The most recent edition of the ISB gathered responses from 93,843 international students from 135 universities during a September–December 2025 survey window.

Here are five important takeaways from this year’s top-level findings.

Students are mostly satisfied with their study abroad experience

When asked in the 2025 ISB cycle, “Overall, how satisfied are you with all aspects of your experience at this institution?”, 90% of respondents said they were “satisfied” or “very satisfied.”

A related question asked respondents how likely they are to recommend their institution to a family member or friend. Etio uses the responses to generate a Net Promoter Score (NPS). Using a response scale of 0–10, students who provide a score of 6 or below are classified as “Detractors,” whereas those who give a 7 or 8 are classified as “Passives,” and those who give a 9 or 10 are “Promoters.” The Net Promoter Score is arrived at by subtracting the percentage of Detractors from the percentage of Promoters.

The ISB shows that, globally, the Net Promoter Score has been on the rise since 2019, where the aggregated NPS value across the survey was 15, to 2025 with its NPS of 22. As with overall satisfaction ratings, there are big differences within institutions (by faculty or student nationality, for example), and by destination.

Students feel they are getting good value for their investment in study abroad

When asked, “To what extent do you feel that your current course is good value for money?”, 85% of students either agreed or strongly agreed that they were getting good value.

As we see in the chart, ratings for value for money have been climbing steadily since 2019. “That 85% as we are now is a pretty good result for the sector,” says Etio’s Head of Surveys Robin Hallows. “It suggests that [institutions] are by and large delivering on their promise.”

“I do wonder if there is a link between the improvements we have seen over time around graduate outcomes, employability, and career readiness – if there is a link to student perceptions of value for money.”

“Institutions are also managing expectations around cost,” adds Guy Perring, Etio’s Regional Director for APAC and the Middle East. “Singapore, for example, does very well in this regard. It’s not a cheap option; in fact, Singapore is one of the most expensive cities in the world. But they manage the expectations of the students so that students know how much the cost of living will be [in advance].”

Career impact remains the key driver

This year’s ISB results underscore that decision making for study abroad is heavily influenced by future career considerations, and by a return on investment calculation that weighs the costs of study and living abroad against anticipated future earnings.

Those priorities come through loud and clear when the ISB asked students, “How important were the following factors when deciding where to study?”

“The impact the [foreign qualification] has on their future careers is the most important decision factor,” says Mr Hallows. “And it’s always been the most important decision factor since 2019.”

“It is important for institutions to understand what drives decision making,” Nannette Ripmeester, Etio’s Regional Director for Europe, Africa, and North America. “This generation of students is completely different. [Study abroad] has to provide return on investment for them.”

Online information sources are having a greater impact on student decisions

When asked, “Which of the following helped your decision to choose this institution?”, students noted institutional websites and education agents as the most important influences on their study abroad decision, followed by friends and family.

It is interesting that the influences that have seen the greatest change over time are all digital, including the institutional website, online advertising, and social media channels.

There is a satisfaction gap in career services

The ISB asked a number of questions around career services, including “How satisfied are you with the following types of employment / careers support from this institution?”

“There is a bit of a variance [in satisfaction] within career support,” adds Mr Hallows. “Satisfaction with ‘information’ is quite a bit higher at 78% than employment – i.e., getting a job – at 59%. What I see when I see this is the potential for further improvement; for growth.”

For additional background, please see:

• “What students want: The top decision factors for study abroad“
• “How post-study work rights can make or break the return on investment for study abroad“

The post Five things we learned from this year’s International Student Barometer appeared first on șÚÁÏčÙÍű Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

This finding is especially notable in our present era when the global pecking order of research heavyweights is changing. The US has fallen to second place, after China, for research output. Not coincidentally, its international research collaborations have declined, while China’s have skyrocketed. EU leaders in scientific innovation such as Switzerland, the Netherlands, the UK, and Germany are increasingly partnering with China, and reducing their joint scientific projects with the US.

This has geo-political implications that could become more pronounced due to the Trump administration’s isolationism, threats to top US research universities’ operations, and cuts to scientific funding.

An early study made the connection

A by Caroline Wagner, a professor at Ohio State University and distinguished fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and Koen Jonkers, Head of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, found that countries “at the forefront of research” are also those with:

• The highest level of international co-authorship of papers;
• A commitment to the international mobility of their research workforce.

China leads in output and research collaborations

China now leads the world in research output, and the volume of its international co-authored papers is soaring. According to an October 2025 report from , China’s research output exploded from 26,200 papers in 2000 to over 878,000 in 2024. Its internationally collaborative papers shot from 6,000 to more than 163,000 over the same period.

What’s more, this is happening while the US is declining both in output and international collaborations.
Elsevier notes:

“The United States has historically led global research, but recent trends suggest a strategic inflection point. US output is declining, and its share of global collaboration is shrinking. Co-authorship with most partners dropped sharply between 2021 and 2022, with collaboration with Mainland China falling even earlier — from 2019 onward.

Policy decisions have played a role. Restrictions on foreign collaboration and reduced funding for key areas like mRNA vaccine development risk isolating the U.S. from the global research ecosystem.”

In terms of research impact, as measured by academic citations, Elsevier found that collaborative papers consistently outperform domestic-only publications.

EU countries hold stable, and surpass China in impact

The Elsevier study found that European countries are holding their own as the innovation gap between the US and China expands, and that other regions are catching up:

• China now accounts for 28% of published articles, and the US has fallen to 17%. The EU has held steady at 22% of global output.
• The EU is the world leader in terms of international collaborations: 43% of EU papers involve international co-authorship.
• Publications from the total EU membership are cited more often than those from China but less than those from the US.
• Switzerland, Norway, Australia, Canada, and the UK score higher on research impact than the US and China.
• Other Asian countries as well as the Middle East and Africa are rising in the ranks in terms of impact.
• The number of co-authored papers including China and partners in Africa, Asia-Pacific, and the Middle East are expanding rapidly.
• China’s collaborations with Germany, Australia, and the UK have surpassed pre-pandemic volumes but have fallen with Canada and especially the US.
• As well as the EU and Australia, China is prioritising research partnerships in the Middle East and Asia – including Iran, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia, “suggesting a strategic pivot toward emerging regions.”

Implications

A nation or region’s influence and innovation clearly correlates with its approach to research. Collaborative research across borders has a higher impact on the advancement of science, health, and technology than domestic-only research.

As the US recedes from global engagement, China is expanding … all over the world. Its massive economic, educational, and infrastructural Belt Road Initiative launched in 2013 has positioned the country as as a central trade power in Asia and Africa. China’s research and trade relationships with EU partners have been rapidly expanding. At the same time, US President Trump is reducing collaboration with Canada and Europe and is to major domestic science and health research initiatives.

Toby Smith, senior vice president for government relations and public policy at the Association of American Universities told the that his organisation estimates that “if the administration succeeds in its plans to cut the 2026 federal science budget to US$154 billion from US$198 billion — a 25% reduction — it would represent the smallest amount that the federal government has spent on science in this century.”

Mr Smith says the result “would essentially end America’s longstanding role as the world leader in science and innovation.”

The link between scientific innovation and an open, cross-borders approach to research also has implications in terms of broad patterns of international student mobility. Governments that support universities in attracting the best students in the world – and in retaining them after graduation – have the best chance of keeping their country competitive in the world order that is transforming before our very eyes.

For additional background, please visit:

• “Global trends in international enrolments and policies as we head into 2026”
• “US: Study estimates that changes to international student policies could reduce GDP by up to US$481 billion per year”

The post Studies show countries “at the forefront of research” prioritise international collaborations and mobility appeared first on șÚÁÏčÙÍű Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

But immigration settings are never permanent, and research shows that substantial voting blocs in key destination countries are both concerned about immigration levels and supportive of maintaining or increasing international student numbers. In other words, they do not lump international students into general misgivings about immigration. This is important for educators to consider amidst increasingly strict visa settings that are impacting their ability to recruit overseas. If the voting public distinguishes between international students and other categories of migrants, it makes sense that governments should consider this in their policy-making.

Today, we are reporting on research showing that:

• Young Americans have notably different attitudes about their president and his approach to immigration than their older counterparts;
• Britons and Australians draw a distinct line between immigrants and international students, with support for the latter category much stronger than for the former;
• More than half of Australians polled in 2025 are in favour of maintaining or increasing international student numbers;
• People are more influenced by widely circulating narratives about immigration than by quantitative information.

Young Americans see things differently than their older counterparts

In April 2025, the surveyed 4,100 registered voters and featured an oversample of more than 2,000 respondents aged 18 to 29 (i.e., this age range was intentionally over-represented in the poll).

While the research covered a wide range of topics, it featured a particular focus on education and immigration. Yale Youth Poll Director Milan Singh said:

“The poll is focused on what topics are relevant to right now. Questions on whether international students should be deported, or have their visa revoked. We wanted to gauge what people feel about federal funding cuts to universities, whether they should issue political statements or positions on social issues, whether people feel positively or negatively towards the Ivy League or other elite private universities.”

The highlights of differences between younger and older cohorts in the sample include:

• The youth segment (under age 30) gave a “net favourability” score to President Trump of -18% (i.e., an “unfavourable” opinion) compared to the full-sample score for President Trump of +6%.

• Among youth, 79% said the level of legal immigration should be increased (40%) or remain the same (39%). This is considerably higher than the average across the sample: 50% (30% “should be increased” and 20% “remain the same”).

• More than three-quarters (79%) of youth oppose deporting international students who participated in campus protests against Israel’s war in Gaza, compared with a sample-wide average of 62.5%.

Of the finding that 8 in 10 young voters opposed the deportation of international student protesters, Yale’s Mr Singh commented: “We wanted to measure just how unpopular this idea is, and it turns out, among young voters, it’s extremely unpopular.”

Voters in the UK and Australia differentiate between international students and immigrants

Research conducted earlier this year by the immigration think tank based on focus groups in six UK cities and a nationally representative survey of over 2,000 people found that:

“The public perceive international students positively. The survey found almost six in ten (59%) agree that universities would have less funding to invest in top quality facilities and teaching without the higher fees paid by international students, with only 10% disagreeing. And 54%) agreed that international students enhance the reputation of UK universities overseas, with only 11% disagreeing.”

In addition, the research revealed that “only 28% of respondents categorise international students as immigrants, compared to 38% for migrant workers. The top two groups perceived as immigrants are asylum seekers (62%) and recipients of humanitarian visas (46%).”

In Australia, an early-2025 survey of 5,000 respondents undertaken by the (ANU) found that more than half of Australians (53%) consider immigration levels in their country to be too high. However, an even larger percentage (58%) said there should either be no change or an increase in the number of international students enrolled in Australia, again illustrating the distinction people make between immigrants and international students.

The role of narrative

A study called “Narratives, information and immigration policy preferences” by Alyssa Leng, Ryan Edwards, and Terence Wood for ANU’s reveals the significant way in which narratives broadcast by governments and the media influence public perception of international students and immigrants. The study was conducted in 2024 and funded by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

The study explored the extent to which opinions about immigrants shifts according to:

• “A one-shot narrative information treatment on the costs or benefits of immigration for the receiving country population;
• A bundle of factual quantitative information about immigrants’ characteristics.”

The way the study was set up was that three groups of respondents were provided with one of three narratives (i.e., stories) about immigration before being asked about what they felt about the number of migrants of various profiles that should be allowed into Australia. One of the narratives was positive, one was balanced, and one was negative. Then another group, the fourth group, was provided a bundle of quantitative facts about immigration – that is, objective information rather than narratives.

Not surprisingly, what the study found was:

“While narratively informing respondents of the perceived ‘negative’ impacts of immigration on house prices does not substantially change the likelihood that respondents prefer more immigration, it decreases the probability that respondents express support for immigration levels remaining the same or increasing by around five percentage points. Showing respondents a narrative vignette emphasising immigrants’ positive contributions generates larger increases in the likelihood of supporting more immigration than providing quantitative information (between 4–7 and around 2percentage points, respectively).”

Why is the study relevant for educators in Big Four countries?

The study sheds light on the power of narrative on public sentiment and government policies. For example, if the media turns its focus on a handful of economists’ assertions that international students are to blame for housing or healthcare problems, a snowball effect tends to occur where:

• The economists’ position gathers steam (e.g., becomes picked up by more media outlets and thus is seen by more viewers/readers);
• The government is pressured to react to an associated public (aka voter) sentiment that something must be done about international students.

By extension, this phenomenon suggests that efforts by international education stakeholders to shift the narrative are worthwhile, provided those efforts are backed by solid research and accompanied by a strong media strategy and coordinated lobbying.

For example, in Australia in 2024, research commissioned by the Student Accommodation Council, a peak body for the country’s purpose-built student accommodation sector (PBSA), found no alignment between the return of international students to Australia – after borders reopened post-pandemic – and rents increasing. This finding was in direct contradiction with the media and governmental narrative circulating at the time.

One highlight of the research was that international students make up only 4% of all renters in Australia. Domestic students compose 6.2%, and the remainder are non-students. What’s more, the study found that the vast majority of international students do not live in the housing most in demand in Australia: only 3% of international students live in detached houses suitable for couples or families, while 74% live in PBSA close to universities.

Taking accountability

None of this is to say that the international education sector in places such as Canada and Australia has not played a role in the ebb of public support for recruiting international students. Before the tightening of immigration settings in those countries, international student enrolments were growing at an unsustainable pace and the line between education and “edugration” (the pursuit of education abroad as a pathway to permanent residency) was ever more opaque.

But responsible recruiting of international students is another matter altogether, and it is to the benefit of educators, domestic students, international students, governments, and economies that this be not only allowed, but also fully supported. When international students are vetted carefully for their suitability for institutions and programmes, encouraged to consider programmes linked to labour force needs, and supported in career pathways that contribute to productivity and innovation, they are crucial elements of a country’s future competitiveness, development, and place in the global economy.

And so going into 2026, the importance of schools, colleges, universities, and peak bodies collecting data and presenting compelling narratives about the value of international education has never been higher. The research we profiled today shows that voters in the US, Australia, and UK are open to the benefits of certain immigration pathways, including international students and highly skilled workers. That research is often supported by peak international bodies in those countries.

Meanwhile in Canada, linking responsible international recruitment to the sustainability of crucial programmes and research initiatives – and to the larger social and economic goals of the country – is a narrative well worth developing and advancing.

The post The power of data and narrative in building public support for international students appeared first on șÚÁÏčÙÍű Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

Those topline findings, notes the study report, show that, “Education abroad delivers outcomes that go far beyond employability
For most students, the mindset shift is clear — exposure to new cultures, languages and perspectives helps them see themselves as part of a wider global community, not just visitors in another country.”

The findings come from a new impact study published by sector research specialists . The study is a pilot and the beginning of a wider effort to benchmark the impact of education abroad.

The pilot cohort was made up of more than 4,250 students enrolled at 21 higher education institutions across multiple countries. However, the majority of the study participants were citizens of Australia (36%), the United Kingdom (31%), the United States (10%), or New Zealand (6%).

As we see in the following chart, more than half of the pilot cohort participated in a semester abroad, with another third attending a short international programme. The remaining 14% participated in a varsity of work placements, internships, or volunteer assignments.

When it comes to why they choose an international programme, miXabroad says, “Students are strongly motivated by the chance to step outside the familiar and experience something different.” CEO Emily O’Callaghan adds that study abroad participants, “Seek connection, culture and experience – reminding us that meaning, not just resume building, is at the heart of global learning.”

We see that reflected clearly in the next chart below, which illustrates that that pursuit of a new experience, across cultures and personal networks, is the primary motivator for international programme participants.

The vast majority of respondents (96%) report being satisfied or very satisfied (72%) with their international experience. A similar proportion of(97%) said they would likely recommend their international programme, with 77% indicating they definitely would.

“Our focus is on those who are very satisfied – because that’s when students are most inspired to actively recommend their experience, strengthening institutional reputation and driving future participation,” adds the report. “In short: the higher the satisfaction, the stronger the advocacy. Providers that aim to deliver truly satisfying experiences will see students become champions.”

Based on the research findings, miXabroad offers a number of important takeaways for programme designers and leaders.

• Centre personal growth in program design. “Build in opportunities for cultural immersion, social connection and self-discovery. These are the elements students value most and where they report the greatest personal impact.”

• Share student stories to illustrate those personal benefits.

• Engage with students before they start university. Nearly half of students consider going abroad before beginning their university programmes. Universities can boost student engagement and participation in programmes abroad by exposing prospective or incoming students to international opportunities as early as possible.

• Measure personal and social outcomes. Along with grades, universities are encouraged to track the impact of education abroad on student confidence, adaptability, and cultural awareness.

• Strengthen support at every stage of the student journey. “Pair pre-departure preparation and local orientation with ongoing pastoral and academic support. Students who feel guided, included and connected report the highest satisfaction.”

For additional background, please see:

• “șÚÁÏčÙÍű Podcast: Beyond the offer letter: The services that drive international student success“
• “Global student satisfaction survey highlights growing attention to career services“
• “How likely are students to recommend your institution?“

The post Impact study shows pursuit of new experience is a key driver for international exchange appeared first on șÚÁÏčÙÍű Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The survey sampled 7,900 current and prospective students around the world in July and August of 2025.

At the same time as students gravitate to AI inputs to inform decision-making, research by US education consultancy EAB highlights the continued relevance of a multi-channel marketing and recruitment strategy that prioritises (1) the content and design of institutional website and (2) supporting agents with accurate, real-time information about programmes, deadlines, requirements, applications, visa guidelines, and more.

Over half intend to use ChatGPT for study abroad decisions

More than half of surveyed prospective students plan to use ChatGPT to decide which institution to study at (54%) and in which programme (53%). This is up considerably from last year, when 35% of prospects surveyed in August 2024 planned to use AI for institution selection and 38% intended to determine which subject to choose.  

Source: IDP’s Emerging Futures 8

The research also found that 85% of prospective students are seriously considering more than one study destination.

Simon Emmett, chief partnerships officer at IDP Education, commented on the implications of the findings: “While students are still turning to counsellors and universities for advice, many are telling us that AI is becoming part of their decision-making toolkit. As a result, AI is shaping the early stage of students’ journeys.”

AI as the first step, but not the only one

The growing proportion of students who are using AI tools for study abroad research is changing the role of education agents. In the past, it was common for a student to walk into an agent’s office with a vague sense of where and what they might want to study and an expectation that agents would fill in their knowledge gaps and guide their decision-making process. This is still happening, but to a lesser extent.

Vaishali Jain, a senior education counsellor at IDP Education, said she is already noticing a change in the knowledge base of students – and adjusting accordingly:

“We’re seeing a growing number of students using AI tools like ChatGPT to explore study options before they even speak to a counsellor. AI is helping students clarify their interests, compare institutions, and come to us with more focused questions, while still having the support and guidance of counsellors to keep them on track until the visa has been granted. When used thoughtfully, it helps students take more control of their learning journey.”

IDP asked a student for their perspective. Ishika Malik, who is currently in a psychology programme at Swinburne University of Technology in Australia, said:

“When you’re making such a big decision it can be hard to know where to begin. By asking questions that mattered to me, AI helped me narrow down my options and understand what was possible. That made it much easier to have meaningful conversations with counsellors and finalise my application when the time was right.”

In other words, students still value agents’ insights and guidance, but they are increasingly seeking agents’ services later in the decision-making process and with different expectations than in the past.  

Students consider AI results with caution

Beyond the IDP survey, other recent research shows that most students understand that they cannot automatically trust AI responses to their questions. This has important implications for institutions and agents, since there is still significant student demand for information and guidance provided outside of AI.

For example, education consulting firm of more than 20,000 high-school students in the US found that AI chatbots such as ChatGPT or Gemini were trusted the least of all information sources about an institution. The top three resources trusted by students were:

• In-person events (e.g., campus tours, college fairs, information sessions) – 34%
• Online resources (e.g., specific college websites, college search data) – 30%
• High-school resources (e.g., teachers, coaches, counsellors) – 26%

AI chatbots came last in the list of 11 options students were asked to consider (3%).

The EAB survey findings highlight that in-person events and human advice remain the most valued sources of information for students deciding on where to study. IDP’s Simon Emmett concurs with the perspective that AI is not a replacement for other channels used by students in their research. He notes that the latest iteration of Emerging Futures found significant reliance on agents/counsellors and university websites:

“Despite the growing intent to engage AI, more than a third of students told us counsellors are among their most trusted sources of advice, and over half still rely on university websites. The role of counsellors and educators remains vital, especially when it comes to making final decisions, navigating applications, and building the confidence to take the leap.”

Implications for agent-institution partnerships

The IDP research suggests that agents’ value is shifting more to:

• Truth-proofing the results of students’ AI research;
• Offering a more authoritative source of information based on deep, real-time knowledge of institution and programme benefits;
• Liaising with institutions on the shortlist to inform them about how students are evaluating their offer versus that of competitors;
• Supporting students in terms of visa applications and processes and preparing them for study abroad.

For agents to fulfill that ability to deliver authoritative, real-time information, they need institutions to provide them with accurate, compelling facts about what is offered in terms of programmes, requirements, deadlines, etc. Regular updates and check-in calls have never been more important for productive agent-institution relationships.

For additional background, please see:

• “Students are switching to AI for search. Are you ready?“

The post Growing use of AI for study abroad decisions highlights importance of multi-channel marketing strategies appeared first on șÚÁÏčÙÍű Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

This year, the report also does a nice job in setting the context for enquiry management by providing some important takeaways from a survey of 49 responding institutions. Those findings highlight, for example, that two out of five universities in the sample report receiving more than 25,000 international student enquiries every year.

Near nine in ten (85%) of the responding institutions report using either a standalone or fully integrated CRM system to help manage those enquiry volumes. A similar proportion (84%) say that they use marketing automation tools as well. Edified adds that while the use of such tools is widespread, it is “at varying levels of sophistication globally.”

The institution survey also provides an interesting window into the enquiry channels supported across universities. As we see in the figure below, email and phone remain the most commonly available options.

The 2025 Enquiry Experience Tracker

The average overall scores in the tracker study rose by 10% year-over-year to reach a four-year high point. The proportion of responses rated as “excellent” rose from one-third to 58%, and the share of interactions characterised as “negative” fell from 33% to 18%. This reflects, says Edified, “how intense global competition is driving universities to sharpen their interactions with prospects.”

The 2025 study is based on enquiries filed with 103 institutions in five countries, across six enquiry channels (e.g., email, web enquiry form, WhatsApp, or other) and using seven student personas. Roughly a third of the institutions in the study were in the UK, another 28% were in Australia and New Zealand, just over a quarter in Canada, and 7% in the United States (all in the state of New York).

The mystery shoppers’ interactions with each university were then evaluated against 51 criteria, including “findability, responsiveness, clarity, and personalisation.” The scores for each are weighted according to the following model and used to generate an overall Enquiry Experience Score (out of 100) for each institution in the study.

The results

Overall scoring improved this year to a global average of 61, which represents a six-point improvement from the 2024 study. As we see in the figure below, however, the scoring varied a fair bit by region, with institutions in Australia and New Zealand showing the strongest performance. Also of note: each region in the 2025 study either improved or equalled their ratings from 2024.

The four years of the Enquiry Experience Tracker study reflect a steady improvement in enquiry handling, with global ratings rising from 51 in 2022 to this year’s overall score of 61.

Key findings

Beyond those institutional, regional, and global scores, the Enquiry Experience Tracker model has some important insights to offer.

Channels are not always on. Some of the enquiry channels that students find most meaningful – such as peer-to-peer, live chat and WhatsApp – are not always available, meaning students are essentially asked to fall back to more traditional channels like email to reach the institution.

For example, only 70% of institutions provide options to chat with current students, and just over half have live chat or chatbots. WhatsApp is the channel least likely to be offered with two-thirds of this year’s mystery shoppers unable to locate WhatsApp details. The significant of this rests in part in the fact that students found WhatsApp the most satisfying enquiry channel in every region. It is an option that, when available, offers greater responsiveness (all students in the study received an answer to their queries via WhatsApp and 80% of those came within two business hours. “The experience was so good,” says the study report, that “6 in 7 students said they’d be likely to engage further.”

Responsiveness is improving generally. Across the 2025 study, response rates and speed in responding improved. Edified reports: “Half of replies met best practice timeframes, up from four in ten last year.”

The report adds, “Response rates improved slightly, indicating that institutions are paying closer attention to their lead pipelines amid shifting policies and growing competition. On average, ANZ institutions are the most responsive, answering more than 95% of enquiries placed with them, followed by UK institutions, who replied to 85%. Response rates in North America were less consistent. One in four students didn’t hear back after placing enquiries to Canadian and US institutions in the time allowed for this research (three weeks for email and 15 minutes for live channels).”

Enquiry responses are becoming more effective. This year’s study finds that most institutions improved their communications in the last year and delivered both the key information that students need but also an element of persuasion as well. “Nearly 80% of responses were tailored to students’ study interests or country and 60% went the extra mile to include bonus information to help students,” adds the report. “Globally, half of communications were rated as ‘excellent’ against our standard – a further improvement on previous years.”

Follow-up remains a big challenge. While the study reflects better performance in terms of the initial reply to a student enquiry, serious issues remain in terms of any further follow up activity. Only one in four mystery shoppers received follow-up communications in the 2025 study, although this was up from one in five last year.

The report notes an important variation in follow up practice in that, “Students who placed web form enquiries were followed up with the most often, with 45% receiving nurture emails. This indicates a growing capability in data integration and consent management globally. Follow-ups were lowest for phone enquiries, and less than one in ten students heard back from institutions after their call.”

The bottom line. Most students in the 2025 study felt positively about their interaction with the institution(s). But one in five still said they would be unlikely to continue engaging beyond the initial exchange with the institution, mainly because the responses they received were impersonal or lacked warmth or a more personal touch. Just over half of the students in the study reported a positive experience, and more than four in ten said they would be “very likely” to keep engaging with the institution.

“Getting the basics of enquiry management right is not always enough to win hearts,” says Edified. “Student feedback shows they most value the institutions that anticipate their needs, give personalised responses and make them feel genuinely welcome.”

Recommendations

Working off of those important findings, the study report offers a series of recommendations for enquiry management.

1. “Apply a conversion mindset.” Each enquiry is an opportunity to guide the student to choosing your institution. Put your unique sales points forward, offer value-added details that speak to the student’s concerns, and close with practical next steps in the process.
   
2. Open up mobile channels. Many students may prefer to interact on messaging apps, but relatively few institutions offer this option.
   
3. “Don’t send students on a scavenger hunt.” Rather than relying on links to provide information, answer the student’s questions directly and meaningfully in your reply. “A more thoughtful reply builds trust and shows students what they can expect if they choose to study with you,” says Edified.
   
4. Commit to ongoing improvement. Student concerns, expectations, and even channel preferences are changing all the time. “Stay connected with your recruitment and in-country teams to identify shifts or challenges early, and adjust your content and channels accordingly,” concludes the study report.

For additional background, please see:

• “How to improve your communications with prospective international students“
• “In a time of shifting student demand, a speedy response to enquiries is a must“
• “Mystery shopping study indicates many institutions are still losing international student leads“

The post Mystery shopping study finds broad improvement in student enquiry handling this year appeared first on șÚÁÏčÙÍű Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The programme – produced in partnership by Studyportals with Uni-Life and the British Council IELTS – relies entirely on student reviews, which this year amounted to 102,000 reviews from students across 3,059 universities and 124 countries. The reviews were submitted between January 2023 and July 2025, from current students or alumni who graduated after January 2022.

Overall student satisfaction remains high at 4.18/5.00, reflecting a marginal decrease from 2023’s rating of 4.21. Comparable to the 2023 survey, just under 96% of responding students rated their overall study experience at either four or five stars.

At a national level, the top-performing destinations – based on that overall satisfaction score – were the United States (4.32), Belgium (4.29), and Austria (4.28). The following figure highlights a wider selection of country ratings (for overall satisfaction), comparing destination performance on two dimensions: (i) positive or negative change relative to the 2023 rating and (ii) relative ranking compared to the global average of 4.18.

Aside from the US, Canada showed steady improvement over the last four years, climbing from a rating of 4.07 (2021) and 4.11 (2023) to reach the global average for first time. The United Kingdom has also shown steady, if more gradual improvement, rising from 4.1 (2021) and 4.18 (2023) to 4.23 this year. Australia, however, remains below the global benchmark, with ratings consistently around 4.13 over the past four years.

As we see in the following summary of other key indicators from the 2025 ratings, there is a little more variability sitting behind that overall score.

“These results show where universities are winning student trust, and where they risk losing it,” said Studyportals CEO Edwin van Rest. “Students are more confident about career prospects, but increasingly concerned about diversity and their quality of life. In today’s competitive environment, these student voices are critical signals for universities. Understanding these perspectives is crucial for shaping policies and programmes that genuinely meet students’ needs.”

Signals for improvement

The student rating for “Admissions Process” declined from 4.41 in 2023 to 4.24 this year. This parameter reflects student feedback with respect to ease of application, clarity of website information, and quality of staff assistance during the admission process.

Part of the issue here may lie in the premium that students place on ease of use and streamlined experience in other parts of their lives. “Students specifically appreciate when online applications are ‘easy and simple to operate’ and websites are user-friendly,” adds Studyportals. “Modern students expect admission processes to match the usability standards of consumer applications, with intuitive interfaces and straightforward procedures.”

Another notable change this year was in the area of “Student Diversity,” which reflects “how effectively universities foster welcoming environments for students from different countries, cultures, religions, age groups, gender identities, backgrounds, and those with special needs.”

Student satisfaction with respect to “Student Diversity” dropped from 4.37 (2023) to 4.15 this year, a change that the report summarises as, “Universities that intentionally create welcoming spaces for students from different backgrounds see higher satisfaction. Conversely, some students faced problems integrating into the campus community or feeling at home in a new country.”

The meaningful thing about both parameters is that they are largely within the control of each university, which highlights that they remain areas of opportunity and potential competitive advantage for most institutions.

The steady rise of career services

Students rated their satisfaction with “Career Development” at 4.13 this year, a small increase over the 4.08 rating from 2023 but an impressive gain over four years from the 3.86 rating from 2021. As the term suggests, this aspect of student experience is concerned with, “How well universities support students’ career development through extracurricular courses, workshops, conferences, internship assistance, and other employability-enhancing activities.”

Overall, “Career Development” is the most-improved category tracked in the programme, indicating the greater attention to student support and student outcomes in this respect. Given everything we are learning in recent years about the greater emphasis students now place on those outcomes, this is a particularly relevant finding in the 2025 ratings.

This year’s report also includes a series of related recommendations for institutions planning to further strengthen their career services for students.

• “Facilitate industry professional connections. Organise regular interactions with working professionals through guest lectures, networking events, and mentorship programmes. These direct industry connections often prove more valuable than theoretical career guidance, providing students with realistic insights and professional networks.

• Expand hands-on learning opportunities. Bridge the gap between academic learning and professional application through well-supported internships and real-world projects. Students need practical experience with current industry tools and challenges to feel prepared for their careers.

• Leverage faculty research connections. Ensure professors actively engaged in current research translate contemporary industry challenges into classroom content. This makes education feel immediately relevant and prepares students for the evolving problems they’ll encounter in their professional lives”.

For additional background, please see:

• “How likely are students to recommend your institution?“
• “Global survey says graduate outcomes the most important factor in students’ choice of institution abroad“
• “Better living and social environments for students linked to better mental health“
• “Is employability still the holy grail for the new generation of international students?“

The post Global student satisfaction survey highlights growing attention to career services appeared first on șÚÁÏčÙÍű Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

South Korea’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education Ju-Ho Lee said: “We are proud that Seoul has been recognised as the best student city in the world. This achievement reflects the global confidence in Korea’s higher education system and highlights Seoul’s ability to blend academic excellence with vibrant culture, cutting-edge innovation, and a safe, welcoming environment.”

The QS ranking evaluates 150 cities across 58 countries and territories. The US and UK are the most represented, with 16 cities each, and, historically, cities in those two leading study destinations, along with those in Europe, have dominated the table.

Not so in 2026, however. Joining top-ranked Seoul are Tokyo (#2), Singapore (#11), Kuala Lumpur (#12), Beijing (#13), Taipei (#14), and Hong Kong (#17). Beijing and Taipei were the biggest movers at the top of the table, gaining 18 and 12 spots respectively since the 2025 ranking and entering the top 20 for the first time.

“There has been significant movement among the top 20 cities,” says QS. “Now, 10 of the top 20 cities are in Asia Pacific, highlighting the region’s increased influence on global higher education.” As we see in the following chart, that total includes long-standing, high-profile destinations in the region, such as Melbourne and Sydney, but we also see rapid gains for other major centres, notably Taipei and Beijing. That movement up the ranking table reflects the strength of the higher education institutions in each city, but also that a number of these destinations are also scoring higher in the QS ranking for factors such as “student mix” (which reflects the proportion of the student population in each city compared to total population) and affordability.

On the important question of cost, QS adds that, “While the top cities excel in many of our indicators, affordability is a persistent challenge. Low affordability may lead to international students looking outside the big four destinations or staying in their home country. London’s declining affordability was a significant driver in it losing its top spot.” A related comment from echoes the point, noting that, “The cost of living in London remains a growing concern for prospective students. While the city continues to offer a wealth of academic and professional opportunities, rising rent, transport, and living costs have lessened its appeal relative to more affordable alternatives.”

The 2026 city rankings also reflect the growing strength – and ambition – of study destinations across Asia. Japan, for example hosted more than 336,000 students in 2024, growing 21% from the year before. South Korea’s foreign student population reached 208,000 in 2023 (24% growth year-over-year) against a national goal to attract 300,000 students by 2027. Taiwan welcomed 125,000 visiting students in 2024 but wants to reach 320,000 by 2030, and Malaysia aims to host 250,000 students as of this year.

For additional background, please see:

• “South Korea on track to attract thousands more international students within the decade“
• “Beyond the Big Four: How demand for study abroad is shifting to destinations in Asia and Europe“
• “Global survey underscores demand shift from ‘Big Four’ to ‘Big Ten’“

The post Asian destinations show their strength in latest ranking of student cities appeared first on șÚÁÏčÙÍű Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.