There is some overlap between the two in that they jointly regulate institutions that provide programming across higher education and VET, and they share jurisdiction over CRICOS-registered providers (the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students) delivering courses to international students.

The interests of the two regulators are naturally aligned in some ways, but TEQSA and ASQA rarely issue joint statements. However, earlier this month, they did just that, that they are watching how providers and agents are behaving with regards to onshore student transfers.

The joint message says:

“TEQSA and ASQA are aware of concerns that some advertising by registered providers appears inconsistent with the intent of the ban on the payment of education agent commissions in relation to onshore transfers.

“Both agencies view any attempts by providers or education agents to bypass this restriction as unacceptable and providers who are not adequately managing these risks or not meeting the relevant Standards may be subject to a compliance assessment and/or regulatory action.”

The caution speaks directly to a new rule that was introduced in January 2026, and that came into force on 31 March 2026. Under the new rule, education agents are no longer permitted to receive commissions from Australian schools and universities when an international student already in Australia (an “onshore student”) transfers from one institution to another without having completed their course with the previous provider.

The rule appears in revisions to the National Code of Practice – formally, – and it was part of a package of amendments to the Education Services for Overseas Students Act (ESOS) passed in November 2025.

The joint TEQSA-ASQA alert goes on to say that the two regulators have specific concerns in the following areas:

• Recruitment or incentive arrangements that preserve commission-based behaviour (for onshore transfers);
• Practices that encourage and facilitate unnecessary transfers of students from other providers;
• Insufficient provider oversight of education agents;
• Providers failing to declare their arrangements with third parties facilitating student transfers;
• Improper management of data around agent activities and student enrolment, including inaccurate or delayed reporting;
• Weak governance, controls, monitoring or record-keeping practices around recruitment and student enrolment;
• Providers with poor risk management practices in respect of accepting higher risk students who have transferred from another provider and do not appear to be academically prepared for their new course.

The alert then outlines the compliance expectations the regulators have for providers working with agents on onshore transfers:

“Providers need to be able to demonstrate, through robust governance oversight, that their arrangements, practices and controls are consistent with the recent changes to the National Code preventing the payment of education agent commissions in relation to onshore overseas student transfers.”

TEQSA and ASQA expect all providers to undertake a check of their current processes and practices, including:

• Reviewing agreements with education agents and other third parties;
• Checking what education agents are promoting in-market;
• Reviewing admissions and transfer practices to ensure they do not contravene the ban on onshore transfers;
• Demonstrating compliance through clear policies, monitoring, and record-keeping.

The instruction concludes with a more specific warning: “Providers who are not adequately managing these risks or not meeting the relevant Standards may be subject to a compliance assessment and/or regulatory action.”

The joint alert makes it clear that TEQSA and ASQA are concerned about onshore transfers; that they expect providers to take any actions needed to address these concerns; and that they may ramp up compliance checks or other interventions going forward.

Regular readers will appreciate that this is not strictly an Australian story. Rather, the direction of travel is clear across destinations: providers should expect greater scrutiny of their international recruitment activities by governments and regulators. Implementing effective quality checks and oversight of recruitment programmes is key to compliance.

For additional background, please see:

• “Australia introduces new rules restricting agent commissions for onshore student transfers“
• “Narrowing bands of compliance: How the UK’s new RAG system will impact international student recruitment“
• “Who decides about quality? Education agents and the question of increased regulation“

The post Joint sector alert sends a clear compliance message to Australian higher education and VET providers appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

It has set the National Planning Level (NPL), its system for controlling the flow of foreign students into universities and vocational (VET) education providers, at 295,000 new student spaces distributed across those institutions. This is the same number as last year, and the government considers this a continuation of a managed growth approach that “has been effective in returning student numbers to a more sustainable level in 2025, and so far in 2026.”

For background, the NPL system dictates that visa applications are processed normally for an institution that fills up to 80% of their allotted new student spaces. Beyond that 80% threshold, visa processing slows for that institution relative to others that stay within the threshold. The system aims to curtail over-aggressive international recruitment.

The NPL, however, is not the only way in which the government is constraining growth. On top of visa processing controls, a range of other recent policies make it more difficult for international students to choose Australia as a study destination. These include:

• Visa application fees that have risen repeatedly over the past couple of years and which now stand at AU$2,500 for a study visa and AU$5,750 for a post-study work visa. These are the highest in the world, and they are non-refundable for students who end up being rejected.

• High visa rejection rates, especially for Indians, Bangladeshis, and Nepalis.

The government’s satisfaction with how the National Planning Level is working obscures the fact that higher fees and rejection rates are causing international student demand to fall well below what might be considered “sustainable.” Some Australia institutions are not able to reach their allocation levels due to declining volumes of applications and enrolments.

The following chart shows trends in commencements (new student arrivals) over time, and it illustrates the sharp decreases from 2023–2025.

What is the real target?

from minister of education Jason Clare, assistant minister for international education Julian Hill, and skills minister Andrew Giles acknowledges:

“Current tracking indicates international student commencements are on track to be below the NPL for both 2026 and 2027. Commencements in 2026 are down 8 per cent compared to the same period in 2025, and 13 per cent lower than 2019.”

So, the NPL may be set at 295,000 in 2026 and 2027 – but the fact that commencements are coming in well below that threshold appears not to be an issue for the government. This seems quite likely given the follow-up statement in the press release:

“The decision to freeze the NPL at current levels accompanies adjustments to student visa fees.”

Mr Clare, Mr Hill, and Mr Giles all issued comments about the 2027 arrangements:

• Mr Clare: “International education is an incredibly important export industry for Australia, but we need to manage it sustainably. This is about making sure international education supports students, universities and the national interest.”

• Mr Hill: “The Albanese Government inherited a mess from the Liberals in 2022, with unsustainably high growth in student numbers in the least reputable parts of the sector and student visas being misused by crooks and shonks. The Government will not back off from managing the size and the shape of the onshore international student market and ongoing moderation in student numbers towards a more sustainable sector. Australia continues to welcome genuine international students seeking a premium Australian education which is great for our unis, domestic students and research.”

• Mr Giles: “International VET strengthens outcomes for students and supports our workforce, while deepening valuable global partnerships. Today’s announcement provides certainty for the international VET sector, enabling it to continue delivering sustainable growth and high-quality skills outcomes.”

Universities Australia Chief Executive Officer Luke Sheehy issued his own statement on behalf of the sector:

“Sustainability and integrity matter, and universities support both. Keeping new overseas commencements steady gives the sector something to plan around, but it is a long way from the sustainable, managed growth the government promised two years ago.

“Today’s announcement confirms there will be no growth next year. We recognise this may be appropriate in the current context, but the bigger problem is that the policy settings behind the number are making even this steady target harder to reach.

“If the government keeps making Australia more expensive and more difficult for genuine students to choose, we’re going to fall short – and we’re already seeing that risk emerge.

“That’s bad for our sector and Australia. It means fewer skilled workers, weaker productivity and a $55 billion export sector supporting 250,000 jobs put at risk.

“Many universities, particularly in regional and outer suburban Australia, are ready, willing and able to welcome more international students.

“International education is one of Australia’s great success stories, but it’s being steadily eroded by policies that do not serve our universities, our economy or our skills needs.

“A big number on paper means little if the policies behind it make it harder to deliver in practice.
That’s the contradiction at the heart of the current approach. The government says it wants almost 300,000 new international students, while keeping in place policies that make that harder to achieve.

“Unless the broader settings change, the 2027 allocation risks being just another number – not a plan that delivers the skills, jobs and growth Australia needs.”

More details about the NPL arrangements for 2027

None of the education providers subject to the NPL will receive fewer applications in 2027 than in 2026

The following are exempted from the NPL’s allocations:

• Schools
• Students studying standalone ELICOS courses
• Higher degree by research students
• Non-award students, including short term exchange students
• Students studying at TAFE and students enrolled in VET courses at Dual Sector public universities
• Students awarded certain scholarships including from foreign governments, multilateral organisations and Australian governments
• Students that are part of certain Australian Transnational Education (TNE) arrangements in higher education or VET approved by the Department of Education or the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations
• Students from the Pacific and Timor-Leste
• Students in pilot training courses
• International students transitioning from secondary school studies in Australia to tertiary study (higher education or VET)
• Students transitioning from embedded pathway providers or TAFE institutes to affiliated publicly funded universities
• Students transferring providers as a direct result of a provider closing or otherwise being unable to continue training.

For additional background, please see:

• “Australia: Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers”
• “Surprise hike in international student visa application fees ‘a direct hit to Australia’s competitiveness’”
• “Australia: Latest enrolment data challenges the government’s assertion of stability for international education this year”

The post Australia: As visa applications from foreign students fall, the government has set the national target for new international students in 2027 appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

All sub-sectors are affected, with – non-refundable – visa application fees rising as follows:

• Student visa application fee for higher education and vocational (VET) studies (subclass 500): AU$2,000 to AU$2,500, unless students are from ASEAN countries (AU$2,050)
• Student visa fee for English-language studies (ELICOS): AU$2,000 to AU$2,050
• Temporary Graduate Visa 485 (for post-study work): AU$4,600 to AU$5,750
• Partner visa: AU$9,365 to AU$11,710

In addition, the minimum salary threshold for employer-sponsored work visas increased from AU$76,515 to AU$79,499, and the specialist skills income threshold moved from AU$141,210 to AU$146,717.

The government’s announcement has prompted a universal response of shock and dismay across Australia’s international education sector, with many stakeholders warning that Australia’s education brand is now at a deep disadvantage compared with other major destinations.

Vicki Thomson, chief executive of The Group of Eight (representing eight of Australia’s leading research universities), said:

“This is not just a visa fee increase. It is a direct hit to Australia’s competitiveness, skills pipeline and international standing.”

Repeated fee hikes, and much more expensive

As it stands, the AU$2,500 student visa application fee for higher education and VET compares to about the following fees for equivalent visa classes:

• AU$775 for the US
• AU$935 for the UK
• AU$240 for Canada
• AU$790 for New Zealand

Australia’s visa fees have been repeatedly increased by the Labor government between 2022 and 2026 with little to no warning or consultation. If we look just at 2022 fees and 2026 fees (rather than considering several increases in between these years):

• The student visa application fee has risen by +285%
• The temporary graduate (work) application fee has risen by +148%
• The partner application fee has risen by +45%

By contrast, in Canada, there has been no increase in the study permit application fee since 2022. Nor has the US government increased the application fee for F-1/M-1/J-1 visas in that time frame. The UK has had two hikes since 2022, but the percentage change between 2022 and 2026 is only about +15%.

Comparing 2022 and 2026 is one thing, but using a shorter-term lens is at least as startling since it shows just how much international students and education providers in Australia have had to deal with in the space of one year: a +25% increase for study visas (higher education and VET) and a +25% increase for work visas.

While the visa application fee for ELICOS went up less drastically than for other sectors this time (AU$2,000 to AU$2,050), the fee was already so high at AU$2,000 that it has tanked demand for English-language studies in Australia. Ian Aird, CEO of English Australia, says:

“No announcement was made of the decision to hike these visa fees – a decision clearly reached weeks if not months ago. There was no discussion with the sector to consider the likely impacts of these changes. Having been on the phone to members much of the day, it is important to acknowledge the frustration, disappointment, even heartbreak that many of our members are feeling at this news.

“It’s notable that ELICOS has been given a $50 fee increase, not the full $500 increase. It’s a small mercy when the $2,000 fee has already demonstrably decimated the sector. By increasing the student visa application charge for ELICOS by $50, the government has signalled that it is able to differentiate the visa application charge by sector, despite having stated multiple times over the last 18 months that this was not possible, that the government’s computer systems were not able to manage it. However, it also signals that this government does not wish to address the damage done to the ELICOS sector by charging the highest visa application charge in the world, even though so many Australians have and continue to lose their jobs due to this fee increase.”

The “non-refundable” part of the story

The impact of escalating visa costs is compounded by extremely high visa refusal rates for students from a number of markets. Shorter courses – especially in ELICOS – are the most affected by both soaring visa application fees and rejection rates, since applying for an Australian study visa is now roughly as expensive as a short English-language course of 10 weeks. It is not difficult to see why visa application fee hikes over the past couple of years have led to commencements in English-language teaching programmes falling by -40% in 2025 compared with 2024. It is just too risky for many students to apply for a visa for these courses.

Mr Aird points out that the fee hikes are not just turning prospective students away, but they are also destroying the livelihoods of Australians working in ELICOS and economic sectors that benefit from international student spending:

“[The increases] come without care for the Australians who will lose their jobs or the Australian businesses it will destroy – and not just in the education sector. ELICOS students contribute significantly to international tourism, retail, hospitality. The damage done by past visa fee hikes has seen ELICOS numbers fall 60% to 20-year lows costing 1000s of Aussie’s their livelihoods. This new fee increase will drive that further.”

The effect on current international students

In the fall of 2023, IDP Education’s Emerging Futures survey found that in the span of just a few months, Australia had drawn even with Canada as the most preferred destination of the Big Four – largely as a result of the work opportunities it offered international students. So much has changed since then, but what hasn’t changed is that a huge part of Australia’s draw is its post-study work visa.

Writing on , Weihong Liang, president of the International Students Representative Council of Australia (ISRC), spoke of how current international students will be affected by the abrupt announcement of the increased cost of the Temporary Graduate visa:

“For students in their final semester, this is not an abstract policy adjustment. It is a sudden financial burden imposed at the point where they have the least room to change their plans.

“Many of these students came to Australia two or three years ago. They were told that Australia welcomed international talent. Post-study work rights were widely presented as part of Australia’s international education offer. Students made major life decisions, paid substantial tuition fees, moved countries, and built their future plans around the policy settings available at the time.

“Now, after they have already committed, the cost of that pathway has increased dramatically — twice in four months. At the same time, Australia continues to recruit international students globally.

“Governments have the right to change migration policy. But fair policy implementation requires notice, transition arrangements, and respect for those who have already made decisions in good faith.”

Also on , Kaixin Ji, a PhD student specialising in human-centered AI said:

“As an international student who has studied and lived in Australia for 12 years, I feel deeply disappointed and betrayed by this country. I completed my bachelor’s and master’s degrees in IT, and I recently obtained my PhD in Computer Science. Yet after graduation, I have struggled to find a job in either industry or academia. I am also unable to apply for permanent residency because I have not had the required “skilled work” experience for skills assessment.

“This means I have to apply for the Graduate Work (485) visa — a visa that has increased twice this year and now costs A$5,750, with no prior notice … This sudden fee increase may force me to ask my parents for financial help, which feels deeply painful and humiliating as a grown adult. Australia needs to ask whether this is a fair way to treat the people it actively encouraged to come, study, work, and contribute.”

Seeming disregard for the sector

Across the sector, stakeholders have raised concerns about the government’s approach to international education. In an email to ���Ϲ��� Monitor, International Education Association of Australia (IEAA) CEO Phil Honeywood said:

“Australia’s competitor study destination countries will be celebrating today at our market share’s expense. With no consultation and no phase-in period, all visa categories have been increased overnight by approximately 25% …

“The official excuse from our government [for the hikes] is that additional funds are required to pay for national security budget blowouts. However, our beleaguered sector is fed up with such excuses as we are increasingly being seen as just a cash cow for non-related budget issues.”

Felix Pirie, CEO of the (ITECA), said:

“As has become the norm, this was done without sector consultation or engagement as to the likely impacts. It is difficult to build trust when surprises like this have direct and damaging effects on businesses, students, and international partners.”

Universities Australia CEO Luke Sheehy wrote about :

“For years, governments encouraged universities to build this sector because they recognised it as a national asset. The same governments that encouraged universities to build this success are now dismantling it, one decision at a time.

“Today’s fee hike doesn’t stand alone. It comes on top of higher visa refusal rates, policy uncertainty and a series of decisions that have made Australia a less attractive destination.

“Australia needs a stable, competitive international education policy that recognises this sector for what it is – one of our greatest national assets.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers”
• “Australia: Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers“

The post Surprise hike in international student visa application fees “a direct hit to Australia’s competitiveness” appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

This dream is one that is often referenced by universities promoting their programmes abroad, and it tends to be presented as universally possible. But the truth is that only some students are able to progress along that pathway.

The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) has produced a report called “” The analysis shows that institutions in major destinations may be:

• Overpromising a route that is attainable only by a segment of their foreign graduates;
• Not providing the level of language and career supports needed by many graduates to have a good chance of working in-country after their studies and/or gaining permanent residency.

The report also reveals that government policies – and policy volatility – can present unforeseen challenges for international graduates hoping to find jobs that match their hard-won skills.

The OECD observes: “There appear to be tensions between recruitment messaging, which suggests future employment and possible residence, and the realities of post‑graduation opportunities.”

This can lead to false confidence among international students, who, “not always having all relevant information, have at times, an unrealistic expectation of the ease with which they can find a job, secure visa/permit and obtain permanent residency or even citizenship.”

Retention is an issue

Across the six countries analysed, the highest five-year retention rates were in Canada and Germany (52% each). This dipped significantly to about a third in Australia and France (34% and 33%, respectively) and to 19% in the Netherlands. In the UK, only 7% of international graduates were still in the country on a work permit or other immigration permission after five years.

These low retention rates contrast with international students’ high hopes to remain in the country to work after completing their studies: over 70% in Canada, 73% in the Netherlands, 64% in Germany, and 83% in France want to stay on to work.

What barriers are international graduates facing?

The reality that many international graduates face is that employers in their host country find it too cumbersome or expensive to hire them. This leaves many students at a pronounced disadvantage compared with domestic peers.

For example, in Australia, found that for about 20% of international graduates who reported taking a job which they were overqualified, the main reason was that they did not have permanent residency. Many Australian employers see temporary visas as unstable (in the sense that these visas have an expiry date) and administratively burdensome. It is not worth it for them to invest time and money in hiring a foreigner if they can find a domestic graduate with the right skills for the position.

As a result, many graduates go into “visa limbo” where they accept poorly paid jobs unrelated to their skill-set and education. They often apply for another work visa to remain in the country, but they end up becoming “permanently temporary” rather than permanent residents.

The report referenced surveys showing that in three of the six countries analysed, most international students say they feel inadequately prepared to secure a job after graduation and/or to find a job after their studies. For example:

• In the Netherlands, 59% faced difficulty in finding a job after graduation;
• In Germany, only 35% felt “rather” or “well” supported by their institution in planning their career;
• In the UK, 53% thought career support and placements at their institution , followed by internships and experiential learning.

The OECD notes:

“There seems to be a shared nervousness about the transition to employment among both international and domestic students. However, in the case of international graduates, the transition to employment is also tied with the possibility to remain in the country.”

The list of barriers can also include low language proficiency in destinations where English is not the dominant language:

“During their studies, international students are surrounded by English, in their institution and [because] they tend to socialise with other internationals. However, job opportunities for English speakers … tend to be very limited and concentrated in a few specific industries. Most companies in France, Germany, or the Netherlands will still expect at least working-level proficiency of the local language.”

This is particularly relevant given the high number of English-taught programmes (ETPs) in France, Germany, and the Netherlands – many of which do not require competency in these countries’ official languages. These are major attractions for non-EU students especially, and non-EU students are also the segment most interested in remaining in their host country after completing their studies. The issue here is that many of those ETP-enrolled students will not have gained sufficient proficiency in the official language (French, German, or Dutch) to compete successfully for jobs.

Recommendations

The OECD recommends that institutions adopt “a more realistic approach that clearly communicates that available opportunities, jobs and permanent residency permits, might be scarce. That stay after graduation is not guaranteed, and that there is a significant uncertainty about whether a particular international student will be able to settle in the country long term.”

Specific recommendations for policy makers and institutions include:

• Helping international students to understand the labour market, before and during their studies, to guide them in what topics to focus on and on choices regarding their education.



• Integrating labour-market literacy into programmes, supported by career centres. 



• Allowing students to engage with employers and  gain work experience during their studies. For example, “both professional networks and relevant work experience have been identified as among the most highly rated factors in finding employment by international graduates in the Netherlands.” This recommendation means “higher education institutions must establish and maintain strong relations with relevant employers.”



• Informing international students to start looking for possible employment early, to better inform them about various employment opportunities: “International students tend to be aware of the big and well-known companies but are not always aware of small- and medium-sized businesses and other employers.”

• Developing alumni networks that allow international graduates to turn to former students for career support and guidance.

For additional background, please see:

• “Germany’s foreign enrolment continued to grow in the 2025/25 academic year”
• “Many foreign students want to stay in Germany but need more help with the transition to life after study”
• “Netherlands reports first-ever decrease in foreign enrolment for 2025/26”
• “Canada struggling to attract and retain global talent”
• “UK to implement reduced Graduate Route from January 2027”

The post OECD: International students may be underinformed about job prospects in top destinations appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

It is no coincidence that the Key Five are all emerging countries in the Global South, where large proportions of students are open to emigrating, temporarily or permanently, because of limited local opportunities. This makes immigration officials tend to question whether study visa applicants are genuine students – i.e., interested in quality education, a high-skilled job, and remaining compliant with visa conditions – or individuals with little intent to study and great intent to migrate in any way they can. Unfortunately, many genuine students from the Global South are disadvantaged in their applications because of where they are from.

The impact of the visa rejection trend for students from emerging economies in Asia and Africa could be enormous across the global international education landscape – and beyond. Already, it is spurring fewer visa grants, reduced recruiting in high-risk markets, and more withdrawals from students eager to avoid a rejection on their student profile. Not surprisingly, commencements are trending down in leading study destinations, and this will pressure overall enrolments in the years ahead.

In this article, we will look at Key Five origin countries with regards to:

• Their importance to overall enrolments across the Big Four;
• Recent study visa rejection rates;
• Commencement trends (i.e., the volume of new students provided a study visa allowing them to enrol in a Big Four education institution).

Contribution to overall international student numbers

According to the most recent available enrolment data, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Nigeria, and Pakistan compose anywhere from 30% to 40%+ of the entire international student body in Big Four destinations.

Visa rejection rates for the Key Five

Having looked at the huge presence of Key Five students in the total international student populations of the Big Four, we’ll turn to recent visa refusal trends (where official data are available).

Bangladesh: Nearly three-quarters (73%) of Bangladeshi applicants for US F-1 visas were turned away in 2025. Bangladeshi students have in recent years been very likely to receive a visa for Australia (about a 5% rejection rate in 2024/25), but in February 2026, more than half (51%) of offshore applicants from Bangladesh were refused.

India: Indian students, who represent either the #1 or #2 source market across the Big Four, are now quite likely to be refused a study visa in those destinations. Rejection rates were 61% in the US (2025), 80% in Canada (Q2 2025), and 60% in Australia (February 2026). While only 7.5% were denied a sponsored study visa in the UK in Q4 2025–Q1 2026, this this was up from less than 4% in winter 2024/25.

Nepal: More than 8 in 10 (81%) Nepali applicants were rejected for a US F-1 visa in 2025, and in February 2026, the Australian study visa rejection rate for Nepal soared to 65%. Interestingly, Nepali students were more likely to be approved for a UK sponsored study visa in winter 2025/26 than in winter 2024/25, bucking the general trend for emerging markets (see chart below).

Nigeria: Since December 2025, Nigerians have been included in an expanded travel ban announced by the US administration, along with dozens of other countries (mostly in Africa and Asia). In the UK, sponsored study rejections for Nigerian students used to be rare (less than 5%), but in winter 2025/26, 20% of Nigerian applicants were turned away. In Canada, between 70–80% were refused a study permit in in 2025.

Pakistan: More than 70% of Pakistanis were refused an F-1 visa in the US in 2026, and more than 6 in 10 offshore applicants from Pakistan were denied an Australian study visa in February 2026. Like Nigerians, Pakistani students applying for a sponsored study visa in the UK saw their rejection rate spike massively in winter 2025/26: increasing from 5.6% to 41% year-over-year.

These rejection rates for Key Five countries represent an absolutely huge number of potential students turned away.

What is happening to commencements?

Key Five commencements (new student entrants) are falling across the Big Four, with less than a handful of exceptions.
 
A striking example is F-1 visa issuances in the US in July/August of 2024 compared with July/August 2025. The percentages in the table below are based on our analysis of data from the US Department of State. It bears mentioning that in September of 2025 (not shown in the table), F-1 commencements fell further for Bangladesh (-69%), Nepal (-96%), Nigeria (-33%), and Pakistan (-9%) compared with September 2024.

In the UK, the following chart from HESA shows the dramatic drop-off in Indian (turquoise) and Nigerian (navy blue) commencements between 2023/24 and 2024/25: -13% and -33%, respectively. Over the span of two years (2022/23 to 2024/25), the declines were even more serious: -33% for India (126,580 to 94,955) and -132% for Nigeria (53,790 to 23,160).

In Canada, new student arrivals (from all nationalities) fell from 208,750 in 2024 to 115,120 in 2025. In January to April 2026 compared with the same period in 2025, arrivals were down -73% to about 200,000. There is no publicly available government information for specific markets, but the Times of India reports that between January and August 2025, Canada issued just 9,955 new study permits to Indian students.

In Australia, overall commencements fell by about -15% between 2024 and 2025, but this decline was concentrated in sectors other than higher education (the number of new international students in Australian universities edged up slightly in that time period). There was more of a mixed bag of commencement trends for the Key Five than in Canada, the UK, and US. Between 2024 and 2025, Indian and Pakistani commencements fell by -3.5% and -33%, respectively, while Nepal was up +33.5% and Bangladesh +33%.

The implications will stretch beyond international education

Our Key Five markets – Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Nigeria, and Pakistan – can be viewed as roughly representative of what is happening to mobility influences and flows between the Global South and Big Four destinations. They serve to show how immigration policies (and/or policy effects) in the Big Four are affecting demand from top non-EU markets. These policies, especially if they stretch on in time, could lead to:

• An intensification of existing challenges for the operations of hundreds of universities, colleges, and schools across the Big Four. Those institutions are often highly reliant on international student tuition amid declining domestic enrolments and/or public funding. Chinese commencements (which, for decades, were an important source of overall growth) are falling, and emerging markets in Asia and Africa have helped to mitigate the impact.

• Alternative destinations gaining a greater share of the world’s internationally mobile students (this is already happening – see From the Big Four to the Big Fourteen for background).



• A decline in the economic contribution of international education in the Big Four.



• A weakening of innovation and productivity in Big Four economies. India, in particular, contributes a large volume of STEM students and workers to Western nations.



• An erosion of the soft power of the Big Four in the Global South.

Methodological note

Data analyses are based on statistics from:

• The Australian
• (IRCC)
• The UK’s (HESA)
• The in the US

For additional information, please see:

• “UK: International student numbers fall for second year, especially in postgraduate programmes“
• “UK: Sponsored study visa issuances down, rejection rates up, and more“
• “There are more international students in the US than ever in 2025, but commencements are declining“
• “Visa rejections climb in the US for international students from key markets including India“
• “New international student permit approvals for Canada fell below COVID levels in 2025“
• “Australia: Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers“
• “Australia: Latest enrolment data challenges the government’s assertion of stability for international education this year“

The post What is happening to student mobility flows between the Global South and Global North?  appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The order dictates that “no applications may be made to the National VET Regulator under section 9 of the Act until after the day 12 months after the day this instrument commences.” The order is in immediate effect and it means that the Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA) will not accept applications from new providers or for new courses for a 12-month period beginning 19 May 2026.

The order specifically prevents any new applications for registration in the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS). CRICOS is Australia’s official government register of education providers and courses that are approved to enrol international students. And The Education Services for Overseas Students (ESOS) Act 2000 requires that any Australian institution enrolling visa-holding foreign students must be registered on CRICOS.

The 18 May order applies to private vocational education and training (VET) providers as well as those in the English Language Intensive Courses for Overseas Students (ELICOS) sector. Public providers, including TAFEs and public universities, are exempt.

In other words, during the year-long freeze, no new private VET or ELICOS providers may be established, nor may existing private-sector providers establish any new courses.

A background brief accompanying the assistant minister’s order explains that there are two exceptions:

“The Suspension will not apply to applications made by any existing provider that relate to adding:

• a location for a course the provider is already registered on CRICOS to deliver
• a course identified as superseded (non-equivalent) on the National Register (www.training.gov.au), where the provider is already registered to deliver the superseded (non-equivalent) course.”

An accompanying statement from Mr Hill says that the freeze is necessary to “provide ASQA with additional time to address sector integrity issues while processing existing applications with a focus on rigour, scrutiny, and integrity.”

The assistant minister draws a direct line in his comments from the order to two substantive government reviews of Australia’s immigration system – the Rapid Review into the Exploitation of Australia’s Visa System (the Nixon Review) and the Migration Review in 2023 – which identified “significant integrity concerns within Australia’s international education system, particularly in the vocational education and training (VET) sector.”

“Suspending new registrations to teach international students VET or English language onshore is not a decision taken lightly and will allow the Government to address integrity concerns about new market entrants and oversaturation in the international VET and ELICOS sectors,” added the Assistant Minister. “Frankly, it raises suspicions when at the same time student numbers in these parts of the sector are moderating the regulator continues to see a rush of new market entrants.”

A blunt instrument

“The Albanese Government has quietly dropped one of the most consequential blows to Australia’s international education sector in years and it landed without warning,” says . “This is not simply a technical regulatory change. It is a deliberate attempt to reshape the international education market to favour public providers while freezing out the private sector…It freezes the entire pipeline of new entrants regardless of quality, innovation, or workforce relevance. It also blocks private providers from diversifying their offerings.”

Ian Pratt, Managing Director at Lexis English, also questioned the government’s approach, noting that, “We now appear to have reached the point where, instead of properly resourcing regulators to assess applications and enforce standards, the solution is simply to stop accepting applications altogether.”

“Instead of empowering the regulator to identify and remove poor operators, the government has chosen a blanket suspension targeting an entire segment of the sector,” he added on LinkedIn. “The genuinely frustrating part is that quality independent providers are not the problem here. Many of the most innovative, student-focused and internationally responsive organisations in Australian education sit within the private sector. These are the providers building niche programmes, responding quickly to employer demand, investing in student experience, and actively supporting regional economies.”

Part of a larger pattern?

The freeze on new CRICOS registrations arrives in the midst of an ongoing political debate around migration levels in Australia. Both the governing and opposition parties have offered policy positions based in part on reducing immigration levels, including with respect to international students.

A statement from Universities Australia Chief Executive Officer Luke Sheehy cautions in response that, “After two years of instability and policy swings, what the sector and students need now is stability, certainty and a clear long-term strategy.

“International students are not the low-hanging fruit both sides of politics are treating them as in the migration debate. Significant cuts to international student numbers would have real consequences for the economy and our universities at a time both are doing it tough.

“Australia cannot afford another race to the bottom driven by stop-start policy settings, political signalling or measures that damage our economy, our universities and our global reputation.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Australia: Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers“
• “Australia: Student visa refusal rates reach record high amid weakening demand from China“
• “New IDP research shows link between visa uncertainty and the perceived ROI of study abroad“

The post Australia orders a year-long pause on new VET and ELICOS provider registrations appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

These trends are highlighted in results from the most recent by NAFSA, Oxford Test of English, and Studyportals. The survey asked respondents from over 254 universities across 36 countries about new international enrolments in the January–March 2026 intake; perceived barriers to enrolling students; and recruitment strategies.

The research found that universities in the Big Four are struggling with policy-induced enrolment pressures, but it also revealed that they are adapting recruitment strategies for their current context. Edwin van Rest, CEO of Studyportals, commented: “Universities that are agile, proactive and supportive of students are much better positioned to absorb visa disruption and sustain enrolment.”

About the research findings

The survey sample was heavily weighted towards the US, with 149 universities from the US compared with 39 in Europe, 24 in the UK, 13 in Canada, 9 from Australia, and 9 from the Asia-Pacific region (excluding Australia). In all, about three-quarters of responding universities were in the Big Four. For this reason, the regional breakdowns in the survey report are especially valuable.

There was also a Global Enrolment Benchmark Survey wave in January to March 2025. While apples-to-apples comparisons between the early-2025 and early-2026 waves cannot be made because of the waves’ slightly different samples, broad trends are definitely apparent.

New undergraduate enrolments

As shown in Chart 1 below, 69% of Canadian institutions reported fewer undergraduate students in the January 2026 intake. Considered alongside the 82% that reported a drop in the Q1 2025 survey wave, this marks two years of severe contraction.

In Q1 2026, 62% of US universities welcomed fewer new undergraduate students, a greater proportion than the 48% reporting the same in Q1 2025. This suggests that recruitment challenges have intensified in the US over the past year.

The undergraduate enrolment situation in Australia and the UK appears less dire. Under half of Australian (44%) institutions reported a falloff, and just as many (44%) said they had welcomed more new international students. The picture was more balanced in the UK, with 42% saying commencements were down, 37% reporting stability, and 21% enrolling more new students.

Meanwhile, Asian and European institutions are faring very well. Fully 82% of Asian institutions saw more new undergraduate students in Q1 2026 than in Q1 2025, and none of them reported drops. In Europe, almost half (47%) of responding universities reported a year-over-year increase, which is nearly double the proportion reporting a decline (25%).

Graduate trends

As shown in Chart 2 (below), around two-thirds of Australian, British, and American universities reported lower international postgraduate commencements in January 2026. The 2026 trend is worse for British institutions than in 2025, when only half said commencements were down, but it is stable in the US.

Canadian institutions are grappling with further deterioration at the postgraduate level in 2026. Fully 8 in 10 (80%) institutions reported declines (up from 71% in Q1 2025), and none reported increases.

Meanwhile, over half of Asian universities (55%) reported postgraduate commencement gains, as did 43% of European institutions.

Significant differences in Q1 2025 and Q1 2026 survey results

Chart 3 (below) shows the difference in average reported commencements between Q1 2025 and Q1 2026. European and Asian institutions welcomed considerably more new students in Q1 2026, especially at the bachelor’s level. Masters’ commencements were down significantly in Australia. In Canada and the US, intakes at both levels worsened considerably. Canadian undergraduate programmes were particularly affected, while in the US, the most severe reduction was at the master’s level. While less pronounced than in North America, a downward trend is also evident in the UK at both levels.

The most pressing issues

An overwhelming majority of respondents in the Big Four cited restrictive policies as the biggest obstacle they face (Chart 4 below). The full Australian sample (100%) picked this option, as did 84% in both Canada and the US and 71% in the UK. Policies were also the top challenge in Europe, but only 59% chose this response option.

In Asia, the top three cited issues did not include policies at all. Instead, cost of study/living, English-proficiency requirements, and academic requirements were the main challenges for Asian institutions.

What lies ahead

More than 4 in 10 universities in Australia, Canada, and the UK are planning budget cuts in the next 12 months, with over a third saying the same in the US (Chart 5 below). Close to a quarter of institutions in Australia and Canada are also planning to cut staff.

The relatively supportive policy environments in which Asian and European institutions are recruiting are reflected in their plans. Fully 64% of Asian institutions have more aggressive enrolment goals, as do 31% in Europe. In Asia, more than half (55%) intend to use more AI in their operations, and 26% of European institutions do as well. The mindset is clearly one of growth, while Big Four universities have their hands full with managing tough policy contexts and associated budget and staff cuts.

Across the board, however, institutions see diversification as a necessity this year (the most cited sample-wide priority at 37%).

Sector resilience and top strategies

The top strategies being used by universities to boost international enrolments are highlighted in Chart 6, below. Introducing new programmes; diversifying/expanding geographically; executing strong branding/marketing; and offering financial incentives and scholarships were the most cited institution-led initiatives.

In addition, a notable proportion of universities reported that they had introduced January start dates to “manage visa unpredictability and to capture students who would otherwise defer or drop out of the cycle.” The report notes:

“One global recruitment calendar rarely works well for all markets. Understanding demand by origin country can help to prioritise marketing and recruitment activities. Certain countries show a notably stronger preference for the January to March intake than their peers elsewhere.”

Of the Q1 2026 findings, Dr Fanta Aw, Executive Director and CEO of NAFSA, commented: “Despite an increasingly uncertain policy environment, the survey shows that institutions willing to innovate and adapt can still create meaningful pathways for student success and access …. Institutions can and must exercise greater agency to counter serious external forces.”

The study report adds:

“The right response to a shifting landscape is not to wait it out. It is to understand it better and move faster. Student demand for international education remains strong. The institutions that will capture it are the ones that treat uncertainty not as a reason to pause, but as a reason to think differently.”

For additional background, please see:

• “From the Big Four to the Big Fourteen”
• “Canada and the US are losing international student enrolments to Europe and Asia”
• “The four key trends that will shape international student mobility for the next decade”

The post Universities urged to focus on “factors they can control” as policy settings depress international student enrolments in the Big Four appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The context here is the past three years of new policy settings and greater government intervention to manage student inflows, as well as two successive student visa application fee hikes. As of this writing, the non-refundable fee of AU$2,000 is the highest in the world. The cost of a student visa – and the very real possibility for students from many markets that their application will be refused – is dampening demand, especially for students coming for relatively shorter programmes, such as English-language courses.

Unravelling the data

Presenting the analysis to IEAA members in April 2026, English Australia CEO Ian Aird showcased the importance of clarifying the source, time frame, and implications of often misunderstood data indicators for Australia’s international education sector. For example:

• Enrolments vs. student numbers: In Australia, course enrolments tend to be the main data point presented in international education summaries and covered by media. They are sometimes confused with international student numbers – which are something quite different. Enrolments are always far higher than student numbers because international students often enrol in multiple courses in a given year (e.g., two back-to-back English-language courses of four months each would be counted as two enrolments for a single student).

• Commencements vs. NTAs: General commencement numbers comprise both students coming for the first time to study in Australia and students already in Australia who progress from a completed course to a new course. But “New-to-Australia” (NTA) commencements describe only offshore students enrolling for the first time ever in Australia.

Each of those four indicators – course enrolments, student numbers, commencements, and NTA commencements – tell very different stories. Of the four, enrolments are the least indicative of the current and future state of affairs. Mr Aird explains:

“Both enrolment and commencement figures must be recognised as ‘lag indicators’ in terms of sector health. That is, the enrolments are students who may have started their courses months and sometimes years ago. Even commencements are students who booked, paid for, and were granted visas months before they commence. If a commencement is part of a pathway, it too could have been booked years before it is indicated in the official data.

This means that the majority of 2025 enrolments and many 2025 commencements are students who were not impacted by any of the 2024 changes to the student visa system and government policy.”

Why NTAs are more predictive of future trends

New-to-Australia commencement data offers a stronger indication of international student demand under the current settings – and relatedly, factors either easing or challenging students’ ability to come to Australia. This is because NTA counts represent new students coming into Australia within the recent past (as opposed to enrolments, for example, where data could represent demand from years prior, before the new policy settings came into force). Therefore, the latest NTA data reflects students who have relatively recently:

• Wanted to apply to an institution in Australia
• Decided to pay the fee for a visa application (currently AU$2,000)
• Had their visa approved

When NTAs fall, it suggests that fewer students now consider it worthwhile to apply for a visa and/or more students who are having their visa rejected. A recent decline suggests that the trend will continue unless current circumstances change. Right now, that context is Australia’s extraordinarily expensive visa application fee and high rate of visa refusals.

Recent increases or decreases in the volume of visa applications and in the visa approval rate provide an even better sense of the future trendline for the sector. These can also be divided into applications made in Australia (hence, re-enrolling students) and applications made outside Australia (generally, New-to-Australia students).

Have NTAs fallen?

New-to-Australia commencements have indeed fallen (see Chart 1 below), and this decline coincides with both a lower application volume (Chart 2) and a higher visa refusal rate for students from key markets.

Below, Chart 1 shows that whole-sector NTAs have dropped significantly over the past two years and are significantly lower than before the COVID-19 pandemic. Chart 2 reveals that the number of students submitting visa applications fell by 32% from the post-COVID rebound peak in 2023 to 2025.

The damage to ELICOS and VET providers is the most severe

The picture for the ELICOS and VET sectors is considerably bleaker than the all-sector aggregate: a -40% y-o-y New-to-Australia commencement decline in 2025 for ELICOS and a -49% fall for VET. Chart 3 (below) shows the pattern for ELICOS.

As English Australia notes, there is a clear connection between the timing of visa application fee hikes and plummeting applications (and NTAs) for ELICOS:

“The student visa application charge went from AU$710 to AU$1,600 from 1 July 2024. This saw the monthly average student visa applications for ELICOS study fall by 34% versus pre-COVID (2018–2019) application levels or 46% versus post-COVID (2023) application levels. The increase of the student visa application charge to AU$2,000 from 1 July 2025 saw applications for ELICOS fall a further 27%.”

What about higher education?

The higher education sector has so far fared better than other kinds of providers because (1) many of the universities have the advantage of streamlined visa processing, which means their applicants aren’t scrutinised to nearly the extent as for other sectors, and (2) students are more willing to pay the visa application fee because it is a smaller proportion of the cost of a degree. For example, from 2024 to 2025:

• Higher education course enrolments rose by +9.7%;
• Commencements also increased slightly (+0.7%);
• New-to-Australia commencements were down by only -0.5%.

However, the sector’s resilience is now being tested in multiple ways. Major challenges include a decline in demand from China and high visa refusal rates for other key markets.

Chart 4 shows the proportion of applications from the top 10 source countries for higher education. The top 10 countries are traditionally responsible for 85% of all HE applications from offshore (that is, new students in the system). In Q4 2025, Chinese applications accounted for over 4 in 10 (43%) of these offshore applications. This fell to a third (34%) in January 2026 and to less than a quarter (23%) in February 2026.

By contrast, demand from India, Nepal, and Bangladesh has risen to the point where 65% of offshore applications from the top 10 are from these three countries. But much of this demand is being stopped at the border. In February 2026, 40% of Indians applying for a visa for study at an Australian university were rejected, as were 51% of Bangladeshis and 65% of Nepalis.

Lower interest from China – coupled with high visa rejection rates for students from other top markets –will almost certainly lead to a decline in Australian university commencements and enrolments in the coming intakes.

Are Australian government policies working?

To manage immigration, the Australian government is working to better link migrant profiles to labour force skills gaps. It wants to reduce net migration to pre-pandemic levels though policies aimed at increasing barriers for low-skilled temporary visa holders to work and immigrate.

Mr Aird presented a slide (shown below) showing that of eight temporary visa categories, only one is being affected by this mission: international students. He commented:

“Where government is talking about the number of temporary visa holders, and they’re taking all sorts of actions to control and manage that, they’re actually managing only one group – student visa holders. The other groups are all increasing significantly.”

The English Australia report reminds readers: “It’s vital to remember these numbers relate to real people. Falling student numbers means lost jobs in Australia, lost livelihoods.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Australia: Student visa refusal rates reach record high amid weakening demand from China”
• “Australia: Latest enrolment data challenges the government’s assertion of stability for international education this year“
• “Australia: Full-year data for 2025 reveals impact of AUD$2,000 study visa application fee on ELICOS sector“
• “Australia passes integrity legislation; sharpens definition of agents and agent commissions“

The post Australia: Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.