An eligibility criterion is mandatory when the applicable instructions explicitly require it as a condition of applying. It is advisory when the material presents it as guidance rather than a requirement. However, wording such as “recommended” or “should consider” is a clue rather than conclusive proof; the applicant must check the surrounding rules and programme-specific instructions.
What wording indicates a mandatory criterion?
The strongest signal is explicit requirement language. Chevening states: “You must meet our eligibility criteria to apply for a Chevening Scholarship.” The word “must,” together with the stated connection to applying, directly identifies its criteria as mandatory in that guidance.
A heading alone is less reliable. A section called “Eligibility” or “Entry Requirements” indicates where applicants should look, but it does not necessarily explain whether every item is compulsory, recommended or conditional.
| Official wording or placement | What it indicates | What still needs confirmation |
|---|---|---|
| “Must,” “required” or equivalent language | The item is stated as a condition | The precise criterion, any exceptions and the full application consequence |
| A section labelled “Eligibility” or “Entry Requirements” | The programme provides conditions to examine | Whether each individual item is mandatory or advisory |
| “Recommended,” “should” or “consider” | Usually suggests guidance | Whether another part of the instructions gives it a compulsory effect |
| The wording remains unclear | No reliable classification can yet be made | The applicant must consult the governing programme instructions or an official clarification channel |
Why programme-specific wording matters
The Erasmus+ guidance states that each master’s website contains details about the course, participating universities, entry requirements and application steps. This makes the individual master’s website the relevant place to examine the criteria; the general Erasmus+ statement does not itself establish that every listed item is mandatory or optional.
An applicant should therefore read each criterion in context rather than treating an entire requirements list as automatically compulsory. The surrounding sentences may distinguish application conditions from recommendations, alternatives or other guidance.
A practical eligibility check
Before treating a criterion as mandatory, an applicant should:
- Locate the instructions that govern the exact programme.
- Read the complete sentence or paragraph containing the criterion.
- Check whether the text uses a condition, a recommendation or uncertain language.
- Look for definitions, exceptions or qualifications elsewhere in the instructions.
- Avoid assigning a status that the official wording does not support.
If the distinction remains unresolved after checking the programme-specific material, the criterion should remain unconfirmed. Silence, a broad section heading or another applicant’s interpretation is not enough to turn advisory guidance into a mandatory rule—or to dismiss an explicit requirement as optional.