Education – Page 12 – View From A Bridge – management, education and personal thoughts

The Dwindling Party* – More Pathway Closures in the US

Pathways providers are cock-a-hoop about the UK this year but there’s a slightly embarrassed silence about continuing closures in the US. A quick spin through the websites tells us that INTO looks to be shuttering one of its early partners and Study Group has trimmed another from its stable. And there are plenty of discussions about where the axe might fall next (with one contender noted below).

INTO’s portal for students claims 13 US partners but according to the corporate website there are “12..in the US”. It’s not entirely clear which university was intended to be mysterious number 13, but a click on the number leads to just 11 partner logos shown. The missing partner is Marshall University in Huntington, WV.

The Marshall deal was signed in November 2012 with the first students entering the pathway in August 2013. It was the heady days of expansion in the US and the opening came the same year that Leeds Equity took a 25% stake in the INTO University Partnerships business for £66m ($105.8m). With Shorelight Education launched shortly afterwards there was a lot of private money betting that US expansion would guarantee international student growth for a long time to come.

But Marshall’s non-resident alien population and the strength of the INTO pathway have declined sharply in recent years. Institutional data showing early fall statistics shows a fall of 37.6% enrolled at INTO Marshall and 38.7% in the university overall (which implies that direct recruitment was falling faster).

Table One: Marshall University International Student Enrollments

With respect to Study Group, I reported on closure of three US Centers back in September but since that time yet another has disappeared from the list of logos on the website: Oglethorpe University. A visit to the University’s website confirms that the last intake was September 2019, and that the International Study Center won’t exist after May 2020. The partnership was announced in 2017 with President Lawrence Schall, stating, “As part of our globalization strategy, choosing the right pathway partner was important.”

Reasons for the closure are not easy to discern, as the Oglethorpe Fact book suggests significant improvement of international numbers year-on-year for 2019 entry. The number of countries for represented for first-timers had also increased slightly. Maybe the future did not look bright enough.

Table 2: Oglethorpe University International Enrollments

	Fall 2018 Enrollment	Fall 2019 Enrollment
First time, full time international	16	41
Full time traditional undergraduate profile	97	122

While walking through the pathway websites I also came across Cambridge Education Group suggesting that a pathway with Illinois Institute of Technology, first announced in early 2018, is still ‘coming soon’. When I clicked on the link for Illinois Institute of Technology Direct Entry I found an error page. Careless at best if this is an important relationship but perhaps indicative of more deep-rooted reconsideration. As always, I am happy to clarify this if I receive an authoritative correction and explanation.

It seems likely that the US will suffer even more retrenchment in international student enrollments over the coming year. The resurgence of the UK will almost certainly affect the US more than other locations, with the recently reported 93% increase in student visas from India just the early part of the surge to take advantage of enhanced post study work visas. Of course, the implications of coronavirus have yet to play out fully and that may mean that all bets are off.

*The Dwindling Party is a book by Edward Gorey where pop-up illustrations and verses divulge how, one by one, six members of the MacFizzet family, disappear during a visit to Hickyacket Hall, leaving behind only young Neville, who expects “it was all for the best.” It’s an interesting metaphor.

Image by Mediamodifier from Pixabay

SEVIS Report Suggests India Woes for US Higher Education

The January 2020 reporting from SEVIS* reveals a continuing decline in international student enrollments from Asia in the US. The figures also point to growing problems with higher education enrollments by students from India. Even post-study work program Optional Practical Training (OPT), which has propped up the recent headline numbers presented by Open Doors, may be struggling

Over the three-year period** from December 2017 the SEVIS Data Mapping Tool shows a decline of 70,194 student visa holders*** from Asia – a drop of 7.6%. The percentage of the total from Asia has fallen from 77.2% to 75.47% over the period. Tables 1 and 2 look at aggregate SEVIS numbers while tables 3 and 4 look at specific levels of study.

Table 1 – SEVIS Data Mapping of Asian Student Visa Holders December 2017 to January 2020

Source: SEVIS

Digging further into the data by country the latest numbers show particular reductions in the number of visa holders from China and Indian. The 2017 to 2018 loss for the two countries was just over 11,000 but this accelerated with a drop of a further 20,000 from 2018 to January 2020. Particularly troubling was the rapid decline in Indian visa holders where a 3,500 fall from 2017 to 2018 became a further decline of 14,200 to January 2020.

Table 2 SEVIS Data Mapping of China and India Student Visa Holders December 2017 to January 2020

Source: SEVIS

SEVIS also provides an opportunity to see which type of student visa holder has been most affected by the decline. There are a number of categories but the focus will be on students listed in the Doctoral, Masters and Bachelor’s category as these are most relevant to universities and colleges. China and India show quite different patterns with the latter suggesting a rapidly worsening situation for higher education enrollment.

Accelerating Decline from India

A breakdown of the India student visa holder numbers shows that the number listed at Master’s level fell by around 7,000 from 2017 to 2018 and then a further 19,850 to January 2020. A modest upswing of around 3,300 in Bachelor’s and, a more encouraging, 5,400 in Doctor’s complete the picture. If the Master’s level deterioration continues there will need to be continuing growth in other categories to take up the slack.

It has been noted in many quarters that the UK’s reinstatement of a benevolent post-study work visa regime is already providing attractive to students from India. Visas granted to students from India were up 63% year on year to September 2019. With the full implementation of the new regime for students starting their degree in Fall 2020 it is widely anticipated that this will be a bumper year for enrollments in the UK and may bring more challenges for the US.

Table 3 SEVIS Data Mapping of India Master’s, Bachelor’s and Doctoral Level Student Visa Holders (December 2017 to January 2020)

Source: SEVIS

China Stable But Pipeline May Be Thinning

The China breakdown is showing that the same three categories are reasonably robust but that there has been a decline in Secondary, Associate and Language levels. This is a development which might, over the longer term, impact on the pipeline of students moving on to higher education. With the range of potential US enrollment challenges relating to Chinese students growing there is plenty of reason to be concerned that Fall 2020 and beyond will be impacted.

While coronavirus is a rapidly developing issue that is likely to disrupt recruitment of Chinese students to all countries there is little doubt that recent rhetoric and actions in the US have also done damage that may be lasting. With friendlier tones taken by competitor countries and the availability of better value, good quality options for an increasingly economically pressed middle class in China it may be that even maintaining enrollment levels will be a struggle. While the decline in China’s 18-year old population has leveled out it will not return to the volumes seen in the last decade in the near future.

Table 4 SEVIS Data Mapping of China Master’s, Bachelor’s and Doctoral Level Student Visa Holders showing also combined Secondary, Associate and Language Holders (December 2017 to January 2020)

Source: SEVIS

As has been noted it is difficult to get to the underlying picture on enrollments because of the intermingling of different visa types and the particular issues related to the historical growth of visa holders doing OPT. The rapid drop in the numbers for India would, however, suggest that there is a degree of market movement and that US Consul General Joel Reifman’s thoughts on relations between the two countries needs some work.

If, as suggested by some commentators, the size of the decline in Indian Master’s students is partly due to them reaching the end of OPT and not being replaced by incoming students this might suggest that students are becoming used to selecting countries that offer a better path for work or citizenship. That does not seem like particularly good news for the longer term. There are plenty of competitors willing to offer alternatives.

Notes

*SEVIS is the web-based tool that the Department of Homeland Security uses to maintain information on non-immigrant students, exchange visitors and their dependents.

**The SEVIS data is not exact to the month on a year by year basis. The charts reflect the month of publication for the figures shown.

***The term ‘student visa holder/s’ is used to describe the aggregate numbers shown by SEVIS for the region, countries and/or levels of study shown.

Post Study Work May Change UK University Enrolment Growth Patterns

The BBC’s claim that ‘UK universities see boom in Chinese students’ shows a lack of subtlety in understanding the dynamics of growth at different institutions. The latest HESA data available at individual university level shows that just seven universities took 51% of the 16,990 student growth in Chinese enrolments between 2014/15 and 2017/18. But there are intriguing signs that the incoming surge of Indian students might bring a new dynamic to the market.

While China still dominates, the latest HESA data (for 2018/19 entrants) shows that Indian ‘first year entrants’ to the UK in 2018/19 grew by 42% (around 5,250) year on year with comparative China numbers up around 13%. We also know that in the year to September 2019 the UK saw continuing and notable increases in Tier 4 study visas to students from China and India with visas to Chinese nationals up 21% to 119,697 and those to Indian nationals up 63% to 30,550. Anecdotal evidence suggests that post-study work rights are driving applications from India even harder for 2020/21.

With numbers from India growing so rapidly it’s worth considering whether this might impact the growth opportunities of different institutions.

Reputation and Rankings Key to Chinese Enrolments

In the last four years, where data is available at institution level, seven universities achieved growth of over 600 Chinese student enrolments and growth of 50% or more in their Chinese enrolments. Strong brand and rankings focus in the China market mean it’s no surprise that five of the seven are Russell Group universities. The University of the Arts seems to have been able to develop a niche brand in a growing area of study.

Table 1: Universities Increasing Enrolment from China by over 600 and 50% from 2014/15 to 2017/18

Source: HESA

The obverse is broadly true as well. Lower ranking universities have, generally, found it more difficult to recruit students from China with the eight showing the biggest numerical losses being over 4,000 enrolments down over the four years. None of them are ranked above 40 in the Times University Guide 2020.

Table 2: Universities with the Largest Decline in Chinese Student Enrolments 2014/15 to 2017/18

Source: HESA

As an aside, it is interesting to note that the University of Leicester switched pathway operator from Study Group to Navitas during the course of the year. No doubt they will be hoping for a reversal of fortunes under their new arrangements. On the other side of things Cardiff University, one of the most successful in recent years as seen in Table 1, has just appointed Study Group so there would appear to be some pressure to perform. Sunderland and Hull may be wondering whether their involvement with CEG is delivering as needed.

Growth of Indian Students Less Ranking Dependent

We are awaiting the HESA data at institutional level for 2018/19 to see how the growth in Indian student numbers will affect the dynamics. If 2014/15 to 2017/18 is any guide it could begin to level the playing field with some lower ranked universities able to make ground. Between those years total enrolments from India grew by 1425 but the seven universities with over 150 additional enrolments grew their Indian numbers by an aggregate 1870.

Table 3: Universities Increasing Enrolment from India by over 150 and 50% from 2014/15 to 2017/18

Source: HESA

It is reasonable to note that the big losers in terms of enrolments from India were also at the lower end of the reputation and ranking scale. West London (-380). Staffordshire (-340) and Cardiff Metropolitan (-300) showed the most significant losses. But equally, there were no significant gains made by most Russell Group universities.

It is difficult to find any obvious cause and correlation in the grouping that has done well. One factor, for some of the institutions listed in the table, is likely to be the value for money they offer in terms of fees and other expenses. For students taking out personal finance it seems reasonable to assume that universities with lower fees, even if below the top rankings, may be attractive.

Another factor which may be worth considering is the relative strength of the Indian community in some locations. London (Queen Mary) is always a strong draw but the most recent UK Census information indicates that in 2011 there were significant communities in Leicester (De Montfort), Nottingham, Preston (UCLAN), Northampton and Newcastle (Northumbria). All that being said, it is worth noting that the University of Leicester lost 90 Indian students over the period – it may just be that De Montfort is eating its lunch.

Future Disrupted?

What makes it even more tantalising is the recently released top line HESA data on international enrolments in 2018/19. As one would expect five of the big Russell Group players have been top performers with Edinburgh, Kings College, Leeds, Sheffield and University College London each adding over 1,000 new international students year on year. Their gains account for around 25% of the overall 23,280 increase in total international student enrolments.

But the data also shows that East London (505), Greenwich (660), Hertfordshire (475), Nottingham Trent (470) and Teeside (490) all had faster year on year growth in international enrolments than Exeter (345), Warwick (385), Lancaster (60) and Newcastle (40). It’s a little early to call the outcomes and the figures are not available at institutional level by country of domicile. But there is just a hint that the return of post-study work visas has disrupted enrolment patterns and some lower-ranked universities may have the most cause to be grateful.

Notes:

The term ‘international’ is used here to described students paying international fees and excludes European-union students who pay the same fee as UK students.
The data in the Future Disrupted? Section is taken from HESA data:
1. HE student enrolments by HE provider and domicile Academic year 2018/19
1. HE student enrolments by HE provider and domicile Academic year 2017/18

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

Nine out of ten international students (might) prefer….

If governments and educational institutions are serious about differentiation, market segmentation and strategic marketing they should be wary of headline grabbing boasts driven by shallow or questionable research. It’s been a recurring and growing occurrence in recent years but is unlikely to lead to the type of self-analysis and improvement that will build competitive advantage. There are plenty of examples but a small sample relating to international students and taken from the four main recruiting countries is sufficient to show the problem.

A recent PIE article trumpeted the ‘overwhelming satisfaction’ that international student have with their experience in US higher education. The World Education Services (WES) survey, ‘Are US HEIs meeting the needs of international students?’ asserts that 91% of respondents are ‘overwhelmingly satisfied with their experience studying in the U.S’. But the report itself makes the point that the survey findings ‘may not be generalizable’ to the US international student population and may suffer from ‘self-selection and sample biases.’ There’s certainly plenty to question about how representative a sample of 1,921 self-selecting students can be.

This outcome has similarities to the recent UUKi Graduate Outcome Survey 2019 carrying the line that over 90% of graduates who studied in the UK were ‘satisfied or very satisfied with all aspects of their lives’ (UUKi Graduate Outcome Survey 2019). As noted in a previous blog the UUKi Survey is flawed for reasons that are as uncomfortable in terms of the ways universities engage with alumni. Only 6% of the total respondents were from China and, as a footnote confirms, “in the year 17-18, Chinese students made up 33% of the total non-EU student population…”.

Looking further afield Canada’s 2018 CBIE Survey indicated that ‘93% of students stated that they are either satisfied..or very satisfied’ with their experience. The sample size of 14,228 is noted as 4% of total post-secondary students in Canada so still a relatively small group. And the percentage from south and east Asia was only 45% compared to at least 70% of Canada’s international students coming from those regions.

Of the big four recruiting countries Australia’s DET 2018 International Student survey saw an impressive 27% response rate from international students. The outcome was that 89% ‘were satisfied or very satisfied with their living and learning experience in Australia’. Regrettably, there is no access to underlying data to determine how representative the sample is of the international population.

In their publicity material, however, Australia makes claims about its performance in comparison to others across the world. What is peculiar about these claims is that the margins are wafer thin with, for example, ‘satisfaction with learning’ showing as Australia 88.5% Other Countries 87.5%. And the comparison source is shown as *International Student Barometer (incorporating scores from hosting countries including USA, Canada, UK and New Zealand). The obvious question is – who else does it include?

Readers who are concentrating will have notice an interesting echo across all of the results – 91% (WES), over 90% (UUKI), 93% (CBIE) and 89% (DET). This suggests that there may be a self-fulfilling nature to these surveys with the international students who take part simply more likely to be satisfied. Those who found the experience less helpful may just be looking to get on with their lives after a poor experience that has left them struggling to find graduate level employment.

It’s a reminder of the minor marketing furore in the UK, where a well-known advertising slogan for cat food Whiskas was “eight out of ten owners said their cat prefers it”. After a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority, this was changed to “eight out of ten owners who expressed a preference said their cat prefers it”. Perhaps student surveys should come with similar, upfront cautions about their relevance, authority and comprehensiveness.

Another manifestation of the problem is the tendency to cherry-pick data, draw misleading comparisons or ignore longer-term trends in the pursuit of self-congratulatory platitudes. This can happen with students surveys or enrollment counts. But it’s all part of the bland, self-congratulatory spin.

Nicola Dandridge, chief executive of the Office for Students, welcomed the UK’s 2019 National Student Survey with the words: ‘It is good news that overall satisfaction with higher education courses remains high this year.” The full statement recorded that satisfaction had risen to 84% from 83% the year before. No mention of the fact that in 2014 and 2015 the satisfaction rate was 86% and, on that measure, fewer students are satisfied than five years ago.

Some might argue that when the survey first came out in 2005 the overall satisfaction rate was only 81.3% and so there has been an improvement over the longer timescale. A reasonable response to that would be that universities are full of academics who are good at passing tests and that the Survey has been ‘gamed’ so improvement was inevitable. Institutions quickly worked out how to optimize response rates and manage academic behavior in ways that improved their rankings.

For those interested in more reading on the NSS, The Economics Network has done a really nice analysis of results across a number of dimensions, subjects and sector groups. As an example, the Russell Group of universities has, since 2015, seen a precipitous fall in positive responses to the statement, ‘Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair’. It fairs no better on overall satisfaction with scores of 86.5% in 2010 falling to just over 81% in 2019.

Finally, and as an example where enrollment data can be interpreted in ways that distort more worrying trends, there is official reaction to the latest Open Doors press release. As mentioned in several blogs and most recently in December it’s difficult to accept the headline that ‘Number of International Students in the United States Hits All-Time High’ with anything more than a sigh. Including OPT students who are doing post-study work and not directly contributing to universities either financially or academically seems an almost deliberate attempt to draw attention away from two years of decline in those enrolled.

It is reasonable to believe that the surveys mentioned and the individuals quoted are well intentioned, but the best organizations are obsessed with using research to find out what can be improved, and they realize the difference between the PR ‘puff’ and game-changing insights. Higher education decision makers need to be more demanding of student surveys and focus their thinking on students who are unhappy or who are not trying the product at all. They might also care to look harder at whether graduates are finding their degree has genuinely opened up better options, or whether they are benefiting from the ‘aftercare’ service implicit in alumni relations promises.

Colleagues elsewhere in the sector have also commented extensively on the ‘survey fatigue’ that is reducing response rates and undermining credibility. But there should be equal concern about the self-interest of organizations that accept the status quo even when it is manifestly inadequate. Far better to follow the line that made Bill Gates one of the richest people in the world – “Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.”

Image by Florian Bollmann from Pixabay

Another Canadian University Pathway Coming Soon?

Pathway operators have been focused on getting contracts with universities in Canada for several years but there has been little real momentum. All the more interesting to catch rumours of Navitas nearing a breakthrough with Ryerson University. It’s worth having a look at whether there’s any strength to them.

Exhibit one would be the university’s Senate Meeting Agenda of 1 October 2019. Pages 78 to 83 have a summary of meetings ‘from the President’s Calendar’ and there, hiding in plain sight on page 82, is the entry:

Jul 29, 2019: Over dinner, I met with Rod Jones, group CEO for Navitas worldwide; Scott Jones, nonexecutive chair of the board for Navitas worldwide; and Brian Stevenson, president and CEO, university partnerships, Navitas North America. We discussed the potential for Ryerson to bring in international students through the pathways to university education that Navitas offers.

The information had previously been shared at the Board of Governors meeting on September 20, 2019. So we know that Ryerson’s President Mohamed Lachemi has been meeting with senior people from Navitas although that might not be considered unusual. But there’s a little bit more to report.

Recent social media shows President Lachemi escaping the Canadian winter in the past couple of weeks and ‘expanding Ryerson’s relationships with leading universities’ in Australia. This might be unexceptional but the twittersphere also suggests visits to Griffith College and Deakin College – two Navitas centers – arranged by Navitas. And it sounds like there have been more meetings with senior Navitas folk.

There’s no way of confirming the market gossip and I am always happy to clarify the situation if an authoritative source gets in touch. Ryerson has certainly been in conversation with at least one external operator in the past but given the rise of Canada as an international student recruitment magnet it’s questionable what benefits such a relationship brings. Some commentators might argue they could organize themselves to take advantage of the momentum behind enrollments.

Once clue might be that Ryerson looks to have been left lagging despite the surge in interest for the country with the world’s longest bi-national land border. There are thirty Canadian universities listed in the THE 2020 World Ranking top 1000 and the percentage of international students at Ryerson is the lowest of all. At 4% it is well behind other, admittedly higher ranked, Toronto institutions like the University of Toronto (21%) and York University (24%).

Ryerson’s global ranking in the THE ranking 601-800 bracket places it behind the other Navitas partners in Canada. The University of Manitoba is ranked in the 351-400 bracket and has 17% international students and Simon Fraser University is in the 251-300 bracket with 30% international students. This might suggest that there is plenty of scope for Ryerson to grow with the right sort of support.

It would be the third public research university to partner with Navitas and would give the portfolio added depth. The only other pathway provider with representation in Canada is Study Group who have one public research university in Royal Roads and two sub-degree colleges in Stenberg and the Center for Arts and Technology.

With US enrollments still struggling and the maturity of the UK and Australian pathway markets it’s easy to see why there is interest in Canada. Interest remains strong amongst students and agents with little sign of applications slowing. But everyone with a history in international recruitment knows that past performance is no guarantee of future success.

The international student boom in Canada has come with some issues that are increasingly grabbing the headlines. There are allegations of students being ‘duped by unscrupulous agents’, scarcity of part-time work and up to 39% of study visa applications being rejected. It’s difficult to believe that interest will slump quickly or precipitously but it may be time for wise heads to consider what a sustainable rate of growth might look like.

Image by David Peterson from Pixabay

Changing Fortunes and Futures Across Major Recruiting Countries

Another extraordinary year in higher education around the globe and a good moment to review some of the highlights and possible future directions of the main four recruiting countries. There’s plenty to consider as the established recruiting heavyweights fight off emerging challenges, the shake-up of pathways continues, and India’s rise as a market becomes an obsession for recruiters.

USA

A year of reckoning for pathways with four closures each by Study Group and CEG while EC Higher Education exited the market totally. All of which reminded us of the chill wind blowing through international student enrollments in the US. It added to the uncertainty around a sector which is seeing changing demographics and growing competition lead to longstanding institutions closing.

IIE reported overall international student enrollments for 2018/19 down 2.1% on the year before and 3.4% down on the peak of 2016/17, with the number of new undergraduates falling for a third year in a row (down 10.4% over three years). For the press release to claim, “we are happy to see the continued growth in the number of international students in the United States”, seems either complacent or misguided. It’s fair to say that the quote reflects the inclusion of OPT (a form of post-study work) numbers in the overall count but even when they are included growth was a measly 0.05% which hardly seems a basis for contentment.

A microcosm of the problem and its impact on pathways was highlighted by student newspaper The University Daily Kansan which showed the University of Kansas and Shorelight partnership falling short of expectations. It indicates that in 2014 Shorelight intended to double the number of international students at the University. But between 2014 and 2018 the number enrolled fell from 2,283 international students to 2031 – an 11% decrease.

Shorelight parted company with their Chief Commercial Officer, Sean Grant, in October after just over a year in post. At INTO University Partnerships, Cagri Bagcioglu, Senior VP Partners North America, left after 16 months and has turned up at Cintana Education. Reports of job losses at Navitas were in the news and Study Group have yet to announce the replacement of their North American MD.

Looking forward there seems to be little likelihood of the news improving any time soon. Changes to post-study work in the UK may further undermine recruitment from India and there is already good evidence that some Chinese students are putting the UK ahead of the US. It will be worth watching to see whether INTO, buoyed by bumper recruitment in the UK, will invest heavily to make life even tougher for the US-centric Shorelight.

The world of international student recruitment in the UK changed in September 2019 with the announcement that a two-year post-study work visa was being introduced for students from the 2020/21 academic year. Foundation courses are already doing huge business for January 2020 entrants looking to go on to the full university degree later in the year. The British Council is predicting growth of ‘just under 20%’ across the sector in the year ahead.

The announcement lifted the gloom that had been felt since post-study work was ended in 2012. While many big brand names have done well in the intervening years, the new Government policy opens the door for more universities to maximize their intakes. The news built on statistic showing that the UK had already seen a 63% year on year increase in Tier 4 visas granted for Indian students in the year to September 2019.

It was a good year overall for pathway providers with Study Group picking up Aberdeen and Cardiff while Navitas secured Leicester. Given the renewed recruitment opportunity, it’s ironic that INTO’s pathway with Gloucestershire was closed during the summer period. With growth guaranteed for a couple of years the year ahead may be the right moment for some of the smaller players to get a good price for their pathway activity from one of the big players.

The coming year is also likely to see interest focusing back on the implications of Brexit with the probability of the Government inserting a clause to ban any delay beyond December 2020. Plenty of reason for universities to be nervous about enrollment from Europe if students are obliged to pay international fees when the deal is done. And there may be a resurgence of interest in new, European based campuses to try to ameliorate the problem.

Australia

The battle for the Ashes has nothing on the intensity of competition for international students, and it took Australia less than a month to respond to the UK’s post-study work change. They decided that Perth and the Gold Coast would be classified as regional which gives international graduates an additional year of post-study work rights. The federal government added that student in regional centres and other areas would have access to up to six years of PSW.

All this on top of an Australian enrollment juggernaut that has seen double-digit growth in international higher education students for each of the past four years. Enrollments year on year to October 2019 were c45,000 up at 434,756. Despite arguments about lack of diversity their percentage of Chinese students is 28% compared to the US at 34% (including OPT) and the UK at 33% (of international fee paying).

There could be plenty more gas in the tank which may have been the reason Rod Jones and his colleagues took Navitas into private ownership with BGH. It would also explain new kids on the block (or old kids who’ve been round the block) Camino Global Education, founded by John Wood, former CEO of university partnerships at Navitas, and Peter Larsen, who co-founded Navitas (then known as IBT) with Rod Jones in 1994.

Australia has led the way in developing transparency on student recruitment agencies, and its Government recognizes the value of the higher education sector to the economy. One would guess that the potential of trans-national education is well within their sights as they embed their network in the vibrant Asian economies. For the casual observer they also provide the best, most up-to-date and detailed data on international student enrollment and that’s a model most other could do with replicating.

Canada

‘O Canada…with glowing hearts we see thee rise, the True North strong and free’. Those words from the national anthem must be how the country’s higher education sector and national Government feel about international student recruitment. But it’s far from over because the federal government recently pledged nearly $30-million a year over the next five years to diversify global recruiting efforts in the postsecondary sector.

Remarkable to believe that just five years ago a headline of ‘When it comes to foreign students, Canada earns ‘F’ for recruitment’ accompanied the release of a report by the Council of Chief Executives and the Canadian International Council. It provoked action and the launch of the EduCanada brand in 2016, which drove the number of international students in college or university from about 120,00 to 260,000 from 2015 to 2018.

Canada is also unusual in having more students from India than from China. In December 2018 India surpassed China as Canada’s top source of foreign students, across all sectors, with more than 172,000 study permit holders. Each country represents slightly more than a quarter of the total of 570,000.

It’s no secret that every pathway operator has been trying to access the Canadian higher education sector for years. The reality is that the sector had organized itself and was making progress while most of the attention was on the US. There seems little need for outside help as they launch their International Education Strategy 2019-2024.

Anyone who has worked in the international recruitment field knows that bets on long-term success are likely to lead to embarrassment. It’s less than a decade since Australia’s years in the doldrums, this article notes Canada’s ‘F for failure’ and just three months ago the UK wasn’t competing on post-study work options. It’s also only ten years ago that the lure of the US market was driving extraordinary valuations of pathway companies.

But it seems pretty reasonable to say that when the enrollment numbers for 2019/20 and 2020/21 are in there will be smiles in Canada, Australia and the UK. For the US the road to growth is unclear and may be several years in the building. And there remains the possibility that higher education in Asia will reach a tipping point to upset the old order even more fundamentally. Happy holidays.

Photo by Element5 Digital from Pexels

UK’s International Graduate Employability ‘Promise’ – Next Steps

It should be possible to wholeheartedly welcome UUKi’s Conference ‘International graduate employability: Making good on the promise’ because it is an important topic. But I doubt we will see 90% of the time devoted to employability for students leaving the UK after study, although that’s the percentage that will probably look for jobs in their home country. Neither is the Conference likely to have the necessary quality of data about graduate outcomes and views despite the investment made in UUKi’s International Graduate Outcomes 2019 publication.

Even more discouragingly, the publicity for the event majors on the point that ‘we have the post study work visa we have argued for for so long’. This encourages those who want to focus on short-term enrollment growth by maximising the post-study work windfall rather than serving the broader international graduate community. A more balanced view would reflect that providing careers services, alumni relations and employer networks suited to international students returning home will be a key point of strategic differentiation in the long term.

In addition to getting the balance of time in the Conference right it would be good to see discussion and commitments on how to make progress in four key areas:

Make Sure Data Reflects Reality

Several assertions in the International Graduate Outcomes 2019 report are heavily caveated and require detailed explanation in a footnote or the annexes. The most egregious is the claim that “The balance of respondents to the i-GO survey by nationality was broadly similar to that of international students studying in the UK.” (page 17). With only 6% of the total respondents from China this is nonsense and, as a footnote confirms, “in the year 17-18, Chinese students made up 33% of the total non-EU student population…”.

Assertions on comparative salaries (page 49) for UK graduates working in other countries are problematic and confusing. For the diligent reader these anomalies are explained away but the headline claims seem to be a naïve overstatement of the benefits based on data that is not comparable and in some cases is very limited. If this begins to work its way into university marketing materials we are likely to see the Advertising Standards Authority called into action again to correct misleading claims.

Other sources and methodologies, which have more substantial samples and better reflect the nationality mix of UK-enrolled international students, are available. They also offer the potential to compare performance across competitor countries and give substance to claims about the pay premium that returning students can expect. Individual universities are already buying these services but the competitive future of UK HE seems worth a sector-wide approach.

Get Serious About Careers Service and Advice

In the foreword to UUKi’s report Chris Skidmore Minister of State of Universities, Science, Research and Innovation comments, “Together we can build on this research to help ensure that international students who graduate from the UK’s world leading universities are in the best possible position to go on to further employment be it in the UK, or their home nation”. The latter will be difficult if not impossible if there is no concerted effort to build relevant support and services for international students.

The report highlights that only 2% of international students found jobs through their University Careers Service. It is arguable that few of those Services are equipped technically, with funding or with genuine insights, to help international students engage with employers in their home countries. Whatever the reason, it is a dismal outcome and an indictment of the services international students receive for their fees.

Pay More Attention to International Alumni Relationships

Details on response rates are not wholly clarified but the Report stated it was, “… less than 1% of total international graduates from UK higher education institutions” during the sample period. It seems plausible that those who did respond are outliers in the alumni community who feel particular affinity or allegiance to their institution and/or the UK. If so, it is dangerous to assume that high levels of approval and support for the educational experience are commonplace.

Most service organisations are more interested in finding out about customers who are dissatisfied so that they can improve their offering. Lack of engagement means that institutions may be getting highly selective feedback and missing information that could help them build more effective curricula and better support. Even if the responses are representative and the low rate just the result of inertia, it means universities are missing opportunities to develop networks of graduates around the world who may be supportive of future students seeking employment.

Target Connections with Employers Through Better Data, Insight and Graduate Support

HEIs should know the destinations of international graduates and develop targeting to match graduates with relevant skills to employers who need them. The importance of this is apparent in markets such as Malaysia where students ranked nine Asia-Pacific regional companies as the most desirable employers in their top ten for business and commerce according to Universum 2017. In terms of graduate employability many Asia-Pacific based corporations would also benefit from universities providing better information about courses and the strengths of their students.

There are major opportunities for universities that are able to fit together the jigsaw of graduates and employers. Better employment prospects and evidence of thriving careers is a siren call for both potential students and major organisations who are seeing job-prepared employees from favoured institutions. The best way to achieve that level of synchronicity is through data that is individualized to each university delivered with insights about regional economies.

A Strategic Advantage and Virtuous Circle

I would like to give three cheers to the UUKi for staging a Conference on an important issue and their effort to develop a worthwhile piece of evidence that underscores the UK’s position as a high-quality study destination that delivers enhanced career and life prospects. For now, I can only manage one-and-a-half because the Report errs on the side of marketing at the expense of more hard-edged insights, and the Conference may simply reinforce short-term, narrow thinking about finding jobs for students who stay in the UK.

More positively, both are good starting points which, with imagination, conviction and investment, could become the basis for a genuine strategic advantage. This would mean investment in demonstrating through data and insights that the UK produces a global network of alumni with thriving careers. With graduates choosing to work overseas getting appropriate support as they start their working lives, businesses around the world would better understand the value of a UK higher education, and international students would choose the UK knowing it gives them an employment advantage. It’s a virtuous circle worth considering.

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

MORE US PATHWAY RUMORS AS THE MARKET TIGHTENS

Things seem to be moving fast as the big pathway players realise that winter is coming, both physically and metaphorically, to their US operations. Hot on the heels of the recent Study Group closures there are strong rumors of Navitas reviewing its US partnerships and cutting staff. Shorelight has also taken action through changes to its senior management team and staff lay-offs in the past month.

The Navitas partner changes are still at the point of speculation and no brand names have been removed from the list of partners as of today. But the ‘Search Navitas programs’ area of the website turns up no results for Virginia Commonwealth University, Richard Bland College or University of Idaho. Searches for University of New Hampshire courses lead to a broken ‘this page isn’t working’ link.* By contrast the Florida Atlantic University pages, UMass and Queen’s College pages seem fine, as do the Canadian university partner links.

Dr Brian Stevenson took up the reins as CEO and President of Navitas’ University Partnerships North America division at the start of this year. With his strong links to Canada it’s possible that there is a major shift of emphasis that would reflect the continuing popularity of Canada as a student destination. There certainly seems little prospect of any but the best or most market-oriented US universities being a profitable proposition in the near future.

In October InsideHigherEd noted the decline in Chinese student enrollments and its potential impact on US universities but the next news might be about the changing preferences of students from India. 2019 saw the UK have a 42% year on year increase in visas issued to Indian students and there is every sign that the coming year will see similar growth. With changes in post-study work visas coming into effect for 2020 enrollments universities and pathways are already reporting substantial interest.

Back in 2014 Karan Khemka, then a partner with the Parthenon Group, said: “The U.S. third-party/outsourced pathway market is less than half the size of the Australian market despite having a higher education system that is 10 times the size. We anticipate that growth will be constrained only by the pace at which private providers can develop the market.” That was one of the drivers for over $1bn of private investment being made in pathways.

The reality is that, with CEG and EC leaving the market, Study Group cutting back and Navitas now looking hard at its options, the past 18 months has seen a decrease of well over 10% in the number of US pathways. By contrast the UK and European pathway market continues to grow and Australia has just loosened its post-study visa regime a little further. It seems likely that this is the prevailing direction of travel for the foreseeable future.

*Searches undertaken on 30 October 2019. As with all commentary in this blog any authoritative comments or corrections are welcome and will be recorded.

Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay

Shine a Light on Shorelight

Getting contemporaneous data and sales targets from privately held pathway providers is unusual. But in a July 2019 podcast interview, Sean Grant, Chief Recruitment Officer of Shorelight Education, tells us that Shorelight recruited 3,000 students “last year” (presumably 2018/19) and are forecasting to recruit ”4,000 students plus this year.” Grant notes that the 3,000 student figure for 2018/19 represented year-over-year growth of 35%, which suggests Shorelight recruited approximately 2,200 students in 2017/18.

It was equally enlightening to hear that the company continues to invest heavily in building its sales function. Grant noted that Shorelight’s US-based onshore recruitment team grew from five people to 28 in “about six weeks” last year. While staff growth of this magnitude and pace is prodigious by most measures, it may be the norm for a company that considers itself “the Amazon or the Google of the…international education sector.”

Because Shorelight is a private company based in the US, it has largely been able to maintain confidentiality around its economic performance (unlike UK-based competitors, who are required to publicly disclose annual financials). The Shorelight website shows 17 current university partners, and a press release announced their partnership with Cleveland State for fall 2019 recruitment, bringing the total to 18. Grant referenced 19 partners in his interview, so it’s just possible we may have had early notice of a new partner joining the portfolio.

Shorelight is now in its seventh year of operation since its mid-2013 inception. With the disclosure of recruitment numbers and the indication that the business continues to invest heavily in sales staffing, it’s worth drilling down to look at how the six public universities that signed early on with Shorelight are doing*.

Louisiana State University

Shorelight began recruiting for LSU in 2015 and since then the university’s total enrollment of non-resident aliens have fallen from 1704 in fall 2015 to 1599 in fall 2019 according to the Geographical Origin of Students spreadsheet.

Table 1 – Total Fall Enrollment of Non-Resident Aliens at Louisiana State University

Souce: LSU Fall Facts and Interactive Dashboard

In the form contract between LSU and Shorelight, publicly disclosed by the State of Louisiana, the articulated enrollment goal for the International Accelerator Program, i.e., the pathway, is 850 students in the ’fifth Academic Year of the IAP” (2020/21). Inside Higher Ed reported that in spring 2018 “there were just 136 students enrolled,” and market rumors suggest that recruitment remains a long way short of target. The absence of overall international enrollment growth at LSU suggests that neither pathway or direct recruitment are going to plan.

University of Kansas

There is a similar story at the University of Kansas where the fifteen-year contract with Shorelight came under fire from academics at the time it was signed in 2014. Sarah Rosen, then Vice Provost for Academic Affairs at KU (who has since moved to Georgia State), was reported to have articulated enrollment aspirations of about 600 in two or three years. As Shorelight sought and won an injunction preventing the release of the contract, no further insight into the parties’ ambitions are available. As KU’s total fall enrollment of non-resident aliens (termed international in the Factbook) has decreased during the relevant period, it seems likely that this aspiration was not met.

Table 2 – Fall Enrollment of Internationals at University of Kansas

Source: University of Kansas Interactive Factbook

Auburn University

Auburn signed with Shorelight in 2015. The university’s online, interactive Factbook offers the option to filter enrollments by on-campus, “Primary Major” which includes the various “Auburn Global” programs offered in partnership with Shorelight. Enrollments rose substantially between 2015 and 2016 but have been in steady decline since. Overall, enrollments are largely undergraduate and Chinese.

Table 3 – Fall Enrolment to Auburn Global Courses at Auburn University

Source: Auburn University Factbook

Table 4 – China/Non-China Fall Enrolment to Auburn Global Courses at Auburn University

Source: Auburn University Factbook

At the university level, the impact of the trends within Auburn Global are clear: total international student enrollment has grown from 1639 in 2015 to 3034 in 2019, with the percentage of Chinese students going from 46% to 62% during this same time. Obviously, the financial impact of 1400 additional students is material; however, the risk associated with such a large proportion of students from a single source country, especially in the current political climate, is palpable.

University of South Carolina

The Fall 2018 International Student Enrollment Report from USC captures the five-year picture on the university’s international recruitment. The International Accelerator Program (IAP) has helped push undergraduate numbers forward but its growth appears to have stalled. Of the total international enrollment for the university 40% of students are from China.

Table 5 – International Student Fall Enrollment – University of South Carolina

Source: USC Fall 2018 International Student Enrollment Report

Florida International University and University of Central Florida

Both of Shorelight’s Florida partners have seen strong growth in overall international enrollments. As a comparator, the University of South Florida, an INTO partner, saw total international enrollments grow by around 1500 between 2015 and 2018. This may reflect both the popularity of Florida as a destination for international students and that the three universities have lower fees than the others reviewed.

Table 6 – International Fall Enrollments at UCF and FIU

Source: Factbooks of Florida International University and Central Florida University

Summary

Some crude metrics emerge from the forecasted recruitment outcomes mentioned in the podcast. If Shorelight indeed recruits 4,000 students this year, the average number of students recruited by each member of the 145-person sales team this year will be 28, and the average number of recruited students per partner (assuming 18 partners) will be 222. Seasoned recruitment professionals will have views on how that ratio stacks up in terms of performance.

There will also be opinion on what the drive for 35% growth might mean in terms of cost of acquisition for US-bound students. As Inside Higher Ed reported in June 2018, promotional bonuses were already pushing agent compensation ”well north of the 15 percent threshold,” and it seems unlikely that this cost will have fallen. With the UK resurgent after reintroducing two year post-study work visas competition just got even tougher.

The closure of partnerships by Study Group, CEG and EC has provided insights into how difficult the US pathway business has become. The experience of the partners reviewed here suggest that, regardless of ranking, success can be elusive and only time will tell whether Shorelight’s strategy is a winner. Investment and targets are one thing, but brute market realities are quite another.

*University reporting formats are not wholly consistent. Extensive efforts have been made to verify data used and sources are given for reference. Authoritative comments or corrections are welcome.

Image by mollyroselee from Pixabay

More US Pathway Cutbacks

Keeping pace of the developing pathway scene among the private providers in the US requires constant attention. Study Group has taken action within its US portfolio and no longer recruits for four brands featured on the company’s website a few months ago. After this year’s closure of CEG’s US centers and EC Higher Education’s withdrawal from the market it’s further evidence of the pressure on international student recruitment.

The closed Study Group pathways are Roosevelt, Widener and Merrimack while West Virginia was a direct recruitment option. The Merrimack relationship extended back over a decade, Widener and Roosevelt were opened in 2012/13. West Virginia came online in January 2018 with recruitment commencing in fall 2018.

These changes leave Study Group with four regionally-ranked and seven nationally-ranked university partners according to USNWR 2020 listings. Among the nationally-ranked, two were taken over from EC while only three sit above 200: Baylor (79), Vermont (121) and DePaul (125). Three of the four remaining regionally ranked universities, Oglethorpe, Western Washington and Lynn were signed in 2017, so there may be contractual impediments to early action.

US News Ranking 2020 of Study Group US Partnerships (closed institution in red)

The Study Group closures mean that, as far as I can track from public information, the company has launched 14 university partnerships in the US of which five have now been closed in the past two years. Between CEG and Study Group more than 10% of US private-pathway provider centers have closed in the past two years. These tended to be smaller operations in terms of student numbers, but it reflects the stress that the sector is under.

As global competition grows, the potential for private pathway providers to recruit successfully to less prestigious and/or lower ranked institutions seems increasingly questionable and even bigger names have seen enrolments declining. It is difficult to see that the increasing view of Admissions Directors from Masters/Baccalaureate institutions that pathways ‘will become more important’ is well founded. Neither is it obvious that the billion dollar private equity fuelled dash to build pathway capacity in the US is going to pay off in the foreseeable future.

With UK international recruitment prospects resurgent under a new Post-Study Work regime, the growing quality of emerging options around the world and the continuing assertiveness of Canada, Australia and Germany, it’s probably time for a rethink.

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay