Category: Education

International Education Strategy – Less Haste, Less Speed

The UK Government’s recently launched ‘International Education Strategy: global potential, global growth‘ has received many plaudits.  But those who believe the floodgates will be opened, with growth similar to recent years in Australia and Canada, should consider the compound annual growth rate implied.  Getting from the 460,000 international students enrolled in 2017 to the 600,000 targeted for 2030 only requires a growth of just over 2% each year.  A bit better than the 1.23% compound growth in enrolments from 2014 to 2017 but it’s hardly tearing up any trees.

A joined-up, Government backed strategy is not in itself a bad idea but this one raises lot of questions and is light on answers in key areas.  The 460,000 number used is the aggregate of international fee-paying students (320,000) and current EU-fee paying students (140,000).  It’s not entirely clear if the plan, and its £35bn target in education exports, includes EU students paying full international fees, staying with UK fees or replacing them with others from round the world.

Staying on the financial side, it was only in June 2015 that Jo Johnson, Minister of State for Universities and Science, said, ‘We are committed to increasing education exports from £18 billion in 2012 to £30 billion by 2020.’  One presumes that the 2020 target will be missed if the plan is really only to add a further £5bn by 2030. These things are easy to say and people lose track of the performance as easily as they lose track of the politicians who made them. 

To add to the potential for confusion, the new Strategy lumps in trans-national education and includes ‘…education providers setting up sites overseas, and education technology solutions being sold worldwide.’  Given global demographics, the rise of English-language degree provision in emerging countries and the spread of technology, it will be interesting to see how effort is coordinated between the paths to revenue.     

When people start talking about long-term growth and big numbers I am reminded of the song, ‘The Impossible Dream’ from Man of La Mancha.  Visions of tilting at windmills, living with ‘unbearable sorrow’ and the inevitability of the Spanish Inquisition come to mind.  It is likely to be tough to sustain international student growth over a decade or more and it seems to me that the real need is for more urgent action and targets.     

It’s not as if we haven’t been here before and history does not offer good omens.  In 2013 the Government published a strategy – International education strategy: global growth and prosperity – where the stated ambition to help the sector secure 3.7% enrolment growth from 2011 to 2020.  On that reckoning the graph shown below suggests international student enrolment in 2017 should already be around 550,000 by now rather than 460,000.

Source:
International education strategy: global growth and prosperity 2013 (p.41)

This reflects another problem with long-term strategies.  Those responsible for blowing the trumpets when they are launched are seldom around to answer for the failures or receive the plaudits.  David Willetts MP (now Baron Willetts) was the Minister for Universities and Science launching the 2013 Strategy, but left the Government by 2014. It is difficult to see The Rt Hon Damian Hinds or Dr Liam Fox being around in 2030.

It is also not entirely heartening to see Action 1 of the strategy being the appoint of an International Education Champion.  Perhaps this newly appointed Degree Czar will be able to develop and implement joined up policy which would be a good thing.  But the 2013 Strategy document was also strong on the need for coordination that never quite happened as the Treasury called for growth and the Home Office battened down the hatches on visas.

It might have been better to see the long-term vision broken down into short-term targets. 5.46% growth per year in international enrolments for the first five years seems a good idea.  It will not surprise the observant and mathematically minded readers that this would take the UK to 600,000 enrolments by 2022.

After that a different set of issues would begin to emerge as the global picture and the UK’s own demographics begin to change.  By 2025, according to the ONS, the number of 18-20 years olds in the UK is likely to be back to 2014 levels and will continue to grow rapidly to 2030 which might bring very different pressures on the sector.

The tension between long and short term is very real and I am reminded that John Maynard Keynes said, ‘The long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that when the storm is past the ocean is flat again.’  Education is a long-term business but the needs of the sector are both urgent and important.  It would be good to see the Government responses couched in equally urgent terms.

Brexit – University Challenge But Pathway Provider Opportunity?

Last Friday saw a pretty eye-catching announcement by the University of Surrey whose problems appear to demand radical cost-cutting action including offering all staff voluntary redundancy. One highlight was Vice-Chancellor Max Lu’s comment that ‘Some of the main financial challenges include reduced income due to Brexit….’.  If that’s right a number of universities might be even more troubled. 

In 2017/18 the average percentage of EU students (defined as EU domiciled but non-UK) in all degree awarding institutions listed by HESA was 5.94%.  With an EU population of 9.9% Surrey was considerably above the norm but far from alone with Lancaster University and City University at 10.1% and 10.5% respectively. This might go some way to explaining Lancaster’s desire to set up a remote campus in Germany.

Leaving aside relatively narrow, specialist degree awarding institutions, Cranfield with 21.2% EU and University Colleges Birmingham with 20.6%, look to have a lot at stake.  The broadly-based university with greatest exposure seems to be Aberdeen where 19.9% are EU.  If the big brands and specialists are able to overcome any Brexit jitters the next most vulnerable English university looks to be Essex with 12.8% EU.

Table 1: Top 20 Universities for EU Students As A Percentage Of Total Enrollments (excluding  specialist institutions) 2017-18

Of course, the spectre of Brexit may just be the University of Surrey’s way of getting impetus for restructuring.  To be absolutely fair Lu’s comments continue, “… and an ever more competitive student recruitment environment, significantly increasing pension costs and a national review of tuition fee levels.”. That would be true for every university so it is interesting that he adds, “Our university also faces the not inconsiderable impact of a fall in our national league table positions.”

The potential for league tables to create such havoc with a University’s finances is troubling and needs consideration at another time. But the potential for a sharp fall in European Union recruits is certain to be a concern for those institutions with heavy representation and it would bring even sharper competition to the battle for UK and full-fee paying international students.  In that respect the bigger brands have an inbuilt advantage and will be looking to take an even bigger share of the market.

As Brexit plays out it will also be interesting to see if more pathway operators are able to convert university nervousness about recruitment into opportunities for partnership. Navitas seem to have a head start in operating overseas campuses for partners, but QA Higher Education operates UK campuses with full-degree courses for several of its partners, and INTO have been doing the same for Newcastle University in London. It’s an interesting development area for pathway operators attempting to diversify and deepen their services.

SHOPPING FOR IDEAS: HIGH STREET TO HIGHER EDUCATION

Higher education should look to the disruption in retailing and other sectors to develop a roadmap to the future.  While no two sectors are the same, the notion that novel and implementable ideas can come from other alternative disciplines has a good history1.  The parallels between retailing and higher education offer particularly fertile territory for consideration. 

There are, arguably, particular similarities between department stores and universities.  Both offer wide ranges of largely similar products and make claims about their quality, customer experience and real estate to justify premium prices.  Moreover, in recent years both have been driven to special offers, discounting and increased marketing costs in an attempt to secure the volume of customers they need to survive.

Breaking Bad As Demographics, Technology and Globalisation Bite

The heyday of high street and the shopping mall, from the mid to late 20th century, coincided with the ‘massification’ of higher education2.  The demands of the baby boomer generation coupled with consistent c5% annual real GDP growth in developed market economies from 1950 to the early 1970s3 underpinned both.  Changing demographics and the relative decline in government investment has made higher education as vulnerable as retailing to changing market forces.   

In that context, headlines reported a record number of over 7,000 store closures in 20174. While doomsday predictions that “50% of the 4,000 colleges and universities in the U.S. will be bankrupt in 10 to 15 years”5 may be wide of the mark, closures are accelerating.  For universities it may be ominous that the major losers in retailing were department stores which “have been suffering a death by a thousand cuts for years due to poor merchandising and outdated business models”.6

Further broad comparisons between the sectors can be drawn.  Technology is often cited as a key factor in the disruption of retail and higher education, and education is rapidly moving to a point where attendance at a bricks and mortar institution is optional.  But even if technology had not created generations of digital natives who learn in new ways it has placed the power of search and comparison is in their hands. 

Globalisation has also had a marked and growing impact in both sectors with a shift in favour of Asia Pacific over the past ten years7.  China’s improving performance in global university rankings and its plans to be the dominant global centre for international students by 20498 suggest the direction of travel. The traditional distribution of international students from east to west appears to be shifting rapidly and institutions need to develop effective responses.

Finding The Path From Apocalypse To Renaissance

Against these headwinds there are a small number of universities in the world who may have the financial and brand strength to resist these global tides.  Short of a catastrophic scandal, financial mismanagement or a government bent on vandalising its international credibility it is probably safe to assume that the likes of Harvard, Cambridge, and other national or private treasures are secure. 

For the rest there is an urgent need to refine, realign and reinforce what they offer to students.  A germane lesson for them from retailing is that, despite the headlines, overall in 2017 more stores opened than closed and retail sales grew by 4.5% (over $232bn)9.  While the media were coining the phrase ‘retail apocalypse’, smart investors and business operators were moulding their offer to meet the needs of a changing world. 

Retailers have invested significant brain power and cash in trying to find a way through the storm.  Their focus on their value proposition – how they solve customers’ problems at the right price – is a useful tool for focusing on what is important.  And there are a number of themes which universities might consider.

1.            Provide unique and compelling products and experiences

Dreary, derivative and duplicated product lines are not enough in an era where a world of choice is accessible at the touch of a button.  Universities must examine their own “product lines” (degrees and other courses) and determine how much they can be streamlined into areas that are both market sensitive and differentiable from the competition.  While the campus experience is not dead it cannot be taken for granted, and the marketing lessons of experience-driven destinations such as national parks and vacation resorts might provide inspiration.

2.            Online delivery must be world-class

Costco, Walmart, Nordstrom and others have invested heavily in ensuring that their online involvement is well resourced and competitive with the best that Amazon can offer (their success is one reason that Amazon has begun advertising itself in traditional media10).  For most universities the reach and scalability of online is attractive but they will be competing against the rest of the world.  Only the very best quality delivery of market relevant courses with full academic commitment and outstanding user experiences will stand the test of time.

3.            Pace, performance and personalisation  

Retailers have optimized supply chains and utilized technology to ensure that product is always available, personalisation is possible, delivery never disappoints, and repeat business is maximised.  For universities excellence must extend from the first point of contact to the building of alumni networks and lifelong learning.  If a programme of study or administrative process is not competitive, a disciplined university will recognise the problem quickly and adjust it or eliminate it.

4.            One size does not fit all  

Sears declined from being the largest retailer in the US in 1989 to near bankruptcy in 2018, but Dollar General, 7-11, Aldi and O’Reilly Auto are among those opening stores.  Value, convenience and specialisation have given them growth opportunities in the market.  It’s a reasonable reminder that there are millions of students around the world with differing needs and resources.  Universities should actively focus on understanding the market, seek differentiation and develop their niche.

Perhaps the best rallying call from retailing is what Deloitte has termed ‘the great retail bifurcation’11 with growth for ‘price’ and ‘premium’ performers contrasting with ‘balanced’ retailers, who have broadly similar offerings, lagging behind; they suggest that the moment is ripe for a modern renaissance which uproots traditions, institutions and thoughts.  More starkly they comment on the need for ‘new and unique capabilities’ and reflect the degree to which the ‘new requirements differ from the old operating model’.

All told, however, the most significant and radical change needed may be an unravelling of the emotional commitment to delivery and outcomes which remain organised around a model first established in the 11th century.  The large fixed-cost base of buildings and grounds have also come to be seen as more central to the identity of most universities than meeting the needs of their students.  There is a pressing need to focus hard on the needs and expectations of the customer and consider new models and concepts.  Looking outside the sector for inspiration may help.

References

  1. Sometimes the Best Ideas Come from Outside Your Industry, Poetz, Franke and Schreier, Harvard Business Review, November 21, 2014
  2. ‘The United States Country Report: Trends in Higher Education from Massification to Post- Massification’, Gompert, Iannozzi, Shaman and Zemsky, National Center for Postsecondary   Improvement, Stanford, 1997)              
  3. Multinationals and Global Capitalism: From the Nineteenth to the Twenty-first Century, Geoffrey G. Jones, Oxford University Press, 2005).
  4. 2017 just set the all-time record for store closings, CNN Business, October 25, 2017
  5. Quote by Clayton Christensen, from Inside Higher Education, November 21, 2017
  6. Debunking the Retail Apocalypse, Holman and Buzek,  IHL Group, August, 2017
  7. Global Powers of Retailing 2015 Embracing Innovation, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, 2015
  8. Carma Elliot OBE, Director China British Council, quoted in The Pie, December 19, 2018
  9. Retail’s Radical Transformation/Real Opportunities Beyond the “Retail Apocalypse” to a Bright Future, Holman and Buzek,  IHL Group, August, 2018
  10. Jeff Bezos used to hate spending money on ads, Eugene Kim, CNBC, February 1, 2019
  11. The Great Retail Bifurcation, Why the retail ‘apocalypse’ is really a renaissance, Deloitte Insights, Deloitte Development LLC, 2018

GOOD NEWS – FOR SOME – IN UK INTERNATIONAL ENROLMENT 2017/18

The latest HESA release showing enrolments in UK institutions for 2017/18 show a welcome increase in international enrolments.  Digging under the surface suggests that the trends of the past five years are getting reinforced.  The big brands are doing well and there are a couple of well organised outliers.

Table 6 of the HESA data allows us to look at total enrolments by individual institution which gives a good sense of who is able to replace students leaving the university with new enrolments as competition increases.  Looking at the total enrolments also gives a better sense of what might be happening to tuition revenue.  The table shows that total international enrolments have gone up by 3.8% from 307,540 to 319,340 – that’s 11,800 students.

Ten institutions absorbed 7,320 additional students with the Russell Group universities taking eight of the ten places. In terms of ‘branding’ the 24 Russell Group universities added 10,230 students overall.  De Montfort continues its remarkable performance in international recruitment and that’s great credit to the focus and discipline of the management team. 

The performance of the University of the Arts is also very strong.  Looking at the Annual Report the university is showing a 19.8% increase in international fee income for the year in question – from £86m to £103m.  It’s a strong and differentiated higher education brand in one of the world’s most culturally vibrant cities and looks to be leveraging those benefits

Table 1 – Top Ten Universities for Increases In Total International Enrolments (Non-EU) 2017/18

This lop-sided distribution of growth inevitably means that some universities did less well.  Those showing the largest losses may all have strategic reasons for reducing international numbers but that seems the least likely explanation.  The universities Sheffield Hallam, Hull, Sunderland and Greenwich were all identified as being in long-term decline in international enrolments in my blog Winning And Losing In Global Recruitment back in April 2018.

Table 2 – Top Ten Universities for Decreases In Total International Enrolments (Non-EU) 2017/18

While international enrolments reflect global competitiveness they should be seen in the context of wider recruitment issues in the sector.  Lower ranked universities are already being squeezed by the bigger and better placed universities when it comes to recruiting home-students.  It’s a painful double-whammy for some institutions as they face into the Augar Review and the Government’s thinking on post-school education.

Universities: ‘A Common Treasury’ For The Knowledge Economy

For several decades UK higher education has been a battleground for short-term thinking, abdication of responsibility and political point scoring.  But Phil Baty of the THE recently that the UK HE sector has been the subject of an unusually intense barrage of bad headlines.  This is often part of the softening up process before a government intervenes with its latest ideologically driven initiatives.

The ‘independent’ trigger may be the Augar Review which is part of the government’s current review of post-18 education.  The Review themes of choice, value for money, access and skills provision offer cover for significant intervention in the sector.  There are many areas where universities do each of these things well but the very notion of autonomous, self-governing institution does not give it an easy time in assembling a coherent, sector-wide response.

More worryingly, the review’s focus on ‘wage returns’ picks a battleground where universities have probably relied too long on distorted ‘average earnings of graduates’ to defend themselves.  Alongside attacks on pay levels of Vice-Chancellors, unconditional admissions and grade inflation, the sector is painted as being self-serving, complacent and out of touch with its student customers or employers’ needs.  It is painful to watch at a moment when the UK needs to defend its reputation for quality higher education against global competition rather than have a firing squad in an inward-facing circle.

In thinking about the future of the sector I was reminded of the ideas of Gerrard Winstanley, the ideological driver of the True Levellers (commonly known as the Diggers) in the late 1640s who saw the land as a ‘common treasury for all’.  Their attempt to implement his ideas of a Utopian society based on common ownership of the land and shared purpose in meeting the needs of all was suppressed by the government of the day.  But in a global knowledge economy it seems to me that universities have a strong claim to be today’s ‘common treasury for all’.

Taking this as my starting point I offer my own version of steps that might help build a better integrated and more stable higher education sector:

1.           An Independent ‘Bank Of Education’ To Oversee Quality, Relevance and Cost

Independent central banks emerged in many developed countries because the economy is too important to place all the levers in the hands of transient governments.  The same is true of education but the sector is also too important to have the rights and needs of students as the only consideration.  The Bank of England’s mission is ‘Promoting the good of the people of the United Kingdom by maintaining monetary and financial stability’ and that is the breadth required by a ‘bank of education’ freed from political interference.            

2.           If One Pays Then Everyone Should Pay

I have always believed that education is a common good and should be free.  If that cannot be the case then it seems illogical to have arbitrary cut off points to begin repaying student loans.  Every graduate should begin, on a sliding scale, to repay their student loan from the moment they begin earning a salary.  It would mean every graduate can say they are giving back – even if it is only pennies – in line with the benefit they receive.  Every graduate gets treated the same with a straight deduction from earned income without external contributions or the ability to pay the debt early. 

3.           The Beneficiaries Of An Educated Workforce Should Pay More And Get Involved

The data on pay suggests that graduates do not always get premium ‘wage returns’ but in principle employers should always benefit from a better educated workforce and the burden of funding should reflect that.  Several writers have noted that the model provided by the Apprenticeship Levy has potential for higher education and the notion of hypothecated funding seems attractive.  But a slogan from the 1700s, no taxation without representation, is a good reminder that employers should also have a right, indeed should be obliged, to support and guide university activities.

4.           A Strategy For UK Education As A Major Economic Asset

Governments around the world, particularly in recent years China, Canada and Australia, have demonstrated that a joined-up approach to higher education can be of significant economic benefit.  Even without UK government help, well-ranked institutions have shown that at both an international and country level that they can monopolise declining or static pools of potential students.  Whether the future is in building global super-brands or allowing weak players to fail a coherent, data-led and output driven, game plan for UK higher education, is important.

5.           Consider Undergraduate Study As A First Job

Young people have lots of reasons for going to university straight from school but it is difficult to understand why their experience should be seen as so removed from those who go straight to employment.  Both have to be disciplined, have to learn, want to enjoy their experience and are looking for a grounding that will allow them to progress.  As traditional undergraduate teaching is altered by blended learning, bite-sized credentials, online delivery, compressed time periods and 24/7 availability there is a moment to see work and study as part of a continuum.  I heard recently that learning ‘is a seventy year job’ – it’s a good way to think about education.     

 6.          Stress Tests and Plans For University Closures

There has been a lot of posturing around the potential for universities to fail but precious little sign that anybody has a plan for the eventuality or a way of understanding the risk level.  There should be absolute clarity around the responsibilities for understanding the potential for failure, managing/reviving a declining university and the way in which its closure or repurposing might be led.  In terms of the ‘common treasury’ there is an associated need to consider the broader interests of the sector and national/local economy by managing unfettered growth from universities unfairly advantaged by brand and financial muscle.

From Deal to Delivery With Pathways

After the champagne has been drunk and lawyers have left the building the respective teams of the pathway provider and the university face ‘operationalising’ the arrangement.  57% of College and University Admissions Directors believe ‘pathways programs will become more important to US higher education in the current environment’ (IHE/Gallup Survey, 2018) so it’s a good moment to consider how that can work.  Here are a few thoughts and things to consider based on experience from both sides of the fence.   

Most deals are driven by senior management who want to meet strategic needs including more students, revenue and diversity.  Work groups, steering boards and workshop sessions are often held in the context of political will from the top down to get a deal done.  But once they believe the international recruitment issue is resolved the top team moves on to other priorities.

The failure of many pathways to deliver the expected results can be traced back to this moment because there is no perfect preparation for the day to day engagement between two culturally different organisations.  Caution, disorientation and lack of empathy quickly become frustration, blame and mistrust.  As Mike Tyson memorably put it, “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth”.

Personal relationships between key decisionmakers can help and one example will serve. One pathway provider wanted to take over all communication with agents, a plan that was being resisted wholeheartedly within the university.  It became a symbol of resistance in the international office but a sign of naivety and bloody mindedness by the provider. 

Over a couple of Long Island Iced Teas in a Malaysian bar the universities head of international recruitment explained the insecurities, egos and justifications to the provider’s Global Sales Director.  After a pause he simply said, “OK.  You carry on communicating directly.  As long as you promise that we can review in six months and if it isn’t working we try my way.”

It allowed the head of international a ‘victory’ but also the chance to give a clear warning to the internal team that they had to deliver.  Having conceded without rancour the provider was able to leverage goodwill on other issues. A year or so later both the main protagonists agreed that it was never that important an issue in the first place.

But personal relationships are the result of hard work, respect, regular engagement and transparency.  There will always be decisions to make, changes to consider and strong views to manage. Below are a few things that will almost certainly come up in the first year or so and some possible responses.  

  • Entry requirements will need reconsidering.  Most pathway providers will, at some point, say that recruitment or progression is being hindered by unrealistic academic standards.  Every university with a few years of successful recruitment will want to raise grades and then gets surprised when applications drop off. 

Be realistic and conduct ongoing research into what is happening in the market – not just in your country but around the world. Too many universities fail to fully understand international equivalencies or the difference between school systems in other countries.

  • Cost of acquisition is going up and universities should invest. Competition is tough and commission deals are a complex range of standard, special, emergency and wrapped in deals for marketing, trips and exhibition slots.  The suspicion is always that higher costs are simply an excuse to cover poor recruitment planning.

Understand the providers commercial plan for engaging with agents and why they believe it works for your university.  Then keep asking how it is going and what evidence exists – term sheets are relatively easy to get from friendly agents.  Consider the lifetime value of the student to the university and work with the provider to consider that return holistically. 

  • Academics should travel to support recruitment.  Some academics have been global road warriors with great success and some senior management teams spend weeks on the road at key times.  Some try never to leave the university campus because it interferes with their research or they don’t have budget.    

In the battle for students an academic title can make a real difference and overtime the winners will have academics who travel regularly.  Get used to it and build an internal team that is willing to trot the globe and work hard to recruit. Also, make sure there is a budget to support international travel – time in country is never wasted.

  • Admissions times are rarely fast enough.  This usually become a running sore and it needs to be dealt with quickly. Standards should be agreed before the deal is signed but even then the provider will want to move the goalposts.     

Admissions processes are part of the recruitment arms race and sometimes responses are needed very quickly to optimise enrollments.  Work with the provider to make the internal investment case for improved systems, people and processes.  Start from the point that admissions is a bridge not a gate – the objective should be to secure every student who has a reasonable chance of completing their academic programme. 

  • Targets will be missed.  In the heat of deal making the pressure to close is intense and people, on both sides, sometimes get greedy and fearful in equal degree. Too many partnerships then work under a fog of misunderstanding and misinformation about target, stretch target, baseline, quotas etc.  Even worse can be a lack of realism and prompt feedback about changing market conditions.

Start by presuming that first-year recruitment may be well below target (and that it is not necessarily the providers fault).  Make sure university budgets, assuming progressing students, have a reasonable buffer.  Do the work to review second year and third year targets as early as possible in the light of experience.  Understand what can and will change to make ensuing years better.   

  • Universities expect the provider to do it all.  It can seem reasonable to hand the controls to the ‘experts’ and sit back to watch the students roll in.  And there is always a get-out clause or a contractual stick to beat them with if targets are missed.

That is not partnership and universities should want to be involved in anything that involves their reputation.  It’s not just about money because students and staff have a stake in the outcomes.  University staff know their institution better than any external provider ever will – the more generous and helpful they can be the better for everyone.  And providers need to socialise new thinking carefully rather than launching a new plan that is seen as counter-cultural.

  • Senior people and champions will leave.  A partnership deal is often partly the result of a meeting of minds and ambitions.  But it is rare for the original movers and shakers to be as regularly involved after three years.  Incomers will have different understandings and motivations and the glow of ‘mutual benefit’ can be tarnished by competing interests.

Providers need to be alert to changing University personnel and work hard at relationships– not just at senior level but by embedding themselves at several levels.  Taking time to understand new thinking while establishing a common knowledge of history pays off.  Universities need to make sure they are allowing good access and taking time to keep their internal audiences informed.

This list is not intended to be exhaustive and there is plenty more that could be said about building long-term, productive partnerships in student recruitment.  Neither partner should expect to have it all their own way but the search for optimal outcomes should be ceaseless.  Perhaps the best advice is to have ‘the qualities of an old political fighter’ as Boris Yeltsin once ascribed to a colleague – ”patience and flexibility, always searching for intelligent compromise.  

2018 Surge in UK Student Record of Prior Acceptance

This may be one for aficionados of the nuances of UK Higher Education admissions trends.  A lot of attention has been paid to the rapid growth of unconditional offers as a way of inducing undergraduate students to go firm with a university.  But there seems to have been no comment on last year’s near 38% rise in Record of Prior Acceptance (RPA) applications registered by UK students.

For the uninitiated the RPA allows a student and university to deal directly to make/accept an offer rather than going through the UCAS system.  To ensure that the UCAS reporting captures all students universities then report the RPA students to UCAS.  Once the student completes the RPA form they are not able to make any other applications.  

After a period of relative stability the number of RPAs registered increased by 7870 year on year for UK students.  This was in a cycle where the number of UK applicants overall fell.  Both Other-EU and International students using RPAs increased – the former by 43.6% – but from a lower base.  

It seems plausible that the driver is that students have decided to start using RPAs more often during the clearing process.  But it seems a stretch to believe that they know about this route for applications before engaging directly with a university.  For the university it allows them to help the student while reducing the chance of that individual shopping around for options.

In the scheme of things, the numbers involved are still relatively small.  Just over 6% of the total number of students used the RPA route in 2018.  But that’s up from 3.9% in 2014 and just 4.8% in 2017.  As the demographics make UK students increasingly sought after it’s another dynamic to consider.

 

Open Doors and Outliers – Looking For Rubies in a Mountain of Rocks

Open Doors data, published by the Institute of International Education (IIE) on 13 November, confirms the much-anticipated decline in international student enrollments in the US. But delving into the detail demonstrates that there are also outliers with significant growth in international students year on year. It is always interesting to dig down to see who is bucking the trend – but more importantly how they are doing it.

At the headline level there is unmitigated gloom with the total number of enrolled international students in 2017/18 down by 11,797 (1.3%) on the prior year. There are also signs of a fractured pipeline for Fall 2018 with non-degree student starters down 9.7% year on year (4,868 students) and down 23.8% (14,135 students) from the 2014/15 peak. Since a 2015/16 high-point undergraduate and postgraduate new-enrollments are down by 9% (10,723) and 6.8% (8,556) respectively.

Table 1 – New International Student Enrollment in the US 2007-08 to 2016-17
Source: Open Doors Report on International Educational Exchange. Retrieved from http://www.iie.org/opendoors

Against that background the state of Kentucky was eye-catching for two reasons. It posted a 26.9% increase in international students – an exceptional performance for a state that was, in 2016/17, 31st in overall popularity in terms of volume of students enrolled. Within the state Campbellsville University was the only one of the top five (by volume enrollments) to grow and became the leading recruiter with a year on year increase of nearly 2800 students.

Table 2 – Year on Year Change in Foreign Students in Kentucky (Source: Open Doors Fact Sheets 2017 and 2018)
IPEDS data shows that across all domestic and international, full and part-time enrollments Campbellsville grew by 96% year on year to Fall 2017. A time series shows that growth at the institution accelerated very significantly in the past year. Graduate part-time has been the primary engine of growth with graduate full-time and undergraduate part-time also contributing.

Table 3 – Campbellsville University Total Graduate and Undergraduate Enrollments 2014-2017
NB: 2017 data is listed as Provisional Release data by IPEDS

International student enrollments (as per non-resident aliens in IPEDS reporting) have been the driving force for the significant growth over the past year. Full-time international graduates grew by more than 600 year on year and part-time international graduates by over 1700.

Table 4 – Campbellsville Full and Part Time Graduate Enrollments
The graduate growth appears to be almost entirely driven by students from India. In 2016 Open Doors reported the proportion of students from China and India in Kentucky as being equal at 18.9% of the total. By 2017 students from India leapt to 43.1% of the total as China fell to 13.1%.

This is supported by the Quartz news website which published, in May 2018, an article reviewing the courses offered by Campbellsville and another Kentucky-based institution, the University of the Cumberlands . The article quotes Shanon Garrison, the vice president for enrollment services at the University of Campbellsville, as saying that “99% of the students in the course are native to India but live in and work for companies based in the US.” Most students are enrolled in the Masters of Science in Information Technology and Management (MSITM).  which, according to Quartz, is ‘designed to allow international students to work full-time jobs while enrolled.’.

The report suggests that students are required to attend the campus for three days of face-to-face classes at the beginning of each term and that the degree costs around $17,000. Flexibility, affordability and the opportunity to work appear to be key factors in the popularity of the course. It is a powerful combination which appears to have turbo-charged growth at Campbellsville.

International recruitment has always been a space where intelligent minds consider ways to develop creative programming that works productively within the legal, visa and competitive environment. Large institutions can often be relatively slow in adapting to new circumstances or may rely on their reputations to see them through the bad times. Innovation and boldness are usually the hallmarks of smaller, more nimble institutions and their successes are often worth considering.

The purpose of looking more closely at the University of Campbellsville is to illustrate possibilities and is not intended to advocate for or against the model. The Quartz article outlines some of the potential challenges and it is not unusual for innovation to appear in specific niches that are inaccessible or out of scope for other institutions. But at a difficult time for US international student recruitment it’s interesting to see opportunities that are still being discovered and exploited.

 

FRESH HOPE OR ZOMBIE DAWN AS CLEARING FOG LIFTS?

Day 28 sounds like a bid for the latest in the zombie movie franchise but its the UCAS yearly data-release marking four weeks from A-level results day. For some UK universities the former might feel appropriate because the clearing season is nearly over and visa deadlines are coming. It’s not long before all that is left is the counting of enrolments.

This year Day 28 was 13 September with the data published a week later. These numbers give the best indication of how far the UK has come in enrolling new undergraduates for the 2018/19 academic year.  It’s a mixed bag.

The good news that the number of ‘placed’ international students (non-EU) is up 4% to 38,330 – that’s 1,500 more than last year. It’s a solid gain although slightly disappointing after double-digit applicant growth in the early part of the cycle. It looks anaemic against the growth in Canada and Australia but is likely to be better than the US.

At a subject level the biggest winners are Business and Administrative Studies (+350), Computer Sciences (+310) and Biological Sciences (+240). However, the number of Engineering students is down by 230 and at its lowest level since 2012. The five-year growth in Technologies has also been reversed with a loss of 130 students taking it to its lowest ever total.

With 6,040 students international students still holding offers the eventual enrolment outcome remains uncertain. In 2015 the number holding offers on Day 28 was 6,380 but in the past two years had fallen to 1,760 (2016) and 1,610 (2017). It is difficult to understand what is driving this fluctuation and there may still be time for a late windfall.  But the majority may just be phantoms preying on the minds of hard-pressed recruitment teams.

More good news is that EU-students ‘placed’ are also up by 2% to 30,350. This is still slightly below the number for 2016 but is some cause for encouragement. A number of universities, including De Montfort who opened an office in Portugal earlier in the year, are enhancing their physical presence in Europe. It will be interesting to see how these developments plays out with Brexit looming.

The bad news is that the total number of placed students after 28 days – counting all domiciles – is down by 10,000. At a standard UK home student fee rate that’s £277m of fee revenue over a three-year degree. Universities know that the home-student demographic dip will continue for a few years, which is one reason those that can have been building their student base. It seems to be one factor behind the growth in unconditional offers from well-ranked universities.

Table 1 – Total of All Placed Undergraduate Students 28 days After A-Level Results
Of course, undergraduate enrolments are not the only source of student income for universities and postgraduates make up the bulk of international enrolments.  But it is also difficult to see why the postgraduate enrolment picture would be much of an improvement on that for undergraduates.  And an enrolled undergraduate gives a near guarantee of three years income compared to the yearly challenge of recruiting more one year taught Masters students.

Against this background it was interesting to read Being set up to fail? The battle to save the UK’s Universities from speculative finance. The article, from May 2018, notes that ‘some £3bn has been borrowed by UK universities since 2016, over half of this in the form of private placements.’ Some of that borrowing may be based on predictions of student enrolments that look increasingly unsustainable.

This echoes WonkHE’s November 2016 report, Getting worse: HEFCE’s bleak prognosis for university finances. One recruitment related line from HEFCE was “Our financial modelling shows that removal of projected growth in overseas fee income over the next three years (2016-17 to 2018-19) would all but wipe out sector surpluses by 2018-19, with projected surpluses falling from £1,081 million (3.4 per cent of total income) to £56 million (just 0.2 per cent of total income).”

It is to be hoped that the early warning signs from HEFCE were heeded and that the long-term financial health of individual universities has been considered more carefully over ensuing years. My blog Getting To Grips With Pathways – A Thorny Subject? showed the decline in some university incomes that has already become evident as international enrolments fall. The UK demographics will not improve for several years and the battle for international students will not get any easier.

GLOBAL LEAGUE TABLES OFFER MIXED NEWS FOR THE US AND PATHWAY PROVIDERS

Credible and well publicised global comparative university rankings are one factor changing the face of international recruitment. Students and their advisers can compare and contrast between Beijing, Berlin, Boston and Birmingham at the touch of a button. The rapid growth of online courses from universities around the world has also helped to popularise the notion of ‘shopping’ for courses through the internet.

It is clear that league tables matter and that universities see them as an important part of student recruitment.  Some less welcome consequences include misleading claims and recent incidents suggest that data submitted is not always accurate.  Perhaps these incidents reflect the recognition that league tables can help build reputations that support both country and institutional desirability.

In that respect evidence suggests the US is losing its way as a global rankings leader with strength in depth.  For pathway providers it’s a double-whammy when the quality of their US partnerships, as defined by global comparisons, looks to be lagging behind their partners in other parts of the world.  At a difficult moment for US recruitment of international students it may be another indicator of harder times ahead.

US DECLINE IN GLOBAL RANKINGS
The US has traditionally been dominant at the top of global rankings and remains powerful. But The Economist (May 19th 2018) highlighted how its broader grip on the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) table has slipped over time.  Chinese and Australian universities have seen the most significant growth in the table over that period.

Table 1 - Representation of Countries in ARWU TOP 500 - 2003 to 2017

The Times Higher Education (THE) World Rankings also noted that in 2018 ‘two-fifths of the US institutions in the top 200 (29 out of 62) have dropped places.’ In contrast, two Chinese universities had risen into the top 30 for the first time.  This shift in global power reflects the growing power of China as a first choice for international students.

US PATHWAY PARTNERSHIPS BELOW TOP LEVEL
While many US universities are slipping in global rankings, pathway providers also seem to be struggling to secure partnerships with the very best universities in the country. Since April 2016 none of the partnerships announced by Study Group, Navitas, INTO or Shorelight has been in the top 200 in the QS Ranking or THE World rankings.  Only two make it into the US News and World Report (USNWR) Global top 200.

Table 2 – Comparative Ranking of New US Pathway Partnerships Announced Since April 2016*National rank unless noted

Looking over the total portfolio of pathway partners of the ‘big 4’ providers in the US shows that more than half are not globally ranked by the QS, THE or, even in the US News and World Report Global Top 1000.

Table 3 – Global League Table Rankings of Pathway Provider Institutions in the US

UK PATHWAY PARTNERSHIPS LOOK STRONGER IN GLOBAL RANKINGS
Three of these providers are active in the UK where their portfolios look significantly stronger in terms of global rankings. With the addition of the fourth big player in the UK – Kaplan – the overall number of partners is similar. At an aggregate level the worst performance is in the USNWR ranking but even by that measure less than a third of partners are unranked.

The UK is a more mature market for pathways but the recent emphasis of the major players seems to be on enhancing quality. Kaplan partnered with the University of Nottingham in July 2016 and Study Group announced a deal with Durham University in February 2017. Kaplan and Navitas have established new-style arrangements, including investment in infrastructure, with long-term partners Liverpool and Swansea respectively.  INTO’s last UK deal was with the University of Stirling in April 2014.

Table 4 - Comparative Global League Table Rankings of Pathway Provider Institutions in the UK

A GLOBAL LEAGUE TABLE FOR THE ERA OF THE CLICK
Some pathway groups also have strong representation in Australia (and to a lesser extent in Canada). A composite league tables to reflect this and show the ‘top 11’ pathway partner universities, according to three major global league tables, shows considerable consistency. Six universities (shaded) are in all the tables and five are in two.  It is, however, worth noting that all but one have slipped lower in their placing between THE 2018 and THE 2019.

Table 5 - Top Pathway Partner Universities In Selected Global League Tables

NB: The University referred to in the table as Alabama is the University of Alabama – Birmingham.

CONCLUSION
Most people who work in the sector have seen the growth of league tables as an imposition with occasionally perverse consequences for investment and resource allocation in the institution. It is entirely possible to argue that that the rankings are arbitrary and spurious with no particular relevant to student outcomes.  But they are increasingly offering new layers of insight to capture attention – the QS Graduate Employability Rankings is an example.

Students, parents, agents and employers look at league tables and most student recruitment marketing focuses on favourable rankings while ignoring less flattering indicators. They are far from the only factor involved in decision making but they set a tone that influences potential students and staff. It is rare to find an institutional leader who is not keenly aware of their relative performance.

In terms of international recruitment league tables are part of an institution’s ‘sales kit’ and the growth of global comparisons exposes their relative strengths and weaknesses. It is noticeable that as international student growth has stalled in the UK over the past five years the bigger and better ranked university ‘brands’ have taken a larger share of those coming to the country.  It seems inevitable that this will be the story for the future and that universities without ranking ‘power’ will need to work harder to avoid being marginalised.

NOTE:

The exact nature of pathway provider and university partnerships is not always clear but extensive efforts have been made to focus on pathway partnerships where students are taught on-campus.  The author is happy to hear from any authoritative source who has information that might improve the accuracy of the article.  Any corrections will be noted below. 

Correction and Update – 1 October 2018
The tables and commentary have been updated to reflect the publication of the THE Global Rankings 2019 during week commencing 24 September 2018 (comparative positions for individual universities are shown).  Broadly speaking the new table showed declining rankings for both US and UK universities   In addition, the tables have been corrected to show the rankings for Shorelight partner the University of Mississippi (Table 2) and INTO partner the University of Exeter (Table 5).