Gabrielle Rolan, pro vice chancellor at the University of South Australia, led the event, which featured senior Navitas Australia executives Jonathan Chew (chief insights officer) and Ethan Fogarty (senior manager, government relations) sharing Navitas’ projections. Those projections were based on a variety of primary and secondary inputs from Oxford Economics and UNESCO (which counts higher education enrolments).

International student mobility set to grow

In 2019, six million students were studying in countries other than their own. Navitas projects 4% growth over the next few years, culminating in just over nine million students abroad by 2030.

India and China will continue to send the most students, followed by Nigeria. Regionally, Central Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa are expected to post the most percentage growth.

Will India overtake China?

The question is on everyone’s minds. Indian student demand for study abroad has been extraordinarily high for several years, while Chinese demand has been more complicated – slowed by the pandemic and disrupted by the proliferation of high-quality domestic options.

Mr Fogarty crystallised the complex interplay of factors that might inform the answer. India’s overall population will exceed China’s in 2030, as will its number of 18–22-year-olds. These dynamics guarantee an upward outbound mobility trajectory.

However, India trails China in several ways that will affect how many of its students will study abroad in the next few years. Its tertiary enrolment ratio, outbound study mobility ratio, and GDP per capita are much lower than China’s. These factors lead to a lower projected outbound volume in 2030 than China’s.

Still, for China, the outlook is uncertain. Mr Fogarty notes that confidence in the Chinese economy has deteriorated since the pandemic. Predictions for Chinese outbound have been volatile as a result, as shown in the following chart.

Mr Fogarty foresees “countervailing” inputs that will determine what happens in the event China’s economy deteriorates:

• On the one hand, affordability would become more of an issue – fewer families might be able to send their children for study abroad;
• On the other, unemployment and limited job prospects would drive more Chinese students to pursue opportunities in other countries.

Mr Fogarty points out: “Poor employment prospects can actually drive positive effects for students’ propensity to study.”

Because of this uncertainty, it is not impossible that India will defy the forecast and edge ahead of China by 2030. India has outperformed Navitas’ forecasts in the past, and it was instrumental to the recovery of international education sectors in leading destinations post-COVID.

But India would a great deal of catch-up in the next few years to match the market fundamentals of China. As shown below, GDP per capita would need to move from 6.8K in 2019 to 35K in 2030. Tertiary enrolment would have to jump from 28.4% to 58%. And there would need to be a doubling of the outbound student mobility ratio.

The more likely scenario – if India were to outpace China – would be more compelling “pull” factors for Indian students, such as better post-study work and immigration opportunities.

Whatever happens, it is almost certain that China and India will remain the top two sending markets in 2030.

A narrower pool of students

New immigration settings in leading destinations are fundamentally changing the way (1) international students consider study abroad, (2) educators recruit overseas. The following chart succinctly summarises this shift for Australia, but it could easily be extrapolated to the other three of the Big Four: Canada, the UK, and the US. Incoming students will be more academically motivated and less price-sensitive.

This isn’t to say that demand for foreign qualifications in emerging markets will lessen. To the contrary, it will probably grow. But transnational education, including branch campuses, international exchanges, and models where students complete part of their degree at home and part abroad, will likely play a much larger role in expanding access to globally recognised degrees in the future.

For additional background, please see:

• “Demand for study abroad rising in China but students considering more destinations in 2024”
• “Market snapshot: International student recruitment in China today”
• “What impact will a slowing economy have on Chinese demand for study abroad?”
• “Spending by Indian outbound students could reach US$70 billion by 2025”

The post Which countries will contribute the most to global student mobility in 2030? appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The study, , was conducted and authored by Joonghyun Kwak and Maia Chankseliani and appears in The International Journal of Educational Research.

The authors write that they pursued the study because while there is ample research on the positive effects of study abroad on individual students (e.g., upward social mobility and income), there is not much on its effect on whole societies.
��
There is a complex methodology underlying the findings, which , but we will limit our coverage to the study’s main findings and takeaways.

Long-term benefits

The authors looked at the relationship between global study mobility from 1999–2018 and poverty levels in 43 low- or middle-income countries. They found that the impact of international student returnees on poverty levels happens gradually over a 15-year period.

The following chart shows that as international student mobility increased over time, poverty in the sampled countries went down. The difference between poverty levels in 1999 and 2018 is quite striking.

The intangible good of transnational spaces

When students decide to study abroad, they aren’t just border-hopping to access a more developed country’s education system, even if they might think of it that way initially. When they are abroad, they not only acquire new skills and credentials, but they also enter what the authors call a “transnational” space where different cultures and worldviews are shared.

This intangible – even unexpected – space is also populated with other international students with the same drive for progress, success, and knowledge. The transnational space is full of connections that students take back with them if they return home.

Back at home, students’ skills and global understanding tend to drive economic and social development. Their success and immersion in new environments abroad provides them with newfound agency that can empower them to work towards innovation and progress, which reverberates across their society. For example:

“Returnees can use their connections formed abroad to build bridges between their home countries and global networks of resources, innovation, and knowledge …. These global connections enable the exchange of ideas and resources, promoting cooperation and supporting local economic development. For example, returnees can attract investments or support for poverty alleviation projects in their own communities ….

Armed with technical expertise and an entrepreneurial spirit, returnees may introduce new technologies and methods to sectors like health, science, and business.”

Issues to consider

The authors make the important point that at an individual level, most international students are not from households experiencing extreme poverty. Study abroad is very expensive, and relatively affluent families are best positioned to pursue it. This underlines the crucial role of government and institution-level scholarships for poorer international students. The authors note: “We contend that students’ exposure to diverse cultures and perspectives abroad leads to a transformation in how they perceive and engage with their home countries.” Poorer students deserve that opportunity, too.
 
The other caveat is that not all international students return to their home countries. Many see study abroad as the first step towards emigration, which leads to a certain amount of brain drain.

Targeted scholarships and short-term exchanges are important in this respect. Here are two examples of initiatives designed to help students to contribute to their home countries through study abroad:

• , which are offered by the German government to outstanding students from developing countries. They allow international recipients to obtain a master’s degree in disciplines of special relevance for the social, political, and economic development of their home country at German institutions of higher education.

• are a short-term exchange opportunity. The Canadian government offers funding for students from Caribbean countries for one or two semesters in fields such as climate-smart agriculture, sustainable culinary practices, renewable energy, and sustainable building techniques.

In general, we are seeing more activity in international research collaborations between so-called Global North and Global South universities. As the world moves further from colonialist assumptions, two-way mobility agreements that benefit both traditional destinations and emerging economies are becoming more common.

The post Research shows link between study abroad and poverty alleviation�� appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

International student mobility has historically been concentrated among the “Big Four” destinations of Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US. Over the past few years, however, there has been a shift towards a wider field of study destinations. That change is being driven both by changing student preferences and by the strategic goals, demographics, and labour market needs of emerging destinations.

New research from INTO University Partnerships shows that prospective students are applying to more programmes than ever before – typically four or five – and to more institutions in more destinations than in previous years. This trend is projected to continue in the long term, and it means that institutions investing in enquiry responsiveness and admissions processing will see more applications converting into enrolments.

Students’ openness to alternatives reflects their changing priorities, including :

• Affordability;
• Fast visa processing;
• Geographic and cultural proximity;
• The expansion of English-taught degree programmes in non-English-speaking countries;
• Opportunities to work during and after studies in the host country.

At the same time, destinations such as Japan and South Korea are working more actively to recruit foreign students in part because of declining domestic populations of college-aged students and the related need to attract talent in key areas of local labour market demand.

“As international students seek to understand what return they can expect on their investments, we see that decisions across every major source market are increasingly based on cost,” says Peter Thompson, vice president of data analytics at INTO University Partnerships. For Jessica Turner, chief executive officer of QS, this creates a competitive point of differentiation for emerging study destinations: “In contrast to students seeking education in the Big Four, students setting their sights elsewhere tend to prioritise affordability over reputation and teaching credentials.”

Economic opportunities are a common draw

Dr Florian Hummel, vice-rector for international affairs at the International University of Applied Sciences (IU) in Germany, says, “The economy is one of the main reasons international students come to Germany. Our strong career prospects and clear post-study work rights are some of the reasons that a growing number of students from the Indian subcontinent are choosing to study at IU.”

A mix of factors drives choice

Cost of living influences many students, but more expensive destinations can still attract significant market segments by virtue of other attributes. Living costs in Japan are relatively high, for example, but Japan welcomed an additional 50,000 international students in 2023 compared to the year before.

More students are also taking sustainability, national sentiment toward international students, and mental health into account when making their decisions. These trends could already be contributing to increases in student mobility to destinations such as Germany, France, and Finland.

Pros and cons

Greater access to a more diverse range of study abroad opportunities is good news for students. But Mr Thompson cautions that higher volumes of applications can also pose a risk to the sector’s reputation globally. For one, administrative functions will be under more pressure. And students may also delay decisions as they hedge their bets across destinations. This means that, more than ever before, speedy and effective response to enquiries and applications will be absolutely key.

The race for foreign talent

Countries outside of the Big Four are seizing the opportunities of a changing international education landscape, with destinations across Asia and Europe growing in popularity. Ms Turner notes, for example, that the number of international students in China doubled over 10 years from 2013 and remains healthy despite declines in the pandemic. Further, with a healthy contingent of those students coming from other Asian countries, China continues to establish itself as an important player in intra-regional recruitment.

Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, and Taiwan are on upward trajectories as well, with Japan aiming to host 400,000 international students within the next decade. South Korea’s Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Lee Ju-ho declared last year that, “Now is the time to attract foreign talent strategically.”

In Germany, the government is the primary funder of the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD). Recognising the long-term benefits of global collaboration and welcoming the brightest minds, the DAAD is the world’s largest funding organisation for international exchange of students and researchers. In China, the government issues tens of thousands of scholarships for international students each year and is investing in infrastructure through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative.

More English-language programmes outside the Big Four

Edwin van Rest, chief executive officer of Studyportals, says, “The European Union’s decade of growth in this area is winding down. Now we are entering a decade of Asian expansion. South Asia has expanded its ETPs more than twofold since 2019. China, the Middle East and North Africa, and the rest of Asia have doubled their offerings. The Big Four are losing market share, dropping to 78% this year from 82% in 2021.”

That said, the English language is and will remain influential in Europe. Leaders such as Dr Hummel are investing in ETPs as part of their growth strategies. One of Germany’s largest universities, the IU, has approximately 200 programmes. Nearly half of those programmes are now offered in English or German.

Indeed, educators across Europe are buoyant. France and Germany each enrolled more than 400,000 students last year and international strategies in Spain are generating results. The prospects of European institutions beyond the UK are healthy overall: these destinations have become more attractive to international students from all major source countries in the last year. As we see in the table below, education agents report that interest in these European destinations has surged more than 90% among students from South Asia, and the Middle East and Africa.

Agents in China, Hong Kong, and Macau also report that interest in non-UK European institutions has increased nearly a quarter. However, these agents have seen even greater growth in the appeal of institutions in Southeast Asia and the rest of Asia.

Policy drives students to alternatives

Mr van Rest says that many students from sending countries that are the most affected by new policy settings in Big Four destinations are now looking elsewhere: “What they find are more attractive conditions in terms of work rights, affordability, and proximity.” This may partly account for the dramatic surge in interest in New Zealand and Ireland this year: student applications to these countries via QS increased 7.2-fold and 1.7-fold respectively, compared to last year.

Flexible delivery modes disperse demand

The appetite for new modes of higher education delivery models is reflected in expanded transnational education (TNE) activity, including regional hubs, remote delivery, and branch campuses. The UK dominates TNE, accounting for 75% of the market with around 580,000 students enrolled. Australia and the US are also key players, particularly in Asia and the Middle East. As a host country and as an education exporter, China is rapidly expanding its TNE offering and is becoming an increasingly influential player in the field.

Student mobility beyond the Big Four is being defined by strategies to deliver practical outcomes and relevant experiences. As the executive director and chief executive officer of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, Dr Fanta Aw, says, “There is plenty of room in a growing space. We should be thinking about the 20 major countries instead of the Big Four, because students should have choices to get the best education that is right for them.”

For additional background, please see:

• “The view from here: How the ‘Big Four’ study destinations are adapting in a year of change”
• “European study destinations now offering thousands of English-taught degree programmes”
• “Recent policy changes slowing student interest in the UK, Canada, and Australia”

The post Beyond the Big Four: How demand for study abroad is shifting to destinations in Asia and Europe appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

In its latest update, IRCC first confirms that 1 November 2024 is the cut-off date for which the new rules will apply. Students who applied for or held a study permit prior to 1 November 2024 will remain eligible for a PGWP under the previous rules.

Students applying for a study permit on or after 1 November 2024, however, will be affected by the new rules, the most important aspect of which concerns a new “field of study” requirement for graduates of college programmes, including degree programmes.

IRCC explains that as of that 1 November effective date, “If you graduated from a college program or any other program not listed above, you must graduate in an eligible field of study” in order to be eligible for a post-graduation work permit.

Graduates of degree programmes offered by universities are unaffected by the new rules and will continue to be eligible for PGWPs of up to three years, without a field of study requirement.

On the key question of fields of study for college graduates leading to a PGWP, IRCC’s 4 October announcement provides . Crucially, those programmes are confined to five broad areas: agriculture and agri-food; healthcare; science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); skilled trade; and transportation.

This means, however, that some key areas of college programming that tend to attract significant numbers of international students, such as tourism and hospitality or business programmes of any kind, will no longer be PGWP-eligible. Commenting on LinkedIn shortly after the 4 October announcement, Karen Dancy, director, recruitment and international at Olds College, said, “Notably absent on the list is hospitality. This will be catastrophic for local communities, including rural and remote areas, that rely on our college-educated international learners.”

In an open letter to IRCC Minister Marc Miller on 27 September, Marketa Evans, the president and CEO of Colleges Ontario, registered the sector’s strong objections to the additional restrictions placed on college graduates. “I write to express our strong objection to the federal government’s decision to end automatic work permits for international students attending Ontario’s public colleges,” she said. “We are very concerned about the lack of consultation with provinces and the use of national labour market information to inform what local employers need. We urge the federal government to work collaboratively with the province to ensure that the needs of Ontarians are taken into consideration under this new work permit system.”

The process by which the list of PGWP-eligible programmes has been determined remains unclear. But IRCC has previously said that it would be based on areas of long-term labour shortages in the Canadian economy. In a 1 October statement to ���Ϲ��� Monitor, an IRCC spokesperson added that, “The occupations in long-term shortage on which this policy is based are the same as those used in Express Entry’s category-based selection process,” and that the list of eligible field of studies would be “chosen with input received from our partners, including provinces and territories, and stakeholders across the country.”

Many stakeholders, however, have called that process into question, especially with respect to its ability to recognise or adapt to regional or local labour market needs. A 2 October statement from Pari Johnston, the president & CEO of Colleges and Institutes Canada, makes that very point.

“The reforms single out public colleges to prove their programs align with national labour market needs – determined by Ottawa – in order to be considered an eligible field of study for a post-graduate work permit. New eligibility restrictions also make a false distinction between the quality and relevance of college and university bachelor’s degrees approved by their provinces…Ottawa’s decision to align programs with national needs creates a fundamental disconnect between the pressing needs of local labour markets and the essential contributions of skilled international graduates from the over 10,000 diploma and bachelor’s degree programs in high demand fields across our network. We believe this disconnect needs to be addressed with urgency.”

Scale of impact

The reports that “105,030 post-graduation work permits were approved in the first six months of this year, with 64% of them going to international graduates from colleges. Over the same period, graduates in business studies made up 42% of the work permit recipients while 37% were in STEM and 16% in computing and IT. However, just 1% studied [skilled] trades.”

In other words, more than six in ten PGWPs issued in the first half of 2024 went to college graduates, roughly 67,000 of them. Of those, nearly half would no longer be eligible for post-study work in Canada under IRCC’s new rules.

What happens next

There is no question that IRCC’s 4 October announcement presents a massive challenge to Canadian colleges, and one that will have significant impacts on recruitment strategy and institutional finances.

Writing on on 4 October, Dr Dennis Johnson – formerly the president of the College of New Caledonia and now a consultant in the sector – said that, “The recent policy changes announced by Minister Miller mark a pivotal shift for Canada’s International Student Program, drastically reducing what was once a financial lifeline for many institutions. The future of the post-secondary education system is at risk, and without coordinated action, both the viability of institutions and opportunities for future learners are in question.”

Dr Johnson sees a period of turmoil ahead, with considerable demand for additional funding from provincial governments, but ultimately that these current challenges may also drive innovation within the sector: “I firmly believe that Canadian institutions will use this crisis as an opportunity for improvement, innovation and change. We are likely entering one of the most transformative periods in Canadian post-secondary education in decades, as institutions rethink their business models, improve operations, professionalize management practices, and adapt their priorities and program offerings to align with new realities.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Canada announces updates for foreign enrolment cap and post-study work rules“
• “The view from here: How the ‘Big Four’ study destinations are adapting in a year of change“

The post Canadian immigration ministry releases list of college programmes eligible for post-study work permits appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

There is an increasingly critical need for better and more timely data in international education, and one that is being driven by a number of overlapping factors. Students, for example, are looking for stronger evidence of the return on investment they can expect from study abroad. At the same time, policymakers and other stakeholders want clear and current statistics for international enrolments, including indicators of student performance and outcomes.

It is widely acknowledged that there are significant data gaps across the international education sector. We generally don’t have as much information as we could use in terms of how students are recruited, where and how they study, how they perform in their programmes, graduation rates, and student outcomes. Further, there can be a real issue with timeliness of the data we do have. In the UK, for example, higher education enrolment figures often lag well behind the actual reporting period. This year, they were released months later than usual and arrived a full 16 months after the academic year in question.

This absence of comprehensive, transparent, and up-to-date data creates vulnerability for the sector. It undermines the impact and narrative around the benefits of global education. To take just one recent example, during a September 2024 media briefing, Canadian Immigration Minister Marc Miller asserted that foreign college graduates mainly go on to work at low-paying jobs in Canada. Many educators may have wanted to contest the point, but often lack the student outcomes data that could tell a different story of that student experience.

Telling a better story

Jamie Arrowsmith, director of Universities UK International believes, “We need a new narrative around international higher education and the global role of universities. It’s about foregrounding the academic, social, and cultural benefits that come from internationalisation, and bringing those to the fore in the public discourse and public policy.”

“The availability of data and evidence is crucial for making the case for international education,” agrees Dr Fanta Aw, executive director and CEO of NAFSA. As international education increasingly works to link student mobility to larger economic goals, the necessity of data to help address skills gaps and meet labour market demands is increasingly obvious.

“The fact that we can cite that one in four of the United States’ billion-dollar start-ups has been founded by former international students is powerful,” says Dr Aw. “We can show that 42% of the major companies making advances in AI have been established by former international students. That’s important. We use this data to prove the value of international education.”

Nick Miller, chief marketing officer of QA Higher Education, agrees. “We must be more deliberate about the types of provisions that feed the employment opportunities of our economies,” he says.

Beyond meeting student and economic needs, data-based narratives are essential for effective advocacy with governments and other stakeholders. Significant policy shifts in major study destinations across the past year have emphasised the sector’s vital need for stable policy. “If the policy doesn’t match the rhetoric about welcoming international students, particularly around immigration, it creates a disconnect,” says Anne Marie Graham, chief executive of UK Council for International Student Affairs (UKCISA).

International education can do more to advocate for the policies that enable student mobility. And it should do more. “If we are not proactive in shaping policy then others will make a policy for us in a way that’s not always as well informed as it could be,” says Arnold Persoon, who has served as a board member of the European Association for International Education.

The sentiment is echoed by Bobby Mehta, pro vice-chancellor (global engagement) at the University of Portsmouth. Highlighting the need for collaboration, Mr Mehta says, “As a sector, as an ecosystem, we must really work together to give the assurances to governments that international education is managing and delivering contributions to society. This is essential to creating the conditions for a stable policy environment.”

To be effective, those assurances need evidence. They need to be grounded in data. “Data allow us to show how policy changes impact the sector, and to advise on protecting it,” says Rachel MacSween, director of partnerships at IDP.

Ms MacSween points out international growth strategies are at risk even before migration policies change. “Our data show that international student demand for a country often starts to decline well before any policy changes. That is typically driven by negative public feelings or rhetoric, which policies then tend to respond to.”

“Anti-immigration and nationalism is rising in several parts of the world,” adds Professor Sarah Todd, vice president (global) for Griffith University. “That’s a challenge that we really need to think about as an international education community, regardless of where we live.”

“There is a stereotyped image of what an international student looks like, who they are and how much money they have,” says Professor Todd. “It reflects neither what we’re doing as education providers nor the role of recruitment agencies. So how do we ensure international students are seen as a benefit to the communities they live in, regardless of what countries are doing on migration? As education providers, we have a role to play in that. I think we’ve all got a little bit of branding and reputation enhancement to do.”

Dr Aw points back to evidence-based insights as critical. “The idea that students from Africa are not of as good quality as those from another part of the world is simply not true,” she says. “Data show that students from diverse regions, like Africa, often excel academically, with strong graduation rates and job placements. Disaggregating data debunks these misconceptions and proves that quality is not tied to geography.”

A call to action

The call for better data to inform accurate narratives that generate support for international education is clear. Institutions can start by joining the conversations to explore opportunities for improvements and collaboration. They can examine their internal data and take deliberate steps to improve data collection, analysis, and communication. Mr Mehta urges for greater openness in the sector. He says, “The more transparent we are in these areas, the better. Unifying as an industry to make the case will give education leaders the space to focus on our individual institutions, putting energy into the subject areas and the research that we specialise in.”

“We cannot do this work without making the case, and we can never stop making the case for international education,” concludes Dr Aw. By focusing on transparency and collaboration, institutions can lay the groundwork for a more coherent and comprehensive approach to data collection at both national and international levels.

When parsed by factors such as field of study and country of origin, these indicators will enable the sector to tell a clearer and more compelling story at the institutional, national, and international levels. A story of international student success and the broader benefits of global education. And a story that is fundamental to shaping a sustainable future.

We should all begin this work today.

For additional background, please see:

• A special selection from the ���Ϲ��� Monitor archives of articles relating to the major themes in discussion during the ���Ϲ��� Monitor Global Summit in London, September 2024
• “Under pressure: How global migration and economic trends are impacting international education“
• “What is the cost of policy intended to reduce international student flows?“

The post International education has a data problem. It’s time to do something about it appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

includes recommendations for expanding access, investing in research, and stimulating local growth. It also emphases the need for a coordinated global strategy for UK universities.

Acknowledging multiple challenges – including a recent decrease in demand from key student markets such as Nigeria and India – the report argues that a cohesive strategy is necessary to improve the UK’s global reach, reputation, and impact in the years ahead.

Professor Dame Sally Mapstone, Principal and Vice-Chancellor of the University of St Andrews and President of Universities UK, writes:

“We stand at a fork in the road in the history of the UK’s universities. There is now a clear choice. We can allow our distinguished, globally competitive higher education system to slide into decline. Or we can act together, as institutions and with government, to ensure that higher education is able to deliver for the nation into the 2030s.”

Report arrives at a critical moment

As a new Labour government takes office in the UK, the report is well-timed to engage the government in a conversation with huge implications for the future of higher education in the country.

On 27 September 2024, the new Labour administration announced that it was launching , a move that could lead to the setting of new student enrolment targets.

The existing strategy, created under the former Conservative government, set a goal of growing overseas student numbers to 600,000 by 2030. This target was reached in 2020-21. Amid growing public concern over immigration figures, however, a series of policies less welcoming to international students were adopted, causing student visa numbers to fall by almost 17%.

More funding needed

To improve the UK education brand in overseas markets, improve access to higher education, increase collaboration, and produce graduates with skills needed by local and national labour forces, the report says that universities need more government funding.

Earlier this month, Universities UK stated that government grants and fees have not kept pace with rising costs and argued for accelerated funding to avoid worrisome budget deficits. Such ongoing deficits, the report suggests, have led to an over-reliance on international student fees to stopgap funding shortfalls.

Yet the government plans to do away with a multi-year tuition freeze and to allow fees to rise with tuition. Prime Minister Keir has also announced that the government is backing away from a pledge to abolish tuition fees.

At the recent ���Ϲ��� Monitor Global Summit in London, Jamie Arrowsmith, the director of Universities UK International, said that the current situation – in which universities are forced to rely on international student revenue for operations – is unsustainable:

“Fundamentally, basing the long-term sustainability of universities – which should be seen as a real strategic asset for the UK – on a pretty dynamic and actually quite volatile funding stream cannot be in our interest, it cannot be in student interest, and it is certainly not in university or community interest.”

The Rt Hon. the Lord Willetts, who authored the report’s global chapter, says that policy flip-flops regarding international students have damaged the attractiveness of the UK as a study destination.

Call for a coordinated UK global strategy

To strengthen the UK’s reputation abroad, the report calls for a coherent Global Strategy for Universities with this objective:

“To harness the global reach, reputation and impact of our universities to create opportunity, foster prosperity and develop knowledge, both for the UK and our international partners.”

This strategy would be based on broad consultation with stakeholders within education, training, research, and global development. The report envisions the strategy being “owned and coordinated by the Cabinet Office, setting a national framework that recognises and supports the needs and priorities of regions and devolved administrations. It is critical that the Home Office be a partner in this strategy, alongside the Department of Education, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, Department for Business and Trade and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.”

A ‘Compact’ proposed for universities and government

The Universities UK report also advocates for a new Compact between universities and government. This would set a stable policy framework and be geared at securing “sustainable levels of international student recruitment and well-managed growth.”

Such stability would be achieved by universities fully implementing the Agent Quality Framework and Fair Admissions Code of Practice; committing to sustainable levels of international student recruitment; investing in student experience; and diversifying to avoid single-market dependencies.

As for the government, the Compact would see the government demonstrating:

• A long-term commitment to stable, sustainable levels of international student recruitment and well-managed growth, including a commitment to retaining the Graduate Route in its current form;
• Greater transparency when reporting migration trends;
• A review of the removal of visas for dependants, acknowledging the impact this policy has had on equity, diversity and diversification and on the UK’s wider strategic objectives, particularly its effect on programmes designed for students with significant professional experience.

In addition, the report advocates for a coordinated plan to attract global talent; commit long-term to the Turing scheme; consider a future association with the Erasmus scheme; increase funding for global research collaboration; and partnering of universities and government to help mitigate ongoing security risks from hostile outside actors.

For additional background, please see:

• “What is the cost of policy intended to reduce international student flows?”
• “UK reports record-high foreign enrolment for 2022/23”
• “US gains greater share of international student interest amid policy changes in competitor destinations”

The post Universities UK releases blueprint for higher and international education appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

“The idea that the US and the [established] foreign market can continue to dominate is a very old framework,” says Dr Fanta Aw, executive director and CEO of NAFSA: Association of International Educators. “There are many emerging countries, and students, policy makers, and others are looking at those countries.”

Through a series of keynote speeches at the inaugural in London this week, insights from sector leaders in the “Big Four” study destinations – Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US – provided perspectives on the scale of transformation, and strategies that are reshaping student mobility.

While the US has started down a path toward more carefully coordinated action between educators and policy makers, practitioners in Australia, Canada and the UK are responding to new rules that are dampening international student demand.

Those new policy settings arise from an increasingly politicised environment around immigration in many study destinations, one fuelled by growing public concern around access to affordable housing and rising costs of living. The resulting downturns in student numbers across those major destinations has only highlighted how dependant post-secondary systems have become on international student fees.

Larissa Bezo, president and CEO of the Canadian Bureau for International Education (CBIE) says, “When we closed out 2023, we had over a million international students in Canada; that represents about 185% growth over the last 10 years. [That level of enrolment] is significant, it is visible. It certainly not only has a profile on campus, but certainly that visibility also extends to the host communities around our institutions.”

Jamie Arrowsmith, director of Universities UK International, says, “The reason it creates a sort of political and policy problem for us is that funding is seen as the sole driver of global engagement and recruitment. Fundamentally, basing the long-term sustainability of universities – which should be seen as a real strategic asset for the UK – on a pretty dynamic and actually quite volatile funding stream cannot be in our interest, it cannot be in student interest, and it is certainly not in university or community interest.”

This sentiment is echoed in Canada, where the challenge is honing focus on new opportunities to drive strategic international growth.

“The reality is we can no longer afford to base institutions’ survival on how effectively they recruit international students and how many they can recruit,” says Ms Bezo. “What this does is afford us an opportunity to think about how we do this very intentionally, and how we recalibrate such that we can be much more sustainable as we look forward to the future.”

Redoubling efforts to ensure great student experiences is now central to the conversations between CBIE and its members. According to Ms Bezo, those discussions are already delivering innovation and dynamism. International departments are investing in capacity building with partners in-market, more face-to-face working, refreshed training, and immigration support. Student experience divisions are exploring stronger commitments to graduate outcomes, creative approaches to employment progression, and ongoing career development paths both within and outside of Canada.

Across the Big Four, sector leaders and educators have signalled their support for measures to strengthen quality controls and especially to improve the experience of foreign students during their programmes abroad. However, the nearly unanimous view across the sector is that the speed and reach of policy changes introduced to date has also created a great deal of confusion and uncertainty. And that it is that uncertainty, often as much as any new policy settings themselves, that has had the biggest impact on student numbers this year.

This is perhaps felt most urgently in Australia and in Canada. The situation remains very fluid in both countries where changes have often been introduced abruptly, catching the sector off guard or with insufficient detail to allow for proper forward planning.

That rapid change is on full display in Australia at the moment where a new foreign enrolment cap has been proposed for implementation in January 2025. However, the government must pass legislative amendments quickly in order put the cap into force and time is running short. Meanwhile, there are serious questions in play, including at continuing hearings of the Australian Senate, around the process and detail of the proposed limits, and it remains unclear how and when they will be implemented. If they are passed into law as they are currently set out, the projection is for very significant impacts in both the university and VET sectors, with, by some estimates, as many as 300 private training colleges at risk of closure.

“I have been in international education a long time, and this is the biggest own-goal I have ever seen.” said Professor Sarah Todd, the vice president (Global) for Griffith University. “We have constantly advocated to the government that if they went ahead with this, that they needed to reinforce the message that we welcome international students. There has been no positive messaging from the government at all, and I think that’s a real gap. So we’re trying to do it. I wrote personally to all of our recruitment agents last week about our enrolment limit because I know how much confusion there is.”

Universities UK, meanwhile, is working to engage a newly elected Labour government with meaningful dialogue to celebrate international collaboration and mobility exchange as “cornerstones for the sector,” and create a more sustainable model that recognises the multi-faceted benefits of universities.

“As a university community, the thing that we really need from our own governments more than anything else is stability, policy stability is really, really critical,” says Mr Arrowsmith, “But in return for that, we have to ensure that we are sustaining and maintaining very high levels of trust of what we are doing, both in recruitment but also in international collaboration more broadly.”

Similarly, Ms Bezo sees a drive in Canada to be realistic about available study opportunities and where they will lead students in the future. “The reality is, is that not every student will be in a position to come into study in Canada,” she adds. “But we want to be realistic about those opportunities and to be very transparent about that pathway even when it comes to post-graduation. I think the other conversation that we’re having in the Canadian context is how do we ensure that we’re supporting our students in that post study environment.”

“How do we better align Canadian post-secondary education with the Canadian economy and what does that actually look like in terms of the student experience?” she added. “How do we use the challenges that we’re currently facing in the international education sector to work together business, our institutions, our communities in terms of developing a strategy to really harness the potential of that global talent, both for the benefit of Canada, but also where we’re creating meaningful opportunities for growth for those students.”

For Dr Aw, honesty is fundamental for any US institution considering international recruitment. She says, “We have been very clear with our institutions: do not bring international students if you do not have the structures in place to do right by those students and their families. That is dishonest and it’s going to backfire in ways that will be unprecedented.”

Despite international students accounting for a modest 5% of the total US student body, compared with 30%, 24%, and 22% for Canada, Australia, and the UK respectively, the US has no comprehensive international education growth strategy, yet.

Underscoring the vital importance of a sustainable and coordinated approach to student mobility, Dr Aw says, “It is in the national interest to diversify and grow international students in the US, and it is essential that student success is the heart of strategy to achieve that growth.”

To catalyse a national effort, NAFSA is leading a US Success Coalition for International Education. Its 40 members advocate as a group for collaboration, communication, diversification, capacity building, commitment, and expanding employment pathways for international students. These are common threads across the Big Four, despite their distinctions.

That many of our colleagues across these influential study destinations are gritting their teeth and holding on tight to get through some challenging days this year is undeniable. Shifting perceptions, policy instability, funding crises, and geopolitical tensions make for a white-knuckle ride but the outlook from the Big Four illuminates a path that prioritises student outcomes, advocates for stable policy, explores new opportunities, and connects with employers and labour markets to forge a sustainable future for student mobility.

As Ms. Bezo says, “Through the challenges that we’re walking through, this kind of fire before us, I think we see a lot of really unique opportunities.”

For additional background, please see:

• “What is the cost of policy intended to reduce international student flows?“
• “Recent policy changes slowing student interest in the UK, Canada, and Australia“
• “Under pressure: How global migration and economic trends are impacting international education“

The post The view from here: How the “Big Four” study destinations are adapting in a year of change appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The trend represents a significant competitive advantage for European educators at a time when international students are increasingly exploring alternatives to the “Big Four” destinations of Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US. That said, those leading English-speaking destinations still dominate the ETP market.

The report, , shows that as of June 2024, 43% of on-campus ETPs and 58% of online ETPs outside of the Big Four are in Europe.

Ireland, Germany, and The Netherlands offer the most

Those three countries each offer more than 2,000 on-campus English-taught degree programmes, followed by France, Italy, and Spain (over 1,000). France and Italy stand out as the EEA countries where growth in ETPs has risen the fastest. France offered roughly 1,200 in 2019 and now offers about 1,400, while Italy’s 960 in 2019 has moved to 1,250.

At the city level, Dublin, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Cork, and Berlin are the top suppliers of ETPs in Europe.

Online master’s programmes on the rise

While overall, since 2021, the supply of European-based online degree programmes in English has risen by 67%, the real growth is coming from master’s programmes, as shown below.

The report notes that the online space is one to watch in a context of policy-based limits on international student mobility:

“Several popular study destinations are also implementing policies that restrict international student mobility, with social, economic, and political crises in many source markets further limiting students’ ability to study abroad. Consequently, the digital landscape presents a promising opportunity for EEA institutions to enhance their reputation in both face-to-face and online education.”

German institutions are leading the way in Europe in terms of how quickly they are expanding their supply of online programmes.

“Off the beaten path”

Commenting on the survey results, Piet van Hove, President of EAIE, said:

“In recent years, political trends are severely affecting migration policies as well as putting higher education in a defensive mode. All this adds up to a highly volatile and uncertain landscape for international student mobility. Provision of English-taught programmes is a key indicator of the state of internationalisation, and the EEA is still emerging a strong alternative to the Big Four. More and more, students are looking for truly global education experiences and going off the beaten path.”

Megan Agnew, IELTS Global Partnerships at British Council, noted: “While the Big Four markets … continue to dominate, the shifting landscape of English as a Medium of Education provides international students with more choice than ever before.”

A different approach

Edwin van Rest, CEO of Studyportals, commented on the unique lens through which European institutions view internationalisation:

“There is increasing tension between anti-immigration politics in some countries, and a global war for talent and demographic declines. Governments in Europe generally have a strategic approach and see international students are not just a source of tuition revenue and spending power, but are key to addressing talent shortages and increasing national competitiveness.”

For additional background, please see:

• “US gains greater share of international student interest amid policy changes in competitor destinations”
• “Demand for study abroad in Australia, Canada, UK already affected by new international education policies”
• “Ireland to open applications for new quality assurance mark in September 2024”
• “Germany expands in-study work opportunities for foreign students”
• “Germany confirms increase in proof-of-funds requirements for student visa applicants”
• “Dutch universities detail plan to reduce international enrolment”

The post European study destinations now offering thousands of English-taught degree programmes appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.