Tag: #intled

Fatal Four Way Match for Universities?

Economist John Maynard is famous for saying, “In the long run we are all dead”, but he also wrote, “there will be no harm in making mild preparations for our destiny”.  Universities might consider this as they struggle to encourage international students to overlook the near-term uncertainties of the pandemic in 2021. The real winners will be those readying for 2022 when all four of the major receiving Western countries are likely to be competing from a position of strength.

There is no point in the last twenty years when the US, UK, Canada and Australia have, at the same time, been growing aggressively or had in-country conditions enabling them to promote themselves effectively.  While globally mobile student numbers have grown there has always been a country operating with at least one hand tied behind its back.  It seems likely that this is about to change, which is going to bring unusual pressures to bear on recruitment efforts.   

If there is significant headway on vaccination rollouts, the pandemic recedes and internal country politics align it will be time for a revitalized UK, a desperate Australia, a confident Canada and a Biden-powered USA to do battle.  Those familiar with World Wrestling Entertainment’s Fatal Four Way match up may think it could be a contest that makes equally interesting viewing.  For international students it will mean a smorgasbord of opportunity, offers and opening doors.        

Overview and Trends

Data from individual countries are not standardized but the graph below focuses only on students identified as bachelors, postgraduate taught and doctoral for each country.  This eliminates the language only, non-degree and/or OPT registered elements that provide wider fluctuation and distortion between countries.  For example, significant elements of the recent Canadian international student growth are concentrated outside degree level programs.

The data indicates that when the US has done well Australia and the UK have been steady or in decline.  It also demonstrates the increasing place of Canada in degree level awards with every likelihood that the explosive growth at lower levels will feed through over time.

A starker way of visualising the pattern is to consider each country’s percentage share of the aggregate enrollements of all four and show how it has risen or declined year on year.  Changes in the US share correlate reasonably well to the shifts in the fortunes of other countries and particularly the UK and Australia.  The Canadian share is relatively stable but is likely to have an increased impact as the volume increases.

From 2002/03 to 2011/12 the US consistently lost market share against the other countries.  The burst of growth, which underpinned the expansion of investment in pathways in the US came from 2011/12 to 2015/16 when its share of the market grew.  The subsequent decline of US enrollments from 2016/17 has correlated with accelerated growth from Canada and Australia and latterly, the UK.  

Country by country factors broadly match the numbers and suggest that it was not competition alone that caused the ebbs and flows.  US growth in the 2000s was sluggish as the country proceeded with caution after the terrorist attacks of 9/11.  The UK stagnated after removal of post-study work visas in 2012.  Australian visa restrictions, from 2009 were followed by significant benevolent changes from 2013 onwards.  And Canada’s focus on growth came with particular emphasis from the 2011 Economic Action Plan and 2014-2019 International Education Strategy although its relative share was undermined by the US growth between 2011/12 and 2015/16.

The Global Picture

At a global level, the OECD measure of globally mobile students pursuing tertiary education gives an indicator of the competitive threats and opportunities that exist.   What seems most clear is that the trend has been for the non-OECD countries to increase their share of the market over time.  In 2018 they had 30% of the market while in 2000 they had only 24%, which suggests power is gradually moving away from the traditional receiving countries.

The big four will also suffer from the success of countries like Germany, the Netherlands and Russia taking an increasing share of OECD country growth.  A by-product of that may be the way that pathways – which have come to be a dominant part of the UK and Australian landscape – have to respond to the new era.  Pathways operations in Europe have become commonplace and Brexit may be another factor that accelerates their growth. 

Number of international or foreign students enrolled in OECD and non-OECD countries

Source: Education at a Glance 2020.  Figure B6.1. 

With growth likely to come from more price sensitive markets it may also be worth universities taking account of the relative changes in costs that may be coming around the corner.  It is interesting to watch foreign exchange predictions and there seems to be a view that the US dollar may weaken over the coming 18 months and increase the competitiveness of its services.  Alongside this there are voices suggesting strengthening of the UK pound, the National Bank of Canada expects the Canadian Dollar to appreciate, and there seems to be plenty of confidence in the future value of the Australian Dollar.

Conclusions

It seems reasonable to conclude that over the past two decades each of the main four recruiting countries has, from time to time, benefited because one of the main competitors has struggled to create the conditions for growth.  But no country with a thriving higher education section is going to willingly shut its doors forever and all the signs are that universities will need growth to offset economic conditions and government cutbacks in their home country or state. While it is easy to feel smart when things are going well; it is wiser to be smart about what is happening to the competitive set and what you can do to prepare for changing conditions. 

2021 remains uncertain but there is every reason to believe that 2022 will see greater competition across the globe.  In a head-to-head match, where the quality of the universities, visa availability and the possibility of post-study work become more equal, it will be interesting to see who wins.  The US has all the tools to win and its fall from being the most favored destination owes as much to its decrease in popularity as the increase in desire to go elsewhere.  

The time to prepare is now, and there is nothing to stop a smart US university giving real consideration to establishing a market-priced offering to students from the most rapidly growing source markets.  Establishing a high-profile recruitment platform in early 2021 would take advantage of the market sentiment towards the Biden administration supported by the gradual re-opening of visa offices.  Carpe diem may summarize 2021 but audentes fortuna iuvat should be on everyone’s lips for 2022.

Footnote

Data on international enrollments are not consistent across the main recruiting countries.  The data used takes sources where it appears to be possible to secure an aggregate number for total enrollments of international students undertaking a bachelors, postgraduate taught or doctoral degree.  The sources for each country are itemised below and any insights or corrections to my assumptions are welcome.  The data are also subject to other anomalies which make comparison a subjective business.  The main points to make in that regard are:

i) Australian data appears on a calendar year.  Placing this against sources reporting academic years requires making a judgement about which year compares to which but is not material in the context of the main line of argument in this blog.

ii) UK data used are from the latest HESA release (27 January 2021) for the most recent five years and use historical data for the years before.  In building the spreadsheets I noticed that the numbers in the most recent release differ slightly from those in prior releases.  These differences are not significant enough to make a difference to the main argument.

iii) EU student data has been omitted from the UK data because the economic incentive to recruit them is not the same as international students who can be charged higher fees than home students.

iv) The timing of data collection is likely to be an increasingly important factor as universities increase their number of entry points in the year.  This is likely to be a contributing factor to the HESA data noted above. 

v) Sources

– US data from IIE Open Doors download of historical data and analysis of Undergraduate (Bachelors and Associate), and Graduate only:

– UK data from Higher Education Statistics Authority.  Latest release for most recent five years but historical data before that time.  Non-European Union, all levels (UG and PG) and all modes of study:

– Australia data from Department of Education, Skills and Employment, Higher Education Statistics, uCUBE, Enrolments Overseas, Sum of Postgraduate and Bachelors, 2001-2019 (removed enabling and non-award):

– Canada data from Statistics Canada, Postsecondary enrolments, by registration status, institution type, status of student in Canada and gender. Selected University,   International Students, all fields of study, 2000/2001 to 2018/19.  Sum of International Standard Classification of Bachelors, Masters and Doctoral (and equivalents) for Canada:

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

Jeopardy for UK Universities – Part 2

Responses to an earlier blog showing that, post-Brexit, a number of UK universities would continue to offer all European Union students preferential tuition fee status over international students suggested it was worth digging deeper.  It’s also worth considering what the consequences might be if a group of international students or the National Union of Students decided to test whether a university’s blanket discount for EU students was discriminatory.  The recruitment implications for pathway operations if some university partners provide preferential fees for EU students is another dimension for consideration.

Research on university websites suggests that universities planning to give EU students the same tuition fee as UK students in the 2021 academic year include:

BedfordshireBuckinghamshire
SolentLeicester
West LondonRoyal Holloway
De MontfortPortsmouth
Oxford BrookesNottingham Trent

In most cases the intention is clearly stated but there are more subtle versions of preferential pricing such as the University of Gloucestershire where details are buried in the 2021/22 Fee and Bursary Policy (on page 14 of 19).  It notes that “The International Grant Award is a tuition fee waiver of £3,000 deducted from your first year’s tuition fee” while the “EU Grant Award is a tuition fee waiver of £3,000 deducted from each year”.  So, an EU undergraduate student on a three-year degree course gets the benefit of an additional £6,000 of grant “automatically awarded at the point of offer”.

Some of the university websites are so Delphic or poorly organized that it is difficult to confirm their position one way or another so the list may not be comprehensive.  At least 13 universities reviewed do not seem to be in a position to show fees for 2021/22 or say they are awaiting further information from the Government.  These include some surprisingly big players:

CoventryNorthumbria
CambridgeLiverpool
University of the Arts, LondonBrunel*
Queen MaryLoughborough
GreenwichSOAS
BrightonHertfordshire
London South Bank 

*A source has indicated that Brunel are offering the same rate to EU as Home students in 2021 but I am unable to verify this on the website.

The legal consequences seem ill-defined and it remains possible that last minute Government action might change the situation.  Scotland has already decided that post-Brexit it could not legally continue to offer EU students the same, free tuition as Scottish students.  Edinburgh University is publishing 2021/22 fees that have three rates – those for Scottish students, Home/Rest of UK, and International/EU.  This would suggest that the university sees little room for manoeuvre in maintaining even the Home/Rest of UK for European Union students.

Legal analysis is very thin on the ground with the Time Higher Education article by Elizabeth Jones of Farrer and Co being an exception and the piece does not run to exploring remedies that might arise if the differential fees are illegal. The university would, presumably, be obliged to honour its contract with the EU students to charge them at home rates so could not change that arrangement.  If that is the case then it is possible they might be required to reduce fees for all other international students to the same level.

As an example, the difference for De Montfort would be around £5,000 a year per student.  HESA data for 2018/19 indicates that the University had 1,020 EU and 2,025 other first degree, full time international students so, if one took a third of the latter number that could suggest around 675 first year international undergraduate students and, therefore, a potential cost of £3.375m a year in lost fees if they had to be charged at the lower rate.  There are many ‘ifs’ involved in the calculation and I am happy to make any corrections needed if an authoritative source is able to say how much is at stake.

There’s also the interesting matter of what international students who are attending a course with a commercial pathway provider have been advised about their fees.  Just as an example, De Montfort is aligned with Oxford International Education Group (OIEG) which offers an integrated degree – the student can either study an International Year Zero (IYZ) and then go on to do three years with the university or an International First Year (IFY) and go on to do two years with the university. 

The point is that the OIEG website shows the “International or Tier 4 Visa students” fee for IYZ at £14,995 for 2020/21 and 2021/22 and for the IFY at £14,995 in 2020/21 rising to £15,995 in 2021/22. EU students on the same courses are being charged £9,250 in 2020/21 and the 2021/22 fees are not yet announced. Commercial providers in a similar situation may soon have to choose whether to continue to offer wholescale preferential rates on the basis of nationality.

Some pathway operations have grown large numbers of EU students into their operation with the lure of being charged the same as Home students when they go on to the university to complete their degree an important sales points.  For example, the 2018 QAA Report on the Navitas pathway operation with Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) noted, “The significant growth in student numbers at the Cambridge College, based on recruitment of home and EU students, is a trend that the Provider is looking at in relation to other colleges.”   Individual course pages suggest that ARU is currently planning that in 2021/22 EU students will be considered international but that could be tested if other universities and their partners appear to be successful in their recruitment efforts with preferential fees.

It would be good to see the UK Government confirm its position so that UKCISA and universities have to provide certainty to students about the fees they will pay.  This is also a moment where the NUS could step up to ensure that international students are being treated equitably.  The current situation was wholly foreseeable and organizations that are meant to have student interests at heart are only noticeable by their absence.

If universities offering lower EU fees are successful in their recruitment efforts it does not take a great leap of imagination to see how this could become widespread across the sector. It would mean universities choosing (rather than being obliged by Government) to embed preferential treatment based solely on nationality into their recruitment processes.  That seems an unfortunate consequence which should be challenged at the earliest opportunity.

No Easy Pathways – Even Before the Pandemic

As a relief from the global pandemic, it was interesting to take some time to look a little harder at recent developments from the Study Group, Shorelight and INTO camps.  It’s a further reminder of how the US pathway sector was climbing a mountain even before the pandemic brought new challenges to international student enrollments.

Study Group

Study Group looks to be adding to last year’s closures in North America with pathways at both Royal Roads in Canada and the University of Vermont shutting down.   Both institutions are still featured on the Study Group website but there is hard evidence in once case and strong rumour in the other.  As ever, I’m happy to accept an authoritative response and correction if this is incorrect.

Minutes from Royal Roads Board of Governors meeting dated March 31, 2020 state: “The Study Group partnership was entered in 2011 to deliver preparatory pathway programs and expand international student recruitment into university programs. Following a formal review, a decision was taken to not renew the contract when it expires August 2020…….. A team will be struck in early 2020 to manage the transition to wind down the partnership by August 31.”

The change comes as Royal Roads posts some interesting statistics about its international student enrollment expectations.  From 577 international student FTEs in onshore credit programs in 2018/19 they are forecasting 1,012 in 2020/21 – an eye-watering 75% growth.  The expectation is spelt out very clearly “…with revenue increasing by $4.5M (35%) from $13.0M in 2019/20 to $17.5M in 2020/21.”

While there’s no institutional announcement, strong feedback from the market suggests that the Study Group relationship with the University of Vermont will come to an end later this year.  The partnership started in early 2014 with the stated aim to ‘recruit approximately 140 international students per year with a two-term pathway sequence’.

The University doesn’t give exact details on the Study Group contribution but over the five years total Fall international enrollments rose to a peak in 2017 and fell back below 2015 levels in 2019.  Non-degree international enrollments peaked at 171 in Fall 2015 and have declined since to 88 in 2019.  It’s a story that’s been hear all around the US but it’s worth remembering as a sign of the times that this is a University ranked 121 by US News in 2020.

This follows Study Group’s announcement of three pathway partnerships closing in 2019 at the universities of  Roosevelt, Widener and Merrimack and the closure of the Oglethorpe University pathway earlier in 2020.  For those trying to keep up here’s the list (with closures highlighted in red) which includes DePaul and Hartford taken over from EC Higher Education in 2019. 

Shorelight

Shorelight’s website suggests that since its first partnerships in the US in 2014, it has grown to 19 partners.  The relationship with UMass Boston does not appear to be a traditional pathway (which seems to rest with Navitas).  The American Collegiate (DC and LA versions) do not appear on the list of traditional, full-service partners and appear to be short summer programs along with a year-long undergraduate level course through UCLA extension. 

Huron Consulting Group Inc. is a long-term investor in Shorelight Holdings LLC (the parent of Shorelight Education) with an initial investment of $27.9m in 2014 and 2015.  Huron’s recent Form 10-K filing showed that in the first quarter of 2020 it invested a further $13m.   The initial investments were zero coupon convertible debt instruments maturing on July 1, 2020 but that maturation date has been extended to 17 January 2024 which matches the date the new investment matures.

The pathway sector has seen a significant amount of investment in the potential of a strong US portfolio but the growing tensions are stark.  In a recent Boston Globe article, Ben Waxman, chief executive officer of International Education Advantage, argued “International enrollment is going to plummet like a rock” due to the pandemic.  In the same article Shorelight’s cofounder, Tom Dretler, said the company is still seeing increased interest from foreign students in enrolling in US colleges for summer and fall programs. He noted that universities will have to offer these students a more engaging online experience. Time will tell.

INTO University Partnerships (INTO)

Growing global and in-country competition were probably factors undermining the growth of early INTO success stories like Marshall University.  The pathway at Marshall closed earlier this year and leaves INTO with 11 partners in the US.  As noted in a previous blog, enrollment to both the pathway and directly to Marshall had been falling for several years.

A look at INTO’s most recent published accounts for the year to 31 July 2019 show that there may be more dark clouds on the horizon.  Taking US pathways that have been open five years or more (including Marshall) it is noticeable that the level of debt owed by the joint ventures to INTO has grown from under £5m to nearly £15m.  Colorado State University (CSU) and Drew are at or above the same levels as Marshall. 

It’s probably a bit early to see the direction of travel for new joint ventures Hofstra, Suffolk or Illinois State.  But St Louis University’s level of indebtedness has remained at around the same level for four years, and the University of Birmingham Alabama has moved from owing £895k in its first reported year to £4.96m in 2019.  Washington State University has seesawed with a first-year indebtedness of £1.74m followed by a recovery but then a rise back to £1.34m in the latest accounts.

None of this has stopped company founder Andrew Colin from moving up 133 places year on year in the Sunday Times Rich List published this month.  What’s interesting is that the Sunday Times valued the business (based on 2017/18 information) at £200m which would suggest that Leeds Equity’s 25% stake was worth £50m.  That’s after a £66m investment made in 2013.

Of course, all of this is before the coronavirus and a global pandemic that has created havoc with traditional student choices and may alter global mobility forever. The US was in decline as a destination of first choice for several years before the virus, and there is little to suggest it has risen to the competitive threat. A recent IDP survey showed the US lagging behind on key measures as students are making their decisions.

There is already evidence that Canada and Australia are responding more aggressively to support international student recruitment after the peak coronavirus period.  Even the UK had done more to revive its flagging fortunes and was looking towards a bumper intake in 2020.  It leaves pathway operators and universities in the US in a very tough place.

 Image by Arek Socha from Pixabay

This Time It’s Different Because…

While hoping for the best it is increasingly difficult to believe that the next two years won’t be very tough.  The economic news changes by the day and there is still little certainty about the process for removing the various lockdown measures around the world.  It is even tempting to not to write until the dust has settled. 

A number of commentators have suggested that higher education is counter-cyclical in terms of student growth and refer to the experience of the ‘great recession’ of 2008.  But I recently quoted Charlie Munger, vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway who said of the current situation, “This thing is different”, and I doubt that previous global shocks a good guide to what might happen this time around.  For home and international student enrollments this may even be a fundamental turning point.

This is not a counsel of despair.  There are signs that many students are still keeping their options open before deciding whether to travel across country or overseas for study.  But the backdrop to their decision making and the factors constraining countries, let alone universities, are far more complex than 2008.  

….it really is Global

The 2008 recession for the G20-zone (85% of all gross world product  (GWP) is often called a global recession which lasted  from mid‑2008 until 2009.  But while 2009 saw real GDP rates fall in virtually all of Europe, along with Canada and the US, the reality was that China, India, South America and almost all of Africa had GDP growth.  The coming recession may be V, W, L or swoosh shaped, but it seems likely that every country in the world will have a dip in GDP this year.   

China was never in recession throughout the period of what was called the ‘great recession’ but the first quarter of 2020 saw the Chinese economy shrink for the first time since 1976.

…Established Student Sources May Not Drive Growth

China’s GDP growth was at 14.7% in 2007 and remained above 9% until 2012.  Its 20-24 year age group grew by 13 million between 2007 and 2011.  These factors fueled international student growth through the ‘great recession’.

According to HESA data, between 2007/08 and 2011/12 the number of Chinese students in UK universities grew by over 33,000 to 78,715.  The next largest growth was from India which grew just under 14,000 from 25,905 to 39,090 by 2010/11 before falling back to 29,900 as Government visa policies hardened.

In the US, Open Doors data indicates that 2007/08 was the first year since 2001/02 that international student enrollments had got above 560,000.  By 2011/12 the number of enrollments had increased by a further 120,000.  China contributed over 100,00 of that increase.   

China’s university age population is stable but at lower levels than a decade ago and financial pressure on the middle class was already evident before the coronavirus.  Add in the safety concerns and it is little wonder that the British Council found that Chinese students had a high propensity to reconsider plans for the coming year.    

…Oil Glut and Increased Production Capacity

In the previous recession oil prices dipped rapidly but recovered within two years.  This time round some benchmark oil prices have gone negative early in the pandemic and the global oil glut is considered by some to be similar to the 1980s when prices stayed low for several years.  The impact is exemplified by Saudi Arabia’s reduction of $27bn in net foreign assets in just the month of March.  Development of technology and the re-emergence of the US as a dominant producer seem certain to make it difficult to constrain production in a way that forces prices up.  

It seems unlikely that, in the foreseeable future, any government will be able or willing to fund substantial scholarship schemes driven by oil wealth.

…Quality, Value and Availability of Online Degrees

In 2009 it is estimated that there were 5.5m students worldwide taking at least one course online, but by 2017 it was estimated to be over 6m in the US alone.  By 2019, 98% of public universities and colleges in the US offered some form of online program and the University of Pennsylvania had become the first Ivy-league institution to offer a bachelors’ degree totally online. 

In the ‘great recession’ the for-profit universities were at the forefront of online education.  This time around there is, literally, a world of choice and great brand names available to students.  Students wanting to get a degree do not have to incur the health risk, the uncertainty or the extra cost of an on-campus experience.

Online has provided a short-term response to the coronavirus but students may find it a cheaper and more convenient option for future study.

…Cost of Higher Education to Students

Analysis suggests that going to college in the US in 2018/19 was 25.3% (private) and 29.8% (public) more costly than in 2008/09 on a like-for-like dollar basis.   Forbes has estimated that between 1989 and 2016 the cost of going to college grew eight times faster than average annual wages. 

In England the introduction of £9,000 a year student fees didn’t occur until 2012.  By 2019 average student debt on entry to repayment was £35,950 compared to £11,720 in 2009.  Rising levels of debt have not, thus far, deterred students in England from going to university but it’s on their minds. 

As importantly, universities have been obliged to spend significant amounts on attracting students from less well represented backgrounds.  The government debt burden has also been significantly increased as the real cost of student loans was added in late 2019.  Faced with the cost of combatting coronavirus and a global recession students, universities and the Government may be less willing to absorb these costs.

The cost of going into higher education has become increasingly difficult for any of the stakeholders to absorb – even before the pandemic.

….Attitudes Towards the Value of Higher Education Degree Have Hardened 

UK and the US students have never paid more for their degree and there is some evidence that disenchantment has set in.  In 2013, Gallup found that 70% of U.S. adults considered a college education to be “very important,” 23% felt it was “fairly important” and 6% said it was “not too important.”  In 2019, those figures had shifted to 51%, 36% and 13%, respectively with even bigger negative shifts seen in the 18-29 age group.

Longitudinal evidence about student sentiment is harder to come by in the UK but this year’s graduating students will be the first under the higher English fee level to come into a world where unemployment is rising.  UK unemployment following the ‘great recession’ peaked at just over 8% in 2011.  It is likely that the job market will be tough for at least a couple of years.

The value of a degree has always been partly about having choices and career options.  The rising cost of education and the gloomiest jobs market for a decade may make potential students rethink their decisions.  The UK Government may be forced to reconsider whether Post Study Work visas are creating too much competition for scarce jobs.

…and New Options May Be More Attractive

A recession is likely to focus this argument on the ways a workforce is able to help a country emerge from recession.  It is claimed by Upwork that the 20 fastest growing skills on their Skills Index do not require a degree.  It notes that in 2018 Glassdoor said, “Increasingly, there are many companies offering well-paying jobs to those with nontraditional education or a high-school diploma.”

Non-traditional education options focused on work skills have grown rapidly and the lockdown may be driving more people in that direction.  Udemy has already seen a surge of interest in its online courses, particularly in AI and machine learning.  A trend towards skills-oriented learning, whether online or in short-courses, leading to a qualification may become better established.

The safety of university degrees offering shelter from the jobs market for three or four years come at a high cost.  It seems possible that the new options available and the scramble to find work or avoid excessive HE costs will drive people towards focused solutions.   

This is not an exhaustive list but flags some things which seem materially different this time round.  The extent to which institutions are able to adapt and pivot to meet the needs of students and society may determine their ability to survive.  There will always be opportunities for the flexible, the creative and those who can offer value for money and the promise of a better future.

Image by WikiImages 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.

UK

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