students to study abroad at almost 1,600 institutions in 86 countries since 2007. • Students from Germany form the largest group
of international students in the Netherlands and the imbalance in student mobility between the Netherlands and Germany continues to grow. However, there are signs of diminishing growth in the number of German students studying in the Netherlands. The decline is offset by larger numbers of students from Bulgaria, Greece, the United Kingdom, Italy and France, which has increased the diversity of international students in the Netherlands. • The number of international students enrolling
at Dutch research universities is growing at a faster pace than the numbers of students entering Dutch universities of applied sciences, as is the number enrolling on master’s rather than bachelor’s degree programmes.
1 Nuffic operates a number of Netherlands Education Support Offices (Nuffic Neso offices) to support Dutch higher education abroad. There are Nuffic Neso offices in Brazil, China, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia, Thailand, Vietnam and South Korea, and Nuffic Neso Desks in India and Taipei.
1.2
Mobility from
a Dutch perspective
The number of international students rose once again between 201011 and 201112, with the percentage of the total number of enrolled students up from 8.1% to 8.4%.
The percentage of international students that make up the student population in academic or researchoriented higher education (weten schappelijk onderwijs, WO) has climbed in the last five years from 7.7% to 11.2%. In the same period, the percentage of international students pursuing higher professional education (hoger beroepsonderwijs, HBO) rose from 6.0% to 6.8%. In terms of numbers, this equates to 6,350 additional students in higher professional education as opposed to 11,000 additional students in researchoriented higher education. The number of international students in research oriented higher education is rapidly approaching the number of international students in higher professional education.
Germany remains the main country of origin for international students. However, the growth in student numbers from Germany seems to be diminishing and the German share of international students in the Netherlands has declined marginally to 45%. Austria surpassed the Netherlands in 2008 as the main destination country for German students. The number of German enrolments is followed at some distance by enrolments from China and Belgium, which in turn are still well ahead of the growing numbers
of students from Bulgaria, Greece, the United Kingdom, Italy and France. The continued growth in student numbers from the latter countries appears to be offsetting the diminishing growth in student numbers from Germany.
Based on residence permit data, the number of
students from the Neso target countries1 who
have studied abroad in the Netherlands since 2007 jumped from 2,500 to 10,500 students registered in the Netherlands in 2012. The difference between the percentages of female and male students of foreign nationality has steadily increased in favour of female students. Fiftynine per cent of international students pursuing higher professional education are women, while women account for 54% in academic higher education.
Almost three quarters of the international students pursuing governmentfunded education were enrolled in a bachelor’s degree programme, the majority of whom were higher professional education students. In academic higher education, the number of international master’s students exceeded the number of international bachelor’s students in 201011 for the first time ever.
Although Agriculture remains the most inter nationalised field of study in academic higher education – recording the highest percentage of international students among the student population pursuing this field of study – the
majority of international students pursuing academic higher education can be found in the field of Economics. In higher professional education, the most international field of study is Language & Culture, thanks to the contribution of the arts disciplines; here too, however, the majority of international students have opted for the much wider field of Economics. The Gerrit Rietveld Academy this year again attracted the highest percentage of international students, with Maastricht University, Codarts, the University of the Arts in The Hague and Hotelschool The Hague – International University of Hospitality Management occupying second through to fifth place. In terms of absolute numbers of international students, Maastricht University again ranks number one, followed at a distance by Fontys University of Applied Sciences, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, the University of Groningen and Delft University of Technology. The University of Amsterdam’s student population reflects the most diversity in nationalities.
In addition to inbound mobility, the Netherlands also has its share of outbound mobility. In 200809 a larger number of Dutch students – over 18,100 – enrolled at universities abroad. In terms of percentage of the total student population in the Netherlands, the number also rose, from 2.7% to 2.9%, reflecting an upward trend. The main destination countries are the United Kingdom, Belgium, the United States and Germany.
The growth in the number of students taking advantage of the Dutch student grants and loans system to study abroad seems to continue to be slowing down somewhat, as is the number of countries where they are studying. The preferred countries are Belgium, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, Sweden and Portugal. No less than 87% of students funded by the Dutch student grants and loans system study abroad in these countries. There are signs of diminishing growth in outbound mobility particularly to the AngloSaxon countries whereas other countries – due to the continued growth in outbound mobility – now rank as the top four destination countries. The portability of student grants and loans has yielded a broad range of international experiences: since 2007 Dutch students have embarked on study programmes at almost 1,600 different institutions in 86 different countries. In 2007 Dutch students studied in only 14 different countries pursuing 134 study programmes.
The above data relates to students who enrolled on a full study programme. This is referred to as diploma mobility. Mobility during a study programme is also referred to as credit mobility. Credit mobility, particularly outbound credit mobility, is a key indicator of the level of inter nationalisation of a study programme. In line with the Bologna agreements, credit mobility is preferably measured among graduates. The Netherlands is one of the few countries that actually does so: once a year among
2 EFTA countries: Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Switzerland. higher professional education graduates and
once every two years among academic higher education graduates. After a sudden dip, the most recent higher professional education figures are again showing a limited increase, moving above the 20% standard for graduates with studyabroad experience. Students gained the most international experience at Hotelschool The Hague – International University of Hospitality Management and HAS Den Bosch University of Applied Sciences. Around 90% of students graduating at these institutions boasted study abroad experience. Unfortunately, there are no comparable figures for inbound credit mobility.
1.3
Mobility from an
international perspective
According to the latest UNESCO data, the number of students studying abroad rose from 1.7 million in 1995 worldwide to almost 3.7 million in 200809. Half of the outbound students studied abroad in five countries in 200809: 18% studied abroad in the United States, 10% in the United Kingdom and 7% in Australia, Germany and France. Close to 41% had a connection with the EU as a whole: the students studied in the EU, or originated from the EU or travelled between EU countries for study purposes. The centre of excellence for diploma mobility seems to be undergoing a gradual shift towards East Asia and the Pacific.
The Netherlands’ share of the global international student market, measured as a percentage of all international students worldwide studying
in the Netherlands, rose from 0.7% to 1.2% between 2000 and 2009. Despite the increase, the percentage of international students as part of the total student population in the Netherlands is still below the EU average. Compared with other Western European countries, however, the Netherlands hosts a relatively high percentage of international students from within the EU and
the EFTA countries.2 German students account
for the majority of the inbound flow.
In terms of outbound diploma mobility, i.e. the number of students following an entire study programme abroad, expressed as a percentage of the student population in their own country, the Netherlands also does not achieve a high score relative to other EU countries. However, the percentage has been growing since 2004. The increase is mostly determined by supply given the fact that Dutch students – at least until recently – were quite satisfied with education and conditions in the Netherlands. On the one hand, supply has increased owing to the – some what slower – introduction of the bachelor’s master’s degree structure in many of the neighbouring countries. On the other hand, the portability of student grants and loans that has been in place since 2007 facilitates the study abroad option.
The number of students from all Neso countries pursuing a study abroad has been growing since 200708. This trend has in part contributed positively to the number of outbound students from the Neso target countries studying in the
Netherlands. The number climbed from 2,500 to 10,500 students between 200708 and 201112.
1.4
Theme:
Internationalisa-tion between secondary school
and university: the gap year
The gap year – a term commonly used in Anglo Saxon countries – refers to the year out between finishing secondary education and commencing tertiary education. Around 9% of Dutch students take a gap year (which incidentally sometimes exceeds one year). One of the main reasons for doing so is that students hope it will be beneficial for their ultimate choice of study programme although nonstudyrelated reasons also contribute. Almost 3% of Dutch students travel abroad in the gap year to gain international experience. The percentage differs for academic higher education students (5%) and higher professional education students (2%) and moreover depends on their field of study. University College and Language & Culture students enjoyed above average travel in the gap year whereas Engineering students travelled less. Around 8% of students in academic higher education pursuing Language & Culture travelled prior to commencing a study programme. Students who opted for the inclusion of a gap year affirmed that it had helped them in their ultimate choice of study programme. As corro borated by research, the dropout rate in the first academic year is significantly lower among students who had taken a gap year. For students in academic higher education this is attributable
to having travelled abroad in the gap year, and for students in higher professional education to having worked during that period.
Governments take different approaches to the gap year phenomenon. In the United Kingdom the gap year is funded, subject to certain conditions and students can obtain recognition of their acquired competencies. By contrast, in Denmark, where many Danish students do in fact take a gap year, a discouragement policy applies. In some cases, for instance in Australia, universities seek to embed a gap year in a study programme.
The question is: how does the Netherlands approach the gap year?
1.5
Reference guide
Chapters 2 and 3 describe developments in student mobility to and from the Netherlands based on explanatory diagrams. Chapter 4 discusses the total flows of inbound and outbound students in the Netherlands. Chapter 5 puts Dutch mobility into an international perspective while Chapter 6 elaborates on the theme of ‘Internationalisation between secondary school and university: the gap year’.
12 13
Diploma mobility
to and from
the Netherlands
2
2.1
Inbound
diploma mobility
Diagram 01International students in government-funded higher education in the Netherlands, 2007-2012 Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 % of total enrolments in the Netherlands Number of international students 6.6% 38,726 7.2% 43,216 7.7% 48,567 8.1% 53,129 56,131 8.4% 14 15
2.1.1 Developments in
inbound diploma mobility
As is usual, the inbound diploma mobility figures for the last five years have been revised and updated. The figure for international students in 201011 was increased by one thousand whereas the figures for 200910, 200809 and 200708 were lowered by several hundred. Notwithstanding these adjustments, the trend of continued growth described earlier remains unchanged. An absolute and relative increase has again been seen between 201011 and 201112. The number of international students in the Netherlands climbed from 53,129 to 56,131 in the above period. In addition, the percentage of the total number of students of foreign nationality enrolled in governmentfunded education was up from 8.1% to 8.4%.
The growth in the share of international students in higher professional education has fallen since the 200506 academic year. In 201112, 6.8% of the student population in higher professional education were nonDutch, representing an increase of 0.1% compared with 201011. Growth in academic higher education remained stable. In 201112, 11.2% of the student population comprised nonDutch nationals, representing an increase of 0.8% relative to 201011. Currently, 51% of international students in governmentfunded higher education are pursuing a higher professional education study programme, while 49% are pursuing an academic higher education study programme.
Diagram 01 Diagram 02
Mobility from countries whose citizens need a residence permit
Since 2004, information has been available on the number of students who come to the Netherlands from countries whose citizens need a residence permit as well as on the percentage of this group who stay in the Netherlands for a prolonged period of time.
Diagram 03 shows that the number of residence permits issued between 2010 and 2011 grew by 390 rather than by 770 permits, which is slightly less than between 2009 and 2010. Growth is apparently levelling off mainly due to a slight decline in the number of students extending their residence permit for the purpose of pursuing a multiyear study programme. Just as the previous year, an increase of around 500 new residence permits was recorded, bringing the total to 10,550.
Diagram 03 (see page 16) Diagram 04 (see page 16)
2.1.2 Countries of origin
Enrolled students
Germany is the main supplier of international students enrolled in governmentfunded, main stream higher education in the Netherlands. As a result of the decline in the growth of student numbers from Germany by almost half, their share of the total international student population
Diagram 02
International students in government-funded academic higher education and higher professional education, in numbers and as a percentage of the respective total student populations, 2007-2012
Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 % of HBO % of WO
International students enrolled in higher professional education (HBO) International students enrolled in academic higher education (WO) 0 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 7.7% 6.0% 8.7% 6.3% 9.6% 6.5% 10.4% 6.7% 11.2% 6.8% 22,408 16,318 24,054 19,162 26,329 22,238 28,066 25,063 28,757 27,374 % 14 15
Diagram 03
Number of new residence permits issued or extensions granted to students or student trainees from outside the EU-27 and EFTA, 2007-2011
Source: IND, 2012 (revised figures; purpose of stay: study, including a supplementary examination)
5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 Total New Extended 7,845 8,229 9,031 9,195 10,040 10,552 7,994 8,385 9,559 9,321 15,839 16,614 18,590 19,361 19,747 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 Total Study purposes Work placement 15,839 15,501 338 16,614 16,280 334 18,590 18,187 19,361 19,059 19,747 19,437 403 302 310 Diagram 04
Number of residence permits issued to students or student trainees from outside the EU-27 and EFTA, 2007-11
Source: IND, 2012 (revised figures; purpose of stay: study, including a supplementary examination)
fell slightly. Fortyfive per cent of international students now originate from Germany. The Netherlands was also the main destination country for German students from 2005 through 2007. In 2007, 18% of outbound German diploma mobility studied in the Netherlands, while 16% chose Austria. However, in 2008 the number of German students pursuing studies in Austria surged by 35%, ousting the Netherlands from its spot as the main destination country. In 2008, 19.5% of German students opted to study abroad in Austria and 18.5% in the Netherlands. Just as in 2007, German students chose the United Kingdom as their third destination country in 2008; 12.5% of outbound German students
pursued studies there.3
The number of students from China, the main country of origin after Germany, fell between 2005 and 2008 but is again showing an upward trend. Belgium remains stable in third place. Diagram 05 (see page 18)
Diagram 06 (see page 18)
There is more movement among the group of countries ranking after the first three. Bulgaria had previously broken away from the group and is now followed by Greece and the United Kingdom, which in turn is followed by Italy, a newcomer, closely followed by France in eighth position. After France come Poland, Turkey, Romania, Indonesia and Spain, each with more than 800 students in governmentfunded higher education.
To gain insight into shortterm developments, we have looked at the percentage changes that have occurred since the previous year. In the EU the number of students from Greece and the Baltic States reflected the strongest growth, with Greece recording an increase of 24%, Estonia 23%, Lithuania 22% and Latvia 20%. The United Kingdom, Austria, Slovakia, Italy, Cyprus and Ireland recorded growth percentages between 1020%. Outside the EU, Morocco (+103 students, or +17%) and the United States (+60 students, or +11%) reflected notable growth figures. By contrast, the Japanese student population in Dutch governmentfunded education continued to shrink (31 students, or 26%), and has virtually halved since 200607.
The past six years have seen a catchup effort by students from the twelve newest EU member states. Their numbers grew by more than 144% compared with 75% for the EU27 in general. Fourteen per cent of students from the EU27 originate from the twelve recent entrants to the
EU.4 These students are enrolled in government
funded higher education. No information is available on EU (and EFTA) students in private higher education.
Students holding a residence permit We looked at countries for which at least 100 residence permits were issued to students in 2011. In this group, the number of students originating from South Korea, Mexico, Russia, the United States and Ukraine rose by more than 10% between 2010 and 2011. By contrast,
3 DAAD, HIS, WBV. (2008, 2009, 2010, 2011). Wissen schaft weltoffen, Daten und Fakten zur Internationalität von Studium und Forschung in Deutschland. Bielefeld: DAAD. 4 Cyprus, the Czech Republic,
Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia acceded in 2004; Bulgaria and Romania acceded in 2007.
Diagram 05 and 06
Top three countries and top four to eight countries of origin for diploma mobility, 2007-2012 Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
top 3 top 4 to 8 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 711 664 792 622 812 1,017 736 799 692 853 1,260 834 848 809 922 1,444 1,069 945 923 946 1,602 1,414 1,142 1,043 1,020 Bulgaria Greece United Kingdom Italy France 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 16,469 3,334 2,179 19,155 3,405 2,158 22,109 3,787 2,262 24,093 4,145 2,359 25,032 4,313 2,418 Germany China Belgium 18 19
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 Mexico Iran Suriname Russia South Korea India Turkey Indonesia United States China 4,146 4,435 5,102 5,435 5,717 1,011 1,228 1,492 1,496 1,660 1,332 1,281 1,230 1,182 1,198 728 724 847 935 843 480 524 658 749 804 344 389 410 542 654 342 427 447 497 576 559 547 568 568 543 234 316 412 456 501 244 275 291 338 404 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Diagram 07
Residence permits issued: top ten countries of origin in 2007-2011 Source: IND, 2012 (revised figures)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Female students enrolled in higher education (HO) Male students enrolled in higher education (HO) Female students enrolled in academic higher education (WO) Male students enrolled in academic higher education (WO) Female students enrolled in higher professional education (HBO) Male students enrolled in higher professional education (HBO)
42.3% 41.1% 40.9% 40.4% 40.7% 57.7% 58.9% 59.1% 59.6% 59.3% 45.9% 46.1% 46.1% 45.7% 46.2% 54.1% 53.9% 53.9% 54.3% 53.8% 43.8% 43.3% 43.3% 42.9% 43.4% 56.2% 56.7% 56.7% 57.1% 56.6% 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Diagram 08
International students in government-funded education according to gender, 2007-2012 Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
student numbers from Tanzania, Kenya, Nepal, Cameroon, Zimbabwe, Ghana, Ethiopia and Thailand dropped by more than 10% (with Tanzania and Kenya seeing their share plunge by more than 20%). Even though the number of students from Morocco and Turkey in governmentfunded education is rising, no increase has been seen in the number of residence permits issued to students from these countries. The reverse is true: the upward trend for Turkish students was interrupted the previous year, plummeting suddenly by almost 10% while the number of residence permits for Moroccan students has definitely been falling since 2005. Suriname enrolments too were up until the previous year, but the number of residence permits has remained reasonably stable since the decline seen between 2006 and 2007. From a regional perspective, the number of residence permits for students from the United States and Canada has risen by 264% since 2005 and by 142% for students from Oceania, by 34% for students from Asia and by 2% for students from Africa. The figure for Oceania rose sharply until 2008 but was followed by a moderate decline, while the figure for Africa grew until 2009 but has since continued to fall. Diagram 07 (see page 19)
2.1.3 Ratio of male to
female students
The ratio of male to female international students in governmentfunded higher education has changed in recent years. In the 199899 academic
year the ratio was 54% male to 46% female students. With the 200001 academic year marking a turning point, the ratio recorded since 200809 is 57% female to 43% male students. In higher professional education over 59% of students are female while women account for 54% of students in academic higher education. Diagram 08 (see page 19)
2.1.4 Bachelor’s or master’s
degree programmes
The majority of international students in governmentfunded education pursue a bachelor’s degree programme. This is primarily attributable to students in higher professional education where almost all international students pursue a bachelor’s degree programme. In academic higher education the number of master’s students exceeded the number of bachelor’s students in 201011 (revised data).
Diagram 09 Diagram 10 Diagram 11
As expected, international students in higher professional education pursue all CROHO components, particularly bachelor’s degree programmes. Only in the Language & Culture and Education components a notable percentage of these students are pursuing a master’s degree programme. Bachelor’s programmes are only pursued in the crosssectoral academic higher education component (at the University Colleges) while most international students who are studying Behaviour & Society are enrolled on
14,722 (26.2%) 41,273 (73.5%) 73 (0.1%) 63 (0.1%) Bachelor’s Master’s Post-master’s Undivided Diagram 09
International students in government-funded higher education by phase, 2011-12
Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 8,652 7,301 41 324 10,096 8,799 49 218 11,409 10,626 44 159 12,390 12,513 59 101 13,603 13,635 73 63 Bachelor’s Master’s Post-master’s Undivided Total
jaar
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Bachelor
6.618
7.773
8.859
10.336
11.286
Master
4.638
5.857
7.410
8.919
9.958
Ongedeeld
1.474
668
354
246
189
Post-master
46
50
42
53
45
Totaal
12.776
14.348
16.665
19.554
21.478
16,318 19,162 22,238 25,063 27,374 Bachelor’s Master’s Total 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 21,383 1,025 22,993 1,061 25,258 1,071 26,939 1,127 27,670 1,087 22,408 24,054 26,329 28,066 28,757 Diagram 10International students in government-funded academic higher education by phase, 2007-2012
Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
Diagram 11
International students in government-funded higher professional education by phase, 2007-2012
Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
0 20 40 60 80 100 By phase Natural Sciences Agriculture & Natural Environment Law Engineering Language & Culture Behaviour & Society Healthcare Education Economics Cross-sectoral 2.3%0.0% 97.7% 0.0% 64.7% 0.0% 19.7% 15.6% 81.9% 12.0% 0.0% 6.1% 61.8% 0.6% 18.5% 19.2% 36.4% 0.1% 43.4% 20.2% 49.8% 14.3% 16.5% 19.3% 45.5% 0.0% 15.1% 39.4% 0.0% 0.0% 47.2% 52.8% 26.7% 0.0% 9.1% 64.2% 0.0% 0.0% 24.4% 75.6% 49,3% 1,9% 24,2% 24,5% Higher professional education bachelor’s Higher professional education master’s Academic higher education bachelor’s Academic higher education master’s Diagram 12
International students in government-funded higher education by type of study, and phase by CROHO component, 2011-12
Source: DUOCFI, 2012
The percentage of international students as a share of the total CROHO component population, which is an indicator of the degree of international orientation, shows a completely different picture. The crosssectoral category, which refers to University Colleges, is the most notable category. In Agriculture & Natural Environment too, the percentage of international students is above 20%, while the percentage in the CROHO component of Economics is almost 20%. Behaviour & Society as well as Engineering follow at some distance reflecting percentages of around 12%. Education concludes the list accounting for only 4.3% of international students. The only component showing signs of stabilisation is Agriculture & Natural Environment while continued growth is evident in all other sectors.
Diagram 14 (see page 25) Diagram 15 (see page 25)
The most popular component in government funded higher professional education in terms of student numbers is Economics, which again saw a growing number of international students in the 201112 academic year. By contrast, the number of international students studying the Language & Culture component once again declined in the 201112 academic year relative to the previous year. The Healthcare field of study also saw student numbers drop for the first time.
At 23.5%, the Language & Culture component (art academies) reflects the highest percentage of international students as a share of the total component population in higher professional a bachelor’s degree programme. On the other
hand, the reverse applies to Agriculture & Natural Environment, and Natural Sciences and Engineering, the components in which the largest majority of international students are pursuing a master’s degree programme. The students pursuing the other academic higher education components are more evenly distributed across the bachelor’s and master’s degree programmes.
Diagram 12
Diagram 13 provides a breakdown of the nationalities with 100 or more students in the Netherlands by study type and phase. It is interesting to note that certain groups of countries have no clear preference for the type and phase of study programme. Most EU countries can primarily be seen in academic higher education although this does not apply to countries such as Germany, France, Spain or Sweden. This evidently depends on the characteristics and circumstances of each individual country. Further research would be required. Diagram 13 (see page 24)
2.1.5 Fields of study
Looking at the numbers of international students in governmentfunded academic higher education, the CROHO components of Economics, and Behaviour & Society are especially popular. Although these two fields of study are perhaps showing stronger growth than the other fields of study, in all cases consistent growth has been seen in recent years.
IND figures show that of the students who obtained a student residence permit for the first time in 2005, 19% were still in the country at the beginning of 2012, 2% were still studying while 17% had obtained a different residency status. Of the 2006 cohort, 21% were still in the country, 4% were still studying while 17% had obtained a different residency status. Of the 2007 final cohort, 23% were still in the country, 8% were still studying and 15% had obtained a different residency status.
Higher professional education bachelor’s Higher professional education master’s Academic higher education bachelor’s Academic higher education master’s 0 20 40 60 80 100 Latvia Japan Italy Israel Iran Indonesia India Ireland Iceland Hungary Greece France Finland Ethiopia Estonia Germany Denmark Czech Republic Colombia China Canada Cameroon Bulgaria Brazil Belgium Austria Afghanistan 63.0% 0.0% 27.6% 9.4% 41.2% 5.0% 30.1% 23.7% 34.3% 4.4% 37.8% 23.5% 51.8% 4.1% 14.1% 30.0% 53.9% 0.6% 18.5% 27.0% 82.8% 0.0% 10.2% 7.0% 36.9% 3.7% 11.2% 48.1% 49.8% 0.4% 15.7% 34.0% 21.0% 2.1% 8.2% 68.7% 22.9% 2.4% 26.8% 47.8% 49.1% 4.6% 23.4% 22.9% 57.2% 0.5% 30.5% 11.7% 44.3% 2.9% 20.7% 32.1% 12.7% 0.0% 2.7% 84.7% 35.9% 3.4% 37.2% 23.5% 55.5% 4.7% 17.6% 22.2% 11.3% 3.0% 8.1% 77.6% 49.3% 5.9% 14.0% 30.7% 38.9% 11.1% 12.0% 38.0% 30.3% 4.8% 17.0% 47.9% 9.7% 0.2% 8.7% 81.4% 40.5% 0.6% 14.3% 44.5% 36.3% 2.5% 20.8% 40.4% 44.9% 14.0% 22.4% 18.7% 31.7% 4.7% 21.2% 42.4% 57.3% 18.8% 8.5% 15.4% 51.6% 2.9% 23.8% 21.7% 0 20 40 60 80 100 Vietnam United States United Kingdom Ukraine Turkey Thailand Taiwan Switzerland Sweden Suriname Spain South Korea Slovenia Slovakia Russia Romania Portugal Poland Pakistan Norway Nigeria Nepal Morocco Mexico Luxembourg Lithuania 36.4%4.0% 21.5% 38.0% 53.0% 4.0% 25.0% 18.0% 19.1% 3.2% 8.8% 68.9% 82.8% 0.3% 13.2% 3.6% 57.7% 0.0% 4.1% 38.2% 61.9% 0.0% 14.8% 23.3% 67.2% 3.2% 15.9% 13.6% 50.4% 0.0% 15.1% 34.5% 41.2% 3.0% 24.9% 30.8% 51.7% 6.7% 10.8% 30.9% 30.8% 1.9% 14.9% 52.5% 51.2% 3.7% 18.0% 27.1% 45.0% 0.8% 17.4% 36.8% 30.5% 7.6% 16.2% 45.7% 52.6% 11.1% 18.1% 18.1% 41.9% 13.3% 14.8% 30.0% 43.5% 0.4% 32.8% 23.4% 51.9% 2.4% 29.3% 16.4% 42.9% 5.7% 17.0% 34.4% 24.3% 5.8% 8.7% 61.2% 43.4% 4.7% 8.5% 43.4% 61.4% 1.6% 11.7% 25.3% 55.3% 1.1% 16.0% 27.5% 37.6% 5.1% 29.2% 28.2% 25.0% 6.9% 18.3% 49.7% 59.0% 0.0% 10.4% 30.6% Diagram 13
International students in government-funded higher education, phase by country of origin, 2011-12
Source: DUOCFI, 2012
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 4,275 3,537 2,252 1,553 1,317 919 1,008 889 527 41 5,219 4,132 2,666 1,714 1,455 1,167 1,114 998 648 49 6,246 4,820 3,025 1,952 1,612 1,417 1,237 1,109 776 44 7,030 5,409 3,375 2,163 1,697 1,643 1,503 1,301 883 59 7,582 5,837 3,805 2,292 1,807 1,806 1,629 1,503 1,040 73 16,318 19,162 22,238 25,063 27,374 Economics Behaviour & Society Engineering Language & Culture Natural Sciences Law Agriculture & Natural Environment Healthcare Cross-sectoral Education Total Diagram 14
International students in government-funded academic higher education by CROHO component, 2007-2012
Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 29.2% 21.4% 13.3% 8.4% 8.1% 8.2% 5.2% 3.5% 3.1% 3.8% 7.7% 31.7% 21.6% 15.3% 9.6% 9.3% 8.6% 5.5% 4.3% 3.4% 4.4% 8.7% 31.9% 21.7% 17.0% 10.4% 10.2% 8.9% 6.0% 5.0% 3.7% 3.3% 9.6% 31.8% 23.4% 18.1% 11.3% 11.0% 8.9% 6.5% 5.8% 4.2% 3.7% 10.4% 32.6% 23.3% 19.1% 12.4% 11.8% 9.0% 7.1% 6.4% 4.8% 4.3% 11.2% Cross-sectoral Agriculture & Natural Environment Economics Engineering Behaviour & Society Natural Sciences Language & Culture Law
Healthcare Education Average Diagram 15
International students in government-funded academic higher education by CROHO component as a percentage of the total component population, 2007-2012
Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 25.5% 7.2% 8.9% 6.8% 4.0% 3.8% 1.4% 6.0% 24.5% 7.8% 9.0% 7.0% 4.1% 3.9% 1.5% 6.3% 24.4% 8.3% 8.4% 7.1% 4.5% 4.0% 1.6% 6.5%* 24.0% 8.8% 8.2% 6.8% 4.8% 4.4% 1.6% 6.7%* 23.5% 8.8% 6.5% 6.3% 5.0% 4.7% 1.7% 6.8%*
Language & Culture Economics Agriculture & Natural Environment Healthcare Behaviour & Society Engineering Education Average 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 9,75 0 4,334 2,198 2,271 2,197 947 711 10,952 4,262 2,375 2,366 2,386 992 721 12,358 4,333 2,768 2,582 2,520 1,049 714 13,422 4,243 3,146 2,886 2,543 1,094 727 13,906 4,101 3,343 3,177 2,485 1,126 594 22,408 24,054 26,329* 28,066* 28,757* Economics Language & Culture Behaviour & Society Engineering Healthcare Education Agriculture & Natural Environment Total Diagram 17
International students in government-funded higher professional education by CROHO component as a percentage of the total component population, 2007-2012 Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
Diagram 16
International students in government-funded higher professional education by CROHO component, 2007-2012
Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
* Includes crosssectoral: five students in 200910 and 201011, 25 students in 201112.
* Includes crosssectoral: five students in 200910 and 201011, 25 students in 201112.
students. Fontys University of Applied Sciences and Saxion University of Applied Sciences clinched their second and third positions with Delft University of Technology retaining its fifth place and the University of Amsterdam retaining its ninth place. With an additional 500 international students the University of Groningen jumped from seventh to fourth place whereas HAN University of Applied Sciences fell from fourth to sixth place. The Erasmus University Rotterdam went from eighth to seventh place, and Stenden University of Applied Sciences went from eighth to sixth place. The Hague University of Applied Sciences joined the ranking to take up the tenth spot while Zuid University of Applied Sciences was knocked out of the top ten.
It should be noted that these figures relate to students in governmentfunded education. In addition to this group, the institutions often also play host to nongovernmentfunded diploma mobile students and noncentrally recorded credit mobile students. The international student population is usually higher, therefore, and sometimes even considerably higher, than the figures presented here. More comprehensive records need to be maintained to accurately reflect the total population.
Diagram 19 (see page 29)
Among the top ten institutions with the most international students relative to their total student populations, the Gerrit Rietveld Academie recaptured the top spot with 46% international students. Maastricht University fell from first to education. The percentages for the other CROHO
components are at least 50% lower. A lower percentage has again been recorded for three components in the 201112 academic year. Agriculture & Natural Environment shows the strongest decline, dropping from 9% in 200809 to 6.5% in 201112. A longer term adjustment applies to Language & Culture which declined from 25.5% in 200708 to 23.5% in 201112, while the number of Healthcare students only began to fall in 200910 by 7.1% to 6.3% in 201112. Economics is stabilising while the other fields of study are still enjoying continued growth.
Diagram 16 Diagram 17
Preferred fields of study by country of origin Diagram 18 shows subjects prioritised on the basis of student numbers for the main countries of origin. The largest numbers of students for most countries can be found in the Economics component, followed by Language & Culture, and Engineering. Norwegian students enrol mainly in the Healthcare component. Where the largest group of students for most countries did not opt for Economics or Language & Culture, the secondlargest group did.
Diagram 18 (see page 28)
2.1.6 Higher education
institutions
Top 10 institutions
Maastricht University again cemented its number one position with an additional 600 international
Afghanistan Austria Brazil Bulgaria Cameroon China Czech Republic Germany Estonia Finland France Ghana Greece Hungary Indonesia Latvia Lithuania Macedonia Morocco Nepal Nigeria Poland Portugal Romania Russia Slovakia South Africa Suriname Sweden Thailand Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom Vietnam Canada Denmark Ireland Italy Luxembourg Serbia Slovenia South Korea Spain Switzerland Taiwan United Stated Belgium Colombia Ecuador India Iraq Iran Mexico Bangladesh Ethiopia Norway
1st field of study 2nd field of study 3rd field of study 4th field of study 1st field of study 2nd field of study 3rd field of study 4th field of study
2 x 2 =
ABC
€
Economics
Behavior & Society
Education Cross-sectoral
Nature Language & Culture
Engineering
Agriculture & Natural Environment
Healthcare Law
Diagram 18
Most popular CROHO component in government-funded higher education according to country of origin, 2011-12
Source: DUOCFI, Nuffic, 2012
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Haagse Hogeschool
Universiteit van Amsterdam Stenden Hogeschool Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen Technische Universiteit Delft Rijksuniversiteit Groningen Saxion Hogescholen Fontys Hogescholen Universiteit Maastricht 6,662 3,816 3,486 2,718 2,714 2,685 2,408 2,310 2,190 1,887 Diagram 19
Top ten institutions in terms of international student numbers in 2011-12 Source: DUOCFI, 2012
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Helicon University of Applied Sciences
Amsterdam School of the Arts Design Academy Eindhoven Stenden University of Applied Sciences Wageningen University Hotelschool The Hague International University of Hospitality Management University of the Arts, The Hague Codarts University for the Arts Maastricht University
Gerrit Rietveld Academy 46.0%
45.1% 42.5% 37.0% 26.1% 23.4% 23.1% 21.5% 21.0% 20.2% Diagram 20
Top ten institutions in terms of percentages of international students within the total student population by institution, 2011-12
Source: DUOCFI, 2012
the University of Amsterdam (36) followed by Delft University of Technology (35) and Erasmus University Rotterdam (35). The most widely distributed student nationalities were German (across 42 institutions with at least 10 German students), Belgian (35), Chinese and French (29), Italian (28), British and Polish (27). Diagram 23 (see page 32)
2.1.7 Students from Neso
target countries
Nuffic operates a number of Netherlands Education Support Offices (Nuffic Neso offices) to support Dutch higher education abroad. There are Nuffic Neso offices in Brazil, China, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia, South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam, and Nuffic Neso Desks in India and Taipei. In addition to the number of students in governmentfunded education shown in Diagram 24, the number of students holding a residence permit is shown in Diagram 25. The increasingly wide range of nonpublicly funded study programmes means that Diagram 25 provides a more accurate picture of current trends. Moreover, the diagram shows students who actually came to the Netherlands to pursue a study programme. The enrolment statistics in Diagram 24 could also include students who had already been living in the Netherlands for some time or were born there.
Diagram 24 (see page 33) Diagram 25 (see page 33) second place and Codarts University for the Arts
from second to third. The University of the Arts The Hague, Wageningen University and Stenden University of Applied Sciences maintained their respective fourth, sixth and seventh positions. Hotelschool The Hague – International University of Hospitality Management climbed from ninth to fifth place with an additional six percentage points while Design Academy Eindhoven slid from fifth to eighth spot with eleven percentage points. The Amsterdam School of the Arts moved down one place while ArtEZ Institute of the Arts exited the top ten ranking, ceding its position to Helicon University of Applied Sciences. Diagram 20 (see page 29)
Diagrams 21 and 22 show the historic development of the numbers and percentages of international students. We would again like to point out that the figures relate to students in governmentfunded higher education. The total international student population therefore usually is higher than shown here.
Diagram 21 Diagram 22
Preferred institution by country of origin Diagram 23 shows the preferred higher education institutions by country of origin. The criteria for inclusion in this statistic are that the nationality is registered with at least three institutions and that at least ten students from that country are registered at the thirdmost preferred institution. Looking at only the minimum number of ten students, most countries were represented at
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Helicon University of Applied Sciences
Amsterdam School of the Arts Design Academy Eindhoven Stenden University of Applied Sciences Wageningen University Hotelschool The Hague International University of Hospitality Management University of the Arts, The Hague Codarts University for the Arts Maastricht University Gerrit Rietveld Academy
41.9% 42.2% 44.8% 45.2% 46.0% 36.0% 38.9% 41.4% 42.8% 45.1% 48.9% 45.4% 43.7% 42.1% 42.5% 35.6% 34.7% 35.5% 34.4% 37.0% 17.2% 20.1% 21.9% 25.1% 26.1% 21.4% 21.6% 21.7% 23.4% 23.4% 16.8% 19.9% 22.4% 22.8% 23.1% 25.2% 26.2% 29.2% 32.1% 21.5% 22.5% 22.6% 22.6% 23.0% 21.0% 20.1% 18.4% 20.5% 17.1% 20.2% 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Diagram 22
Top ten institutions in terms of percentage of international students in government-funded education within the institution’s total student population, 2007-2012
Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000
The Hague University of Applied Sciences University of Amsterdam Stenden University of Applied Sciences Erasmus University Rotterdam HAN University of Applied Sciences Delft University of Technology Groningen University Saxion University of Applied Sciences Fontys University of Applied Sciences Maastricht University 4,318 5,042 5,751 6,104 6,662 2,630 2,796 3,212 3,648 3,816 2,157 2,605 2,990 3,296 3,486 1,088 1,365 1,817 2,208 2,718 1,758 2,037 2,245 2,481 2,714 2,023 2,196 2,458 2,744 2,685 1,273 1,478 1,775 2,125 2,408 1,604 1,943 2,261 2,324 2,310 1,490 1,762 2,032 2,274 2,190 1,035 1,257 1,447 1,632 1,887 Diagram 21
Top ten institutions in terms of international student numbers in government-funded education by institution, 2007-2012 Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
1st institution 2nd institution 3rd institution 1st institution 2nd institution 3rd institution
Hogeschool van Amsterdam, University of Applied Sciences Maastricht University
The Hague University of Applied Sciences Delft University of Technology
Gerrit Rietveld Academy
AVANS University of Applied Sciences Wageningen University
Leiden University Utrecht University Groningen University
University of the Arts, The Hague Fontys University of Applied Sciences Eindhoven University of Technology Saxion University of Applied Sciences Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen
Stenden University of Applied Sciences Rotterdam University
University of Amsterdam Erasmus University Rotterdam Hotelschool The Hague-International University of Hospitality Management INHOLLAND University of Applied Sciences HU University of Applied Sciences Utrecht CAH Dronten University of Applied Sciences Tilburg University
Utrecht School of the Arts Amsterdam School of the Arts HAN University of Applied Sciences Zuyd University of Applied Sciences Afghanistan Austria Belgium Brazil Bulgaria Cameroon Canada China Colombia Czech Republic Denmark Germany Finland France Ghana Greece Hungary Ireland Iceland India Indonesia Iran Israel Italy Japan Latvia Lithuania Mexico Morocco Nepal Nigeria Norway Pakistan Poland Portugal Romania Russia Slovakia South Korea Spain Suriname Sweden Switzerland Taiwan Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom United States Vietnam
2 x 2 =
ABC
€
Diagram 23Institutions with the largest number of students from a specific country in 2011-12 Source: DUOCFI, 2012
1st institution 2nd institution 3rd institution 1st institution 2nd institution 3rd institution
Hogeschool van Amsterdam, University of Applied Sciences Maastricht University
The Hague University of Applied Sciences Delft University of Technology
Gerrit Rietveld Academy
AVANS University of Applied Sciences Wageningen University
Leiden University Utrecht University Groningen University
University of the Arts, The Hague Fontys University of Applied Sciences Eindhoven University of Technology Saxion University of Applied Sciences Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen
Stenden University of Applied Sciences Rotterdam University
University of Amsterdam Erasmus University Rotterdam Hotelschool The Hague-International University of Hospitality Management INHOLLAND University of Applied Sciences HU University of Applied Sciences Utrecht CAH Dronten University of Applied Sciences Tilburg University
Utrecht School of the Arts Amsterdam School of the Arts HAN University of Applied Sciences Zuyd University of Applied Sciences Afghanistan Austria Belgium Brazil Bulgaria Cameroon Canada China Colombia Czech Republic Denmark Germany Finland France Ghana Greece Hungary Ireland Iceland India Indonesia Iran Israel Italy Japan Latvia Lithuania Mexico Morocco Nepal Nigeria Norway Pakistan Poland Portugal Romania Russia Slovakia South Korea Spain Suriname Sweden Switzerland Taiwan Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom United States Vietnam
2 x 2 =
ABC
€
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 3,334 1,072 264 358 280 275 171 126 150 111 3,405 1,017 312 426 287 271 174 134 159 117 3,787 951 393 455 283 272 193 139 148 126 4,145 900 487 482 286 277 234 161 119 114 4,313 930 515 510 270 268 251 170 106 103 China Indonesia India Russia South Korea Vietnam Mexico Brazil Thailand Taiwan 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 4,146 1,332 480 344 342 244 377 302 207 219 4,435 1,281 524 389 427 275 364 301 229 231 5,102 1,230 658 410 447 291 388 278 271 239 5,435 1,182 749 542 497 338 377 303 296 175 5,717 1,198 804 654 576 404 389 303 298 157 China Indonesia India South Korea Russia Mexico Vietnam Taiwan Brazil Thailand Diagram 24Students from Neso target countries in government-funded higher education in the Netherlands, 2007-2012
Source: DUOCFI, 2012 (revised figures)
Diagram 25
Students from Neso target countries holding a temporary residence permit in higher education in the Netherlands, 2007-2012
Source: IND, 2012 (revised figures)
0.98% 0.28% 0.26% 0.74% 1.68% 3.88% 0.75% 0.90% 0.80% 0.96% 1.09% 0.23% 0.22% 0.84% 2.36% 4.47% 0.69% 0.87% 0.73% 0.73% China India South Korea Russia Vietnam Indonesia Taiwan* Mexico Brazil Thailand 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 2005-06 2004-05 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 402,805 139,743 101,002 38,776 20,796 30,056 32,525 23,209 19,562 23,681 406,594 139,228 104,899 41,171 23,325 28,351 34,058 24,138 20,018 23,859 429,578 155,100 109,984 42,946 28,020 31,022 37,171 25,207 21,671 24,805 0.90% 0.27% 0.30% 0.77% 1.03% 4.13% 0.91% 0.95% 0.89% 0.90% 459,026 177,170 114,801 44,221 36,534 32,257 33,021 25,772 23,136 24,430 0.87% 0.27% 0.32% 0.91% 0.83% 3.81% 0.90% 1.02% 0.87% 0.92% 512,418 195,405 122,824 47,143 43,670 33,645 33,339 26,863 26,282 25,192 Diagram 26
Percentage of outbound students from Neso target countries holding a temporary residence permit in higher education in the Netherlands, 2004-2009
Source: UNESCO, IND, 2012 (revised figures)
* Source: Ministry of Education, Taiwan (http://english.moe.gov.tw/ct .asp?xItem=9354&ctNode=1184& mp=1). UNESCO does not maintain data for Taiwan.
Language & Culture while students from one country, namely Thailand, chose Agriculture & Natural Environment.
Diagram 27 The Dutch share of student numbers from Neso
target countries in centrallyregistered study programmes in OECD countries is growing in the case of Russia and Mexico; the share is more or less stable for South Korea, Thailand, India, Taiwan, Brazil and China; but is falling in Vietnam and Indonesia. The data inevitably refers to 200809 (the most recent figures). While this adds no information about the Dutch share of the total number of students from the Neso target countries, Diagram 25 shows that the number of students from Neso target countries in the Netherlands climbed by 2,000 or 24%. In percentage terms the largest increase was seen in student numbers from South Korea (+68%), India (+53%), Mexico (+47%), Russia (+35%), Brazil (+30%) and China (+29%). By contrast, there was a decrease in student numbers from Thailand (32%) as well as Indonesia (6%).
Diagram 26
Preferred fields of study for students from Neso target countries
As is the case for the entire international student population, Economics is the preferred field of study among students from the majority of Neso target countries. In 201112 students from South Korea and Taiwan also opted mainly for Language & Culture while students from India and Mexico opted mainly for Engineering. A more varied picture applies to the second field of study. Students from four countries chose Engineering, students from three countries chose Economics, students from two countries chose
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
All Neso countries Taiwan Thailand Brazil Mexico Vietnam South Korea Russia India Indonesia China Economics Engineering Language & Culture Agriculture & Natural Environment Behaviour & Society Natural Sciences Law Healthcare Cross-sectoral Education Diagram 27
Students from Neso target countries in government-funded higher education by CROHO component, 2011-12 Source: DUOCFI, Nuffic, 2012
2.2
Outbound
diploma mobility
2.2.1 Developments in
outbound mobility
The number of Dutch nationals enrolled abroad continued to rise to over 18,100 between 200708 and 200809. Although the Dutch student population abroad has been growing since the turn of the century in terms of absolute numbers, the upward trend is currently continuing in percentage terms too, and has even been reinforced. The general portability of student grants and loans in 2007 may have contributed to the increase between 200607 and 200809 (while more interest was certainly shown in this option, as described below, it is unclear to what extent this group was included in the OECD figures: for instance, some students might study at institutions that have not been included in the statistics). The Dutch share in the total outbound flow from the EU27 countries rose from 2.6% to 2.8% between 200708 and 200809 but is still smaller than what might be expected given the size of the Dutch student population (see also Chapter 5).
Diagram 28
Portable student grants and loans
Although portable student grants and loans had been an option for a limited number of fields of study and host countries for many years, they became generally available in September 2007. The only restriction is that the study programme abroad must be of sufficient quality.
As shown in Diagrams 29 and 30, the number of studyabroad countries has primarily increased
since the implementation of the general portability of student grants and loans. The number of countries grew from 14 in 200607 to 78 in 201112. However, 87% of the students funded still study abroad in Belgium, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, Sweden and Portugal (see below).
Diagram 29 (see page 38) Diagram 30 (see page 38)
2.2.2 Destination countries
When enrolling for a full study programme abroad, the host country for almost 80% of Dutch nationals is another EU country. In 200809 the largest number of Dutch students studied abroad in the United Kingdom, followed by Belgium, the United States and Germany. Dutch enrolments are increasing in almost all countries. The increase even accelerated in Belgium where an additional 820 students enrolled in 200809, as well as in the United Kingdom where Dutch student numbers were up by 600. This applies to a lesser extent to Spain (+80) and, outside the EU, to the United States (+155) and Switzerland (+60). The limited increase of 50 Dutch students has evidently halted the prolonged decline of Dutch students studying in Germany.
Diagram 31 (see page 39)
Destination countries for portable student grants and loans
Most of the Dutch governmentfunded students studied abroad in Belgium, with the
Diagram 28
Dutch students studying abroad to obtain a diploma, 2004-2009 Source: OECD, 2012 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 2005-06 2004-05 Abroad
% of total enrolments in the Netherlands 2.33% 2.66% 2.45% 2.50% 2.93% 13,184 14,188 14,725 16,018 18,115 36 37
Diagram 29
Number of students funded abroad, 2007-2012
Source: DUOInformation Management Group, DUOCFI, 2012; figures as of 1 March of each year
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 Number of students
% of total enrolments in the Netherlands
0.0% 0.4% 0.8% 1.2% 1.6% 2.0% 7,929 5,517 6,429 1.07% 7,432 8,347 1.25% 1.21% 1.17% 0.94% Diagram 30
Number of countries where study programmes are funded by the Dutch government, 2007-2012
Source: DUOInformation Management Group, 2012; figures as of 1 March of each year
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 Number of students Number of countries 0 20 40 60 80 100 65 55 69 7,929 5,517 6,429 7,432 8,347 77 78 38
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 2005-06 2004-05 3,463 3,078 1,540 1,703 571 35 3,984 3,273 1,623 1,607 603 49 4,464 3,462 1,622 1,558 626 57 4,975 4,056 1,682 1,544 652 399 5,577 4,877 1,839 1,593 673 485 United Kingdom Belgium United States Germany France New Zealand Diagram 31 Destination countries, 2004-2009 Source: OECD, 2012 39
United Kingdom in second place in 201112, in turn followed by the United States, Germany, Sweden and Portugal. While Belgium enjoyed a 7.8% increase of 335 students, the number of Dutch students studying abroad in the United Kingdom is stabilising. The number of Dutch students studying in the United States seems to be declining slightly, which surprisingly also seems be the case in Australia, Canada, Ireland and New Zealand. As the differences between the other countries have narrowed, the diagram has been expanded to include six countries. Incidentally, there is a marginal difference between the number of Dutch governmentfunded students in Portugal and the subsequent countries (Denmark, France, Spain, etc.).
Over one third (34%) of the total number of Dutch governmentfunded students studied at 5 Flemish institutions: the K.U. Leuven (1,042), the University of Antwerp (758), the University of Ghent (536), Antwerp University College (319) and KH Kempen University College (210). Students enrolled at a total of 55 Belgian institutions. In the United Kingdom, Dutch students pursued studies at 180 institutions. More than 50 Dutch governmentfunded students studied at 7 universities (London Metropolitan University, University College London, the University of Cambridge, the University of Edinburgh, the London School of Economics, the University of Oxford and King’s College London). Small groups of Dutch students were reasonably evenly distributed across the other 173 institutions.
In the United States, 232 institutions hosted enrolled Dutch governmentfunded students. The largest number, 10 students, attended Columbia University.
In Germany Dutch students pursued studies at 94 institutions. RWTH Aachen University (53), Freie Universität Berlin (14), the WWU University of Munster (12) and the University of Cologne were the only institutions attended by 10 or more Dutchgovernment funded students.
In Sweden Dutch students pursued studies at 21 institutions, with 10 or more students attending the Universities of Jönköping (21), Lund (21), Uppsala (19), Gothenburg (12) and Stockholm (11), as well as the Stockholm School of Economics (10).
Concluding the list, Dutch students pursued studies at 14 institutions in Portugal, mainly at the Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Technologias in Lisbon (65).
The latest figures showing enrolments at 1,064 institutions in the 78 countries included in the diagram confirm that the portability of the student grants and loans system has contributed to boosting a broad international experience. Eightysix countries and as many as 1,584 institutions have accepted enrolments since 2007.
Diagram 32
Diagram 32
Main host countries, 2007-2012
Source: DUOInformation Management Group, 2012; figures as of 1 March of each year
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 3,53 9 825 164 209 24 6 3,785 1,164 293 227 58 13 4,066 1,548 367 279 61 35 4,284 1,767 412 267 86 55 4,619 1,770 379 281 138 96 Belgium United Kingdom United States Germany Sweden Portugal Total 6 countries 4,767 5,540 6,356 6,871 7,283 40 41
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 3,53 9 825 164 209 24 6 3,785 1,164 293 227 58 13 4,066 1,548 367 279 61 35 4,284 1,767 412 267 86 55 4,619 1,770 379 281 138 96 Belgium United Kingdom United States Germany Sweden Portugal Total 6 countries 4,767 5,540 6,356 6,871 7,283 40 41
Credit mobility
to and from
the Netherlands
3
Note: We have elected toexamine inbound mobility first in this publication and then outbound mobility. With respect to diploma mobility, inbound student mobility is the key indicator in terms of both numbers and policy. Although the reverse is true in respect of credit mobility – more students probably go abroad rather than come to the Netherlands, and more importance is usually attached to outbound mobility in terms of education – for consistency we have first looked briefly at inbound credit mobility.
