A year ago seems an age away but in January 2020 I was speculating about how the surge of student mobility from India might change the UK higher education sector in terms of demographics and financial benefit. At that point I described the HESA data as ‘tantalising’ but with the 2019/20 enrollment data available by country and university it’s clear that things have moved quickly. And there may also be lessons for US universities to consider as they ponder their post-pandemic international recruitment strategies.
The top line numbers from HESA DATA show that the total number of Indian students enrolled in UK higher education grew by 27960 (101.7%) between 2018/19 and 2019/20 compared to a growth of 20,790 (17.2%) for Chinese students. For each country the growth in the number of undergraduates year on year was around 8,000 but India had an additional 19,000+ enrolled graduates year on year compared to around 12,000 for China. It is the first sign of a new order for markets of origin with India sending over 5,000 more first year students than China in 2019.
More importantly, the distribution of Indian students by type of institution has proved to be significantly different to that of Chinese students. One way to illustrate this is a comparison between the universities that saw the biggest year on year growth in each. It is striking that all of the universities with the greatest increase in the number of Chinese students are in the Russell Group but none of those with the most significant increases in Indian students are in the Group.
TABLE 1: Top Ten overall increases for Chinese and Indian Enrollments between 2018/19 and 2019/20
| Change in total enrolled Chinese student yoy from 2018/19 to 2019/20 | Change in total enrolled Indian students yoy from 2018/19 to 2019/20 | |
| Edinburgh | 1410 | 50 |
| East London | -15 | 1710 |
| Leeds | 1235 | 45 |
| Bedfordshire | 30 | 1595 |
| Southampton | 1190 | -10 |
| Hertfordshire | -135 | 1575 |
| Sheffield | 1150 | 15 |
| Northumbria | 90 | 1510 |
| UCL | 1065 | 25 |
| Kingston | 160 | 1265 |
| Manchester | 885 | 75 |
| Ulster | -15 | 1230 |
| Birmingham | 860 | 10 |
| Central Lancashire | -105 | 1180 |
| Newcastle | 855 | 50 |
| Middlesex | -110 | 915 |
| Kings College | 725 | 50 |
| Greenwich | -185 | 840 |
| Nottingham | 725 | 30 |
| Coventry | -85 | 810 |
Source: HESA
Digging deeper indicates that location is not the main driver of these vastly differentiated enrollment patterns. The situation for several cities with two main universities is shown below. Manchester Metropolitan shows relatively balanced numbers but they are small changes and the differential is swamped by the University of Manchester’s growth in Chinese students.
TABLE 2: Selected cities showing change in university enrollments year on year
| China – student change yoy | India – student change yoy | |
| Birmingham | 860 | 75 |
| Birmingham City | 50 | 800 |
| Nottingham | 725 | 50 |
| Nottingham Trent | -150 | 270 |
| Manchester | 885 | 25 |
| Manchester Metropolitan | 50 | 70 |
| Sheffield | 1150 | -10 |
| Sheffield Hallam | -135 | 185 |
Source: HESA
What becomes clear is that lower ranked universities are securing a significantly greater proportion of the growth in Indian students. This supports the notion that the changing importance of the two main source markets could have a major impact on the financial strength in different parts of the sector. But the underlying drivers of the recruitment patterns are less obvious.
It is likely that lower ranked universities represent better value for money in terms of fees, accommodation and other costs of study which is likely to be particularly attractive to self-funding students. There is also a propensity for lower ranked universities to make offers at lower grades which means a less competitive route to selection and enrollment. Several are located in areas that the UK census has shown have strong communities with contacts in India but that would not explain the differences within cities that have two universities.
The differences in performance are very striking and it raises a number of questions about the longer- term strategy of universities that are not currently recruiting heavily from the Indian market. It seems possible that as numbers from China stabilise or even go into decline there will be greater competition for the growing numbers from India. It is probably best for lower-ranked universities to make the most of this moment in the sun but if they have the opportunity to develop a solid local community and optimise their contacts with alumni the impact may be long lasting.
More troubling for some universities might be their failure to recruit strongly from either of these major markets in 2019/20. There are some well-known names and reasonably ranked institutions that seem to be suffering as the big city Russell Group universities excel in recruiting students from China but who do not appear attractive to students from India. It is interesting but seems counter intuitive that the two with the greatest loss from China year on year are partnered with pathway operators with traditional strengths in the country.
TABLE 3: Universities with the largest year on year loss of students from China (2018-19 to 2019-20)
| University | China – year on year change in total enrollments | India – year on year change in total enrollments |
| Sussex | – 340 | 10 |
| East Anglia | – 260 | 40 |
| Hull | – 200 | 5 |
Source: HESA
As noted the University of Hull has embarked on an aggressive marketing ploy to charge postgraduate students the same fee as home students in 2021. As far as I am aware this is unique in the UK higher education system and it will be interesting to see how it works out. It’s certainly better than those universities that will continue to discriminate in favour of all European Union students who are now deemed international but are being allowed home student rates.
For UK universities there is unlikely to be any Government opposition to the growing numbers although experience shows it’s always possible for U-turns in policy. As recently as 4 March, 2021, Minister for Future Borders and Immigration Kevin Foster said, “As we rebuild from the global pandemic we want the world’s brightest talent, who aspire to a career at the highest levels of business, science, the arts and technology to see our United Kingdom as the natural place to fulfil their aspirations. The changes announced today will ensure once they have received a gold standard qualification from one of our world leading education institutions they can easily secure the status they need to continue living, working and fulfilling their dreams in the UK.”
It sounds great news for recruitment but I am reminded of a Government statement with the words, “We want high quality international students to come here. We want them to study at genuine institutions, whose primary purpose is providing a first class education. And we want the best of them – and only the best of them – to stay on and work here after their studies are complete.” This statement was made by then Home Secretary, The Rt Hon Theresa May, in 2011, shortly before the UK post-study work visa was removed. It would probably only take an economic setback and rising numbers of unemployed graduates to see post-study work for international students being viewed less favourably by a Government that is still posturing about border control.
For US universities keen to make the most of revitalized interest from international students it is worth considering how recent research from IDP might dictate their engagement and offer strategy. A survey of more than 800 prospective international students in more than 40 countries who are interested in studying in the US – with more than half of respondents based in India – found that more than three quarters (76%) have improved perceptions of the US since the 2020 presidential election, with 67% stating they are now more likely to study there. What is clear from the UK experience is that the opportunity to recruit from India is available to almost all institutions if they can get the fundamentals right.
Critically, the emerging facts from the UK suggest that value in the cost of study is likely to be as significant a driver of interest as rankings. Post study work is an important outcome but students, particularly those that are self-financing, will be equally interested in being able to minimize their outgoings during the course. Making appropriate adjustments and moving decisively to work in market with a compelling message will be vital for institutions wanting to maximise international enrollments post-pandemic.