Some time ago, Special Envoy ran a report devoted to "free movers" ( can still see here ). Kezako? I confess to have learned myself looking thing. The free movers, these are students that go to study abroad, outside the framework of the exchange University Erasmus-style. Let us look at the course to see what they tell us to globalization.
In "free movers", there is free. Besides that this is the name of a company well known for its timescale and advertisements that are not less, this term means, I do not teach my readers, "free". Our students are therefore free to move as they place themselves outside the constraints of academic exchange. The phrase alone concentrate much of the classic presentation of international mobility: going abroad, it would be proof of freedom, it would courageously take a much better opportunity to be present across borders, it would accomplish, in a word, freedom.
Finally, if you are Western, wealthy and, as far as possible, white. If you are Latino or African or Chinese or whatever, go abroad, it is not that at all, it is the result of an immeasurable weight restrictions on your frail shoulders - the weight of poverty or that of the totalitarian state - is an attempt to more or less creeping invasion.
The story of "Special Envoy" borrowed, as might be expected, much to the first presentation, héroïsée rather, of international migrations. Even if they were facing "bottlenecks" of French society, whether the requirement to pass the difficult test to enter the preparatory class at a business school or a numerus clausus far too low for the Medical Profession , followed by student journalists were touted as innovators who cleverly found a new solution. The idea of freedom of movement is everywhere: the world awaits you, for daring to enjoy it.
This is particularly visible in the beginning of the story where we follow the footsteps of a young Bachelor quite happy to integrate HEC Montreal. Journalists filming and taking on board and that of their audience, the different emotions: OHLALA, we have computers, we would not do that in France, OHLALA, there are courses where one is not 500 in the Amphi is impossible in France, oh my god, you can participate in associations in the school and is valued by employers, you can imagine that in France, of course not, the French, ahahah ... Sometimes, I confess, I would like some journalists do the job for which they are paid. Because the French business schools, very expensive, moreover, offer computer equipment for their students and receive funding from business, organize courses for small groups and encourage more strongly that their students participate in associations and all the stuff. This last point is even in the heart of the pedagogical strategy of HEC Paris ( see this excellent article from someone who has bothered to set foot ).
It is almost inevitable, since The Guardian has launched fashion with an article on the French landing in the UK mass , that the whole issue becoming expatriates, one way or another, a stinging comparison between France and the Anglo-Saxon. This demonstrates at least one important point: we place today in France, much legitimacy that comes from abroad, following the principle that the grass is always more tense. In itself, nothing new under the sun: it was as a child where the aristocracy went to great travel throughout Europe, especially Italy, for further training of a gentleman. Current practice still if we are to believe Michel Nip-Nip and Monique Charlot or Anne Catherine Wagner . This point suggests a research question: we know that the movement globalization itself is old (it can be traced back to the nineteenth century at least, some authors even going further in the past), what about the practices that we see today as news? I speak without a doubt next time.
The first departure is described by the report in its logic value paid to the experience abroad. Even if, as the report rightly points out, there may be some difficulties in return, HEC Montréal alumni who may not have the same opportunities as those of HEC Paris (though he was also good to compare with smaller business schools), they have a fulcrum to transform their journey success story. Faced with an employer, rather than explaining that they had fled two years of preparatory classes, they will try to advance their knowledge from abroad, coping skills, etc.. already valued by their partner.
Rest the other two routes taken: that of a veterinary student and that of a medical student (and a few other of his cronies), the first in Belgium, the second in Romania. Both are parties to circumvent the numerus clausus, the limitation of registrants in their respective disciplines, capitalizing on the equivalence of diplomas in Europe. It is amazing how these "free movers" have little freedom. Because for one as the other raises the same problem: the return to France. It's the same elsewhere for the girl enrolled at HEC Montreal for whom the issue of return arises even then it is just beginning his studies.
We must ask ourselves this question: What are incurred in these "free movers"? What type of career? If one considers the veterinarian or doctor, the answer is relatively simple: Both of them are engaged in Careers French. Although being a part of their studies abroad, their progress is guided by a French horizon. Stay in Romania? It is difficult to envisage. Should agree to be away from his family and loved ones. It should also accept living conditions and remuneration Romanian. It should finally acculturate regarding ways to Romanian. None of this is impossible, but these are all obstacles to full freedom of our "free movers". It is notable that in the video, we see the French who, in Romania, especially to attend them. As they plan to leave relatively short term, they did not seek to forge some links with the Romanians, they did not seek to integrate into this country. They are therefore free to leave, but only to France. This is because they never really left this country. And more so that the large number of French students pursuing this strategy allows them to move in a "French community" relatively homogeneous.
What then describe the course "free movers"? Certainly not a shrinking world where people would become more free to move as would some presentations of globalization. Yet minus the great saga of a few adventurers left to seek his fortune across the seas. More simply, one can see many uses detailed and limited departure abroad. And to be linked, each in its own way, what is happening in France: whether by the legitimacy granted to the "global" and "Global" or the institutionalization of certain practices - let the French doctors go to training in Romania is never a means to privatize quietly studies medicine without having to call into question the French institutions.
So there is a contradiction in the term chosen to denote these students. On the one hand, mobility is not that big. On the other hand, if indeed they are placed outside the traditional academic exchange, their paths can indeed be guided by considerations and national institutions, they remain so for "French abroad" without intent to settle permanently. Without doubt they are closer to the figure of the tourist, who comes from today to tomorrow, than that of the foreigner who comes today and will resume tomorrow for a formula of Simmel. And if the tourists were the central figure of globalization?
In "free movers", there is free. Besides that this is the name of a company well known for its timescale and advertisements that are not less, this term means, I do not teach my readers, "free". Our students are therefore free to move as they place themselves outside the constraints of academic exchange. The phrase alone concentrate much of the classic presentation of international mobility: going abroad, it would be proof of freedom, it would courageously take a much better opportunity to be present across borders, it would accomplish, in a word, freedom.
Finally, if you are Western, wealthy and, as far as possible, white. If you are Latino or African or Chinese or whatever, go abroad, it is not that at all, it is the result of an immeasurable weight restrictions on your frail shoulders - the weight of poverty or that of the totalitarian state - is an attempt to more or less creeping invasion.
The story of "Special Envoy" borrowed, as might be expected, much to the first presentation, héroïsée rather, of international migrations. Even if they were facing "bottlenecks" of French society, whether the requirement to pass the difficult test to enter the preparatory class at a business school or a numerus clausus far too low for the Medical Profession , followed by student journalists were touted as innovators who cleverly found a new solution. The idea of freedom of movement is everywhere: the world awaits you, for daring to enjoy it.
This is particularly visible in the beginning of the story where we follow the footsteps of a young Bachelor quite happy to integrate HEC Montreal. Journalists filming and taking on board and that of their audience, the different emotions: OHLALA, we have computers, we would not do that in France, OHLALA, there are courses where one is not 500 in the Amphi is impossible in France, oh my god, you can participate in associations in the school and is valued by employers, you can imagine that in France, of course not, the French, ahahah ... Sometimes, I confess, I would like some journalists do the job for which they are paid. Because the French business schools, very expensive, moreover, offer computer equipment for their students and receive funding from business, organize courses for small groups and encourage more strongly that their students participate in associations and all the stuff. This last point is even in the heart of the pedagogical strategy of HEC Paris ( see this excellent article from someone who has bothered to set foot ).
It is almost inevitable, since The Guardian has launched fashion with an article on the French landing in the UK mass , that the whole issue becoming expatriates, one way or another, a stinging comparison between France and the Anglo-Saxon. This demonstrates at least one important point: we place today in France, much legitimacy that comes from abroad, following the principle that the grass is always more tense. In itself, nothing new under the sun: it was as a child where the aristocracy went to great travel throughout Europe, especially Italy, for further training of a gentleman. Current practice still if we are to believe Michel Nip-Nip and Monique Charlot or Anne Catherine Wagner . This point suggests a research question: we know that the movement globalization itself is old (it can be traced back to the nineteenth century at least, some authors even going further in the past), what about the practices that we see today as news? I speak without a doubt next time.
The first departure is described by the report in its logic value paid to the experience abroad. Even if, as the report rightly points out, there may be some difficulties in return, HEC Montréal alumni who may not have the same opportunities as those of HEC Paris (though he was also good to compare with smaller business schools), they have a fulcrum to transform their journey success story. Faced with an employer, rather than explaining that they had fled two years of preparatory classes, they will try to advance their knowledge from abroad, coping skills, etc.. already valued by their partner.
Rest the other two routes taken: that of a veterinary student and that of a medical student (and a few other of his cronies), the first in Belgium, the second in Romania. Both are parties to circumvent the numerus clausus, the limitation of registrants in their respective disciplines, capitalizing on the equivalence of diplomas in Europe. It is amazing how these "free movers" have little freedom. Because for one as the other raises the same problem: the return to France. It's the same elsewhere for the girl enrolled at HEC Montreal for whom the issue of return arises even then it is just beginning his studies.
We must ask ourselves this question: What are incurred in these "free movers"? What type of career? If one considers the veterinarian or doctor, the answer is relatively simple: Both of them are engaged in Careers French. Although being a part of their studies abroad, their progress is guided by a French horizon. Stay in Romania? It is difficult to envisage. Should agree to be away from his family and loved ones. It should also accept living conditions and remuneration Romanian. It should finally acculturate regarding ways to Romanian. None of this is impossible, but these are all obstacles to full freedom of our "free movers". It is notable that in the video, we see the French who, in Romania, especially to attend them. As they plan to leave relatively short term, they did not seek to forge some links with the Romanians, they did not seek to integrate into this country. They are therefore free to leave, but only to France. This is because they never really left this country. And more so that the large number of French students pursuing this strategy allows them to move in a "French community" relatively homogeneous.
What then describe the course "free movers"? Certainly not a shrinking world where people would become more free to move as would some presentations of globalization. Yet minus the great saga of a few adventurers left to seek his fortune across the seas. More simply, one can see many uses detailed and limited departure abroad. And to be linked, each in its own way, what is happening in France: whether by the legitimacy granted to the "global" and "Global" or the institutionalization of certain practices - let the French doctors go to training in Romania is never a means to privatize quietly studies medicine without having to call into question the French institutions.
So there is a contradiction in the term chosen to denote these students. On the one hand, mobility is not that big. On the other hand, if indeed they are placed outside the traditional academic exchange, their paths can indeed be guided by considerations and national institutions, they remain so for "French abroad" without intent to settle permanently. Without doubt they are closer to the figure of the tourist, who comes from today to tomorrow, than that of the foreigner who comes today and will resume tomorrow for a formula of Simmel. And if the tourists were the central figure of globalization?
0 comments:
Post a Comment