VISTA AUTUMN 2014
DESTINATION ASIA BALANCING THE SCALES OF STUDENT MOBILITY
IEASA GLOBAL DIALOGUE | MARKETING CHANNEL OPTIMISATION | ENGAGING THE ACADEMY
CONTENTS WHEN EAST MEETS WEST AND NORTH MEETS SOUTH:
4
IEASA GLOBAL DIALOGUE Helen Zimmerman THE GETTING OF WISDOM: AIEA IN REVIEW PUBLISHED BY International Education Association of Australia (IEAA) PO Box 12917, A’Beckett Street Melbourne VIC 8006 Australia + 61 3 9925 4579 admin@ieaa.org.au ieaa.org.au Vista is a quarterly magazine produced for IEAA members. It features in-depth analysis, insights and commentary on international education in Australia and around the world. We welcome contributions from members and industry experts. If you would like to contribute to a forthcoming edition, please email your ideas to Peter Muntz at peter.muntz@ieaa.org.au. All rights reserved. Articles may be reproduced with permission. Unless stated otherwise, opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the position of IEAA. Copyright © 2014 COVER IMAGE Ilya Terentyev (iStock)
9
Joanne Barker DESTINATION ASIA:
10
BALANCING THE SCALES OF STUDENT MOBILITY William Purcell MARKETING CHANNEL OPTIMISATION
14
Peter Muntz ON MATTERS OF BRICKS AND MORTAR:
20
NRAS AND THE STUDENT HOUSING DEBATE Phil Honeywood ENGAGING THE ACADEMY: THE NEXT FRONTIER?
22
Douglas Proctor THE BEST OF BRISBANE: AIEC 2014
26
Gordon Scott PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
30
CONFERENCES
31
HIGHLIGHTS
DESTINATION
ASIA
BALANCING THE SCALES OF STUDENT MOBILITY
Redressing the imbalance of students travelling between Australia and Asia requires a whole new paradigm in regard to resources, infrastructure and mobility models, writes William Purcell. Page 10.
WHEN EAST MEETS WEST AND NORTH MEETS SOUTH
ENGAGING THE ACADEMY: THE NEXT FRONTIER?
Emerging and developing countries are increasingly steering the global conversation on internationalisation, writes Helen Zimmerman. Page 4.
Academics are crucial to successful internationalisation, yet their role is conspicuously absent from the major education conferences, writes Douglas Proctor. Page 22.
IEASA GLOBAL DIALOGUE
WHEN
EAST MEETS WEST NORTH MEETS SOUTH AND
The internationalisation of higher education has arguably been driven by the developed world, but emerging and developing countries are increasingly steering the global conversation, writes Helen Zimmerman. In mid-January this year there was a seminal meeting of international education peak bodies for a ‘Global Dialogue on the Future of Internationalisation of Higher Education’ in South Africa. The three-day Dialogue was seminal not because the issues under discussion were new. Nor was it seminal because the issues were novel to educational institutions, national and regional peak bodies, or to academics, international education professionals and practitioners across the globe. Discussion, research and action has been occurring for a number of years on the need to: ■■ ensure mutual benefits in internationalisation, student mobility and collaborative research; ■■ redress the imbalance in global mobility flows; ■■ further develop internationalisation of the curriculum and internationalisation at home; ■■ explore the transformative impacts of globalisation, demographics and digital technologies on education.
4 | VISTA
Communities, governments and businesses are similarly familiar with the ‘internationalisation debate’. Indeed, the majority are grappling with the realities of an interconnected and interdependent world and the need to engage positively on global issues that bring to the fore imbalances of power, wealth, health and education (see ‘Millennium Development Goals’ inset, page 6). The Dialogue was seminal for its potential influence on the development of future events. It was seminal for those of us who work in international education because of its intent, participation and location. Firstly, the Dialogue was initiated by bodies and institutions in the emerging and developing countries – specifically those in South Africa and the African Network for Internationalization of Education (ANIE). The invitation was issued by the International Education Association of South Africa (IEASA) and raised questions as to how the internationalisation of higher education – which has largely been driven by developed nations – could be relevant to, and inclusive of, emerging and developing countries.
AUTUMN 2014 | 5
Image: DNY59 (iStock)
IEASA GLOBAL DIALOGUE
Setting the challenges Dr Lavern Samuels, President of IEASA, opened the Dialogue with a number of challenges for us: “It is our opportunity to reflect on the practices of our past and present, and to envision a future that harnesses the potential that internationalisation has as a transformative tool, which has impact not only within higher education but more profoundly on broader society, thereby bringing about change to the world we live in. We have significant challenges in moving towards a framework for the internationalisation of higher education that is more inclusive and more impactful. ■■ How do we bring in the voice of the international student at a policy and implementation level? ■■ How do we achieve the international student mobility charter? ■■ How do we move beyond narrow, parochial interests and immigration policies that currently inhibit the potential that internationalisation has to create a better world? ■■ How do we bridge the NorthSouth divide in a manner that is mutually beneficial? ■■ How do we sustain the diversity of voices in the ongoing internationalisation dialogues?
(There is an African proverb that says “For as long as the lion does not have a storyteller, the story of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.”) ■■ How do we reshape higher education internationalisation and the internationalisation development agenda so that it more effectively addresses world issues and participates in finding collective solutions to global challenges (e.g. epidemic diseases, food security, sustainable development, reusable energy and peace and security)? We also need to reflect not only on what attributes we would like to see in our next generation of graduates, but also on how we would like to see our higher education institutions evolve. ■■ How do we ensure that the impact and benefits of internationalisation are felt not only by the mobile minority but by all our graduates and staff and then beyond? ■■ And, perhaps for me, most important is to build on individual benefits of internationalisation and take it to a level that builds a better world and ensures that we have a sense of global citizenship in a world that is more tolerant, peaceful, mutual and respectful. And certainly one that addresses the huge disparity in the world we see today.”
MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND RIO+20 The United Nations’ ‘Millennium Development Goals’ form a blueprint agreed to by all the world’s countries to meet the needs of the world’s poorest. un.org/millenniumgoals The Rio+20 conference held in June 2012 – at which UN Member States adopted the ‘The Future We Want’ document – is further testament to governments, civil society and other partners coming together to meet the needs of both people and planet. un.org/en/sustainablefuture
6 | VISTA
Secondly, it was the largest gathering to date of peak bodies and organisations from across the globe. Twenty-four organisations represented constituencies in the Americas, Europe, Australia, South and East Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia as well as several with a global remit. We came together with common intent to find ways to work together on the future of internationalisation. Not every peak body was able to attend either through lack of resources, competing priorities or because we have yet to know about the unrepresented voices and invite them into the network. And thirdly, the Dialogue was seminal for its location. One of the realities of the major international conferences being held in America, Europe or Australia is that participation by colleagues from Asian, African, Eastern European, Middle Eastern or Latin American education institutions and peak bodies is severely limited. Holding the Dialogue in South Africa meant participants and observers from a number of African universities and peak bodies could attend and provide their insights and perspectives. Dialogue participants came from diverse cultural backgrounds, had different perspectives and experiences, and represented associations with different constituencies and purposes. However, we were all committed to mutually beneficial outcomes and conscious of the imperative for more inclusion and better collaboration.
Identifying our priorities The Dialogue organisers asked associations to prepare two brief papers for circulation prior to the meeting: the first providing background on our organisations and key focus areas; the second to identify one or two issues that we believe to be critical for the future internationalisation of higher education.
IEAA chose to focus on international student rights and welfare, and the ‘student voice’. In 2010–11 the European Association for International Education (EAIE) and IEAA developed an International Student Mobility Charter. Its purpose was to gain recognition within the global community of the importance, complexity and diversity of student mobility and securing international student rights and welfare. Although it has subsequently been endorsed by many of the national and regional peak international education associations, IEAA sought to raise discussion about how effectively we, as peak associations, are working with our members to actively endorse, support and promote the Charter’s fundamental principles. We also wanted to discuss what place a student charter should play in “setting the ground rules for future Higher Education Internationalisation”. IEAA’s second issue was the need to involve international students as active participants in internationalisation dialogue: “Australia has had a mixed experience in the manner in which it has gone about supporting our international students. Up until the past few years the voices of international students were largely absent from international education policy development ... within peak body deliberations, and in the development of educational institutions’ internationalisation strategies and operational planning. It is clear that government, peak body and institutional internationalisation strategies require integrated frameworks that encompass teaching and learning, intercultural competencies, and staff skills and training with other aspects of the student experience (accommodation, transport, welfare counselling, health and safety); strategies which can only be better informed by consistent and systemic input from international students.” AUTUMN 2014 | 7
Setting the global priorities In all there were over 25 papers raising critical issues and areas for debate and discussion. The Brazilian Association for International Education (FAUBAI) used the Brazilian Government’s ‘Science Without Borders’ initiative to illustrate the commercial, one-sided, recruitment-focused approach of many higher education institutions from developed countries, and also highlighted the need for developed countries to increase their focus on ‘internationalisation at home’. The Mexican Association for International Education (AMPEI) had similar concerns. They also called on us “to move international education beyond the ivory tower of higher education. We need to start as early as possible, preferably on the K-12 level, with projects centered on the UN Millennium Development Goals, foreign language acquisition, diversity issues, and youth exchanges.” IEASA’s paper detailed the isolation of South African higher education institutions during the decades leading up to the 1990s that occurred as a result of the international community’s academic and cultural boycotts that were in response to the then government’s Apartheid policies. IEASA asked “whether the exclusion of large parts of the world from higher education internationalisation, for the past 25 years, as a result of the fact that it was mainly conceptualised and
driven by the education systems of North America, Europe, the UK and Australia is as damaging as the isolation of South Africa was? This global dialogue is the perfect place to debate this matter and to ask the next question – can we continue with this without running the risk of creating ‘gated higher education systems’ focussing only on the national issues and ignoring the interconnectedness of global higher education systems?” The Association of International Educators’ (NAFSA) papers were a call to action rather than developing more charters and statements that ‘sit on the shelf’. “NAFSA wants to be sure that internationalization moves from rhetoric to action…Our association should be committed to impacting the curriculum, challenging dominant paradigms, and putting assessments in place, for sustainability of our important, international perspectives.” There were two intense days of debate, discussion and reflection. Our assumptions were questioned and challenged, as were those of the facilitators. While the initial discussion about how to prevent higher education becoming a multilateral corporation was polarising and essentially a ‘straw man’, we quickly moved into a more nuanced debate that attempted to unpack the complexities and realities inherent in an increasingly internationalised and interdependent world. The debate
articulated underpinning principles; and identified next steps for ensuring a mutually beneficial and inclusive higher education future. At the conclusion of the Dialogue, all participants felt able to sign off on a Declaration they could put to their governing bodies and seek commitment to implement individually and collectively over the coming years (see below). At its meeting in February this year, the IEAA Board endorsed the Nelson Mandela Bay Global Dialogue Declaration on the Future of Internationalisation of Higher Education and determined to work with IEAA members to further our practices and competences in the three areas as well as actively participating in the work plan of a reenergised Network of International Education Associations. I am immensely grateful to IEASA and Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU) for the opportunity to engage with educators from such diverse backgrounds and perspectives. Everyone’s comments were insightful, at times challenging, and always grounding and affirming of the value and place of education globally. On top of all that, IEASA and NMMU were wonderful hosts ensuring that we had time for lots of intercultural experiences – food, art, music and animals – and time to relax, get to know each other and have some fun. Helen Zimmerman is President of IEAA.
GLOBAL DIALOGUE DECLARATION The Nelson Mandela Bay Global Dialogue Declaration on the Future of Internationalisation of Higher Education emphasises the ‘importance of decision-making and practices in the development of internationalisation activities that are imbued with ethical considerations and inclusivity’. It recognises the importance of the documents ‘Affirming Academic Values in Internationalisation of Higher Education: A Call for Action’ and the ‘International Student Mobility Charter’. It commits to promoting higher education and research that ‘recognises the richness and diversity offered by all regions for a global higher education agenda which is equitable, ethical, socially responsible, accessible and accountable’ and 8 | VISTA
to actions that will bring more ‘voices’ into the dialogue and around the table. And it identifies three integrated areas for development: 1. Enhancing the quality and diversity of programs involving the mobility of students and academic and administrative staff; 2. Increasing focus on the internationalisation of the curriculum and of related learning outcomes; 3. Gaining commitment on a global basis to equal and ethical higher education partnerships. Download the full declaration at bit.ly/1f4z0Iz
Universities now devote significant resources to internationalisation, yet there is still a very limited understanding of how the process takes place at an institutional level, writes Joanne Barker.
A session at the recent Association of International Education Administrators (AIEA) conference in Washington DC focused on a group of senior international officers in US universities reflecting on their successes and failures in promoting internationalisation and advocating for change. The session foreshadowed a new book intended for publication later this year. For the purposes of the session, “internationalisation” was defined as including language studies, international student recruitment, study abroad, exchange and service learning programs, international technical assistance projects, joint research programs, the establishment of branch campuses overseas and reform of the curriculum.
Internationalisation is a complex and difficult process, and the speakers provided candid and entertaining insights into their battles within their institutions, coping with tight resource environments, competing demands, and high turnover among the most senior staff in universities. While the climate might not always be conducive, students are demanding more than ever before an education which will help them to compete in a highly competitive global environment. While universities now devote significant resources to internationalisation, the speakers emphasised that there is still a very limited understanding of how the internationalisation process takes place at an institutional level and offered some suggestions to deal with the challenges. One of the speakers, Professor William Lacy, Vice Provost University Outreach and International Programs at the University of California, Davis, discussed the importance of: ■■ enlisting the support of the senior leadership ■■ involving all levels of the university in internationalisation efforts ■■ developing partnerships with deans and departments heads as well as key members of the senior administrative staff, and
Most importantly, he advised us not to take ourselves too seriously and to maintain a good sense of humour, and to be realistic but not to stop dreaming.
AIEA IN REVIEW
THE GETTING OF WISDOM
Professor Lacy is one of 15 experienced international specialists in higher education who has contributed a chapter to the forthcoming book. Intended for publication later in 2014, the book will be edited by Professor Gilbert Merkx of Duke University and Professor Riall Nolan of Purdue University and will represent the accumulated wisdom of some of the most successful senior international officers in the United States today. The book will draw on each leader’s unique experience to explore common themes, and to identify those underlying variables that determine success or failure, with a view toward illuminating both the opportunities and the limitations of international education activities in reshaping higher education. Joanne Barker is Director, International Office at The University of Adelaide, and an IEAA Board member. The Group of Eight was a platinum sponsor of the AIEA conference 2014.
■■ seeking advice from colleagues both at home and abroad. AUTUMN 2014 | 9
DESTINATION ASIA BALANCING THE SCALES OF STUDENT MOBILITY
10 | VISTA
Image: Ilya Terentyev (iStock)
In 2012 Australian universities sent some 15,000 domestic undergraduate students on overseas mobility programs. This represented 13.1 per cent of completing undergraduate students undertaking an international study experience. By global standards this compares reasonably well with 13.8 per cent in the US. There is, however, a significant variance across the sector ranging from 1 per cent to 26 per cent, with the median university around 12 per cent. Five of our universities now have mobility rates between 20–26 per cent. Overall the mobility experiences divide equally between semester plus and short-term programs. Our students divide between Europe (40 per cent), Asia (33 per cent) and the US (25 per cent). The pattern for Asian mobility, however, is quite different to the overall mobility pattern as a whole. In Asia, short-term programs provide the engine for growth, accounting for more than 80 per cent of undergraduate mobility experiences and most of these students are studying in notfor-credit programs. This is an important success measure, but points to a significant issue for credit-based mobility in Asia. Sadly, nothing much has changed over the past 30 years since my time as a student studying Japanese and Korean in semester plus programs. Today, like then, almost all of our students in semester-based mobility programs are primarily language focused.
The mobility balancing act In terms of balance between incoming and outgoing students to and from Asia, there are two significant balance trends: 115,000 undergraduate students from Asia are studying in Australian universities, while only 5,000
domestic undergraduate students travel to Asia each year. The balance of incoming to outgoing students to and from Asia runs at more than twentyfold in favour of incoming students and operate on quite different models. However, comparing like with like, less than 250 students come from Asia on credit-based mobility programs compared with around 1,000 that go out. Both (im)balances present different but significant challenges. In terms of making study in Asia a “rite of passage” for Australian undergraduate students, currently only 4.3 per cent of completing domestic undergraduates go to Asia for study. And as I have emphasised, mostly on shortterm, not-for-credit programs.
DESTINATION ASIA
Redressing the imbalance of students travelling between Australia and Asia requires a whole new paradigm in regard to resources, infrastructure and mobility models, writes William Purcell.
Less than 1,000 of these students (or less than 1 per cent) are currently studying in credit bearing programs of one semester or more in Asia. This is a significant issue for the sector and for scaling up under New Colombo Plan (NCP) aspirations and guidelines. Both of these imbalances present their own unique challenges. The main challenge for our mobility in Asia will be in our ability to scale up current mobility levels – certainly if we are to get to a level we could consider a rite of passage for Australian students. If we are talking about a rite of passage to study in Asia being say 50 per cent of our undergraduate completing students, then we are talking about a twelvefold increase in total experiences in Asia. If we are talking about semester plus study in Asia as the measure for the rite of passage then we are talking about a scaling up of around 50 times the current level. AUTUMN 2014 | 11
DESTINATION ASIA
Scaling up, especially in relation to semester plus exchange, is going to require a whole new paradigm with respect to resources, infrastructure and mobility models. It also presents both an opportunity and a challenge for us all. Currently the average university receives only 10–15 applications per year from students who want to study for credit-based exchange in Asia. This is the case even with generous funding and scholarship support through International Student Exchange Programs (ISEP) and Cheung Kong available prior to AsiaBound and the NCP.
Moreover, semester plus for-credit students have a very narrow choice of destinations in Asia. The vast majority choose Hong Kong, Korea and Japan and, as I have stated already, in overwhelmingly languagerelated study. There are even fewer students attracted to Singapore or China (even then, most go to Beijing or Shanghai). At present very few students are studying in destinations such as Thailand, Malaysia or the Philippines on semester plus credit based exchange.
Student (mis)conceptions What then is the Australian student and parent mindset about study abroad and especially in Asia? In focus group meetings with parents and students at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) some interesting patterns emerged. Students see Asia primarily as a social venturing destination rather than one for academic study. They are also mindful of the challenges of working in a foreign language and cultural environment and the potential impact that this could have on their GPAs. 12 | VISTA
Students also expressed concern over being able to get full credit and achieve a full disciplinary load while studying in Asia as well as Asian universities having sufficient English language courses available in disciplinary subjects. As a whole, Asia was seen by students as being a much more difficult destination for academic study compared with the US or the UK. Students also expressed a strong desire to complete their degrees in degree time and be able to undertake a full disciplinary load at whatever destination they attend. While Japan, Korea and Singapore were perceived as high tech, many other Asian perceptions were regarded as low tech in respect of technology.
The rise of helicopter parents Parents had overlapping but different issues in regard to study in Asia. Parents identified safety and health concerns with Asian destinations. They also expressed unease about their ability to easily communicate with their children. There was also a strong perception of Asia as a holiday destination, rather than a study destination. Parents also strongly held the view that they wanted their children to study at highly ranked institutions and saw these as being located in North America and UK – not in Asia. What we discovered was that parents are a very important part of the decision-making process around their children’s mobility choices. Parents were pushing for their children to go on a mobility program to the best US or European college. In most cases parental expectations and preference fed strongly into the study aspirations of their children. This generation of young adults are closely influenced and associated with their parents in a different way than in previous generations.
Parents are playing an important role in the decision of students to participate in international mobility and where they study. This coincides with other information we have about the rise of the so-called ‘helicopter’ parent generation. Parents also want the best perceived value for their expended funds. Currently North America and Europe are considered by parents as being both easier and more valuable options for academic studies.
Removing the barriers How can we remove barriers to exchange and mobility with partners and scale up our operations? First, we need to have more a guaranteed, longer term or at least multiple-year funding model if we are to scale up, rather than an annualised project-based bidding system. This would help to ensure traction and to build sustainable relationships with partners. At the university level there are a range of issues we experience with partners in Asia. Service provision to international students in Asia is still largely hospitality focused and not professionalised or mainstreamed as in Australia. Our Asian partner universities don’t have the infrastructure to scale up or deal with more than 2–3 students at a time. As a result we burn through partners who are annoyed with our taking advantage by sending them endless numbers of students for ‘free’ study. Understandably, demands will be made on Australian institutions to assist and welcome the Asian partners’ students in return. The question is how we fund this if we are not to be seen as taking advantage. As yet, many of the best and brightest of Asian countries cannot truly afford to come here, but we will be expected to lend a hand.
HOW DO WE GET MORE STUDENTS TO STUDY IN CREDIT-BASED SEMESTER PLUS PROGRAMS? 1. Leveraging off short-term programs as tasters. The best way to change perceptions, build confidence and positive experiences of Asian study is to provide safe, structured and well-managed programs which are cohort based. 2. Returning students share stories with the university community, again to build interest and confidence. 3. Champions and examples of excellence need to be promoted in the university community. 4. Reassure students and parents of the quality of programs and partnerships in Asia. Rankings can highlight the quality of our partners in Asia. 5. Make it easy to apply. Universities need to focus on ready-made, semester-based study packages built into degrees and removing subject selection barriers. 6. Develop more cohort-based programs. 7. Make study in Asia prestigious and desirable: high awards, scholarships and high achievement outcomes for Asian exchanges. 8. Attractive outcomes: real future jobs must be seen as an outcome. Employers need to be demanding Asian skills! 9. Ensure language barriers are removed or de-emphasised. Image: neomistyle (iStock)
Is reciprocal exchange the answer? Is the reciprocal-based exchange model the right model into the future? With small numbers, reciprocity is not an issue. But as expectations and numbers grow, our partners will want more of their students to be able to come to Australia. Unfortunately many Asian students will not be able to meet our English language requirements or our living costs. A new model will be needed and perhaps a new NCP model which funds incoming (plus English language) – as well as outgoing students – will be the only sustainable up-scaling model into the future. Currently visa provision is often ad hoc or undeveloped for visiting Exchange and Study Abroad
students in large numbers in many of our Asian partners. Students find the visa issue just too difficult and we will need to resolve this issue as we upscale in Asia. Semester-based subject and study options are currently very limited in many of our partner institutions in Asia, particularly in the STEM discipline areas, or they are not available in English. Contact systems and communication with many Asian partners is still challenging; arranging the experience is slow, cumbersome and very case-by-case. Most Asian universities do not have well developed exchange teams for advice and support, and often operate through an international relations team. Significant gearing up on support and services will be required in Asia to provide the level
of support expected by Australian students and their parents. We have a wonderful opportunity through the NCP to build the Asian skills and intercultural capabilities of our students. To ensure that building these skills becomes a rite of passage we will have to significantly scale up our current mobility programs at least tenfold. This will require a new paradigm shift in our commitment, resources and infrastructure to manage mobility into the future. Professor William Purcell is Deputy Vice-Chancellor (International & Development) at the University of Technology, Sydney. This speech was originally delivered at the Universities Australia conference in February 2014.
AUTUMN 2014 | 13
MARKETING CHANNEL OPTIMISATION Facebook is all but dead, right? According to University College London’s ‘Global Social Media Impact Study’, the next generation of prospective students are fleeing the social media behemoth – and their Facebook-savvy parents – in favour of newer platforms such as Instagram, Snapchat and WhatsApp. Of course, it all depends on where you get your stats and what part of the world you’re looking at. According to a recent white paper on ‘Marketing Channel Optimisation: Achieving competitive advantage in higher education recruitment’ released by Hobsons Asia-Pacific and Australia (APAC), Facebook is still alive and well.
Marrone is circumspect when it comes to Facebook and social media naysayers. If the students you want to attract and engage with are using a particular platform, then it’s a viable channel for university marketers to use, he says. “Digital or traditional channels all have their place – it just depends on what market you’re looking at. It’s about catering your marketing strategy and your communications to what those students want.”
It’s all about optimisation
“I think different platforms go through different lifecycles,” says Fabian Marrone, Vice President Marketing at Hobsons APAC. “Some of those statistics are really around Western countries and not necessarily around the countries from which we’re trying to attract international students.”
These latest Hobsons findings are based on a survey of more than 9,000 prospective international students from 179 countries. The main objective was to determine how students search for information and the channels with which they most engage when choosing an institution. The results aim to help institutions optimise their marketing channels and enhance engagement with prospective students.
Facebook not only trumped all other platforms as the preferred social media platform used by international students (85 per cent), but is also the preferred platform used by students when following a university (almost 35 per cent).
“What we are trying to achieve is to define some student profiles, based on demographic and behavioural information, to find out how they want to be communicated with,” says Marrone. “We can inform universities that
14 | VISTA
The naysayers may say Facebook is dead, but according to a new Hobsons survey it all depends on what part of the world you’re looking at. Peter Muntz spoke to Fabian Marrone and Stephen Reimann from Hobsons to unpack the results of its recent white paper on Marketing Channel Optimisation. students in India, for example, are really interested in using Facebook and they want to be communicated with on a weekly basis. This will enable institutions to align their marketing strategy and communications to attract individual key markets.” The ‘Marketing Channel Optimisation’ white paper is part of a new Hobsons APAC research and insight strategy that aims to analyse current and future marketing trends. As a key source of demographic and behavioural student data to individual education institutions, Hobsons is a veritable font of market intelligence. For Marrone and the team at Hobsons it was a natural progression to disseminate such intelligence to the wider industry. “We have a lot of data and great information that we provide our clients and we were looking at how we could use that to the benefit of the broader international education industry,” says Marrone. “We came up with a thought leadership or insight program to give people some practical outputs on how they could look at marketing in new ways.”
“Digital or traditional channels all have their place – it just depends on what market you’re looking at. It’s about catering your marketing strategy and your communications to what those students want.” Fabian Marrone, Hobsons APAC
Image: mattjeacock (iStock)
AUTUMN 2014 | 15
Is Australia lagging behind? Although students might be well engaged on social media, it seems Australia has a long way to go in terms of how we engage with students. The report notes that UK, US and Canadian institutions are much further ahead in using social media platforms for commercial benefit.
3
Even compared to other industries within Australia, it would seem a large number of higher education institutions have some catching up to do. According to a recent study by analytics company Social Pulse, universities ranked 24th out of 26 industries – ahead of only insurance and telecommunications – for Facebook engagement Marrone, however, isn’t quite so pessimistic. “There are a lot of different studies that say different industries are in certain points,” he says. “There are some really good examples of universities, schools and education providers doing some great things on social media. I think we need to look at what’s working well across all industries in digital marketing, pull the best bits and create best practice in education marketing.” “I think Australia is now in a great position to see what worked and what didn’t work in those countries. We can then take the great bits and really start implementing them across the international education industry.”
The influence of income Of course, social media is just the tip of the iceberg. The Hobsons report reveals that one of the most important factors influencing choice of study destination is family income, with the highest proportion of students coming from families earning less than US$25,000 (see Graph 2). This paints a very different picture to the common misconception of silver-spooned 16 | VISTA
“We know anecdotally that when the Australian dollar goes up, all enquiries to Australian universities go down,” says Stephen Reimann, Head of Research and Analysis. “I’ve been tracking it since 2006 and it’s up and down, top and tail. Once the price becomes equal in between Australia and the UK, Australia and the US, teaching quality is again at the forefront.” Family income not only affects choice of study destination, but preferred mode of study. If the majority of students come from low income backgrounds, and are required to support themselves with part-time work, it’s not surprising that a significant number of students are interested in alternative study modes like distance learning (21 per cent) and part-time study (40 per cent). Given that international students are currently only permitted to study full-time, the report highlights the need for a potential change in policy. “When you look at the future of education – with advanced video, blended learning and those kind of things – you can imagine the model for international education is going to change. It’s not going to be all about onshore international students studying full-time anymore,” says Reimann. “There’s going to have to be a move at some point, but wherever that tipping point is is out there for debate.”
as the most important factor when first deciding where to study (see Graph 3). In the final decisionmaking stage – when students are often tossing up between their final two choices – teaching quality came second only to scholarships. Although universities may be adept at promoting teaching quality via the multitude of rankings and league tables, we rarely take more than a cursory glance at such claims to find out what teaching quality actually means. “The term is thrown around a lot, but what does it actually mean when a student says teaching quality is important to me?” asks Marrone. “What really came out of the ‘Marketing Channel Optimisation’ report was that teaching quality is really important, so we’re going to extend this piece and unpack what teaching quality means to prospective students.” If it sounds like Marrone is already mulling over future topics as part of Hobsons’ research and insight strategy, then you’d be right. In addition to teaching quality, forthcoming reports include using MOOCs as a marketing channel and supporting institutions in the ongoing quest to improve student retention. Watch this space.
MARKETING OPTIMISATION
international students supported by wealthy parents. If families are investing their life savings in an international education, value for money and teaching quality become more important than ever.
Download the ‘Marketing Channel Optimisation’ white paper at www.hobsons.com/apac
Peter Muntz is Communication and Client Services Coordinator at IEAA.
Teaching quality trumps all The model of international education in future years may be uncertain, but the importance of teaching quality remains paramount. A total of 83 per cent of students rated teaching quality AUTUMN 2014 | 17
18 | VISTA
UPDATES
OUTBOUND MOBILITY FORUM 2014
Speakers include: PROFESSOR KENT ANDERSON The University of Adelaide KATE DUFF The Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade HON PHIL HONEYWOOD IEAA JACQUELINE HOWDEN and MARIE GREALY Department of Education PROFESSOR DAVID LLOYD University of South Australia SENATOR THE HON BRETT MASON Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Foreign Affairs RIGHT HON STEPHEN YARWOOD Lord Mayor of Adelaide
10–11 April University of South Australia Registrations close Friday 4 April
ieaa.org.au/mobilityforum AUTUMN 2014 | 19
A MATTER OF BRICKS AND MORTAR The current debate about the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) is a timely reminder that appropriate measures must be taken to address the housing shortage for domestic and international students, writes Phil Honeywood.
In the International Student Barometer survey of 250,000 students conducted every two years, Australia consistently rates poorly for affordability of student accommodation and overall living costs. In some cases our student rental charges are twice the average of competitor nations, including Canada and the US. HSBC also recently published research that concluded Australia to be the most expensive country for international study. Our cost of living was the key differentiator with the US and British markets. Australia’s universities and private education providers have always struggled to match supply with demand for on-campus or campus-proximate housing for domestic students. This situation was further exacerbated by the huge growth experienced throughout the 1980s and 90s in fullfee-paying international students. Far more than their domestic student counterparts, international students regard themselves as consumers who are investing their parents’ hard-earned income in costly tuition fees. They consequently have a low tolerance level for what they regard as, by world standards, exorbitant accommodation charges.
20 | VISTA
There are, of course, other factors at work here. Competitor nations such as Britain, Canada and the US have longstanding government policies that have decentralised university campuses to regional towns. Some of their most academically elite institutions – including Cambridge, Oxford, Harvard and Yale – are located at some distance from the high-cost cities of London and New York. Importantly, because these regional cities have evolved into student and academic-dominated communities, they provide attractive and comparatively low-cost study locations for international students. Conversely, because most of Australia’s academically elite universities are located in our major cities, they are subject to our most expensive rental accommodation markets. Australia has much higher construction costs than most of our competitor nations. Landlords will therefore do whatever the market will bear to recoup these costs. When most of our campuses were being established, Australia’s potential to host a half-million international students was never dreamed of, and for too long education providers have not
“While many would argue that the NRAS should never have been diverted from low-cost social housing to student accommodation, it shows how effective universities can be with co-ordinated government support.� regarded student accommodation as core business. Now, of course, many of them are playing catch-up. When NRAS came along, it represented an unparalleled opportunity for universities to gain access to a whole new government-funded infrastructure pool. Those universities that realised its potential have enjoyed exponential growth in their accommodation capacity. Others, which in many cases decided that the NRAS was not an appropriate funding model or were slow to act, have been left pondering how to deal with an intractable problem. With the benefit of hindsight, while many would argue that the NRAS should never have been diverted from low-cost social housing to student accommodation, it does highlight the important role that government can play.
It shows how effective universities can be with coordinated government support. If a similar scheme to the NRAS could be devised to assist universities to address the serious shortage in accommodation for domestic and international students, this would be of great assistance to the sector and the flow-on effects would be enormous. Surely addressing the dearth of low-cost housing for domestic and international students should be a key infrastructure priority for governments if we are to achieve our higher education participation goals and grow our knowledge economy. Phil Honeywood is Executive Director of IEAA. This opinion piece was originally published in The Australian on Wednesday 19 March 2014.
In 2006, The Netherlands came up with a questionable solution to address student accommodation shortages by building 1,000 apartments from modified shipping containers from China. The idea has since taken off in Le Havre, France (pictured). Image: vidalidali (iStock)
AUTUMN 2014 | 21
ENGAGING THE ACADEMY: THE NEXT FRONTIER? Academics are no doubt crucial to successful internationalisation, yet their role and contribution are conspicuously absent from the major international education conferences. Douglas Proctor asks if this is negligence, disinterest or whether they are so engaged in internationalisation efforts that they simply fly under the radar. What role do academic staff play in the internationalisation of your institution? To what extent are they involved in the implementation of your international strategy? And what do you know about their motivations to drive or support international education initiatives or to contribute to broader internationalisation endeavours? These are timely questions, as a growing number of discussions on the role of academic staff in the internationalisation of higher education point to a turning tide in attitudes and awareness. A report on ‘Leadership Needs in International Higher Education in Australia and Europe’ was published in January 2014 by IEAA and the European Association for International Education (EAIE). Among its findings, the report identifies 22 | VISTA
the effective engagement of academic staff in the process of internationalisation as a key challenge. For Australia, the report also highlights an opportunity to support increased international engagement by Australian university researchers. At IEAA’s International Research Roundtable in October 2013, participants also agreed that not enough is currently known about how to enhance the international engagement of academic researchers and research students. Both of these calls were echoed by Dennis Murray, IEAA Research Director, in a recent blog post for the LH Martin Institute, ‘Wither Internationalisation’, where he highlights the attitudes of academic staff towards internationalisation as a particular problem.
Image: skodonnell (iStock)
The word cloud above illustrates the predominant themes of the major international education conferences in 2013.
A simple analysis of recent international education conferences provides further support for these concerns about limited faculty engagement in internationalisation (as it is known in North America). An investigation into the keywords found in session/workshop titles at the major international education conferences in 2013 (AIEA, AIEC, EAIE, Going Global, NAFSA) is particularly telling. The word cloud above comprises the 30 most frequent words from session titles across all five conferences and presents a strong visual statement of the predominant themes. For cross-cultural consistency and ease of comparison, all references to ”internationalization” are normalised to “internationalisation” and all references to ”students” normalised to “student”.
The words “international” (217 counts), “education” (141 counts) and “student” (109 counts) all feature over 100 times; “global” and “internationalisation” also rate highly, with 85 and 60 counts respectively. However, reference to faculty or academic staff is conspicuously absent. Across the five conferences in 2013, only eight references were made to either “faculty” (in the sense of academic staff, rather than a structural unit) or “academic” (in the sense of a staff member, rather than as an adjective). So, what does this limited focus on academic staff in the major international education conferences tell us? And, more practically, where can we look for examples of good practice in terms of engaging faculty staff on our campuses?
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the US has a long and well-documented history of seeking to engage its faculty in internationalisation. Thirty years ago, a set of 17 case studies was put forward as a guide to successful international programming. These case studies emphasised that an “articulate” and “determined” faculty was crucial to the internationalisation of the curriculum (Backman, 1984). A subsequent Association of International Education Administrators (AIEA) publication on internationalisation strategies highlighted that, if the involvement of academic staff in international education was to continue and expand, greater emphasis needed to be placed on faculty development and rewards (Klasek et al, 1992). AUTUMN 2014 | 23
ENGAGIN G THE ACADEMY
Leading on from these and other early guidelines, the American Council on Education (ACE) established its ‘Mapping Internationalization on US Campuses’ project in 2001 and has since run three surveys designed to assess the state of internationalisation at US institutions.
In its suggestions for future action, the IEAA-EAIE Leadership Needs report calls for additional research into good practice in faculty engagement with internationalisation, as well as into the attitudes of academic staff towards greater engagement in internationalisation.
Conducted in 2001, 2006 and 2011, these surveys have included a series of questions on faculty policy and practice. The results paint a mixed picture of institutional commitment to faculty engagement over the past decade. For example, while the percentage of institutions funding international programs and activities for faculty has grown over the life of the survey, it shrank between 2006 and 2011.
Similarly, one of the recommendations from the 2013 IEAA International Research Roundtable was that a group of international education associations – including IEAA, the EAIE, the AIEA, the Asia-Pacific Association for International Education (APAIE), the International Education Association of South Africa (IEASA) and the British Council – develop a joint agenda for priority research. In light of the leadership needs report, it can only be hoped that faculty engagement is high on the agenda.
The IEAA-EAIE Leadership Needs report calls for additional research into good practice in faculty engagement with internationalisation, as well as into the attitudes of academic staff towards greater engagement in internationalisation. Nevertheless, US international education associations appear to remain committed to programs which promote greater faculty engagement. The Spring 2012 edition of the Institute of International Education’s (IIE) Networker magazine focused entirely on ‘Engaging Faculty in Internationalization’, while ACE published two features on faculty engagement in its ‘Internationalization in Action’ web series in Spring and Summer 2013. In Australia, we do not have the same rich data on which to draw. Yet there is evidently a growing recognition that it might be important to learn more.
24 | VISTA
Coming back to the seeming absence of academic staff from the agendas of the major international education conferences, it is not clear what this tells us. Have they been overlooked? Or are they so embedded and central to the endeavour that they fly under the radar? Hopefully, a commitment to further research by the major associations will make that clearer over time. Douglas Proctor has recently commenced a PhD at the University of Melbourne’s Centre for the Study of Higher Education. He is interested in the role of academic staff in the internationalisation of higher education and in implementing international strategy. For more information, visit douglasproctor.com and cshe.unimelb.edu.au. Sources Backman, E. L. (Ed.)(1984), Approaches to international education, New York: American Council on Education. Klasek, C. B., Garavalia, B. J., & Kellerman, K. J. (Eds.) (1992), Bridges to the future: strategies for internationalizing higher education, Association of International Education Administrators.
This two-day symposium will be a uniquely collaborative forum aimed at developing mutual, long-term engagement between institutions in Australia and the Asia-Pacific. It is jointly organised by IEAA and the Asia-Pacific Association for International Education (APAIE) and will be hosted by the Chinese University of Hong Kong. The symposium will bring together university academics and professional staff, government representatives, business leaders and students for an open discussion on the two key themes of enhancing student mobility and fostering research collaboration.
Student Mobility
Research Collaboration
■■ The current state of play in staff and student mobility across Australia and the Asia-Pacific ■■ The impact of short-term versus long-term mobility ■■ Internships and business connections, preparing students for placements and employer perspectives
■■ Ethics in research and the impact of funding ■■ Research support across different fields in the region ■■ Research collaboration between Australia and Asia: what is happening, what are the opportunities and why do we need to collaborate?
Date: Location:
ASIA-PACIFIC SYMPOSIUM
INTERNATIONALISATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC: SYMPOSIUM
Thursday 12–Friday 13 June 2014 The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Register now at ieaa.org.au/asiasymposium
This symposium has received funding from Austrade as part of the Asian Business Engagement Plan.
AUTUMN 2014 | 25
THE BEST OF
BRISBANE
26 | VISTA
The nation’s eyes are on Brisbane for the G20 Leaders Summit later this year and, of course, the Australian International Education Conference (AIEC). Gordon Scott gives us a rundown of the cultural and culinary highlights of Australia’s “hippest” city.
Brisbane is the thriving multicultural city selected to host the G20 Leaders Summit in November 2014. Australia’s new world city, Brisbane has a way of winning over all who visit – from world leaders to tens of thousands of international students every year. Originally the home of the Jagera and Turrbal Aboriginal clans, Brisbane first came to the attention of European explorers in 1799 when Matthew Flinders sailed into Moreton Bay. Whether you visit for work or pleasure, there is much to enjoy in and around Brisbane. Earlier this year, travel bible Lonely Planet declared Brisbane was “Australia’s hippest city”. GQ followed up with its own report on “Seven Reasons Why Brisbane is Cool.” This is the kind of kudos that money cannot buy and is a reflection of Brisbane’s growing reputation as an entrepreneurial, innovative, young and modern city with some of the best weather and lifestyle in Australia. Brisbane’s rich history, desirable al fresco way of life, vibrant food and boutique bar scene are further enhanced by its growing cultural capital, including a South Bank precinct buzzing with restaurants, bars and museum, entertainment and art complexes.
Go, go... GOMA Brisbane has become a beacon on Australia’s cultural landscape, thanks largely to the overwhelming international success of its Gallery of Modern Art (GOMA) – the southern hemisphere’s largest gallery of modern art. Since opening in 2006, GOMA has attracted enormous global interest.
In 2010, GOMA and the Queensland Art Gallery became the most visited galleries in Australia with more than 1.8 million people passing through their doors. Blockbuster international exhibitions such as Andy Warhol; Picasso and his collection; Valentino; The China Project; Matisse: Drawing Life; and Portrait of Spain: Masterpieces from the Prado have given GOMA and the Queensland Art Gallery a formidable reputation. Current exhibitions include the Australian exclusive, Cai Guo-Qiang: Falling Back to Earth at GOMA.
Cultural highlights South Bank’s Cultural Centre is also home to the Queensland Museum and the Queensland Performing Arts Centre (QPAC). The Queensland Museum had enormous success in 2012 with its Mummy: Secrets of the Tomb exhibition from the British Museum and exclusive to Brisbane. Afghanistan: Hidden Treasures from the National Museum, Kabul was equally popular in 2013. This year it presents the exciting Deep Oceans (March 28–October 6) which showcases strange real-life creatures (including a giant squid), as well as myths and legends about fearsome monsters of the deep. Meanwhile the QPAC ‘International Series’ highlights Brisbane’s growing appeal to international arts companies. The QPAC International Series kicked off in 2012 with the Hamburg Ballet, Hamburg Philharmonic Orchestra and Hamburg State Opera all performing in Brisbane – an Australian first. AUTUMN 2014 | 27
THE BEST OF BRISBANE
In 2013 Russia’s legendary Bolshoi Ballet performed and in 2014 Brisbane welcomes the highly esteemed American Ballet Theatre.
QPAC is also famous for its show-stopping musicals including The Rocky Horror Show, Mary Poppins, The King and I, Annie, Jersey Boys – The Story of Frankie Valli & The Four Seasons, South Pacific and Driving Miss Daisy. Stay tuned for an announcement on what popular musicals will be on at QPAC later this year, but two other drawcards at QPAC in October include Queensland Pops Best of British (11 October) and a radical interpretation of Wuthering Heights from the Shake & Stir Theatre Company (1–18 October). Brisbane is the base of the Queensland Theatre Company, Queensland Ballet, Opera Queensland, Queensland Symphony Orchestra – all world class – and many other vibrant and independent music, theatre, dance, cabaret and performance groups. Visitors to Brisbane won’t get very far without noticing the impressive and eclectic mix of public art gracing 28 | VISTA
community and civic spaces. Kangaroo Point Park, for example, features five stunning public art works including Venus Rising: Out of the Water and into the Light by internationally acclaimed British artist Wolfgang Buttress.
Natural wonders Brisbane is also renowned for its natural beauty. The river is the star attraction, but there is a playground to explore right on the city’s doorstep including stunning Moreton Bay, home to Stradbroke Island, the world’s second largest sand island. Other day trips will take you to wineries, rainforests, wetlands, waterfalls, local food and wine trails, beaches, arts hubs, heritage centres, dramatic mountain ranges and adventure sports opportunities.
In and around the city Stay in the city and lap up stylish and sophisticated accommodation options – from international hotels to charming boutique options – from which you can indulge in Brisbane’s worldclass dining scene, retail precincts,
urban villages, fresh produce, designer markets and much more. Find out why Brisbane is Australia’s breakfast capital. Awaken your inner chef at a cooking school or link up with the Brisbane Greeters for a free tour of the city tailored to your interests. Brisbane Greeters provide authentic sightseeing services to locals and travellers. Across the team, greeters are fluent in 25 languages, including Spanish, Russian and Mandarin. For the sports lovers, Brisbane doesn’t disappoint. A major highlight for later in the year is the third and final Bledisloe Cup Test match between the Australian Wallabies and New Zealand’s All Blacks at Suncorp Stadium on 18 October. Come to AIEC in Brisbane this year and you won’t want to leave. visitbrisbane.com.au Gordon Scott is Director of Export at Brisbane Marketing and an IEAA Board member. Images courtesy of Brisbane Marketing.
Online n Registratio Opens w
o
w
m
May 2014 .c w. aiec.idp
7–10 October | Brisbane Brisbane Convention & Exhibition Centre
Inventing the Future We cannot predict the future but we can invent it. This year’s AIEC will challenge participants to imagine international education in new ways. The program will showcase innovation and emerging trends in international education, across all sectors and will focus on the practical impact this has on us as international education professionals and practitioners as well as on partnerships and collaboration. Looking ahead, we will examine how we can most effectively navigate and take advantage of the new challenges that this changing context entails. It’s tough when circumstances change and we don’t. Innovation is anything but business as usual. New ways of thinking, innovative strategies, creative approaches and contemporary solutions will feature prominently in the program. AIEC 2014 aims to inspire, challenge and push us all out of our comfort zone.
Follow us on Twitter @AIEC and join the conversation #AIEC2014
www.aiec.idp.com
Key Dates Call for Proposals Opens 3 February 2014 Call for Proposals Closes 28 March 2014 Registration Opens 12 May 2014 First Early Bird Closes 11 July 2014 Second Early Bird Closes 8 August 2014 Conference Starts! 7 October 2014
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
WHERE
BIG IDEAS STELLAR CAREERS TAKE FLIGHT AND
ieaa.org.au
April 2014 Forum on Education Abroad 2014 2–4 April 2014 San Diego, United States forumea.org Brazilian Association for International Education (FAUBAI) 13–16 April 2014 Joinville, Brazil faubai.org.br
1 MAY, BRISBANE 2 MAY, MELBOURNE
AN INSIDER’S GUIDE TO DIGITAL MARKETING & RECRUITMENT
Going Global 29 April–1 May 2014 Miami, United States ihe.britishcouncil.org/going-global
CONFERENCES
SOUTH-EAST ASIA IN FOCUS: MARKET OVERVIEW
May 2014 NAFSA 2014: Pathways to Global Competence 25–30 May 2014 San Diego, United States nafsa.org
June 2014 7 MAY, MELBOURNE ACROSS THE ARCHIPELAGO: TNE IN INDONESIA
INTERNATIONALISATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC: IEAA-APAIE SYMPOSIUM 12–13 June 2014 Hong Kong ieaa.org.au/asiasymposium
August 2014 International Education Association of South Africa (IEASA) 20–23 August 2014 Johannesburg, South Africa ieasa.studysa.org
8 MAY, MELBOURNE
DOUBLE TROUBLE, OR TWICE THE REWARD? DESIGNING & MANAGING JOINT AND DOUBLE DEGREES
September 2014 European Association for International Education (EAIE) 16–19 September 2014 Prague, Czech Republic eaie.org
October 2014 Australian International Education Conference (AIEC) 7–10 October 2014 Brisbane, Australia aiec.idp.com
November 2014 28 MAY, MELBOURNE
Canadian Bureau of International Education (CBIE) 19–22 November 2014 Ottawa, Canada cbie-bcei.ca AUTUMN 2014 | 31
Image: Andrew Rich (iStock)
Contact us IEAA Secretariat PO Box 12917 A’Beckett Street Melbourne VIC 8006 Australia +613 9925 4579 admin@ieaa.org.au
ieaa.org.au