(break until 14.00)

Loredana: Welcome to all of you.
I will give 2 minutes to those in the room to take their seats. Thank you.
We are back to our final multiplier event of the European universities working for inclusion. Euni4all network. We are very glad to have you back. Those who joined. Or those who are joining now for the first welcome.
We hope you will enjoy the rest of the event. We are still having 2 more sessions. And we will start now with the session on mobility of students with disabilities. This session is moderated by Lidia Blagma from the Netherlands. 27 years old young woman coming from the chronical disease background. She is member of the EDF youth committee. she is working at the Dutch national council of persons with disabilities in the Netherlands. As education policy officer.
She is very active person involved in debates around young people and Lidia will do a great job. Welcome. And I pass on to you, Lidia. To take us...
Lidia: Thank you for that introduction, Loredana. For the kind words. Wonderful to have you back. Hope you had a great lunch. In this panel we will discuss the wider inclusion of students with disabilities. In a wonderful pamel.
First is Emily McPherson.
And Juan Rayon, president of the Erasmus student. And online is Rosa Asenjo. Working for the Spanish service for the internationalisation of education. Hello.
- Rosa: Hello everyone.
Lidia: Joining us from the European Commission is Fafa. Who is replacing Marta Gutierrez Bennet.
Svava: Happy to be here.
Lidia: We will not dive into the policy. But more the personal experience of the people here. I think in many of these... Everything okay?
- No slides, right? Conversation?
Lidia: Yes, so this is more of a practical note. The presentations before. The panels before had presentations with slides. This conversation is more suitable. Between us as professionals.
Rosa: I had prepared a small presentation.
Lidia: Let's make some space for that. We can share your work.
Before we turn to your presentation, I'd like a more personal question. In these types of spaces we ask disabled students about their personal story. Such as Balasz shared with us earlier today. They are very helpful to illustrate what inclusion or exclusion looks like in practice.
I also think it is important that this burden of sharing your personal experience should not only be placed on disabled individuals. But also ask the policy makers about their personal experiences with mobility. I'd like to turn to the 4 panellists with the question: Do you have a personal experience with mobility as a student? If you reflect back on your student days. What was the personal experience with mobility and how do you look back on it? Why was it important for you? Let's start online. Rosa, could you share maybe about your experience as a student?
Rosa: Sure. It was many years ago. I hardly remember. I only remember that when I was studying at the university in Valladolid in Spain, there was 1 person visually impaired. That was my only experience with disabilities in the educational context.
I didn't have any particular personal experience. Except that.
I don't have anything to say really.
Lidia: Thank you Rosa. I am curious to you Svava, do you have international experience as a student that you can reflect on?
Svava: Yes, I did an Erasmus exchange myself when I was in Iceland. I did a year abroad in the UK. I certainly learned a lot from it. It was very good for me to grow as a person. I was living with 5 other girls in a big house. It was an experience. We had to learn how to work together and how to clean this big house by ourselves. It was definitely a personal, for personal growth. But also in the academic sense. I realised I did not want to continue my career in English literature studies. The exchange helped me realise that. It is very good. But I also have experience from the university point of view. I used to be a mobility coordinator at the university of Iceland. I saw how much good this international experience can do to students. Even if the student didn't have the best experience ever. They are thankful for the experience.
But I definitely didn't see a lot of participation from students with disabilities or students with fewer opportunities. I remember we had 1 participant who was on Erasmus traineeship. In a wheelchair. Her story was an inspiration for the community in Iceland. I think we really need these ambassadors who can really show other students with disabilities or fewer opportunities that mobility can be for everyone. It might be difficult. We hope the universities can come in and help the students.
Lidia: Thank you Svava. Also to hear from you. The very personal and professional skills that you gained through your international experience. Thank you.
Turning to my left.
Juan, can you reflect on international mobility in your own experience? As a student.
Juan: Absolutely. I think I would lose all the credibility to speak about it. I did my first mobility in Istanbul when I was in my 4th year of lawschool. I come from Oviedo. There were great limitations. You could only go if you had more than a certain grade. Something we advocate against. It poses another discrimination to those students without good performance. Mobility can enhance the performance. One of the reasons I wanted to go was my family always supported to go on Erasmus. This is not the case for many students. They don't get the support to go abroad. This is why other types of promotions are so important. Those with disabilities or coming from fewer opportunities background to feel confident enough. I come from a little town in the north of Spain. Going to Istanbul was a realisation of how big the world was. I was confident. When I arrived in Istanbul with 16 million people, I thought it was a bit too much. Everybody was shouting. Do you want a taxi? But I did. You don't get to used to it. You get to lobby. Overcome difficulties you have. You are part of the community. This was a call to action. I knew I wanted to dedicate part of my life to widen the participation. That all the students could have the experience I had. I looked for the next mobility. I moved to Grenada. We have a national mobility system in Spain. I remembered when I joined the Erasmus student network, one of the things I was asked was: What would I do if in one of the city tours is a student in a wheelchair. Why was I asked this question? In Spain, thanks to the collaboration with ONCE, I see many colleagues here, making sure the Erasmus experience is accessible is a core part of our work. This is very important. It is not only about widening the participation. Making sure the students from different backgrounds go. It is making sure that all the students can enjoy the experience with the same conditions. Not only about you go and you have a different experience. But how to make sure all the students can enjoy it. Thanks to the work in Spain. The feel of inclusive has been my core priority. I am happy to be here.
Lidia: Thank you for being here. Great to hear your personal experience translates to your current ambition to make the experience accessible to all.
Emily, can you reflect on your experience with international mobility?
Emily: Thank you. Hi. Emily. I have brown hair. wearing a black dress and pink jacket.
I am originally from the UK. I have grown up between the UK and Norway. I started my first university degree in England. That's when I had meetings with other disabled students. Two of my closest friends, Emily and Rachel were disabled students at the time. Of my university. They taught me a lot. I struggled a lot during my first university degree. Due to my physical and mental health. I didn't have a formal diagnosis. I didn't get much support. And never even thought of travelling on exchange. Naturally, living in 2 countries I had a lot of international experience.
I moved back to Norway and struggled to find a job. It didn't go well with my degree. I started studying again. Didn't have the opportunity to go on exchange. I was still struggling with my health. I received an ADHD diagnoses at the age of 29. And got my ME diagnosis just last month.
Doing mobility was never something that I realistically could do. I was struggling enough at my home institution to be able to go abroad. This is something that I know a lot of my friends have also experienced. Thank you.
Lidia: Thank you for sharing that.
I think also what you mention about diagnosis as a prerequisite for receiving accommodations you might need. Is something I would like to touch back on further on in this conversation. It is important to highlight.
Now that we have some idea of who is in this conversation. What your personal perspective is. And experience is on mobility.
Let's move to Rosa for the presentation you prepared for this panel.
Then, let's after that move to 2 more questions and conversation style proceeding. The floor is yours, Rosa.
Rosa: Thank you. Can we share the presentation? To leave you with ideas.
Lidia: I think we can. Is it possible?
Loredana: Rosa, maybe if you can share it directly yourself? Then you can also share the slides. Is that feasible for you? If not?
Rosa: Let me try. I am working with a remote computer.
Loredana: If not, tell us when to move the slides.
Rosa: Let me see a second. It is not open or anything now.
I didn't think I needed to do that. One second.
Let me see if...
Lidia: We have the presentation open here as well.
Rosa: okay. I don't mind.
Loredana: We will find it.
Rosa: It is difficult for me. I have to work in a remote computer.
So, if it is possible for you to share it?
I will say what I want.
Loredana: We have it open here.
Lidia: We can share the screen.
Just a minute to set it up.
Rosa: Okay. Thank you.
I first wanted to thank you for inviting Sepie, the Spanish national agency for the interesting event. Happy to be here.
Even if it is only online format. Due to my flight cancellation. At the last minute.
Sorry for that.
I have prepared this small presentation. Just 2 points.
Next slide.
First to present the Sepie strategy. And to give ideas about the topic of this round table.
Next slide.
Next one.
I am taking advantage of this event to announce the publication of the Sepie inclusion university strategy. That will be officially presented next Monday in our annual dissemination event.
so, we of course took into account the overall framework of the European Commission strategy. And we work on our objectives, general and specific, internal and external. If you are interested you will be able to see very soon.
Next slide.
I didn't want to go into that in depth of course.
I only wanted to point out that this strategy is a transversal one.
In the sense that we have a working group. With 5 people.
In this group, there were the inclusion officers for each educational unit in Sepie. And other personnel from transversal unit such as communication.
We wanted, it was a hard work to try to, on the one hand to take into account different uses and experiences of each of the educational sectors.
Especially. And the obligation to find common points to build the strategy.
Also, we thought that the openness, the amplitude that the framework, the Commission created, we have to think about this open range of possibilities that the Commission gave with the framework.
As an advantage. Rather than something negative for us.
Because it gave us the flexibility to provide particular answers to the obstacles.
And we tried to tackle all the obstacles. And that was also a little bit tricky. But we have tried to do that.
So, in the next days, next Monday the document will be out. We think that this is, as you have said many times in this presentation. It is not the end of the work. But a new meaning. We have to of course evaluate, to adapt and to improve that strategy.
That's for the strategy. That's all.
Now, getting to the point of the round table.
I have to make a preliminary remark. This is because on this table, the topic is the importance of a wider inclusion of university students with disabilities in mobility programs. Of course, we consider the inclusion of university students is very important. But being the Spanish national organisation, from the perspective of higher education unit I am part of, we have to take into account, I have to take into account, not only the university students. But also non university, higher education students with disabilities. That belong to the inclusion target group.
Next slide.
Of course we consider that it is very important to have higher education students with disabilities in our programs, in the programs that we manage.
And we have been doing that already in the former program. In 2014-22.
For the special need support. We have this profile already there.
And this profile together with the 2 profiles that we considered for the disadvantaged backgrounds, cover more than 20% of the mobility participants. Which is good. But, it is true that in their profile, the students, the profile of disability, didn't reach the 2% of all the students. This is something, of course we have to improve. We had around, to give a number, around 130 participants that were given special need support just before the COVID. And then, with the impact of COVID everything was a little bit down. That was a huge impact we had.
Once the new program started, we kept incorporating the disability group as one of our main groups. But this time, we thought that we needed to further our views. We considered this group, not only for the inclusion support. But also for the top up for fewer opportunities. Because sometimes these students need extra financial support. Even if they don't have additional costs that the inclusion support covers.
So that's why we have incorporated this profile to our top up.
As you have said during the event, we don't have so far, right now, real data about students with disabilities in the program. We can only say that in call to 21, we allocated inclusion support to 21 students, in our projects. In 2022 we have received so far 5 applications in our project. Of course, we expect to go over the 21 that we had in 21.
And we also hope that we will have some applications coming from the K1-71 program. We will see how it works.
Next slide please.
And last one.
So, this final thoughts in order to give way to discussion.
It is important that we keep working, this is an idea that has been repeated many times. We keep working to increase the number of higher education students with disabilities and to improve the quality of their mobility.
For that we think as national agency we will need more funds to cope with the situation. And also, we need together with our beneficiaries to achieve better pre-finance in paying the schemes. This idea has been given. By some of the participants before.
So that, we have to look into that carefully. If possible. And we will see how it works. We will try to find synergies with other European Union funds. Such as the social fund. We will see. If we can find synergies with that or others we don't know. We will look into that too.
We need also to increase our dissemination efforts.
By making public the Commission strategy before and now our own strategy. But also, explaining to our beneficiaries as many times as needed that participants with certain profiles can get additional funding. Sometimes they don't know that. It is a pity. We will have to repeat it over and over again.
Also, we are preparing some specific documents for this target group. Guides, infographies, other materials, focused on these target groups. For example we have our guide for the application in order to get the inclusion support. In every call.
Also we want to propagate examples of best practices. This is the way for other beneficiaries to know what can be done. For students, higher education students with disabilities.
And of course, we have to increase our contacts with beneficiaries and other stakeholders. We have done that. But not as much. We would have liked to do.
Also we have to take into account participants. The experience is very important. As it has been said many times. We need to measure the impact of the program itself. And this strategy that is getting out now. Our strategy, next Monday. We are looking forward to do it. We hope that the new program helps as I said to make the mobility experience for students with disabilities a better one. And with more students with this profile.
So that's what all I wanted to say, to share with you in this presentation. Thank you.
Lidia: Thank you Rosa. It is very helpful I think to learn more about what you are working on as Spanish national agent.
I am very curious, Svava how you would react to it as perspective from working for the European Commission. I can imagine your job entails more a broad overview. How you respond to the approach Rosa explained to us in her presentation?
Svava: Yes, well, actually, I will respond positively.
That is exactly what we want the national agencies to do.
We have tasked them with developing their own strategies. They have to report on how to promote the inclusion in the program throughout the sectors. And provided us with multi annual plans. This is what we want to see. The national agencies are important for us when it comes to the implementation of the program. At the Commission level we don't have the same connections down to the level of the university and the national contexts.
We need the help of the national agencies there.
What we can do is of course give our strategy. What we hope to see.
And of course provide the roles and funding. We can't make anything happen without the involvement of the national agencies. It is a good step forward they take it seriously. And encourage them to publish it online and disseminate in the countries. It is not only for the universities, but also municipalities. I think it is a good step.
Lidia: Thank you so much.
Rosa, from what I hear in your presentation you were also looking for a way to find more contact or feedback from students, right? From the perspective of the beneficiaries.
Rosa: Yes. We have had some contact. With ESN. But we want to give more opportunities to other groups or to find ways of contacting participants directly in order to know what is going on with their mobility or experience.
We will see. We are sometimes, now, we are like entering in a way unknown territory. We have to see what can be done.
Lidia: Clear. I think, we have of course student representatives next to us. Emily, how yould you respond?
Emily: I know students are working on every level. Local, national and in Spain I know that a member union there, this is something they are working on. At this very time.
Something we have to focus on. And I am really glad we have this guide that you have developed. Reading it earlier. The fact I didn't know dot.Com existed today. We are planning to speak to the member unions to see what sort of legislation is in place in their countries. You have done a huge bit of work for us, that helps in our advocacy. We are going to be talking with the member unions and speaking to them. This is something I know, the subject they are working on. Thank you for the guide.
Lidia: Thank you Emily. Juan, you have a department of your organisation in Spain as well.
Do you feel similar to Emily about the perspective of students.
Juan: Absolutely. Congratulations. I know you have been working hard on the inclusion strategy.
Very happy about it. She really means it. Indeed, this inclusion strategies for internationalisation. The implementation of Erasmus+, are a fundamental piece in this process of making it more inclusive. There is a need for translation for the broader goals at the European level into concrete actions. That adapt to national legislation, co-financing schemes. That also Rosa mentioned. Synergies. Like the European social fund plus. That need to be channelled. I want to highlight a couple of things. Rosa, I am happy you publicize it. It will be announced in a fancy theater in Madrid. This is the visibility we need for the topic of inclusion. We need to put it at the center. It is what is done, with the launch and stakeholder involvement. In Spain directly involved. Also had the opportunity to discuss with Rosa and the colleagues some of the proposals for the inclusion strategies.
Also answering what Rosa was saying. Most important is to put in place evaluation and monitoring. Some have suggested is to create structures. That is common at the European level. Stakeholders group that are continuously involved in the monitoring, feedback, evaluation of the processes. It is always better than ad hoc. Student groups can involve stakeholder organisations. Such as foundation ONCE. Also going beyond the disability field. Including a system in a continuous way. Not only through consultations. And also, indeed, include qualitative elements with beneficiaries. Always report the participants through the participants report and this is important. When we talk about inclusive mobility. That quantitative feedback, those numbers you put through an app or computer at the end of the experience are not enough to express your struggles. It is important to channel that feedback. Those ideas. That can contribute to the improvement of the strategy.
I believe this is an important step. I really hope that we will see more and more national agencies making the same promotion and giving the same attention to the strategy. The Commission can take all these strategies and have conversations with us as stakeholders in which we expresst feedback and give ideas for the improvement.
I am convinced that this dialogue with the stakeholders that happened in the preparation of the strategy can continue going forward.
Lidia: Thank you for the response. I would like to zoom in on the monitoring mechanism you described. Also relating back to the sessions of this morning.
That we establish as a group of people.
Feedback of disabled people themselves is crucial in these attempts to make mobility more inclusive. Another question for Emily and Juan.
How do you as student representatives strive to make your organisations inclusive for disabled students. Who would like to participate.
Emily?
Emily: I think it is by fluke I am sitting here as a disabled student.
I don't think it is easy to be a representative. You are struggling enough as it is. To get through your studies.
Your studies often, if you do that extra. We do it to make it better for the people coming after us.
I think, it is hard. Because we are the European level. It depends on what's going on from the local level who are elected into the national.
I forgot the other half of the question.
- What do you do to make that transition. From local, national to European. To make that more inclusive.
Emily: We are spread across Europe. We push to make sure the events are inclusive. Anyone who wants to come can come along. It is not always a given. We had long discussions about the breaks we have. The meetings are too long. Or making sure the rooms are accessible for everyone.
Shouldn't be we are still fighting to make sure that is still a thing.
It is something we are working on. All of our aspects, of our organisation.
Are accessible to all.
I don't think we are. I think there is a long way to go. For the fact that anyone could be sitting here.
There are these pipelines and clocks along the way.
And the same goes elsewhere for democratic representation. At the moment, it really isn't unfortunately.
Lidia: Still a long way to go. Thank you for the practical examples. Juan?
Juan: For us we are mostly an Erasmus alumni organisation. By trying to make Erasmus more inclusive, one of the spill over effects is that we have more students that want to join the organisation. We have seen it in the last 4 years. More and more students with disabilities has been joining. It has beecome more wellknown. In certain countries that have focused on inclusion of students with disabilities. When we talk about inclusive mobility, there is a lot of focus what do we do to widen the participation. It is equally important that we work to become an inclusive university to host students.
Something we see from the data in projects such as Epfime. Students with disabilities and also coming for fewer opportunities backgrounds, what are the conditions to make a decision to go abroad. That is fundamental.
And then, in the last few years, the number has increated. Also thanks to a bigger focus on training and internal diversity. Not only mobility, but in volunteering.
We also see the importance of representation. We are connected to what Emily is saying. Representation is fundamental. One of the key motto's of disability sector is nothing about us, without us. I believe this is fundamental.
2 of the national presidents are students with disabilities. Their role of representation is fundamental. Also as a way to give that reality check for inclusion.
Since I joined the organisation I have seen a lot of progress. We have a long way to go. Support the students. They also show to both mobile and perspective students, that mobility can be for everyone.
Diversity is something that you need to cherish. We hope to make progress on this in the next years. In the end what we see is combining the efforts to widen participation and become better trade. Accommodate all kinds of needs.
We will help to improve the diversity in mobility and in youth organisations.
Lidia: Thank you very much. This ranges from practical examples and training and equipment of disabled people in your organisations.
Juan: I said it before. It is important for us.
It does all types of activities. From city tours to parties and festive trips with students.
Something like in countries like Spain is to make sure also those events are accessible to students with disabilities. I have to say, this is one of the big successes. I take my Spanish national prade on this. Every year there are national events in Spain. Since I'm in the organisation, every year, we have numbers on the participation and we ask the students to be able to respond to all types of needs. Every year we have a growing number of students with disabilities. Which is good. It shows the students trust us. This is one of my biggest sources of pride. i want to highlight the collaboration with ONCE. Since I'm in the organisation, it is 1 decade. That collaboration has been key to train volunteers on all levels. How to better support students. All kinds of needs can be responded. It is something all organisations will be do in the next years.
Lidia: Fantastic to hear. Happy to hear the number of disabled students is increasing.
We have 10 minutes on the clock.
I would like to open the floor to questions from the audience. Please raise your hand.
From Loredana. Go ahead.
State to which of the panellists you address your question.
Loredana: Thank you very much. This is Loredana from the EDF.
My question, I have 2 questions.
First one goes to Rosa.
From Sepia, the Spanish national agency.
My second one goes to Svava from the European Commission.
Rosa, you were mentioning at a point, I didn't understand clearly.
Whether it was, you were mentioning a working group.
Was it to set the publication, to setup the inclusion strategy?
To make the inclusion and diversity strategies in Spain?
Or is it an ongoing, this working group is still working?
I'm interested to know whether in this working, have you included also persons concerned. Persons with disabilities. Or other persons who are benefitting of the inclusion measures setup by Erasmus+?
So, this is for you.
And then...
Lidia: Let's answer the question first.
Otherwise it will be more difficult to answer.
Rosa: Okay. Yes. The working group was set to be internally in order to prepare the strategy, the document. We had internal and external objectives. That we thought it was important also to look inside Sepia.
When talking about inclusion.
It was...
It was set for the document itself.
Even if we are, we don't have experience here.
We know we have to evaluate the strategy. All this work.
So, the working group will keep going and will keep working.
I don't know exactly if we will be able to do all the themes that we thought necessary. But we will try to do that.
I can't remember the second question.
Loredana: Whether... You have persons with disabilities.
In our case. Any beneficiaries.
Rosa: I have to say, no, we didn't exactly reach for the working group outside. Except in a few occasions. We talked to Esn. But not as much as we would have liked.
We talked also at university level. With the network that is working in several Spanish universities. Helping students with disabilities and other types of profiles.
But we didn't, for that part, we didn't go over. And look into what the participants with disabilities itself, have to say.
Because as I said, one of the things that was very difficult for us. Was to try to make common, to have points in common. Within the different educational sectors. That was a big, big part of our effort.
We wanted to make sure that internally, we were okay. With what we wanted to present. Rather than, I don't know how to say that.
To make ourselves secured in a certain way. Asking, or having too many other people from outside. We wanted to be sure that what we deliver was okay. For all the groups. And Sepia.
Lidia: Does it answer your question?
Loredana: Thank you very much. It is clear.
Rosa: We will try, as I said, one of the objectives is to try to reach participants.
Loredana: The strategy is already written. That's a pity. It was done without, at EDF our motto is nothing about us, without us. I don't know. I am not in Spain. But if I was in Spain I would feel it was not about me.
But yes...
Rosa: Point taken.
Loredana: My question to Svava is the following. Excuse me if I mispronounce your name.
I would like, the European Commission in its article 15 says that member states have to publish inclusive and diverse strategy. They are not obliged to make it public. Why are they not obliged? Why is it optional?
And secondly, do you have plans on European level to organise something in monitoring and evaluating and monitoring. And then would it be a complaint mechanism. If that is not done by students? Are there any projects in that sense? On policy level. Thank you very much.
Svava: Okay, thank you for the question. Good pronunciation of my name.
I can only speak for the higher education sector. When it comes to the strategies.
We would encourage higher education institutions to develop their own strategies. We haven't made it mandatory in the document.
But we have been working on a monitoring guide. Answering both your questions at the same time. We have in the higher education and Erasmus the charter for higher education. And this is the entry ticket to the program. If you are an institution that wants to participate. You have to commit to certain principles, inclusion and diversity. For the students with mobilities is a fundamental part. The national agencies have a responsibility to monitor the institutions are complying with the principles. We have been developing a monitoring guide. For example that was joined. We are encouraging institutions. The national agencies. To guide the institutions through creating their own institutional strategies. When it comes to the mobility of participants with fewer opportunities. We have a monitoring in place.
When it comes to this from the higher education institutions that they are doing what they promise when they apply for the charter. And for students with fewer opportunities in the program. That's the main way. We have the participant reports. Which enables the universities to keep track on what they are doing. The national agencies use the support. The universities need to report back how they implemented the program. We can do better with monitoring. And we will definitely take a look at how the things are developing and how we can develop and adapt to the realities on the ground. The changes we have made are leading to more inclusion of participants with fewer opportunities. We can take that into account when we continue with the design of the program.
Lidia: Thank you. Loredana, is it an answer you are happy with.
Loredana: Thank you.
Lidia: Any other questions from the audience?
Yes?
- Not really a question. A comment. It is interesting. A pleasure to see that we have more people coming from disability group. That come up to represent their own group. That is very interesting. That is something that we have been struggling with. I work in this area for 25 years. And it is really very hard. I know how hard it is for these students to step up and join their students representation. To be part of the managing of universities. I know how much they still struggle to do a simple thing. Just finishing their studies. The efforts that we demand from this group is still very big. One of the things we try to do with the project is to make it easier for these students. And first to demand from them what we demand from any other student. And maybe like that, they can reach to those roles. It is really nice to have role models like you. For us to show. To our students.
You have to be there. You have to stand for yourself. And represent your perspective in key places. Within university. Not only within that.
I would like to add. What we are doing is of course mainly thinking of this particular group. People with disabilities.
But what we have found out from our experience. Relating to all the strategies of inclusion. I believe, we are thinking beyond people with disabilities. Or beyond the particular and specific group.
I think, that we can learn a lot from this project.
Apply it to a lot of diversities. Because we still are struggling with other vulnerable groups. People from social and economic vulnerable backgrounds.
Also people, because in Portugal there is a lot of international students doing their degree in our university.
If they come from African countries, they have huge difficulties in going out in mobility to other countries in Europe. That's a lot to face. Not only culturally, but also legally they have challenges. We need to address that also in mobility programs. Thank you so much.
Lidia: Thank you so much for that great addition. I think, maybe a final note to also close this session. Would be to go back to what you said.
The principle of nothing about us, without us. How crucial that is in organising the representation of students. We saw some great examples of.
And I think also if you would use that knowledge to also improve the participation of these other groups. The same principle applies. It will be interesting to look at this session with that perspective. To what extent do we have people from rural areas here. People from low socio economic backgrounds here. That will be the final remark I would like to leave you here with today. Thank you to the panellists. Rosa, Juan, Emily and Svava.
I would like to give the floor back to Loredana for the final session. Hope to see you again soon.
Loredana: Thank you Lidia.
Thank you once again to the panellists from the previous session.
It was very good discussion. And time is flying. We are almost at the end.
But not yet. Because we have one more session to come without a break. We are going to have a quick look into some design law, human rights. So, I will pass the floor to our moderator of this session. Tommi... How do I pronounce your name, Tommi? I only know you by Tommi.
Haapenieme. I hope I did it correct. Tommi from the Eastern university of Finland. He is also from the very beginning of the project with us.
Very good work done. Specially when I was mentioning our module. With his university they developed a questionnaire that students answered to check what they think about their university. Are they inclusive enough?
He will not speak about that. He will moderate our session.
And Tommi, the floor is to you. And thank you.
Tommi: Thank you so much. Loredana. Our panel made its first vote before we start. That we would like to be in front if that's possible.
We would like to move. We can see the people. Is that possible? Okay. We will do that.
Okay.
This is working.
Our panellists are right. This is much nicer. We can see who is in the room.
I am from the university of Eastern Finland, member of this project. One of the university members. We are the member of the network. I am proud to have the possibility to moderate the last panel of today.
As Loredana said, it takes a wider perspective for the topics of design, evaluation and law. For the social dimension of higher education in Europe.
The social dimension has been a part of the higher education development for a long time. Aiming at the student body entering. For higher education institutions reflects to the population. As we have heard today it is not about entering, but all that happens between.
We have 4 experts. After the presentations we will have questions and answers.
I am sure I will make mistakes pronouncing your names. Apologies in advance. You can correct me.
We will start with a presentation from Anna Gover. Director of the European association of quality assurance in higher education, ENQA. In this role she manages the secretariate with the board to translate the strategy into activities for the benefit of ENQA members. And represents ENQA in events. Across Europe and beyond. She coordinates the input to policy developments with European education area and internationally.
Anna has 10 years of experience working in quality assurance of higher education. Previously worked for the European University association. Where I got to know you.
Happy to have you with us today. And share your thoughts with us. The floor is yours.
Anna: Thank you very much Tommi for the introduction.
Thank you to the organisers for the invitation to speak today. I am representing the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education. Briefly, who don't know about the organisation. Representative body in the European higher education area. It is important to highlight that when we talk about our membership we talk about not the EU, but the broader European area. That is 49 countries. We have 55 members. Across those countries. Those are quality assurance agencies that have proved they work in compliance with what we call the European standards and guidelines. That's our European level framework for quality assurance.
We also have 52 affiliates which are some of them agencies, some are bodies that have interest with quality assurance in higher education.
I won't go into a lot of detail about what we do.
If you are interested, you can have a look at our website.
What I would like to say, make a note about the diversity of the members.
The external QA landscape in Europe is extremely diverse. Our members as agencies have different responsibilities. And they have very different scope of activities. Depending on the context in which they work.
Some of them work in one national context. Their work is rooted in national legislation. They evaluate or accredite the higher education institutions in their country.
Others work across borders. Across a number of different countries in Europe and outside Europe. Some members accredit institutions as a whole. They look at the whole institutional range of activities. Some of the members accredit individual programs. Just look at the programs that are the object of the QA.
Some of the members focus solely on learning and teaching. The education offering of an institution. Others also look at research, sustainability, service to society, governance, much broader issues within institutions.
This to give you a picture of the diversity of the members we work with. And hold that in mind. It is relevant for some of the comments I want to make later on.
What are the existing requirements for quality assurance agencies at the European level when it comes to issues of diversity and inclusion?
A side note. When I talk today I am not speaking specifically about inclusion of students with disabilities. But rather about inclusion and access and diversity in a broader sense.
As I mentioned, what we have at European level is the European standards and guidelines. The ESG. The full title is long. We refer to them as the ESG. This is a set of standards and guidelines for the first part for higher education. For them a guidance on how to put together the internal quality assurance. And the second part applies to quality assurance agencies.
They refer to external quality assurance.
The other thing to note is the ESG applies to learning and teaching. Not about the broader institutional activity. But the educational offering of an institution.
They are fairly generic. There to guide institutions and agencies in developing their policies and practices. They have to be vague enough to take into account the variety of different national, regional contexts. That we have across Europe.
Sometimes we get the criticism there is not enough detail in them.
They have to be generic enough to apply to all the contexts that we have across the area we work in.
As I said, they talk about education provision. There are some elements around the social dimension of higher education that are included in the standards and guidelines.
For higher education institutions, I pick some examples, we have the standard 1.3 around student centred learning. That covers the students taking an active role.
We also have standard 1.6 around the learning resources and student support. It is important. It covers the forms of student supports and ensuring that this is adequately resourced. The money is always a big question.
But also that it makes reference to the needs of the diverse student population. Including students with disabilities, as well as mature, part time employed and international students.
For quality assurance agencies the first standard we have to deal with and important one, is all the work is to take into account the internal quality assurance that an institution has.
So, an agency has to look at all the standards of part 1. And somehow incorporate them into their own national agency level criteria. In order to ensure that they are taken into account.
The other point I want to make about this is running through the whole document. This is a really important founding principle of the ESG. Around stakeholder involvement. All stakeholders from students, teaching staff, support staff, leadership and the quality assurance agencies and national authorities are involved in the various aspects of quality assurance.
What's important to note is that the ESG are baseline standards.
There are many agencies that go far beyond this. This is the guidance framework. But not a framework that says you do this and nothing else. Many agencies do much more through specific approaches looking at the social dimension of higher education, through research or analysis. To map and review what it is that higher education institutions are doing to support students with disabilities.
I think you probably hear from my colleague in a few minutes, one of those case examples. When a national agency has gone further what are the expectations of the baseline standards.
This is the existing tool we have at European level for quality assurance.
There is one other development I'd like to highlight. That's in the context of the process. The follow up that brings together the stakeholder organisations to discuss issues in higher education. One of the working groups is a working group on social dimension.
What they are doing is they are working to develop a European policy framework for the social dimension. Which builds on the principles and guidelines to strengthen the social dimension in the higher education area. Which was adopted in 2020. As part of the document that came out of the last ministerial conference. A set of indicators for each of the principles. As well as some.
How the indicators could be implemented.
The full set of indicators is intended to be published by the group at the end of the working period in 2024. As a tool, for national authorities. To further address the issue of social dimension in higher education.
Several of the indicators and explanatory descriptors make reference to the quality assurance agencies in monitoring the social dimension. I picked out a few of those on the screen. The presentations may be shared afterwards. Colleagues are nodding. You can look in more detail. The link is also included in the presentation.
Most of the indicators and guidance aimed at national authorities. It is an output of the Bologna process. And it brings for advancing higher education.
What I want to finish with is a few reflections about the role of quality assurance in steering, monitoring, addressing the social dimension of higher education.
My first point is to bring us back to thinking about the diversity of quality assurance agencies.
In Europe.
As I said, some look at program level. Some work in many different countries. They might not be working with national criteria.
Linked to that we need to keep in mind what is the object of external quality assurance. This is usually a higher education institution as a whole. Sometimes is just an individual program. External quality assurance doesn't look at the whole higher education system of a country. It is important to reflect on the fact that some of the issues the barriers, the obstacles when it comes to access and inclusion in higher education are linked to national frameworks and educations. It is an area where these things can be mentioned. But doesn't have the power to change them. Because the broader national framework is not the object of the external quality assurance.
That's not to sure the agencies should not be paying attention to this. It means we need to be careful to the extent we regulate it at the level of the European higher education area in terms of the expectations towards agencies in order to respect what it is that is there remit and the scope of activities.
That said, we have the Bologne process. That's a different matter. From this perspective it is good the process is addressing this issue. There are several examples of agencies that are addressing it proactively.
Some is in the matter of bringing in aspects of diversity and inclusion in the criteria they use to review institutions. Some through studies and support and training for institutions.
I'd like to highlight the importance of this softer approach. Non legislative approach. As being also important and having significant impact when it comes to raising awareness sharing practice and giving input for further action.
My concluding message. Quality assurance has a role to addressing the topic. But should not be the only tool. It is one element of a toolbox that we should have available to us. For addressing the social dimension.
That's my input.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak with you today.
Tommi: Thank you Anna for sharing your views.
About the role of the quality assurance in the theme. We continue with the same theme.
We have Mercedes Siles with us. I have had the pleasure to meet you today for the first time.
I learned from Wikipedia. That you have a long and productive career in the field of mathematics. That's correct.
And at the moment, you are the director of the National agency for quality assessment and accreditation in Spain. We are happy to have you with us. Welcome. The floor is yours. If you want, you can introduce yourself.
Mercedes: Thank you. Pleased to be here. Thank you to the organisation for inviting me.
I am speaking with this one. Now I have two.
Could you put my presentation?
- Did you send it?
- Yes, the first day you sent the message.
I can send it again.
I can send it to you.
Tommi: We will take a minute.
 Mercedes: I have sent the email. To Loredana.
I have sent you an email.
Tommi: I think we have room for 1 quick question or comment now.
I am taking this chance. And giving Loredana a bit time to setup the presentation.
Maybe if you have a question or quick comment?
To what Anna just said.
Yes? Alice?
- I was thinking about what she said.
That was the last thing she said.
On the legal framework and also on the soft approach.
Yes, of course, this is crucial. We really need more training and more information on diversity. People need to know more about diversity. Be more familiar with the different groups and different needs of these groups.
Training is essential and awareness also. Awareness sessions.
What I have learned also from experience is that, when you have a legal framework, sometimes that triggers the need for other things.
It is like, for example, when we started 25 years ago, one of the first measures we had was to make access to university quite easy. For example for people with disabilities.
At first we didn't know how to accommodate them. How to include them.
But the fact that they were there. That made all the difference.
We had to think about and had to move, find out how we can do it. Get the resources necessary. To be able to provide what they needed.
And that triggered a lot of change within universities.
Sometimes, just a legal obligation, like a mentioning. A requirement. May trigger other needs that then are developed. I think that is also important.
Anna: I fully agree with you. That's why I wanted to emphasize that we see QA and the activities as one approach. I was talking to somebody in the lunch break. Described it as a several prawned approach. Not either the legislative approach or soft steering approach. We need both of them.
But for quality assurance agencies often the legal approach is not in the remit. We have to look at other ways to steer this.
Tommi: Now we have the presentation ready. The floor is yours.
Mercedes: Thank you very much. I am going to speak about an initiative to strengthen the social dimension of higher education in Europe.
I am going to speak about a label we are preparing with ONCE.
In the first slide you will see that I am going to speak about 3 things.
The first one... Yes, please.
First one is about a commitment to the sustainability to higher education. Then about the collaboration with institutions working for social inclusion. Then I will speak specifically about quality label on social inclusion.
Concerning ANECA, we are an agency. We are 21 years old. We were created within the framework of the organic law on university. We are in ENQA and the European register of agencies. We are part of several networks of quality assurance in higher education. In Europe, Latin America and worldwide. For example in Siaces.
We follow the European standards and guidelines. Anna spoke about it, the ESG. For several years now we have been working in order to also have the other ESG. These are concerning environmental, here we have the ESG's. The European ESG for higher education. And the other ESG about sustainability. About environmental, social and governance.
We visualise the mission. As the quality agency. In form of a cube. Aneca's quality cube. Based in 3 dimensions. First one is related to whom procedures are addressed. People, programs and institutions. This is the first one.
Second one is related to the missions of the higher education institutions. Research, teaching and transfer of knowledge.
And third is related to sustainability and impact. All of the projects, everything we do must be based in these 3 dimensions. In these quality cube.
Since November 2 years ago we have been working with fundacion ONCE to advance the issue of inclusion. We signed a memorandum of understanding. And analysing in which areas we center our attention. To take into account the percentage of disability when applying for a position at a university. In Spain to have a permanent position in a university, you send your cv and there are several programs. In ANECA, one is for the first stages of your career. The second one is to have a permanent position. Committees who analyse the different criteria and decide if you are prepared or not. This is called accreditation. We took into account the percentage of disability when applying at a position at university.
If one of the things that the person must comply is to go abroad for a period.
When the disability is complete, you have not to fulfill this requirement. If the disability is 50%, for example, then you have to go abroad only for the half of the time. And so on.
This has been very productive and very useful in order to get more positions for people having a disability.
We also have in the evaluation of titles and institutions and more.
Concerning the commitments, it is important to center the attention in sensitisation, awareness raising and training.
Inclusion indicators. Inclusion of design for all in curricular contents.
Also the transfer of knowledge. Access to teaching and research and support for teaching and research staff with disabilities. Also could be very important the quality labels and international congress on university and disability. Next one please.
We have been collaborating with ONCE to develop an international label for social inclusion. This is an priciple we follow.
Everything you do in our context, in higher education. Everything you do must be recognized.
A label is a way of doing this. And a way of encouraging institutions to take into account people with disabilities.
We hope to present this label next year. It is a label for universities with the aim of advancing in the achievement of excellent universities, aligned with the sustainable development objectives. For inclusive education.
To get this label, the higher educationn institution must be focused on the following things.
Organisation and governance. Use of information and review processes for the continuous improvement on the university's actions.
Students.
Teaching and research staff. And administration and services staff.
And finally, concerning society.
The main point is the internal quality system for every program we have the central point is the internal quality system.
Then you have to fulfill different things depending on the label you are going to get.
Next slide.
Concerning the evaluation standards. In dimension A, is organisation and governance.
The institution must incorporate the perspective of inclusion of persons with disabilities in its internal functioning.
Also must ensure the incorporation of curricular content on inclusion, universal accessibility and universal design in its programmes and teaching activities.
Second dimension is related to the use of information and review processes for the continuous improvement of the university's actions.
They have to take into account analyses and must make visible its level of inclusion and must use the information for the proper functioning of its regular processes.
They also have to review and improve its inclusive practices and incorporate universal accessibility and universal design in all its environments and procedures.
Next one please.
Block C is devoted to students.
Specific target group is prospective and future university students.
They have the higher education institution must implement policies for student recruitment, orientation and access to university.
Ensure accessible environments and resources for access to university.
Concerning university students. The higher education institution must take into account how it welcomes processes for new students. Develop the policy for the participation of students with disabilities.
Must design and develop inclusive teaching, learning and assessment processes.
Concerning the graduates. Must promote the employability and entrepreneurship of its graduates with disabilities. Must develop institutional policies regarding the participation of its graduates with disabilities.
Next one.
In block D is devoted to teaching and research staff. Also administration and services staff.
Relating teaching and research staff. The institution must guarantee access to teaching and reseach careers for people with disabilities.
Facilitate the adaptation of the work place and the teaching and research activity to teaching and research staff with disabilities.
Implemen mechanism for the career development of teaching and research staff with disabilities.
Administration and services staff. Must guarantee access to employment in administrative and service staff positions for people with disabilities.
Must facilitate the adaptation of the work place for disabled administrative and service staff.
Block E is devoted to society. Related public non profit or private entities. Must respond to the needs of society regarding the inclusion of people with disabilities and provide expertise.
This is a summary of the conditions we will introduce next year to get this label. Which is an international label. We are an agency following the European standard. This is the framework in which we are working.
Thank you very much for your attention.
Tommi: Thank you for the excellent presentation about the framework and the label. Next speaker and panellist we will have online.
Loredana: It is a video.
Tommi: A video from Maria Soledad Cisternas Reyes. Special envoy of the UN secretary general on disability and accessibility.
The presentation will be in Spanish.
Alice is going to provide interpretation for us. Translation.
- We put on mute the video. You can read. Tat will be the best.
And will open your mic.
Alice: Okay. Not sure how I can follow exactly.
What the original.
To follow. What she is saying. If you put it on mute. It is hard.
Loredana: Problem it won't be accessible for those who are not Spanish.
Alice: I'll try my best.
To follow the subtitles.
And accompany with the reading.
It will be hard.
Tommi: You can start. We can see how it goes.
Thumbs up.
Loredana: If it doesn't work, we will make it available.
Alice can also read the words at the end. We will try again.
Tommi: We will move on. The next panellist and speaker. Pete Kercher.
He followed up the law degree from South Hampton originally. I read is bio. We met today for the first time. He has experience in the field of design for all since the 90's. Including being a founding member of design for all Europe.
And being a member of its national counterpart design for all Italy.
These organisations ambassador since 2007. He is convinced believer in applying design message to the strategic challenges generated by today's complex and changing society. He has promoted the application of design for all by writing articles. Addressing conferences, seminars and providing design consultancy to international projects.
Teaching and holding workshops all over Europe and the rest of the world. In the past decades.
Pete, welcome you to the seminar. We are eager to hear your views on the project results. The floor is yours.
Pete: Thank you. I shall have to write a less pompous curriculum. It sounds too important. That will not do.
I did make a presentation. But then I thought, time is short.
And you don't really need to see a formal presentation about what my organisation is. I can give that in a couple of words.
It was founded in 1993 originally when a brilliant gentleman from Dublin, Paul Hogan was a designer, and vice president of the irish organisation of people with multiple sclerosis. He thought, isn't it time the design world considered people with disabilities? It was quite adventurous in 1992. When he started doing this.
But he managed to secure a European core funding for a 2 year project. In 1993 we established the European institute for design and disability. I have been there since. I am quite old.
Within 1 year we realised we made a false start. We were not interested in designing only for people with disabilities.
However important tat is. That was creating another ghetto.
To create another ghetto for people with disabilities, however well you design, is not the right way to make all the necessary articles and places and services and communications economically available to everybody.
We needed to make sure that what we were doing was not altuistic, but also made good business sense.
We decided to do a restart. That's when we started with design for all.
With design for all we have defined in the Stockholm declaration in 2004 as design for human diversity, social inclusion and equality.
I hear those 3 buzzwords coming up time and time again today. I am glad. Because we are all speaking the same language. We are all singing from the same sheet. We can provide the method. We have been working for 30 years on the method, which is design for all.
By way of adding a couple of extra things. We are part of the project. Even though we were not project partners. We are founding member of the EDF. 25 years ago. We have always considered the EDF to be the parliament of people with disabilities. It is not our role to play an active part but to be there, provide consultancy on design when it is necessary. My god it is necessary now. I want to also borrow the EDF's slogan. Nothing about us, without us. We know what we are doing. We know what we are talking about. With the best will in the world, the rest of you don't.
Unless you studied design with us.
Fundacion ONCE, the project leader has been a member of EIDD, since the beginning. We are also very much part in that respect as well.
I hear words being used and I have an annoying irritating habit. I like to define my semantics. Otherwise I use a word, you hear the same word. If we don't mean the same, the message is like ships in the fog.
So, I will ask a question. What is accessibility?
We all use that word. But we never defined it. Hardly defined it. We can define it in terms of legal instruments. As we have heard correctly, legal instruments alone are not sufficient. I say, the legal instruments, the legislation, standards are the minimum baseline, the absolute essential. God forbid we should stop there. That would mean we do only the basic. Only what is necessary. As I told colleagues over lunch. When we restrict ourselves to be ourselves to be requirements, then as human beings we are talking about eating, sleeping, drinking, breathing and defacating.
Those are the things which keep us alive. Take any one of those away, we die. Those are the requirements. All the other things are the aspirations that make us human beings. It is the aspirations that are the objective of design processes.
We should all assume as the baseline that the requirements are in any case taken care of. Legislation plays that role in terms as physical accessibility. It doesn't do enough in terms of cognitive and institutional accessibility. That's another question. That is the baseline. Designs function is to go beyond compliance. I want to draw a couple of parallels with other fields. Like education and instruction. Tourism and cultural heritage. What does the user want? It doesn't make sense to get to a museum only to find that the selfassurance of the museum that the museum is accessible doesn't comply with my aspirations, my personal needs.
In that case I am using the word needs.
How do I overcome this? I overcome it by providing information in advance. Not only objective information. However much we think the information could be objective, it will not be completely objective for everybody.
What we require is a combination between the objective and subjective information.
It happens that about 10 years ago, the Italian ministry of culture under previous name, it changes name with every government. Sorry about that.
Ran a project called Ade Arte. I was external consultant to this project. And the aim of this project was to create a tool whereby the people working in museums and other places of cultural heritage could learn to self assess in a way that would provide useful information to potential visitors. A combination of words, photographs and information. Because to give you a very basic example. I'll use a wheelchair as example. Not think that it is confined to wheelchairs. It includes a whole variety of different needs and aspirations.
When a person who uses a wheelchair sees a photograph that shows a slight barrier it is the individual who will decide, I can overcome the barrier, I will find a way.
If the museum says, I am accessible and that person gets there and that barrier cannot be overcome, we have a problem.
If the museum says, I am not accessible and that person is deprived of a visit that would be possible, we have a problem.
We need subjective and objective information. That's one of the major issues I want to underline here.
Having heard the results of the work done so far. It is a pity like a project like Ade Arte which is important in Italy, exists in the cultural heritage box and not education. The boxes still, they don't communicate this enough. Don't thike it as criticism. It is a statement of fact. We have so much information. We have information overload. There is so much going on. We need better flow of information. We don't repeat the invention of the wheel.
The information needs to be about what? It needs to be obviously about physical conditions. Not only. It needs to be about cognitive conditions.
And as we have heard today as well. It needs to be about institutional conditions. We heard comments this morning. About institutional barriers. We had a very fine example from Hungary and the Netherlands. About the institutional barriers. That is not a physical or cognitive barrier. Our friend is suffering from institutional barrier.
We are not equipped for this. This is a learning process. To learn to deal with institutional barriers as well.
How do we achieve this kind of inclusion? Well, our method is design for all. I gave you the definition that we have in the Stockholm declaration. It is all very well designing for everybody and including everybody in the baseline of the design process. Which is our mantra. How do you do it?
It was mentioned first time this morning by Alice. Consultation.
Consultation, consultation.
I have heard the word experts mentioned a few too many times today.
Experts are the people who know what they want.
Not just the ones who have a professional experience.
We run a very serious risk of believing that we only have to consult with experts, stakeholder groups. And the stakeholder groups, I am going to use that carefully. Tend to be groups of experts.
We don't talk about stakeholders in design for all, but experiences.
Experiences are all those people who have useful experience to contribute to any process of design.
That includes if you want to make a building like this. The ones who come in after we have gone away and do the cleaning. They can help an architect to avoid those places where the dirt will accumulate and therefore get into the air conditioning system and make it possible for a disease to develop. Nobody is too humble to be an experiencer. Nobody is too humble to have information for the design process. We must always remember that. We have to be humble in every step we take.
And then we have to take all of this we have been discussing today and put it into context.
I am going to quote the tourism analogy.
There is no point, says my good friend Roberto Vitali. An expert in accessible tourism who made business. And he is a user of a wheelchair. No point in making my hotelroom accessible if then I end up being a prisoner in my hotelroom. There is nothing else I can do. I need to be able to go out. If a student is going to a university in another country, we have to remember that the university is just one link in the accessibility chain.
But not the only one. It is a very important one, certainly. That student also needs to have, and want to have guarantees or at least reassurances that I will be able to take part in social life. Go around in the city. I don't want to study for 3 years as a prisoner in a hotelroom. Or in my hall of residence. I may have perfec accessibilityn the faculty. But what about the city? Juan mentioned earlier on. Social occasions. And social organisations.
This is most important as well. Students need to be able to take part in all the aspects of student life.
And not only in the student side, in the educational side.
Of course it is the thing we start with and it is important to do this.
Your job is important. The rest of us, we have to think about the context.
What is happening, where we put all of this?
We need to train university staff. Not only. The staff who are the teaching staff.
Also the custodians. Also the cleaners. We have to train them gently, politely to be disability aware.
Because very often we can find that the best accessible physically accessible building, the effect is ruined when we have a prejudicial response by a member of staff who has not been through awareness training.
This is also part of the package.
Yes. I just want to close by mentioning how we put this then into the context of the next 30-50 years.
I had the privilege to chair the conference in Poland 3 years ago when the commissioner Ferrera introduced the European new green deal. This was the first step towards the first European Bauhaus. I discussed with the commissioner on that occasion. The fact it is not sufficient only to be talking about investing significant sums of money in taking care of the challenges of climate change.
That is important. It is vitally important.
The planet is not going to die. We may die. The planet will be here. Don't worry. I see people talking about saving the planet. No, no. We are not saving the planet. We are saving ourselves.
If we are going to save ourselves, let's make it worthwhile for who we really are. Not something we ought to be.
Our model is designed for them. No. What we need to do, is to think about who really will be come 2050. Do you realise that 1 person in 9 in the EU will be over 80 in 2050?
Compared to 1 in 25 only 10 years ago. Are we ready for that? Are we doing anything in that direction? No, we are not. Having an older population is having a vastly increasingly percentage of people with disabilities.
We are not doing anything. We are so busy with the climate change threat. We have forgotten saving the planet is saving the lives of people on the planet. That's where we need to be moving.
I have done that. Now I will do my institutional bit.
My organisation has an academic network. We have 48 members worldwide.
Mostly in Europe at the moment.
We have 5 members outside Europe. We opened up to the world recently. 1 in Africa, 1 in Asia, Australia and North America.
We have a subnet which is the academic network. What I suggest to you. It doesn't make sense for us not to be collaborating.
Our academic network is there. It is existing. We can provide the framework for continuity. We are one of the few European projects setup 30 years ago that continued to exist at the end of the project and funding. We went ahead. With 100% voluntary organisation with a small membership fee. Universities use us by joining to make Erasmus projects.
To me it is common sense to offer our facilities. They are not physical facilities. Our networking facilities to all of your members. All the network members.
To become members with us. And to share experience and build new projects. And to take this forward also on this political diplomatic level.
We need to put all these different things together. And stop the box thinking. Stop the watertight container thinking. Move forward. So we shape European policy in the future. I am extremely impressed by the work you have done over the past years. I only wish I have been involved since the beginning. It is exciting what you have been doing. It deserves a much broader audience. Let's do this together. Thank you.
Tommi: Thank you so much for your presentation.
This gave us a lot of thought. Food for thought.
In a way, this panel and your presentations bring us, this closes the circle. And brings us back to the beginning of the project. Creating tools, to evaluate the situation. The inclusiveness of universities.
And here we are now.
I thank you all, time is flying. I am giving the floor to Loredana.
The video is not working correctly. We are not able to present it.
So we will send that to you. Check it is working with english text. It is going to be in Spanish. You will have the English translation as text.
We will have to look at that after this seminar.
Loredana, I give you the floor for closing words.
Loredana: Thank you so much Tommi.
Thank you so much for the panellists of the last session.
It is true that we can have accessible ticketing machines. If to get there I have 3 stairs in the railway station and I am a wheelchair user, it doesn't make sense. Does it?
Well, it is indeed a lot of food for thought.
Let's have it. Take it with us.
It was a day with many interesting discussions.
We have had the opportunity to show you our work. During the last 3 years.
Our partners that have worked a lot, students from the union. And those who are not from the union. Who contributed with testimonials. It is about you, mobility with students. With or without disabilities. If all this has happened, with some small technical problems. But that's how it is always.
In any case, I am very pleased. There were very few. And not major ones. All this, if we were here is thanks to our host. The European Economic and Social Committee. Thank you so much, Michael. Elena from the back of the scenes. We haven't seen you. But you have helped a lot. You put at our disposal all this beautiful venue. It is our house. Thank you for opening it to us. And welcoming us. I would like to thank you all, the partners.
To put together the program. To Silvia for the numerous times we had meetings.
To setup. And I would like to thank a lot my colleagues behind the scenes. Julia from communication and Andrea and Natalia who are not with us here. Maybe online. Julia is in the room. Magdalena who helped me. Also here. I would like to thank and congratulate... What you have seen, it is thanks to her. She managed so greatly. Big congratulations. And I would like to thank our captioner Wim. You did a great job. You can type it down. You deserve it.
Because you did more than providing the captioning in English. And automatic translation into Spanish. You helped also to setup a little bit the technical. And the technical team from the committee. Any other persons.
Thank you to all of you who had the courage to come here to Brussels. I hope you can go back home.
I don't know. You will see. But, thank you for coming. Thank you for all those online, who joined.
You were very brave to stay the whole day. It was great to have all of you here. We don't stop here. There will be follow up. Follow our website. Social media. We wish you a very nice evening.
Nice holidays. Enjoy them. I am sure everyone deserves them. Thank you! Bye.