CONFERENCE
In 2008 Sylvain came from France to Riga in order to explore one of new European Union countries Latvia not only simply by making tour. He decided to stay in Riga for two years as full time student gaining new experience in multicultural environment, developing Latvian and Russian language skills, enjoying nature and culture.
Currently Sylvain is living in one of the cornerstone cities of European Union, in Brussels, working as a trainee for the European Affairs Delegation of a large French company called ‘Rhodia’. Sylvain is assured that Latvia is a nice place to study despite the fact that international students are not a very usual thing in here.
- How did you decide to come to study in Riga?
Sylvain: I have thought that it did not make sense to develop a proficiency in European affairs (what was my objective of studying) in a classroom or library of my hometown! I simply wanted to see Europe. In that regard, the so-called ‘new EU countries’ are definitely the place where to go. The main challenges that Europe faces are taking place there more than anywhere else, and there is still a lack of knowledge on these countries among ‘westerners’.
I notice that more and more exchange students are doing such a choice of destination, and I believe their number will increase even more in the next years. Unfortunately, it seems that Latvia still lags behind despite its very strong potential to attract foreign students.
As a study destination, Latvia, Riga offers many advantages: good transport connections to the rest of Europe, rather cheap cost of life, nice attractions, multilingual and multicultural city, an original and even exotic destination but safe, etc. I was attracted by all those advantages.
- Why did you choose Baltic Sea Region studies program? Sylvain: The choice of the study program was also a key-element. The Baltic Sea Region studies Master program was very attractive. It seemed to match my desire to study abroad in English and to seek a particular asset (original and exciting field of study). I was lucky enough and grateful to the Latvian State to obtain a so-called budget place in the program, what made my stay in Latvia a reachable luxury! I even certainly saved money compared to if I would have spent this study year in France. More importantly, I would not have taken part to the Master program of LU without this important and enjoyable budget support. Besides those motivations, I had already experience (Erasmus in Finland) and personal connections in the Baltic Sea Region and in Riga in particular.
- What could you recommend in order to improve Baltic Sea Region studies program? Sylvain: This program definitely addresses good objectives in terms of education and training. According to me, the main quality of the program is to be interdisciplinary. I think the best impact of this program on education of its graduates is to provide access to a wide general knowledge. However, that aspect could be still improved. Interdisciplinary should not be the juxtaposition of many subjects but rather an axis to better understand a variety of problems. For a more ‘professional’ impact, I particularly enjoyed the fact that students are free to choose a field in which they want to specialize, what was highlighted by the academic staff very early in the study process. That is really challenging, although also a bit tricky. As for me, I took this aspect very seriously and tried to choose the best specialization (for instance when choosing my thesis’ topic) to fit my field of interest and my future plans. In the same time, I could feel very easily that this program is still young and needs further running in. It was very nice to study together with a great majority of Latvian fellows. They had a lot of inputs to make. However, I believe that the program would gain in receiving more foreign/international students, notably from the Baltic Sea Region, but also elsewhere in Europe and the world. I hope I was a pioneer, together with the few other ‘international’ students in the previous and current promotions. As a whole, I would evaluate the program as ‘good but can be improved’. More regional dimension would be welcome, rather than “domestic” topics which are interesting when they do not bypass the regional dimension. I wish more visiting lecturers would come with their knowledge on a specific topic. Overall, I do believe that the program will gain from further ‘Europeanization’, both in terms of participants (teachers and students) and of subjects. I think that the most coherent and useful way to consider the BSR is through its European dimension (a sub-EU region), and the master program should stress that more. That is my point of view, explained by the fact that my primary interest is European affairs. I understand that the program has to deal with that and find the right balance. I am thankful to the academic staff devoted in trying to run the program as well as possible, and I wish them good luck - What are main advantages of your time spent in Riga studying and living? Sylvain: My time in Riga was an exciting and exclusive experience. I see it as an asset to make the difference. In terms of professional profile, but also in terms of personal development. Besides, I tried to make good use of my time in Latvia, for instance to learn languages. I started with Latvian and then began also to learn Russian. At the end of my stay, I had reached an ‘upper-intermediate’ level in both languages, of which I am rather satisfied! Regarding the fact of studying in the Baltic Sea Region, I liked the opportunities we had to assist or take part to interesting events. Notably, I enjoyed the possibility to answer a call for papers for an international conference of Baltic studies taking place last year in Kaunas. I went there for the four days conference and performed a presentation on my master’s thesis topic. That was a great and useful experience.
- How did you choose your Master’s Thesis topic? Sylvain: I made the choice very early in the study process. I thought about what benefits I could take, what input I could make. I also tried to include all the requirements of our study program. I wanted to find a hot topic, large-scaled and concrete, with which it was possible to deal in an interdisciplinary way. At the end I chose ‘Free movement of workers within the Baltic Sea Region since 2004’. I do not regret it today. I really enjoyed writing and then defending my thesis.
- What are main similarities and main differences in studying process in between France and Latvia? Sylvain: Similarities are based on the fact that we are all in a European framework. We prepare the same degrees (types of awards) and have standardized formalities (credits to gather, etc.). We also have quite the same future prospects. We all live in the same world and may choose to carry on future plans anywhere in Europe (or elsewhere). So the studying process pursues quite the same aims in France and Latvia. Regarding the main differences, I can still find plenty! In France the studies are really full-time. We have a lot of lectures, workshops and home-tasks. In Latvia I experienced evening classes and was at first a bit surprised to have so much free time during the rest of the day! I took advantage of this fact by using my day-time to take language classes and give a few French language private lessons. At the end, I was busy enough! In France (I used to study law) some academic standards are definitely higher (although to some extents a bit obsolete). Every student is constantly asked for better performance, what makes it exhausting and tiring but also challenging. In Latvia the expectations are not so high, the advantage of which is to develop certain self-confidence (when the French system damages it!). In Latvia, I find the ‘budget places’ given to the best students a good system (probably still to be improved) as a great motivation to better performance. In France, studying is sometimes really stressful, for instance at the end of each semester when we have all exams at once… And study grants depend only on social background (of parents!), not on results (unfortunately). I have big doubts about the academic system in France, that’s also a reason why I am satisfied to have done half of my studies abroad (one year in Finland and two in Latvia). Overall, I would say (very sincerely) that the studying atmosphere is definitely nicer in Latvia: better equipments, nicer teachers, better human relations, better methods, etc. Regarding methods, however, I was sometimes frustrated of the very little feedback we receive after writing essays of making presentation. Feedbacks help one to progress, and I was used to do like this when studying in France.
- What are you doing in Brussels? Does education received in Latvia help you to manage things in Belgium? Sylvain: In Brussels I work as a trainee for the European Affairs Delegation of a large French company, Rhodia. It is worldwide leader in specialty chemicals. I participate in the work of the Delegation including legislative monitoring (I follow certain works of the EU institutions, in particular at the European Parliament), lobbying, participation in the Brussels’ networks of the company, follow-up of the EU funding opportunities… I also draft studies and prospective on a variety of themes (Environment, Water, Energy, Climate, Green technologies, Industry, Trade...). Of course the education received in Latvia helps! Especially, I was well prepared and trained to work in a multicultural environment, i.e. changing habits, several languages, the necessity to be ready to draft documents in English, etc. In addition, I got used to multidisciplinary topics, what I also have to do here. I realize this is really precious in our world, where things are getting more and more complex and interconnected. Living in Latvia was also a good preparation to live abroad again. However, in Brussels I feel much closer of my native environment! I remark that my experience in Latvia is seen as an asset by some recruiters. They identify me as “the guy who went to Latvia”, but most importantly I rely on this to convince them of my openness, my ability to adapt and my experience of multicultural environments. I argue also of my new language skills, although until now I haven’t found an application for them (other than a good impression made on my CV).
- How could you describe Latvia as a country? What made you wonder here? What seemed unusual? Sylvain: Latvia is a charming small country with a lot of character and originality. It does not have particular treasuries but its own art de vivre. I was surprised by the importance of certain traditions such as singing (and well!) folk songs or going to the countryside every weekend of holiday! Latvia seems backwards regarding certain social conditions but for the rest it seems to be a very modern and open country. To many extents more than France, where for instance it is not so common to communicate by email and where you might wait months and months to get an Internet home-connection set-up. Latvia is also deeply bicultural. I wonder why this is still seen as a problem. My native country is multicultural – mostly due to important non-European immigrant communities – and deals with that with difficulty as well. However, I tend to think that the Latvian situation is less inextricable; I believe and hope that the tensions between communities are mostly ‘generational’ and will fade out with time… Latvia’s people are remarkably full of energies and creativity. On the other hand, perhaps they are still too individualistic and tend to have strong self-confidence but - rightly or wrongly – very low trust in collective actions. I am surprised of people’s expectations, especially those of my age who think only about leaving the country without having reasonable plans elsewhere. And yet the maturity of people of my age also made me wonder. In France many of my fellows are still big kids, whereas in Latvia students have an incredible experience of life and seem to be very well-prepared to deal with life’s matter on their own. I feel really like at home now in Latvia. I am sure I will regularly come to Latvia in the future.
- What you missed the most from France during two years in Latvia? Sylvain: Probably some kinds of cheese! But I realize that very soon it is very easy to replace what you miss. Still about food, I evaluated Latvian one very highly. That would certainly be one of my top recommendations for anyone wishing to stay in Latvia. Speaking about what I really missed, of course I should have said firstly my relatives and friends; however most of them enjoyed the chance to take a trip to Latvia to visit me!
- What are your future plans? Sylvain: I still want to see Europe, and there is still much left! I am ready to catch the next opportunity. At present I will try to take valuable insights in the professional world. I plan to stay in Brussels for a while, where I might have some opportunities in the European sphere. And after some years, it could be nice to start doctoral studies. Of course, I hope those will be related to Baltic Sea Region studies, what became my field, now!
- Why did you choose Baltic Sea Region studies program? Sylvain: The choice of the study program was also a key-element. The Baltic Sea Region studies Master program was very attractive. It seemed to match my desire to study abroad in English and to seek a particular asset (original and exciting field of study). I was lucky enough and grateful to the Latvian State to obtain a so-called budget place in the program, what made my stay in Latvia a reachable luxury! I even certainly saved money compared to if I would have spent this study year in France. More importantly, I would not have taken part to the Master program of LU without this important and enjoyable budget support. Besides those motivations, I had already experience (Erasmus in Finland) and personal connections in the Baltic Sea Region and in Riga in particular.
- What could you recommend in order to improve Baltic Sea Region studies program? Sylvain: This program definitely addresses good objectives in terms of education and training. According to me, the main quality of the program is to be interdisciplinary. I think the best impact of this program on education of its graduates is to provide access to a wide general knowledge. However, that aspect could be still improved. Interdisciplinary should not be the juxtaposition of many subjects but rather an axis to better understand a variety of problems. For a more ‘professional’ impact, I particularly enjoyed the fact that students are free to choose a field in which they want to specialize, what was highlighted by the academic staff very early in the study process. That is really challenging, although also a bit tricky. As for me, I took this aspect very seriously and tried to choose the best specialization (for instance when choosing my thesis’ topic) to fit my field of interest and my future plans. In the same time, I could feel very easily that this program is still young and needs further running in. It was very nice to study together with a great majority of Latvian fellows. They had a lot of inputs to make. However, I believe that the program would gain in receiving more foreign/international students, notably from the Baltic Sea Region, but also elsewhere in Europe and the world. I hope I was a pioneer, together with the few other ‘international’ students in the previous and current promotions. As a whole, I would evaluate the program as ‘good but can be improved’. More regional dimension would be welcome, rather than “domestic” topics which are interesting when they do not bypass the regional dimension. I wish more visiting lecturers would come with their knowledge on a specific topic. Overall, I do believe that the program will gain from further ‘Europeanization’, both in terms of participants (teachers and students) and of subjects. I think that the most coherent and useful way to consider the BSR is through its European dimension (a sub-EU region), and the master program should stress that more. That is my point of view, explained by the fact that my primary interest is European affairs. I understand that the program has to deal with that and find the right balance. I am thankful to the academic staff devoted in trying to run the program as well as possible, and I wish them good luck - What are main advantages of your time spent in Riga studying and living? Sylvain: My time in Riga was an exciting and exclusive experience. I see it as an asset to make the difference. In terms of professional profile, but also in terms of personal development. Besides, I tried to make good use of my time in Latvia, for instance to learn languages. I started with Latvian and then began also to learn Russian. At the end of my stay, I had reached an ‘upper-intermediate’ level in both languages, of which I am rather satisfied! Regarding the fact of studying in the Baltic Sea Region, I liked the opportunities we had to assist or take part to interesting events. Notably, I enjoyed the possibility to answer a call for papers for an international conference of Baltic studies taking place last year in Kaunas. I went there for the four days conference and performed a presentation on my master’s thesis topic. That was a great and useful experience.
- How did you choose your Master’s Thesis topic? Sylvain: I made the choice very early in the study process. I thought about what benefits I could take, what input I could make. I also tried to include all the requirements of our study program. I wanted to find a hot topic, large-scaled and concrete, with which it was possible to deal in an interdisciplinary way. At the end I chose ‘Free movement of workers within the Baltic Sea Region since 2004’. I do not regret it today. I really enjoyed writing and then defending my thesis.
- What are main similarities and main differences in studying process in between France and Latvia? Sylvain: Similarities are based on the fact that we are all in a European framework. We prepare the same degrees (types of awards) and have standardized formalities (credits to gather, etc.). We also have quite the same future prospects. We all live in the same world and may choose to carry on future plans anywhere in Europe (or elsewhere). So the studying process pursues quite the same aims in France and Latvia. Regarding the main differences, I can still find plenty! In France the studies are really full-time. We have a lot of lectures, workshops and home-tasks. In Latvia I experienced evening classes and was at first a bit surprised to have so much free time during the rest of the day! I took advantage of this fact by using my day-time to take language classes and give a few French language private lessons. At the end, I was busy enough! In France (I used to study law) some academic standards are definitely higher (although to some extents a bit obsolete). Every student is constantly asked for better performance, what makes it exhausting and tiring but also challenging. In Latvia the expectations are not so high, the advantage of which is to develop certain self-confidence (when the French system damages it!). In Latvia, I find the ‘budget places’ given to the best students a good system (probably still to be improved) as a great motivation to better performance. In France, studying is sometimes really stressful, for instance at the end of each semester when we have all exams at once… And study grants depend only on social background (of parents!), not on results (unfortunately). I have big doubts about the academic system in France, that’s also a reason why I am satisfied to have done half of my studies abroad (one year in Finland and two in Latvia). Overall, I would say (very sincerely) that the studying atmosphere is definitely nicer in Latvia: better equipments, nicer teachers, better human relations, better methods, etc. Regarding methods, however, I was sometimes frustrated of the very little feedback we receive after writing essays of making presentation. Feedbacks help one to progress, and I was used to do like this when studying in France.
- What are you doing in Brussels? Does education received in Latvia help you to manage things in Belgium? Sylvain: In Brussels I work as a trainee for the European Affairs Delegation of a large French company, Rhodia. It is worldwide leader in specialty chemicals. I participate in the work of the Delegation including legislative monitoring (I follow certain works of the EU institutions, in particular at the European Parliament), lobbying, participation in the Brussels’ networks of the company, follow-up of the EU funding opportunities… I also draft studies and prospective on a variety of themes (Environment, Water, Energy, Climate, Green technologies, Industry, Trade...). Of course the education received in Latvia helps! Especially, I was well prepared and trained to work in a multicultural environment, i.e. changing habits, several languages, the necessity to be ready to draft documents in English, etc. In addition, I got used to multidisciplinary topics, what I also have to do here. I realize this is really precious in our world, where things are getting more and more complex and interconnected. Living in Latvia was also a good preparation to live abroad again. However, in Brussels I feel much closer of my native environment! I remark that my experience in Latvia is seen as an asset by some recruiters. They identify me as “the guy who went to Latvia”, but most importantly I rely on this to convince them of my openness, my ability to adapt and my experience of multicultural environments. I argue also of my new language skills, although until now I haven’t found an application for them (other than a good impression made on my CV).
- How could you describe Latvia as a country? What made you wonder here? What seemed unusual? Sylvain: Latvia is a charming small country with a lot of character and originality. It does not have particular treasuries but its own art de vivre. I was surprised by the importance of certain traditions such as singing (and well!) folk songs or going to the countryside every weekend of holiday! Latvia seems backwards regarding certain social conditions but for the rest it seems to be a very modern and open country. To many extents more than France, where for instance it is not so common to communicate by email and where you might wait months and months to get an Internet home-connection set-up. Latvia is also deeply bicultural. I wonder why this is still seen as a problem. My native country is multicultural – mostly due to important non-European immigrant communities – and deals with that with difficulty as well. However, I tend to think that the Latvian situation is less inextricable; I believe and hope that the tensions between communities are mostly ‘generational’ and will fade out with time… Latvia’s people are remarkably full of energies and creativity. On the other hand, perhaps they are still too individualistic and tend to have strong self-confidence but - rightly or wrongly – very low trust in collective actions. I am surprised of people’s expectations, especially those of my age who think only about leaving the country without having reasonable plans elsewhere. And yet the maturity of people of my age also made me wonder. In France many of my fellows are still big kids, whereas in Latvia students have an incredible experience of life and seem to be very well-prepared to deal with life’s matter on their own. I feel really like at home now in Latvia. I am sure I will regularly come to Latvia in the future.
- What you missed the most from France during two years in Latvia? Sylvain: Probably some kinds of cheese! But I realize that very soon it is very easy to replace what you miss. Still about food, I evaluated Latvian one very highly. That would certainly be one of my top recommendations for anyone wishing to stay in Latvia. Speaking about what I really missed, of course I should have said firstly my relatives and friends; however most of them enjoyed the chance to take a trip to Latvia to visit me!
- What are your future plans? Sylvain: I still want to see Europe, and there is still much left! I am ready to catch the next opportunity. At present I will try to take valuable insights in the professional world. I plan to stay in Brussels for a while, where I might have some opportunities in the European sphere. And after some years, it could be nice to start doctoral studies. Of course, I hope those will be related to Baltic Sea Region studies, what became my field, now!
