Living with a foreign family for a few weeks does something to a teenager that no textbook can. You are forced to adapt, and that changes you. I think the advantages clearly outweigh the disadvantages, though one issue – cost – needs to be addressed seriously.
The personal benefits are real and well-documented. Teenagers on exchange programmes develop independence, improve their language skills, and come back with a broader understanding of the world. The Erasmus programme has been running since 1987 and has sent millions of European students abroad. Research shows that participants are more likely to work across borders, speak multiple languages, and report higher levels of confidence than peers who stayed home. These are not small gains.
For the host country, there are benefits too. Schools that take in exchange students become more internationally minded. Teachers and local students gain exposure to different perspectives. These connections contribute to a more open and tolerant school culture.
The main drawback is unequal access. These programmes cost money, and students from lower-income families are often left behind. This is a genuine concern. But the answer is better funding – through government grants or school partnerships – not scrapping the programmes altogether.
In short, international exchange visits have a lot to offer. The question is not whether they work – they clearly do. The question is who gets the chance to go. Fixing that problem should be the priority, not abandoning something that genuinely helps young people grow.