The UK’s decision to leave the European Union would be “no threat” to the country’s continuing participation in the popular and successful Erasmus+ student exchange programme. These were the words of prime minister Boris Johnson in January 2020.

By December, however, it was confirmed that, after Brexit, the UK would, in fact, be leaving Erasmus+ and setting up a domestic alternative, to be known as the Turing scheme. Named after British computing pioneer Alan Turing, the scheme has now completed its first round of registrations. And, despite some teething problems (the deadline for higher education institutions registering to be part of the first Turing cycle had to be pushed back twice, for instance), it is now operational.

Turing is available to students in “universities, colleges and schools”, and about £105 million has been allocated for its first year, which the government says will facilitate 35,000 global placements from September 2021. It is thought that roughly a third of these placements will be for students in further education. But how does the new scheme compare with Erasmus+? And what advice can those FE colleges that have registered offer to those who might be thinking about getting involved?

There’s no getting around the fact that Erasmus+ is a tough act to follow. A 2019 survey of more than 30 colleges, carried out by the Association of Colleges, returned an overall “benefit” rating of 4.71 out of five for the programme.

In addition, 100 per cent of students were found to have “improved their personal confidence following an Erasmus+ placement”. If Turing can get anywhere near this level of positive feedback, it will be a welcome addition to the UK’s international exchange landscape. But, at the moment, that is still a really big “if”.

“Colleges now have to get used to an entirely different programme in both name and concept, even though some of its principles are very, very similar,” says Emma Meredith, international director at the Association of Colleges. “As you’d imagine, there are pros and cons for both schemes.”

So, what are the biggest differences between the two? And what do those differences mean for colleges?

1. Turing is a global scheme

One potential advantage of Turing, Meredith says, is its global nature, as “Turing is open for institutions around the world, not only within the EU and countries that are associated with the EU”. This means that colleges have the opportunity to expand the reach of their exchange activities.

Linda Sykes, international coordinator at Doncaster College and University Centre, welcomes this aspect of the scheme, along with its commitment to targeting students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

“In a direct comparison to Erasmus+, the obvious benefit of Turing is the fact that it is a worldwide scheme,” she says. “We are therefore able to widen our partner network globally and provide more opportunities to our students with access to a wider range of cultures.” This new global reach might mean that more colleges can establish international partnerships that were not previously financially viable.

2. There’s no funding for incoming visits

A major change is that Turing is a one-way programme, at least in terms of funding. The scheme has received criticism for funding only outgoing exchanges - that is, UK students who wish to spend time overseas. Unlike Erasmus+, it does not support the inward movement of exchange students from other countries.

“This is absolutely a concern,” Meredith says. “Ideally, Turing would have reciprocity built into it, or perhaps more of a formal mechanism to connect to other countries’ schemes, where there is funding already for student mobility, so that it appears more connected.” This was such a concern in Wales that, in March, the Welsh government announced its own £65 million exchange scheme, to be known as the International Learning Exchange Programme, which will fund inbound and outbound trips.

At the time, then Welsh education minister Kirsty Williams said that “promoting the message that Wales is an inviting destination for students and partners across the world” was one of the reasons why a reciprocal scheme was needed, and that the country’s education providers “are enriched by students and staff visiting Wales to study and teach”. There has also been concern that Turing does not provide funding for staff to work in partner institutions, unlike Erasmus+. Meredith says this is something she would “like to see introduced”.

Sykes likewise has reservations about the one-way nature of the scheme and the impact this could have on existing relationships. “Due to Erasmus+, we have many established European partners and we are keen to maintain contact with these,” she says.

“Previously, we worked to a reciprocal arrangement, and partners - to our knowledge - can still use their own funding if they wanted to reciprocate a visit. “It is, however, disappointing that staff placements have not been covered, and it seems there are no plans to implement collaborative projects like we were involved in with Erasmus+.”

3. The Turing scheme can include existing projects

Another potential issue relates to projects set up under Erasmus+ that have not yet been realised as a result of the pandemic, Sykes points out. “Those of us who have been active in Erasmus+ already have a backlog of projects…which need to be fulfilled by 2023,” she explains. “We think a lot of people could have been put off applying for Turing due to this, so it might have been useful to phase the Turing project in [more slowly].”

Ben Houlihan, head of quality, teaching and innovation at Bridgwater and Taunton College in Somerset, says he would “really encourage any FE colleges that are intending to apply for the Turing scheme in the next project cycle to consider making existing partners part of their bid”, either on their own or in conjunction with a new partnership. “One of the Turing scheme’s biggest advantages is that the funding available can be used to support existing partnerships and help to sustain links between institutions, as well as establish new international relationships,” he says.

4. There is a new way to apply

So, for colleges keen to make the most of Turing, how do they sign up? And what should they consider when applying?

According to Houlihan, the sign-up process is “very similar” to that of Erasmus+, so colleges that are already familiar with this shouldn’t have any difficulty in applying. The online Turing portal is “easy to access and allows the application to be shared with multiple staff within the institution”, he adds. However, there are a couple of things that colleges can do to make the process smoother, he advises. The first is to work collaboratively with staff on responses to the application questions in advance.

“We found that completing the application questions on Microsoft Word before uploading our answers to the portal was more effective and made it easier to collaborate on, and review, the application,” he says. It’s also important for colleges to take note of the fact that their applications will be assessed according to how well they demonstrate the Turing scheme policy principles, which are: global Britain; levelling up; developing key skills; and value for UK taxpayers (see box, below). To help with this aspect of the application, Houlihan recommends planning well in advance. “It was important to us that we had a strong project concept, so we began work on the application several months before the deadline to ensure we maximised the time we had with the college’s bid writer, and could develop a unique and interesting mobility programme,” he explains.

Ultimately, he continues, while Erasmus+ and Turing are “very different from each other”, each has its benefits. And, he says, he is determined to push forwards with Turing because, “regardless of the change in scheme, there is no question that any international learning programme will always add a great deal of value to the college and its members”.

Chris Parr is a freelance journalist

This article originally appeared in the 16 July 2021 issue under the headline “A better rate of exchange?”