Tag: UK Higher Education

UniVanity League Table

Unveiling a new league table and asking people to look is a bit like extolling the virtues of a spare tyre.  It’s not needed for any functional purpose, takes up space that could be used for better purposes and does not assist with current performance.  Little wonder that about 30% of new cars don’t have one and something of surprise that university league tables continue to proliferate with the support and knowing glances of institutions that should know better.

The UniVanity League Table emerges from a review of the 141 institutional strategic plans and home pages of universities who are members of UUK.  The table reflects a mixture of fact at a point in time, a scoring system* laced with bias, and an entirely personal component to replicate those well-established rankings that rely on questionnaire responses.  It’s a similar methodology (or ‘mythology’ as a US News and World Report ex-editor told Malcolm Gladwell) to many of the major league tables.  

53 of 141 institutions reviewed used rankings from major league tables** on their home page but, the UniVanity Table focuses on 27 who state that achieving a ranking, either explicitly or implicitly in a main league table, is a strategic objective.  Elevating pursuit of rankings to this level looks, in many cases, like a vanity project and is certainly a distraction from the core business of a university.  If fox-hunting is the ‘unspeakable in full pursuit of the uneatable’, chasing rankings may be considered the insecure in pursuit of the unnecessary.        

Readers can be assured that this table, unlike most others, is made available without advertising from institutions and will not be developed or exploited for commercial gain or to build a database of students, parents, agents or government officials who might look at it.  A celebratory event may be held if a sufficient number of universities are willing to invest their scarce resources to buy a table of ten at an appropriately salubrious London venue where they can eat, drink and dance the night away.

UNIVANITY LEAGUE TABLE 2022

UniversityStated AimScore
Southamptontop 10 UK and towards a top 50 internationally26
Bristolfirmly established among the world’s top-50 universities (draft)23
DurhamThe Times/Sunday Times League Tables Top 522
Queen’s Belfasttop 175 in global league tables21
Birminghamwithin the top 50 global institutions in the leading international tables20
PlymouthTop 30 in national league tables Top 250 in international ranking20
Manchesterin the top 25 in leading international rankings18
Glasgow CaledonianAnnual improvement in Impact Rankings score18
Lancasterprogress towards a top 100 position in key global rankings14
East Anglia as a top 20 university in all of the main UK university league tables14
Essextop 25 Times Good University Guide..top 200 Times Higher Education World Rankings14
Liverpoolamong the top 20 UK universities in the world rankings14
Central LancashireLeague table ranking (Guardian, Times, GUG)14
Heriot WattWorld University ranking top 25013
West of Scotlandrecognised as a world leading university ranked inside the top 20013
CardiffUK top 20 in The Times and Sunday Times Good University Guide..world top 200..QS World University Rankings..TimesHigher Education World University Rankings, the Academic Ranking  of World Universities and the Best Global Universities Ranking, and in the top 100 of at least one of these12
CityTop 20 in the Times and Sunday Times University League Table11
West LondonKPI – Aggregate League table position Top 5011
SolentTimes Higher Education Impact Rankings Top third of rankings11
Surreyreaching the top 200 in THE and QS, and the top 300 in ARWU8
HuddersfieldTop 300 Times and QS World University Rankings8
Liverpool John Mooresreputation reflected in..THE WUR: performance of disciplines in Times and Sunday Times8
South Bankbeing in the top 500 QS and THE rankings8
Newcastle global Top 100 as measured by at least one of the main university rankings7
Royal College of Artnumber 1 for art and design in the QS World University Rankings. The College will occupy the same position in 20217
Buckingham New80th or better in aggregate across league tables5
Stirlingone of the top 25 universities in the UK4

You had one eye in the mirror**

Russell Group universities dominate the table with all top five places and nine of the overall positions which suggests that they feel a real need for external validation.  It’s a reminder of the old McKinsey hiring dictum to recruit people who are “smart…driven by their insecurity;and..competitive”.  Institutions that are in a club claiming to be for the “UK’s leading research-focused universities” should probably feel more comfortable in their quality.     

The Group has always been slightly ambivalent about league tables with various press releases making the point that “League tables shouldn’t be used in isolation to make judgements about the quality of an institution..” (2015) and  “Ranking universities is fraught with difficulties..” (2014).  Perhaps it is the division in the views of the members themselves that has caused the Group to be silent on the issue in recent years.  It is also something that Universities UK seems to steer well clear of with a search showing no comments on rankings and league tables at all.

Well you’re where you should be all the time

Tom Peter’s book What Gets Measured Gets Done borrowed the phrase from what he considers the soundest piece of management advice he ever heard, which is why it matters when universities elect to chase specific league table targets.  With many strategic plans reaching a decade into the future it is just possible that the real driver is the ease with which current management can make supposedly visionary statements with no accountability for delivery.  There is also a good deal of fudging of the actual measurement leaving future reporting to decide which table to report against.

Durham University’s strategy set a target to be Top 5 in the Times/Sunday Times league table by 2027 which could reflect that this is a much easier set of parameters to manage than the THE World Rankings where the institution’s position dropped from 96 to 162 from 2017 to 2022. 

Liverpool takes a more nuanced stance in wanting to achieve “a UK top 20 worldwide ranking in a recognised international league table by 2026.”  At one level this suggests that it is content to see its global position decline as long as other UK universities see the same or greater decline in their position.  In the THE World Rankings the university was 25th in the UK and its overall world position had fallen from 158 to 178 since 2017.

Birmingham has made some progress but is falling some way short of its stated ambition of “..ranking within the top 50 global institutions in the leading international tables”.  Since 2017, they have moved from 130 to 105 in the THE but have fallen from 79 to 90 in the QS rankings since 2019 and have been becalmed in the 101-150 ranking of AWRU for the last five years.  The timescale for achieving top 50 is 2030 but the incoming Vice Chancellor must be wondering how the growing strength of other countries will mitigate against further progress.

The great shame is that each university has a Strategic Plan that is choc full of ideas, creativity, energy and brilliant stories of how they intend to make students, the economy and the world better off.  These are good reasons that holding the institutions sense of worth, progress and well being ransom to a vainglorious punt on league tables makes so little sense. 

You Gave Away the Things You Loved

Reviewing over 140 university Strategic Plans is a reminder of the transformative power that institutions have and the tradition of diversity, quality and excellence that they offer.  It reminded me of Sir Howard Newby, then chief executive of HEFCE,  commenting that, “I think the English – and I do mean the English – do have a genius for turning diversity into hierarchy..”.  Perhaps the league table compilers play on this genius to tempt universities into trading instincts for collaboration and cooperation for a system that encourages game playing and one upmanship.

Whatever the reason, the willingness to be judged by external forces seems contrary to the notion of universities as autonomous, self-governing institutions.  The sector has, over time, grumbled mightily about REF, teaching quality framework, NSS and others, so willingly paying homage at the altar of QS, THE, AWUR et al seems out of character.  It is reasonable to measure progress but there are many more targeted mechanisms for determining performance.

By engaging so actively and giving prominence to league tables, universities are also giving significant opportunities for the commercialization of data from potential students.  It is another example of a sector which is struggling to come to terms with the reality that for many organizations education has become just another business opportunity.  External investment and for-profit organizations are very welcome where they serve the interests of students, research and teaching but the sector should act collectively to prevent exploitation and ensure that it receives a reasonable slice of any revenue being generated.  

Notes

* The final score is generated from six categories.  These are: mention (explicit or implicit) of ranking/tables as a measure of performance in the strategic plan; whether the strategic plan was downloadable/easily searchable; how many years are left on the plan; whether rankings were mentioned on the university homepage; Russell Group membership and; whether the compiler had visited the campus and enjoyed the experience.

**’main league table’ generally refers to those published by Times Higher Education, QS Quacquarelli Symonds, or Academic World University Ranking by Shanghai Rankings or in the UK by major national newspapers or the Complete University Guide.

***Sub-headings are, aptly, from You’re So Vain, a song by Carly Simon and released in 1972. It topped the charts in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand and sparked years of speculations as to its subject. Simon has gone as far as to say that the song is about three men and Warren Beatty is one (verse two). Separately, she said the ‘apricot scarf’ was worn by American writer, Nick Delbanco.

****If any of the universities listed feel I have misunderstood the intention of their strategic plan or referred to an incorrect/out of date version I will be happy to receive authoritative corrections and note them on this blog.

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

Post Study Work May Change UK University Enrolment Growth Patterns

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

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

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

Reputation and Rankings Key to Chinese Enrolments

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

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

Source: HESA

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

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

Source: HESA

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

Growth of Indian Students Less Ranking Dependent

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

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

Source: HESA

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

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

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

Future Disrupted?

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

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

Notes:

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

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay 

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

PSW – The Morning After

There’s plenty of jubilation over the re-introduction of two-year Post-Study Work visas and congratulations are due to those who lobbied for it.  But it’s worth remembering that Government’s rarely give something without wanting something in return and that every gift horse should be given careful scrutiny.  In that context there are a few things to look out for over the coming weeks, months and years.

Drift, Detail and Design

A ‘popular’ announcement from a Government under pressure is often rushed out with detail and other policy intent still needing to be tidied up.  The Home Secretary’s announcement that the new Graduate Route ‘will mean talented international students, whether in science and maths or technology and engineering, can study in the UK…’ was curious in the context of a scheme allowing all graduates to stay.  It’s mirrored on the Home Office website and may provide cover for a later tightening of the rules to specific subjects.

A Step Forward But…

Some details of PSW are still to be announced but it seems slightly short of the Australian (two to four years) and Canadian (up to three years) schemes.  It is not yet clear if families can join the PSW graduate as in Australia and it seems doubtful that there will be any room for promoting it as a route to permanent residence as Canadian institutions do.  And there is always the potential for both those countries to step up their offer to become even more competitive.      

Economic Conditions Can Change Policy

PSW was last introduced in the UK in 2002 when unemployment was 5%.  It’s discontinuation in 2012 followed a rapid rise in unemployment to 8% between 2009 and 2011. Prime Minister David Cameron told the House of Commons, ‘Frankly, there are lots of people in our country desperate for jobs. We don’t need the brightest and best of students to come here and then do menial jobs.’

The economic direction of travel for the UK post-Brexit is uncertain but universities have been drawn very directly into discussions about employability and the value of a degree. It’s easy to allow PSW in an era of historically low unemployment, currently around 4%, but if recession hits and unemployment climbs it is equally simple to remove it.  Trends in numbers and careers of home graduates may factor in that equation.

Table 1 – UK Unemployment 2000-2013

Grounds for Home Student Fee Reduction

The HE sector made an enormous song and dance about the contribution of international student fees but may find being granted it has unintended consequences.  With increasing international students providing a major economic stimulus to universities there is fertile ground for populist and electioneering proposals to cut fees for home students and increase investment in school and FE.  It’s probably helpful that international students also prop up the economics of many STEM courses and postgraduate study.

Limiting HE Investment to Support Other Priorities

Universities may hope the Augar Review has been buried but newspaper headlines about ‘low value’ courses, universities manipulating applications, grade inflation and VC pay are unlikely to have been totally forgotten.  More importantly, more money from international students gives grounds to support more popular or political priorities.   It was interesting to see Chancellor Sajid ‘I went to my local FE College’ Javid, Spending Round announcement include an increase for further education funding in the 2019 spending round and increasing ‘school spending by £7.1 billion by 2022-23, compared to this year.’

International Fees For EU Students

One of the arguments against introducing international fees for EU students post-Brexit has been that it will cause a significant decline in their numbers.  A surge in traditional international fee-paying students attracted by PSW makes up those numbers and would allow EU students to work as PSW international students without a more complex arrangement with Europe.  Making EU students ineligible for UK student loans would also eliminate headlines like ‘Thousands of EU students fail to repay loans.’

Never Mind the Quality Feel the Width

It is arguable that strong brands perceived as high quality or with potent strategies for recruitment have not been particularly troubled by the lack of post study work visas.  Eight Russell Group universities each increased their first-year international student intakes by over 27% over the two years from 2015/16 to 2017/18.  Even beyond that Group there are clear winners who achieved significant growth including De Montfort (+78%) and the University of East London (+90.6%). 

For some universities these were grim years with five institutions each seeing their intake decline by over 300 students.   PSW is likely to see such institutions making up for lost time and revenue by driving international numbers up but the quality of the intake may suffer.  PSW as the driver for attracting less able international students to cash-strapped universities is not a particularly lofty ideal.

Competition for Places and Jobs

The potential for significant upturns in volumes of international students comes just as the upswing occurs in home student demographics with HEPI suggesting the need for up to 300,000 additional university places by 2030.  This sets the scene for potential conflict between home students and international students – particularly if home fees go down and institutions are looking towards the economics.  The OECD’s Education at A Glance 2019 noted, ‘there is a risk of squeezing out qualified national students from domestic tertiary educational institutions that differentiate tuition fees by student origin, as they may tend to give preference to international students who generate higher revenues through higher tuition fees”.

It’s suggested that in 2019 around 1,000 places were reserved for international students in Clearing and the economics may push institutions to favouring international students over home students just as home demand steps up.  It is only a short step to stories about debt-laden home graduates being unemployed because universities are enticing increasing amounts of international competition for early career jobs.  At that point the freedom of PSW may find itself subject to increasing scrutiny and Government intervention.

Conclusion

A benevolent PSW policy is to be welcomed where it builds on the reputation of the sector for quality and is part of a strategic approach to supporting higher education’s potential as a major contributor to global influence as well as the UK’s economic and cultural development.  It is also possible that the recent announcement was carefully planned and is the start of a period of unprecedented benevolence towards higher education in the UK.  But history and context suggest that things are rarely so simple.   


Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay   

Clear For Clearing

It’s a bit early to predict final international student (excluding European Union) recruitment outcomes from the UK undergraduate Clearing season but the first week often gives some direction.  There’s also some anecdotal feedback on how institutional and student strategies might be shaping up and what it means for the broader sector. There’s a long way to go with the season largely defined by the last date on which international students can get visas to study.  

Looking at international students who have been ‘placed’ there has been a slightly surprising decline in year on year (YOY) growth over the first week.  On A-Level day (Day 0) 6.7% (2,120) more students had been placed than in 2018 and the number holding an offer was up 5.6% at 16,860.  By Day 8 the placed YOY increase was only 5.2% at 1,900 although offer holders were up 9.5% at 12,120.   

  Table 1 – Year on Year Differences In Place Students

Source: UCAS

NB: Each bar reflects the difference on the year before i.e. bars for 2016 reflect the difference compared to the corresponding UCAS reporting days in 2015  

The deeper context is strong growth in international student application growth measured at 8% at the 30 June UCAS deadline with a particular surge in applicants from China.  There are suggestions that the growth in applicants has allowed institutions to be more selective which seems likely at a point where there is more demand than supply.  An alternative, or perhaps complementary, take is that students are also being choosier and taking the opportunity to shop around before accepting an offer.

Plenty Still To Play For

While conversion tends to slow very quickly after the first week of Clearing the pool of 12,120 offer holders suggest that there’s plenty to play for.   Trying to project numbers forward it may be reasonable to take last year’s outcome as a guide.  In 2018 the pool of those holding an offer on Day 8 was 11,070 and by Day 28 of clearing the total number placed had grown by 18.8% of that number. 

A similar result in 2019 would mean that Day 28 in 2019 would see 40,430 placed students which would be a growth of 5.5% YOY.  It’s a rough and ready calculation and at Day 8 there were still a record number of over 30,000 students free to be placed in Clearing.  Whichever way you cut it this looks like a good year for the sector.

Another factor is that the numbers published by UCAS only cover the main scheme applicants and do not reflect those who might have used a Record of Prior Application* (RPA) to bypass the system.  As I noted in a blog in December 2018 this route has been growing quite rapidly, with just over 6% of the total number of students using the RPA route in 2018 compared to 3.9% in 2014 and just 4.8% in 2017.  Further growth would bring even more upside in recruitment for universities.

A Good Year But Beware The Fog

There may be even better news for the sector because there is reasonable feedback from some pathway operators and sixth form colleges suggesting that they are having a bumper year.  One commentary has suggested that students unable to get direct entry into well-ranked universities of choice are choosing to take pathway courses at those universities.  Even more encouragingly the buoyancy seems widespread and there is likely to be welcome relief for some universities that have seen significant declines in international student volume in recent years.

The undergraduate numbers are the smaller part of the international recruitment picture but there is no reason to believe that postgraduate numbers are not doing at least as well and probably better.  All this before the likely reintroduction of a more powerful post-study work option and the removal of international students from immigration statistics.  It bodes well for the near-term future of the UK sector at a point when the US seems to be mired in difficulties that are unlikely to be corrected quickly.   

Against this background experienced international recruiters will remember Clausewitz’s dictum that, ‘the factors on which action..is based are wrapped in a fog of greater or lesser uncertainty’ – it’s the basis for the popular phrase ‘fog of war’.  Brexit continues to loom over the sector with no real clarity over long-term decisions on the fee status of European Union students.  Concerns must also remain over reliance on one dominant source country when the rise in UG applications was substantially driven by students from China.

*Record of Prior Acceptance – where an application is submitted to UCAS by a provider, when an unconditional firm has been offered and accepted by the applicant. These are not recorded in the daily Clearing analysis and will be reported after the cycle has closed.


Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay y

BIG QUESTIONS FOR PRIVATE PROVIDERS

The past few months have seen Ardian purchase Study Group, Navitas on course to be taken private and, most recently, news of EC’s North American Higher Education division moving to Study Group.  Between 2010 and 2014 the pathway market was characterized by over a billion dollars of private investment and a dash for growth in university partnerships.  But as global competition, technological disruption and changing demographics bite there are closures, sales and realignment.

As the market becomes more challenging investors have some strategic decisions to make. Recent developments and news coverage gives some grounds for speculation on what that might mean.

Cambridge Education Group/Bridgepoint Capital

In 2013 Bridgepoint Capital paid ‘an enterprise value of UK £185m’ (around $241m) for CEG.  One commentator suggested, “The pathways sector has delivered remarkable growth and profitability over recent years. Strategically the space is exciting..”.  It seems possible that the future will be about excitement in other parts of the portfolio. 

CEG recently confirmed the closure of its ONCampus individual pathway centers at Rochester, Rhode Island, CSU Monterey Bay and the University of North Texas.  The relaunch of ONCampus Boston in fall 2019 and direct recruitment at Illinois Institute of Technology keeps a toehold in US HE.  But with no further ONCampus developments in the UK since 2016 it looks like it has called time on pathways linked to individual universities.    

But the Group has other options and is investing in the CATS College brand (colleges for 14-18 year olds) with the first China centers opening in March 2019.  The two centers are in Shanghai and will provide a path for students to join CATS UK Colleges and other CEG options in the UK.  In the UK the company’s digital delivery arm has also been growing and added Cass Business School and the University of Hull as partners in 2018. 

It seems plausible that CEG is focusing on driving the CATS business and building a growth story around digital while putting pathways into a holding pattern.  

INTO University Partnerships/Leeds Equity Partners

In 2013 Leeds Equity £66m purchase of a 25% stake in INTO valued the business at around £266m.  Six years later the Sunday Times has ‘cautiously, put a £170m price on the operation’ (entry 876, Sunday Times Rich List 2019. Public filings show that in 2018/19 a preference dividend of £15m was paid for the first time, presumably to Leeds. 

INTO added the medium sized, public, Illinois State University and smaller, private institution, Hofstra to its US portfolio in 2018.  But data from Oregon State and Colorado State reflects the tightening of the US market and the possibility that new partnerships may erode the enrollments of existing partners.  INTO hasn’t opened a new UK partner since 2016 and average enrollments at mature partnerships (five years or more) and wholly owned centers shows that overall recruitment in the UK is no greater than 2014/15 levels.      

The company’s joint-venture model was a key differentiators in the early days but has been substantially replicated by a US competitor.  INTO is focused on pathways but has the potential to build business as a recruiter of non-pathway international students for existing or new partners.  If Leeds Equity are looking to move on this could be the moment where the business recapitalizes to buy out their 25% share and perhaps get some headroom to invest in new business opportunities.

Shorelight

Shorelight was six years old in January 2019 and is the only major pathway provider with no interests outside the US.  The portfolio grew in the last twelve months with the additions of  Cleveland State University (March 2019) and Mercer University (October 2018).  Eighteen university partners mean that there are a lot of seats to fill at a tough time for the US market.  

With the squeeze on international enrollment growth in the US, Shorelight probably needs to dominate pathway recruitment to deliver the results expected by partners.  The growth in pathway options and degrees delivered in English around the world has made it a buyers’ market for students and recruitment agents. Any outperformance in recruitment is likely to come at a price and provoke a competitive response. 

Declining markets, increasing costs and over-supply are not easy problems to solve and it may be time to look for new options to spread costs and risks.  Given Shorelight’s recruitment infrastructure and evidence of success with some good universities in the US it could be productive to pitch for a high-quality university in the UK, Europe or Australia.  A big name that doesn’t want to be part of the Kaplan, Study Group, Navitas or INTO portfolio might find a dedicated partner worth a conversation.         

Study Group/Ardian

The purchase of Study Group by Ardian positioned the investor with the ambition to make ‘strategic acquisitions’, and a belief that pathway growth would continue to be ‘double digit’.  It is difficult to see that organic growth in the US will be the main driver of the latter prediction.  But taking on EC’s operations in the US appears to signal an intention to continue to build market share. 

Other recent Study Group signings have been with sub-degree colleges in Canada providing a route to degree level study, post-study work and possibly citizenship.  It may be a smart way of infiltrating a market where universities have seemed relatively resistant to the lure of pathways. In 2017, 41% of international students at post-secondary level, including a 67% increase in those from India, studied in colleges.

Study Group’s business is diversified geographically and has high-school/college options as well as pathways.  The UK/Europe pathway business looks stable and recently announced a new partner in Aberdeen.  In the US the Managing Director has just left and it may be a good moment for strategic review in the context of market conditions. 

Image by Anemone123 from Pixabay

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.

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.