The launch last October of a “supreme council” on international education in Australia, the International Education Advisory Council (IEAC), was an Australian government plan to try to encourage innovative solutions to bolster its beleagured international education industry. Now, the council has released a discussion paper on a five-year plan for “sustainability and quality” in Australia’s international education sector, and submissions from the sector make interesting reading.
Concerns over cumbersome legislation crushing innovation and a new “Genuine Temporary Entrant” test figure highly among stakeholders keen to ensure Australia’s industry can retain its pioneering edge. Nearly every submission calls for national recognition of the value of the sector (AUS$16 billion); some demand public acknowledgement of this. Strong statements on agent regulation are also made.
The point of the discussion paper is to draw out insightful comment on where to go next, following already extensive review – notably the Baird review and the Knight review; all the recommendations of this latter Knight review were adopted by the government.
These included major changes to the visa system to ensure easier access for tertiary-level students (albeit with a safety check by immigration authorities), focusing the compliance burden on host institutions but also making access to the employment market seamless for graduates (of the same tertiary-level institutions).
In 2011, more than half of all international students commencing in HE had followed a prior study pathway, either Elicos or VET
The establishment of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), a regulatory and quality agency for HE, and Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA), responsible for vocational (VET) qualifications and courses, built on the Baird Review’s emphasis on effective regulation.
This was needed after a decade of a major growth – an annual compound growth rate of 17% between 2002 and 2011, as noted by Austrade’s Quentin Stevenson-Perks – which meant the sector outgrew its regulatory confines.
Elicos and vocational
While these changes were welcomed, those representing the Elicos (English language intensive courses for overseas students) sector call for more extensive implementation of the new rules on work rights and visa issuance (a pilot extension is in the pipeline). And visa statistics, detailed extensively in the discussion paper, underline just how important this sector is in the bigger picture.
Australia is keen to promote itself as an education destination that prepare and enables students to work in a global economy ©ATC
In 2011, more than half of all international students commencing in HE had followed a prior study pathway, either an Elicos or VET (vocational education and training) programme before transferring on, and Elicos is also a robust stand-alone sector, as underlined by English Australia (EA).
“Is locking young adult students into a defined study pathway educationally sound practice?”
VET has been considered as the most poorly-regulated of the sectors within international education, although this should be changing. But Skills Australia notes that greater transparency of information is needed: “Around 85% of international VET students are enrolled with private providers, [but] national VET statistics are only being collected on publicly funded training”.
It suggests a rollout of a listings website MySkills, to complement MyUniversity, could help if well managed (although MyUniversity received criticism when rolled out this year).
IEAC acknowledged that some problems occured as the VET sector grew rapidly from 2006-2009. Annual growth rates in VET enrolments were around 50 per cent annually in 2007 and 2008, “a rate which was clearly unsustainable”. Moreover, “unfortunately, at that time, some students on vocational courses were there not for the learning on offer, but solely as an easy route to seeking Australian permanent residence”.
By cutting the guaranteed link between graduation and migration in 2010 (cancelling 20,000 applications in process), this particular loophole was closed.
GTE receives criticism from the sector
A more recent government action receives criticism by stakeholders; that of the Genuine Temporary Entrant (GTE) Requirement which was ushered in in November last year. Given Streamlined Visa Processing, GTE is a “safety check”; it means immigration authorities have to determine a visa applicant’s bona fides – this can be via a telephone call to an applicant, The PIE News has learned.
Although Australia’s Immigration Department states, “The GTE requirement will not make it more difficult for genuine student visa applicants to obtain”, clearly stakeholders feel otherwise.
Independent preparatory college, Canning College, said in its submission, “GTE provides Immigration officers with a structure to subjectively reject visa applications. These rejections cannot be challenged, therefore, there is no accountability to clients for decisions made.” It goes further: “There are already cases where GTE provisions are being applied differently in different visa processing offices and being over enthusiastically applied by Immigration officers.”
“This situation requires close monitoring and amendment where apparently spurious, subjective decisions are being made”
ACPET, which has its CEO on the council, backed up this concern. It stated, “Our members report that the recently introduced GTE criterion appears to be resulting in increases in student visa refusals across all sectors. This situation requires close monitoring and amendment where apparently spurious, subjective decisions are being made.”
It calls for DIAC to release a report to industry on the impact of the GTE.
Canning College also said current Streamlined Visa Processing for pathway colleges and universities was unfair to secondary-level institutions, and, possibly, the students.
“Is locking young adult students into a defined study pathway educationally sound practice?”, asked the college.
A national policy regarding the use of education agents
Another area under discussion is a national policy regarding the use of education agents. The University of Western Australia called for a body such as AIRC in the USA. IECA highlighted the recent London Statement related to ethical princples for agencies – launched in tandem with the UK’s British Council, but ACPET also stated that accreditation would be beneficial to ensure a cohesive service was provided to agency clients.[more>>]
“We draw attention to the New Zealand government approach whereby accredited agents (through a formal training programme) gain access to streamlined visa processing,” it said, praising the work of the EATC training scheme delivered by PIER in Australia. It called for all agencies to be required to pass PIER’s government-endorsed EATC scheme and/or gain benefit as a result.
“There has been no public evidence provided that such enforcement has occurred at all”
At fellow association, English Australia, however, a contrary view was posited. In a comprehensive dissection of the essential role agencies play in the industry (read the full EA submission here), this membership-body argued that the activities of agents based overseas cannot be regulated by Australian legislation. It also notes that agencies recruit over 70% of English language students in the country.
Current ESOS (Education Services for Overseas Students) legislation already makes education providers accountable for the actions of their partner agencies, it observed (a position endorsed in other submissions).
“How has the ESOS Act been enforced in relation to providers being held accountable for the actions of their agents? There has been no public evidence provided that such enforcement has occurred at all.”
EA went further – lambasting the government for a focus on control rather than being conducive to success: “English Australia believes that Australia is currently wasting many of the opportunities presented by international education, with a focus by government departments on controlling, restricting and curtailing the industry’s activities, rather than focusing, supporting and nurturing an innovative and entrepreneurial approach to engaging with the world through education.”
“English Australia believes that Australia is currently wasting many of the opportunities presented by international education”
It points out that with compliance being shifted on to providers rather than government, they are being forced to shoulder greater costs, and it levels a complaint that is being echoed in the UK; that an accreditation body with 20 years of experience monitoring the Elicos sector (NEAS) is being sidelined due to new accreditation procedures.
The need to ensure international graduates are work-ready
Another issue that many stakeholders raised was the need to ensure international graduates are work-ready, given education is seen as a passport to employment. This is something the new work rights for international graduates is designed to address; “almost guaranteeing” work rights for graduates in-country.
Australia is keen to leverage its ties with Asian nations © ATC
IDP, a global student placement organisation, highlighted increasing recognition that tertiary-level students need English language training in order to graduate as job ready. It said a recent study showed that “it is not automatic that international students’ English proficiency will improve while they study in Australia” and be good enough to operate in a professional workplace.
“It is not automatic that international students’ English proficiency will improve while they study in Australia”
It recommended English language support programmes throughout studies and language testing upon graduation for all as a goal to realise and for potential employers to use.
And Universities Australia (UA) suggested, “Expanding opportunities for international students to undertake study in a third country as part of their Australian studies would increase Australia’s competitiveness in the market for international postgraduate research students.”
Housing, travel and a tourism-style promotion body
Other submissions to IECA note greater access to affordable housing and transport concessions would help counter any perceptions international students have of being ‘cash cows’. Several submissions pointed to ACPET’s survey on travel discounts (although travel discounts are not common in competitor countries).
Accommodation problems have also hit the headlines in Australia and UA notes that universities currently provide on-campus accommodation for approximately 50,125 students at a bed to student ratio of 1:20, “a figure universities recognise as unsatisfactory”.
It calls for greater access for universities to the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) so they can access NRAS funding to build new student accommodation.
Many call for a British Council-style central body; ideally with a hotline to the Prime Minister
And many call for a British Council-style central body charged with overseeing the sector; ideally with a hotline to the Prime Minister. UA suggests,” A centralised body for international education (possibly titled ‘Education Australia’) could be tasked to deliver a much longer term vision and coordinated approach to international education policy.”
Private provider Navitas echoes that call: “Navitas firmly believes that a central focus point at the federal government level, a Parliamentary Secretary for International Education, is required to improve coordination, representation and alignment across the industry.”
Navitas sums up the risks it perceives – universal issues – : a risk of over regulation making Australia uncompetitive; a lack of transparency in visa processes; and providers being held wholly responsible for visa breaches, over which they have no control.
It could be a global battle cry; CEO, Rod Jones, asserts, “Currently myths such as international students taking education places and jobs have gained community credence, when in fact at least 80% of students return home and Australian institutions derive much needed income from student fees.”
