IEAA Vista Magazine - Winter 2016

INSERT SIDE TAB TEXT

VISTA WINTER 2016

CISA HITS THE TOP END STUDENT MOBILITY TIPPING POINT

CONNECTING WITH OUR DIASPORA

THE SCHOLARPRACTITIONER DEBATE

INSERT SIDE TAB TEXT PUBLISHED BY International Education Association of Australia (IEAA) PO Box 12917 A’Beckett Street Melbourne VIC 8006 + 61 3 9925 4579 admin@ieaa.org.au ieaa.org.au

CONNECTING WITH OUR DIASPORA

Vista is an open access magazine produced by IEAA twice a year. It features in-depth analysis, insights and commentary on international education in Australia and around the world.

Rob Malicki

We welcome contributions from readers 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.

Articles may be reproduced with permission.

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the position of IEAA.

Christopher Ziguras FEDERAL ELECTION OVER: TIME NOW FOR IMPLEMENTATION

8

Phil Honeywood STUDENT MOBILITY REACHES THE TIPPING POINT

MOBILITY MEMBER PULSE 2016

12

18

Davina Potts and Leanne Harrison CISA HITS THE TOP END

24

Anna McLeod THE AGENTS OF CHANGE

28

Gordon Scott and Anton Crace

Copyright © 2016

THE SCHOLAR-PRACTITIONER DEBATE

COVER IMAGE Sahil Puri, Victoria University; CISA Executive (General Member), 2015–16

Bernhard Streitwieser and Anthony C. Ogden

GRAPHIC DESIGN Heidi Adams, Peter Muntz

4

CONFERENCES

34

38

HIGHLIGHTS

CISA HITS THE TOP END CISA 2016 was more than just an opportunity to bask in the Darwin sun, writes Anna McLeod. It brought together and inspired a community of international student leaders. Page 24

FEDERAL ELECTION OVER: TIME NOW FOR IMPLEMENTATION

STUDENT MOBILITY REACHES THE TIPPING POINT

With the Federal Election now behind us, the task of policy implementation must now begin in earnest, writes Phil Honeywood. Page 8

Student mobility has crossed the threshold into the mainstream, writes Rob Malicki. But what will mobility look like in five years time? Page 12

Image: RomoloTavani (iStock)

Connecting with our diaspora will play a crucial role in shaping not just the future of international education, but our place in the world of international business, politics and culture, writes Christopher Ziguras.

4 | VISTA

At this year’s 30th anniversary Australian International Education Conference (AIEC) in Melbourne, we will hear a lot about connectivity, this year’s theme.

Over four days we will reflect on the ways in which "international education is now an inextricable part of a hyper-connected world.

Enhanced technology, global citizenship and greater leveraging of networks and partnerships all combine to influence the growth and success of the international education industry." The battle for the hearts and minds of the mobile young is hotting up.

Governments are realising that if you want to tap into (to put it in the most technocratic terms) the global networks that power the knowledge economy, you can’t just be thinking about the people who happen to be living within your territory at a particular point in time. Governments are thinking not just about their resident populations now, but also their diasporas, which international education plays a big part in shaping.

The struggle is real Most of us who work in international education are pretty good at keeping in touch with our flock. Our Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and LinkedIn feeds spew forth a torrent of amusements, outrage and bragging from people scattered far and wide.

CONNECTING WITH OUR DIASPORA

The term diaspora, which in Greek means the spreading of seeds, is a better way for us to think about how to engage with communities of people living abroad who have a history and ongoing connections with Australia.

Maintaining contact with our online friends, nearby and far-flung, is now a major preoccupation for most of us. There are some who manage to post, like and reply dutifully... day in, day out. Most of us, though, seem to go through bouts of enthusiastic online socialising on a particular platform. Then it all becomes too much, we lose interest or become immersed in some other platform. Or we spend a little bit of time trying to live in the now, being mindful and practising the art of conversation. The point is, managing your relationships with people who you no longer see regularly face-to-face is a tough job. And it’s not just a first world problem, as anyone with friends and relatives scattered around the world can attest.

So bear a thought for those within institutions who have the task of connecting with the social world of the organisation. In the last issue of Vista, Gordon Scott and Gretchen Dobson described how institutions are ramping up their use of social media to connect prospective students, current students and alumni – wherever they may across the globe.

Word-of-mouth recommendations travel much further, and faster, through social media. Most of us in international education are well aware of these developments within institutions, but what is less apparent is the keen interest of governments in tapping into the same global networks of mobile students and graduates.

For decades the emigration of highly skilled residents has worried many governments. Initially this was cast as a ‘brain drain’, but after several countries experienced significant return migration flows (most famously Indian IT professionals returning from the USA), the notion of ‘brain circulation’ took hold. Now many governments are thinking of their expatriates as constituting diasporic communities. They have sought to engage strategically with them, and especially the most highly skilled among them, to achieve a range of political and economic objectives.

This is going to have profound effects for international education, because our sector is one of the main drivers of cross-border mobility of the highly skilled, and governments know it.

WINTER 2016 | 5

We want your brains, and your friends’ brains For over a decade the Australian government has been thinking about how to engage and capitalise on the million or more Australian citizens living abroad.

As well as providing advice and support through its consular posts and online, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has supported an expatriate network, Advance. This describes itself as "a community of global Australians who are able to make a difference for Australians, Australian companies and Australia around the globe".

For decades the emigration of highly skilled residents has worried many governments. Initially this was cast as a ‘brain drain’, but after several countries experienced significant return migration flows (most famously Indian IT professionals returning from the USA), the notion of ‘brain circulation’ took hold.

The evolution of Advance tells us a lot about the nature of Australia’s diaspora. Formed in 2002 in New York City to connect Australian expats in the USA, it soon became a global organisation.

Recently Advance expanded its remit to also include "alumni of Australian universities and 'friends of Australia'". Advance’s inclusion of alumni is part of a much wider trend to see former international students – who now constitute over 2.5 million people – as a key feature in Australia’s overseas diaspora. It is a shame that Advance is only seeking to engage with graduates of our universities rather than graduates of all of our institutions, but hopefully that will change over time as the organisation’s familiarity with the international student population develops.

6 | VISTA

Our embassies and consulates overseas have long supported Australian alumni associations in many countries, just as they have engaged in providing consular services to citizens abroad, and supported bilateral chambers of commerce, and a wide range of other services. Now we see a growing realisation that there is much to be gained by building connections between these groups, whose memberships are becoming increasingly blurred.

The term diaspora, which in Greek means the spreading of seeds, is a better way for us to think about how to engage with that community of people living abroad who have a history and ongoing connections with Australia. Traditional ways of organising these groups into institutions needs to give way to more nimble and exciting forms of engagement using and supporting diverse networks between mobile individuals. Advance is heading down this road, describing itself as “A virtual meeting place of Australia’s most dynamic dreamers and achievers, Advance turns the collective goodwill and experience of our members into a vibrant resource of ideas, advice, inspiration and opportunities.”

Similarly, in recent years we have seen considerable interest in the role of diasporic populations in Australia in shaping our engagement with the rest of the world. The Australian Council of Learned Academies has been leading our thinking in this area, with two excellent reports focusing on those of Asian background in Australia, Smart engagement with Asia: Leveraging language, research and culture (2015) and Australia’s Diaspora Advantage: Realising the potential for building transnational networks with Asia (2016).

These reports recognise that twenty-first century mobility is very different to traditional notions of long-term migrant settlement; the directions and durations of movement are much more diverse.

Educational institutions and professional associations are centrally involved in shaping the way we engage with diasporas and more broadly the way we engage in international relations.

One of the members of ACOLA’s expert working group was Professor Fazal Rizvi, who has a been a great supporter of IEAA as an active participant in our research committee for many years.

Another is Marlene Kanga, who was 2013 national president of Engineers Australia and is president elect of the World Federation of Engineering Organisations. She recently wrote in the newsletter of the Australian Institute of International Affairs that: "Successful multicultural policies have resulted in a diaspora that is proud of its heritage and the links with their country of birth while being proud Australians.

The links of family, language and culture facilitated by modern communication technologies enables the diaspora to maintain active networks in their countries of birth. Asian Australians in particular are a powerful source of connections who can be leveraged as Australia increasingly looks to Asia to participate in the next great economic boom, which is on its doorstep."

And while governments are more interested in the international business links that diasporas forge, there is also growing interest in the way transnational communities are reshaping other realms of international relations. In September this year in Melbourne, the Diasporas in Action conference will focus on the growing impact of diaspora communities in humanitarian, peace and development organisations.

Many of us have seen how former international students, as well as

recent migrants, build connections over time with social movements and interest groups that span their home and host countries. We are just beginning to understand how these networks are influencing cultural and social change around the world.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this year’s National Strategy for International Education was the aspiration to build lasting connections with alumni and the accompanying Global Alumni Engagement Strategy.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop’s enthusiastic preface proclaimed that, "Australia’s international alumni are influencers and leaders.

The strategy celebrates their achievements. It will grow a global alumni community that continues a deep connection with Australia and strengthens Australia’s connection with the region."

Growing a global community is a nice aspiration, but a very difficult thing to do, especially with mobile young people who can be flighty.

It will be interesting to see how the government’s efforts will align with institutions’ alumni engagement strategies, which are becoming more sophisticated and strategic, and with the existing Australian alumni groups in each country.

Whose network?

The Global Alumni Engagement Strategy has three objectives: to "connect alumni to each other and to Australia, mobilise engagement with alumni, and celebrate the achievements of alumni and their two-way links with Australia". So far implementation of the strategy seems to have been focused on an online media strategy, seeding content through various social media platforms. There is an Australia Global Alumni website, with a members-only section open only to Australian Governmentfunded alumni, a LinkedIn group that is open to anyone and currently has over 4,000 members, a Twitter account with over 400 followers and a YouTube channel

with over 100 subscribers.

Through these channels, and the Facebook accounts of Australian embassies, flow regular news stories and videos about Australian education, life in Australia and the achievements of alumni around the world. The content is very slick, and perhaps that is the biggest challenge, since it smacks too often of government public relations advertorials.

But could a government-driven communications strategy be any different?

The bulk of the work of connecting alumni will continue to be done from the bottom up, by graduates themselves building and running their associations, and by individual institutions. Their efforts have been supported by embassies and consulates for many years, and they would also benefit enormously from support of the new global players in this space, namely the Australia Global Alumni and Advance.

While the various organisations at present seem to be intersecting here and there, over time we should see the development of more sophisticated and interconnected online networking between them. In coming years I expect we will see much experimentation and innovation in the way we engage with the Australian diaspora.

We are slowly coming to the realisation that this very diverse group consists of millions of people around the world. Each of these have very different ongoing connections to the country and will play a crucial role in shaping not just the future of international education, but will also shape our place in the world of international business, politics and culture.

Professor Christopher Ziguras is President of IEAA and Deputy Dean, International in the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies at RMIT University.

WINTER 2016 | 7

PRESIDENT'S COLUMN

It's much easier now to remain intimately connected with communities of friends, colleagues and compatriots that are spread far and wide.

FEDERAL ELECTION OVER

TIME NOW FOR IMPLEMENTATION

8 | VISTA

CEO EDITORIAL

With the Federal Election now behind us, the crucial task of policy implementation must now begin in earnest, writes Phil Honeywood.

Regular surveys of IEAA’s 2,300 strong membership highlight that you like our focus on professional development, research projects on topical issues, member networking events and our important information dissemination via email updates, IEAA Monthly and our biannual Vista magazine. Many of you also look forward to the weekly Career Opportunities Alert!

However, increasingly our members tell us that high level advocacy and lobbying are front and centre in your expectations of our mission and purpose.

The experiment of our own minister Four years ago, Michael Chaney's much anticipated report into our sector made 35 recommendations.

Recommendation 1 called for the identification of a “champion” minister who – between the policy silos endemic within different Federal Government departments and their ministers – would coordinate key issues affecting international education.

However, Chaney stopped short of arguing the case for a separate junior minister with specific responsibility for our sector.

Instead, his report maintained that international education's interests would best be served by a senior cabinet minister and the most appropriate portfolio to achieve this end would be education and training.

Love him or loathe him, as Education Minister in the Abbott Government, Christopher Pyne set about implementing Chaney's recommendations.

Effective implementation of the National Strategy for International Education 2025 will rely on having genuine champions in the right positions: be they ministers, their private office staff or key public servants.

Achieving this objective is critical at Federal, State and Territory levels.

WINTER 2016 | 9 Image: zetter (iStock)

CEO EDITORIAL

A number of high level stakeholder forums were held at Parliament House and a coordinating committee formed (which I had the honour of chairing) to draft Australia's first National Strategy for International Education. Other senior cabinet ministers joined in and we had Trade Minister Andrew Robb working on an Austrade ‘Roadmap’ and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop on a Global Alumni Strategy. Our sector was suddenly being recognised as worthy of direct support from some of the Government's most influential cabinet ministers.

But then a curious thing happened.

The new Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, appointed a junior minister with specific portfolio responsibility for international education. This world first appointment took many by surprise. Suddenly, lobbying directly to the usual cabinet ministers had to be diverted through to a junior minister's office. The fact that this minister then reported to two separate cabinet ministers (trade and education) meant that mixed messages would sometimes come back to the sector.

What we thought was the final version of the national strategy was effectively taken over by the new minister's office. No one can deny that Minister Colbeck had good intentions, and attempted to genuinely engage with stakeholders. There is, however, legitimate debate as to whether our sector's influence was enhanced or diminished by the experiment of having our own minister.

Chaney's advice taken It is for the above reasons that IEAA welcomes the Minister for Education and Training, Simon Birmingham, taking over the lead role for international education.

A Liberal moderate from South Australia, he has shown a keen interest in advancing our sector.

The media release he put out on the day of his swearing in highlighted that he looks forward to implementing Australia's National Strategy for International Education.

He also has a good team behind him. Birmingham's Chief of Staff, Rachael Thompson, played a major role in drafting Julie Bishop's New Colombo Plan policy when in Opposition. His Higher Education Adviser, Darren Brown, was previously a senior international education executive at ANU. In equal measure, Tanya Plibersek's move from Labor's Foreign Affairs spokesperson to Shadow Minister for Education will hopefully lead to greater bipartisanship on key policy issues. Too often, Labor Education Shadow, Kim Carr, had a tendency to approach many of our sector's complex issues through the prism of adversarial party politics and philosophical crusades (the passage of the ESOS Reform Bills through the previous Senate was but one example of this). It is also hoped that Labor will soon recognise the talents of one of its newly elected backbenchers.

Julian Hill, the new Member for Bruce, was until recently International Education Director for the Victorian State Government.

Whether Pauline Hanson and her other newly elected representatives will gain traction for their xenophobic beliefs could have major implications for our sector. You only need to talk to UK university colleagues to gain an insight into where such politics can take a country!

10 | VISTA

Notwithstanding all of these good national governance omens, the cause of international education is also likely to be sorely tested in the new Federal Parliament.

As a former State Minister for Multicultural Affairs and Higher Education, I had firsthand experience of the damage done to Australia's standing in our region by Pauline Hanson's first incarnation. Whether she and her other newly elected representatives will gain traction for their xenophobic beliefs could have major implications for our sector. You only need to talk to UK university colleagues to gain an insight into where such politics can take a country!

State of the states Just as international education is finally being noticed at the national level, bouquets must also be handed out to certain State and Territory Governments who have also seen the light.

IEAA likes the fact that Victoria and Queensland now both have ministerial led international education advisory councils. We strongly support the move of NSW's International Education Advisory Board into Premier Mike Baird's own department.

The fact that each of these states have also seen the importance of including key sector stakeholder groups, such as IEAA, as representatives on these state based advisory committees is also strongly endorsed. Our association also notes the transformational work occurring in the Northern Territory to finally recognise international education as a key driver of the Territory's future (hosting the recent CISA national conference being but one example). As study destination market entities, due recognition should also be given to the great collaborative work of Study Adelaide and Study Perth.

As international education is often compared to the tourism industry, it is with some despair that IEAA notes Tourism Australia's annual budget of $180 million – compared to $12 million (over 4 years) for implementation of the national strategy.

Image: Bkbook (iStock)

Everyone in the sector is, of course, working towards the day when their respective state governments (as well as Tasmania and ACT) will move the focus from destination marketing to wholeof-government policy recognition and meaningful support.

Show me the money Putting the right political and governance infrastructure (with genuine sector champions) into place is one thing, but providing appropriate levels of funding for effective policy implementation can be quite another. At the national level, IEAA definitely welcomes the recent Federal Budget's allocation of $12 million (over 4 years) for implementation of the national strategy.

However, this funding comes up short when compared to Canada's $5 million annual international education marketing budget and New Zealand's proportionately higher funding. As international education in our country is often compared to the tourism industry, it is with some despair that IEAA notes Tourism Australia's annual budget of $180 million (approximately $60 million direct from the airline and hotel groups, but the remainder from the Federal Government).

Clearly, if the political rhetoric around international education being our nation's third largest industry – as well as one of the five “innovative industries of the future” – is to become reality, then appropriate funding must become part of the equation.

The Federal election is now well behind us. IEAA members can be reassured that your Association remains determined to live up to your expectations of our important lobbying and advocacy role.

In doing so, we will continue to work collaboratively with the other peak bodies involved in the schools, ELICOS, VET and higher education sectors. We owe it to the 130,000 Australians who work in this dynamic sector – and the 650,000 overseas students who study here and abroad – to put strategy into action.

Phil Honeywood is CEO of IEAA.

WINTER 2016 | 11

STUDENT MOBILITY REACHES

THE TIPPING POINT

12 | VISTA

Image: styf22 (iStock)

Outbound student mobility in Australia has crossed the threshold into the mainstream. In another five years time, the mobility landscape will look nothing like it does today, writes Rob Malicki.

Why is it that some things go viral?

That funny cat meme on Facebook, the latest fashion trend, that hit new television show, what is it about them that somehow grabs the consciousness of the public and blows them up into smash hits? As it turns out, the difference between good things and great things is separated by a relatively fine line – a fine line that things 'tip’ over to become mainstream.

The laws of the tipping point

Gladwell argues that the ‘Tipping Point’ for social epidemics occurs when a new phenomenon spreads from the early adopters to the early majority (around a market penetration point of 16 per cent).

In his seminal book, The Tipping Point, journalist Malcolm Gladwell explores and neatly digests some of the core factors that cause “ideas and products and messages and behaviours [to] spread like viruses.”

Gladwell discusses the importance of a small number of key people that help things to tip. He also discusses the importance of how messages are constructed (their stickiness) and the power of context in causing things to go viral.

The crux of it? That very small things we do, and very few people that we interact with, can have enormous impact on whether or not new things make it into the mainstream, or even beyond the mainstream into the realm of being a sensation. One of the key ideas that Gladwell discusses is the ‘Law of the Diffusion of Innovation’ – a concept about the rate at which people adopt new technologies, ideas or other things.

Consider Figure 1. At one end of this bell curve you have the innovators.

These are the people that camp for three days in the rain to get the new iPhone model; they are the trendsetters. The early adopters are fast to pick up new things, followed by the early majority, the late majority and finally (many years later)... the laggards.

FIGURE 1: Gladwell’s Law of the Diffusion of Innovation

Innovators 2.5%

Early adopters 13.5%

Early majority 34%

Late majority 34%

Laggards 16%

WINTER 2016 | 13

Gladwell argues that the ‘tipping point’ for social epidemics occurs when a new phenomenon spreads from the early adopters to the early majority (around a market penetration point of 16 per cent).

It is at this point that something is no longer too new and different for it to be threatening to the mass public. It tips and becomes widely accepted and adopted.

However, the process of something tipping across the threshold from early adopters into the early majority is not straight-forward.

This is because early adopters and the early majority “speak different languages”. They have different motivations and values, which fundamentally change the way in which these different audiences adopt new ideas, products and behaviours.

To overcome the threshold, it is necessary to translate a new concept so that it is easily understood by the early majority (and thus easy to adopt). That translation can come in many forms, such as enhanced availability, enhanced visibility and enhanced endorsement.

Translation is a key part of something tipping from the realm of early adopters into the realm of the majority.

So how does the tipping point intersect with Australian student mobility?

The growth of Australian outbound student mobility The Australian Universities International Directors’ Forum (AUIDF) first started collecting statistics on the number of Australian university students on outbound mobility experiences in the early 2000s. These early surveys, conducted by Alan Olsen, found that about one in every 20–25 undergraduates (and some 6,000 students in total) were having an international study experience as part of their degree.

FIGURE 2: Participation of students from Australian universities in learning abroad programs (2005–14) 40,000 35,000

18% No. of outbound students % Graduating undergraduates

30,000

10%

20,000

8%

15,000

6%

10,000

4%

5,000

2% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

0%

Fast forward a decade and that number has grown steadily to more than 30,000 students – a breathtaking climb where now one in every six undergraduates will undertake some form of international study experience (like an exchange, study tour, internship, research or clinical placement).

students back in 2007 and was the only external option open to students for several years. In the past couple of years the number of providers has increased, as has the range of overseas learning options being offered by universities themselves (more about that in a moment).

This has been driven by many factors: a professionalising sector, better promotion and better recording of outbound movements by universities. It has also been driven by an increase in the range of opportunities open to students.

AIM Overseas was Australia’s first third-party provider of overseas study programs to university

The power of OS-HELP Without a doubt, one of the more significant drivers in the growth of outbound mobility since 2005 (and particularly since 2009) is OS-HELP, the Australian Government’s HECSbased loan for overseas study experiences.

FIGURE 3: The growth in OS-HELP 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000

Loan Fee Removed

4,000 2,000 0

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015* 2016 * Senate estimates for 2015 unavailable at time of printing.

14 | VISTA

14% 12%

25,000

0

16%

OS-HELP is a world-class funding scheme that removes the financial barrier to studying overseas for vast numbers of students. However, back in the early years of the scheme, the Government levied a 20 per cent loan fee when students took it out: you borrowed $5,000, but paid back $6,000.

In 2009, AIM Overseas ran an extensive national campaign that culminated in the removal of the OS-HELP loan fee by Government.

We didn’t know it until later, but the result was that OS-HELP ‘tipped’ in 2010. It had been translated from a good scheme into a scheme that was fundamentally the same, but fairer. The message advocating OS-HELP to students changed and uptake doubled. It remains one of AIM Overseas’ finest achievements and is a great example of the tipping point.

MOBILITY THE TIPPING REACHES POINT TIPPING POINT

In order for outbound experiences to fully shift into the realm of the majority, we need something to ‘translate’ the value of overseas study experiences for students – something that makes it okay for the early majority, and not just the early adopters, to participate … it just so happens that we already have that something, and that something is called the New Colombo Plan.

The New Colombo Plan: ‘The Translator’ Earlier on we discussed how the tipping point occurs around market penetration of 16 per cent. If you now look back at Figure 2, which shows the growth of Australian outbound mobility, you’ll also see that the proportion of undergraduate students having overseas study experiences has reached ... that’s right, 16 per cent! Australian undergraduate outbound student mobility has reached the tipping point.

However, in order for outbound experiences to fully shift into the realm of the majority, we need something to ‘translate’ the value of overseas study experiences for students – something that makes it okay for the early majority, and not just the early adopters, to participate.

FIGURE 4: New Colombo Funding and student numbers 60.00

12,000 $51.08m

50.00 40.00

New Colombo Plan Funding ($M) NCP Students Out

6,000 $28.21m

20.00 10.00 $5.78m 2013-14

4,000 2,000

$11.26m

2014-15

2015-16

10,000 8,000

$27.82m

30.00

0.00

$50.93m

2016-17

2017-18

2018-19

0

WINTER 2016 | 15

THE TIPPING POINT

In just 12 months time institutions will be expected to double the number of opportunities they are offering to students, and the number of students participating on NCP-funded programs will also double.

Something prestigious and highly visible; something with significant imprimatur. It just so happens that we already have that something, and that something is called the New Colombo Plan (NCP).

Since 2013, Australia’s Foreign Minister, Julie Bishop, has been visibly and systematically spreading the word about the NCP around the region. Australia’s premier scheme to send students to study in the Indo-Pacific is now the subject of discussion of Foreign Ministers, Prime Ministers and Presidents all across the region – it is well funded, prestigious and well executed. In short, it is exactly what is needed to ‘translate’ overseas study from the realm of the early adopters into that of the early majority.

16 | VISTA

Perhaps this sounds a little too speculative? A Government scheme that just happens to be perfectly timed and targeted to push something to mainstream status?

Well consider Figure 4 (p.15). NCP funding is currently in the middle of this chart – approximately half way through its growth trajectory. But in just 12 months time that funding will almost double. For those who don’t know it well, the NCP funding allows institutions to run programs for both groups of students and individuals. It provides generous scholarships and administrative support money. And in just 12 months time institutions will be expected to double the number of opportunities that they are offering to students, and the number of students participating on NCPfunded programs will also double.

Technology that offers insight & digital marketing that delivers enrolments

Measurable marketing offering international diversification of enrolments

Future students data that gives your international strategy the edge

•

Tracking to enrolment: understanding our audience via matching technology

•

Helping clients assess return on investment

Hotcourses Insights – a unique market intelligence tool which can assist and inform your marketing and recruitment strategy, in real time, by understanding the latest trends and behaviour from prospective students

•

See the case study at myhotcourses.com/case-studies/rmit/

Identify popular subject areas or subjects on the rise in specific target markets, detect trends, pre-empt market change, diversity your recruitment markets and more.

For more information, free market reports & to discover how we can assist your institution please contact us  enquiries@hotcourses.com.au  +61 (2) 9331 4463  www.myhotcourses.com

So we’ve seen that Australian outbound mobility has grown systematically over the better part of a decade and we’ve learned that for ideas to become mainstream they need to be translated for the masses. This is exactly what the New Colombo Plan does: it enhances availability, visibility and endorsement of overseas study experiences.

The exploratory phase of Australian Mobility So Australia’s student mobility tipping point has arrived and the flood of outbound Australian students is coming. But what does this mean for Australian universities?

For many institutions, already straining under significant workloads, the pressure to find efficiencies will soon become overwhelming.

This means we are truly entering an exploratory phase, because these efficiencies will come in many forms: new program types, greater outsourcing of services to providers, productivity improvements, increasing use of technology and more collaboration across institutions. It’s an exploratory phase because in five years time, the Australian student mobility landscape will look nothing like it does today: we will have settled into a new normal.

As an industry there are many hurdles ahead, increasing the importance of sharing good practice and maintaining our strong collegiality. It’s exciting to think about what’s on the road ahead.

Rob Malicki is the Director of AIM Overseas and the Global Society.

He is also a member of the New Colombo Plan Reference Group.

WINTER 2016 | 17

MOBILITY MEMBER PULSE 2016

IEAA’s Mobility SIG ran its first-ever Member Pulse survey, designed to check the collective heart rate of professionals in the learning abroad sector. Davina Potts and Leanne Harrison report on the results.

IEAA’s Student Mobility Special Interest Group (SIG) is Australia’s leading forum for discussion, research and the dissemination of information on best practice in learning abroad. For the first time in 2016, the SIG ran a Member Pulse survey, which was designed to check the collective heart rate of its members – anyone working in, or with responsibilities for, learning abroad in Australia. The survey was designed for individuals, rather than as an institutional survey.

The Student Mobility SIG currently has 651 Australian-based members, 113 of whom completed the survey (17 per cent response rate).

Responses were not compulsory, so some respondents did not register a response for some questions. A section of the survey was also only applicable to those who currently work in an education institution.

18 | VISTA

Barriers to student participation Considering the overall picture of learning abroad in Australia, respondents were asked to rate (on a five-point scale) the significance of barriers to student participation in learning abroad.

In line with previous research, cost was identified as a significant or very significant barrier by 77 per cent of respondents. This is not a surprising result, but it is slightly inconsistent with the priorities and issues identified at the institutional level, where travel grants rated as the fifth item that would help build learning abroad participation.

The second and third barriers concerned academic issues: insufficient integration into the academic program (71%) and credit not recognised (69%).

Continued on page 22.

Figure 1. How would you rate these factors as a barrier to student participation in learning abroad?

Cost

77%

Insufficient integration into the academic program

71%

Academic credit not recognised

69%

Inadequate promotion/not identified as an opportunity

62%

Complex application and approval processes

59%

Other commitments in Australia

52%

Professional accreditation barriers

45%

Attractiveness of programs and locations

42%

Influence of family/friends

31%

Cultural background

27%

Safety abroad 0%

10%

20% 20% 30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

WINTER 2016 | 19 Image: fotohunter (iStock)

Registration open IEAA members: save AUD490 if you register by 19 August 2016!

Key dates Registration opens Early bird closes Conference

20 | VISTA

1 June 19 August 18 – 21 October

Why attend?

AIEC is the premier forum in Australia to connect people, ideas and research in international education. Join 1200 degates in Melbourne to celebrate the 30th anniversary of AIEC and explore the theme of ‘connectivity – at the heart of international education’.

If you work in international education, you can’t afford to miss it!

#aiec2016 | www.aiec.idp.com

Meet who’s who in international education – Meet with industry leaders, policy makers, administrators and academics who come together to discuss and shape the future direction of international education.

Broad appeal, topical focus – AIEC offers a bespoke program built to meet the needs of the international education industry, designed from invited and submitted proposals. Program sessions cater to all sectors, cover a broad range of topics and are suitable to industry veterans as well as newcomers to the industry.

Professional development – Gain important and relevant knowledge, discover best practices, industry insights, innovative approaches and trends.

International reach, local focus – Be part of the conversation between the best of international thought leaders and local industry experts.

Networking opportunities – Connect with new and old contacts while learning all you need to know to develop your international strategy.

Value for money – Full registration includes access to all sessions, networking social events on each night and full catering for three days; special rates for IEAA members and IDP Education clients, as well as early bird discounted prices; special rates on conference accommodation options to suit all budgets.

WINTER 2016 | 21

The fourth barrier identified was inadequate promotion/ learning abroad not identified as an opportunity, rated as significant or very significant by 62 per cent of respondents.

This item was highlighted by participant comments, including one respondent who noted "This survey does not give enough opportunity to choose lack of interest by students, or their inability to distinguish between travelling abroad and studying abroad."

The fifth barrier also concerned students – that is, complex application and approval processes (59%) that may discourage students from applying or may lead to applicants dropping out of the process. Of the top five barriers identified, cost may be the only barrier that cannot be addressed through institutional policies and processes (except through the provision of travel grants to reduce the costs to students). Integration into the academic program, recognition of academic credit, promotion of learning abroad and application processes can all be improved through policy and process levers.

Increasing learning abroad

Of the top five barriers identified, cost may be the only barrier that cannot be addressed through institutional policies and processes (except through the provision of travel grants to reduce the costs to students).

22 | VISTA

When asked about the top three things that would help increase learning abroad in Australia, similar themes emerged. More courses that require learning abroad was ranked (in the top 3) by 53 per cent of respondents.

Easier application and approval processes was selected by 43 per cent of respondents. And greater overall institutional focus on learning abroad was ranked in the top three by 40 per cent of respondents. Funding for learning abroad were the themes of the items ranked fourth and fifth, with respondents selecting a major policy initiative beyond the New Colombo Plan and more scholarships/travel grants.

Turning now to the institutional level, respondents were asked “What are the three most difficult issues facing your institution in terms of learning abroad?”.

Credit transfer/difficulties in gaining academic recognition, including faculty resourcing, was ranked as a top 3 issue by 59 per cent of respondents. One respondent noted that it’s not just a credit transfer issue, but an issue of faculty time in processing requests, which have been impacted by reductions in administrative staff.

Fifty-seven per cent of respondents again identified (general) resources for administering learning abroad as an issue. The third most ranked item was lack of faculty support and recognition for learning abroad, indicating two clear issues from the perspective of learning abroad practitioners – academic recognition for learning abroad and resourcing to administer learning abroad. Travel grants and risk management were identified by around one third of respondents.

Ten years ago, travel grants and scholarships were seen as the best way of increasing Australian student participation in learning abroad, and many institutions have demonstrated remarkable growth through funding strategies. While we have no doubt that financial assistance for students will continue to be fundamental to successful learning abroad programs, from the opinions of the staff at the coal face, the next major push has to focus on: 1. Academic integration and recognition of learning abroad 2. Resourcing to support learning abroad (including faculty resources), and 3. Simplifying application and approval processes.

At a time when more Australians are travelling abroad than ever before, there are indications that some institutions are still struggling to raise basic awareness of why students should undertake learning abroad as part of their degrees, as opposed to spending their vacation in Phuket.

Figure 2. What are the top 3 things that would help increase participation in learning abroad?

53%

Easier application and approval process

43%

Greater institutional focus on learning abroad

40%

A major government policy initiative beyond NCP

37%

More scholarships/travel grants

34%

Greater flexibility in the use of OS-HELP

27%

More research on the outcomes/benefits of learning

25%

Greater support for learning abroad in the school sector

13%

Greater support for language learning in the school sector

11%

A reality TV show on learning abroad (think 'Getaway')

9%

More access to language learning in general 0%

8% 10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Figure 3. What are 3 the most difficult issues facing your institution in terms of learning abroad?

Credit/transfer difficulties in gaining academic recognition

59%

Lack of resources to support administration

57%

Lack of faculty support and recognition

40%

Lack of scholarships/travel grants

36%

Risk management

32%

Professional accreditation requirements

21%

Lack of student demand

20%

Financial sustainability of faculty-led learning abroad

19%

Third party providers

9%

Complying with HESA and other government

6% 0%

The next wave of effort to promote learning abroad has to pick up the energy generated through Universities Australia's World Class campaign (funded by the Australian Government) and target the unconvinced. Measuring our success over the next 10 years must include consideration of who is participating in learning abroad and whether we are enabling broader participation across both disciplines and backgrounds.

Dr Davina Potts is Associate Director, Global Mobility at the University of Melbourne and is an IEAA Board member.

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

INSTITUTIONAL DIRECTION ON LEARNING ABROAD Of the 98 respondents who work in an education institution, 90 per cent reported that learning abroad is explicitly included in their institution’s strategic plan, and 83 per cent stated that their institution has set targets for participation in learning abroad.

Forty-two per cent of respondents reported that their institution supported more than 1,000 learning abroad experiences in the last reporting year, including 6 per cent who reported that their institution supported more than 3,000 learning abroad experiences.

Forty-three percent of respondents report that their institution has specific strategies for increasing participation from under-represented groups.

Leanne Harrison is Manager, Strategic Engagement (Internationalisation) for the Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs at the Australian National University.

WINTER 2016 | 23

MOBILITY MEMBER PULSE

More courses that require learning abroad

CISA HITS THE TOP END

CISA 2016 was more than just an opportunity to bask in the Darwin sun, writes Anna McLeod. It brought together and inspired a community of international student leaders.

For those of you familiar with the chill of Melbourne’s winter, you wouldn’t be surprised that I was delighted to spend a week in the Darwin sunshine recently. And what a week it was! I’m not sure what it is about the Council of International Students Australia (CISA) conference. Each year I go along ready to share insights and inspire the students, but always come away being inspired myself.

Delegates travelled from all Australian states and territories to attend the conference, which was set in beautiful Darwin during National Aboriginal and Islander Day Observance Committee (NAIDOC) Week.

24 | VISTA

The conference boasted a true feeling of diversity with many different cultures and countries represented, including domestic Australian student delegates.

Embracing the theme ‘Breaking down barriers: Facing the future together as one’, it was wonderful to see Northern Territory’s Young Achiever of the Year, Kate Axten, give an engaging opening address. Kate’s insightful presentation on Indigenous Australia set the scene for a conference that epitomised the CISA catch cry of 'many cultures one community'.

A lot of progress has been made this year. CISA President Nina Khairina reiterated that 2016 was a year of “firsts in the international education sector”. These include the appointment of a Minister for International Education (now rolled back into Simon Birmingham’s education portfolio), the release of a National Strategy for International Education and the creation of a Council for International Education that is set to include student representation from CISA. Recognition of this progress ensured this year’s conference was about moving forward together and highlighting what can be achieved.

CHINA IN FOCUS

The extent of support for CISA and its annual conference was evident through the strong industry presence. In addition to the representatives from State and Federal Government, there was an extensive range of industry attendees such as CQUniversity, ETS TOEFL, NSW Police and the Fair Work Ombudsman. This enabled delegates to gain valuable insights into policy development, advocacy and skills of the future.

Swapping advocacy for social innovation Kicking off the first pre-conference workshop with an interactive session on social innovation was a great way to ensure that ideas and solutions were in the forefront of delegate’s minds, particularly given CISA’s traditional focus on issues and advocacy. Dr Julie Roberts, CQUniversity’s Social Innovation Project Manager, helped delegates learn about generating and evaluating ideas through collaboration.

Attendees were excited to tackle a real scenario in this workshop and together they generated some excellent ideas about how to bridge the gap between international and domestic students in Australia. Thinking outside the box and coming up with real implementable solutions, delegates planned to take these ideas back to their campus for further development. Ideas ranged from video apps to share activities, buddy programs, social platforms and policy change. Not to forget, of course, two of the big things that always bring people together: food and music.

WINTER 2016 | 25 Image: Sahil Puri, Victoria University

If you were to measure the success of CISA on whether it is achieving its stated mission, it is undeniable that, six years on, this national peak student representative organisation is making a difference.

Dr Roberts stated “I've found that international students are especially receptive to the concepts of social innovation because many of them have seen, first hand, that old ways of doing things aren't working. They are hungry for new ideas and strategies they can use in their personal lives and also contribute back to their communities.� As we move towards a job market that values adaptability and innovation, this session was a timely and useful inclusion in the program which no doubt helped attendees build on their professional development.

Employability is the word It won’t come as a surprise that student concerns about employability were also a key focus.

26 | VISTA

What made this year different was the progress that has been made in the area of international student employability in Australia and the extensive range of supportive tools now available. Collaboration seems to be at the heart of many achievements in the employability space to date. Federal and State Governments, the private sector, not-for-profits and, most importantly, students came together to showcase successful employment initiatives, tips and resources to help delegates build a toolkit to take back to benefit their local student communities.

Those who participated in the StudyNSW Student Welcome Desk Work Integrated Learning program shared valuable insights for students on building professional skills in the Australian workplace.

In the safe and supportive environment that the conference creates, delegates were eager to focus on some broader issues that are not often brought to the fore. Mental health and LGBTI issues were openly discussed and appear to be high on the agenda for many international students. A number of delegates had ideas about support that could be useful for international students. I look forward to seeing how education providers might be able to collaborate with students on these issues and implement studentdriven support solutions.

Image: CISA

One resource shared with delegates was an international student employability video, ‘Top tips to expand your job prospects’. The video showcased advice from international student alumni on how current students can improve their job prospects. This resource is a great tool for the international student community and really complements IEAA's Student Employability Guide launched last year. See: www.ieaa.org.au/employability The insights shared were well received. VET student Wajahat Latif commented “At the initial stages of my career, obtaining top tips from experienced industry experts and other students really gives me the push forward I need to progress. It allows me to analyse the tools I have and the ones I need to develop.”

CISA's collaborative pull As the conference came to a close at one of Darwin’s most magical backdrops, the Mindil Beach sunset, it was apparent that CISA had once again created, inspired and brought together a community of international student leaders.

While the Gala Dinner provided a well-deserved opportunity for delegates to celebrate and recognise their outstanding achievements of the past year, it was evident the social bond created during the week was what they treasured most. I suspect that feeling of interconnectedness is going to be a powerful driving force for CISA in the years ahead.

If you were to measure the success of CISA on whether it is achieving its stated mission, it is undeniable that, six years on, this national peak student representative organisation is making a difference. Acting International Education Director, Tom O’Brien from the Federal Department of Education and Training summarised this evolution well: “What we’re seeing here is CISA moving beyond advocacy and stepping up more into a partnership role.” Working closely with IEAA, Federal and State Governments, the education, not-for-profit and private sectors, it’s clear CISA has been extremely successful in its mission to facilitate the building of a stakeholder network with an interest in supporting international students.

The industry collaboration triggered by CISA is something I’ve not previously witnessed, including traditional competitors working together to achieve positive outcomes for the international student community which Australia so greatly values. CISA cites ‘many cultures, one community’. From an international education sector perspective, I'm starting to think ‘many stakeholders, one goal’.

Anna McLeod works at Navitas Professional specialising in careers and internships.

WINTER 2016 | 27

THE AGENTS OF CHANGE

Heightened uncertainty abounds within the UK industry, as the British government prepares to exit the European Union and the Brexit only serves to exacerbate growing industry disquiet regarding the cessation of post-study work rights for international students.

28 | VISTA

Why have international education agents traditionally played an insignificant role in the US? The answer partly lies in the history of the industry in the US, and in concerns over commercialising the education sector – both at home and, by extension, abroad. It also lies in the recorded signatories of a codified set of ethical practices signed by education officials from Australia, the UK, Ireland and New Zealand: the 2012 London Statement.

Mostly, the answer lies in the lower level of government regulation in the US market, and a legislated ban on the use of education agents for domestic recruitment.

Does this suggest, then, that US education officials consider the use of international education agents to be unethical?

Why does the Australian model work?

Early in the new century, the Australian Federal Government became motivated to address industry concerns about education agent practices following publicity about links between education and migration and questionable ethical activity. In 2005, peak international education industry bodies were brought together to conduct an industry needs analysis. PIER (a subsidiary of International Education Services), the then Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Australian Education International (AEI) developed the first online Education Agent Training Course (EATC).

It was launched by The Hon. Julie Bishop MP, as Minister for Education, Science and Training, during the Australian International Education Conference in 2005.

Since that time, PIER has continued its relationship with several (renamed) departments within the Australian Federal Government to maintain the EATC. The course has been completed by more than 32,000 education agent counsellors around the globe. Approximately 4,500 of these people have undertaken a further Qualified Education Agent Counsellor exam to become listed on the Qualified Education Agent Database.

Although EATC is not mandatory, it has provided the Australian sector with confidence in the third-party recruitment of students. EATC has become the gold standard of Australian recruitment, and this is reflected with an increasing number of institutions requiring their agents to complete EATC training. Having such a course complements the high level of Federal Government industry regulation that exists in the Australian international education market.

Ongoing visa-related policy amendments by the Australian Federal Government have also brought about further reasons to be positive about the future of the Australian industry.

WINTER 2016 | 29 Image: a_Taiga (iStock)

EDUCATION AGENTS

Gordon Scott and Anton Crace examine why international education agents play such an insignificant role for the US market compared to Australia, UK and New Zealand?

On 1 July 2016, the Australian Department of Immigration and Border Protection implemented a new student visa processing framework that placed the onus of risk mitigation upon institutions.

The Streamlined Student Visa Framework (SSVF) has been broadly welcomed by agents and educators. Under the new framework, visa applications will be assessed on a risk framework based on two main factors: the immigration risk attached to the chosen education institution; and students’ country of citizenship.

As well as levelling the playing field and widening access to streamlined visa processing, which until now has only been open to universities and their nominated business partners, the SSVF reduces the available student visa categories from eight to two. It also moves all visa applications online and no longer restricts the length of time students can undertake English language study. As the SSVF moves Australia’s student recruitment process further into the new century and places responsibility upon more institutions, those institutions will need to learn to handle that responsibility.

Institutions must now work more closely with their agent networks to correctly handle the onus of risk mitigation together. This is an extension of the requirements already placed on institutions through both the Australian Education Services for Overseas Students Act (ESOS) and National Code. The code ensures that registered providers enter into written agreements with agents subject to the terms established in the National Code, that agents are privy to accurate marketing information about the provider, and places the onus of ethical behaviour and appropriate student visa upon the provider.

30 | VISTA

Additional favourable market conditions such as foreign currency exchange rates, poststudy work arrangements and enhanced destination awareness have brought about a period of relative stability and growth to the Australian international education industry. Export revenue from international students soared 13 per cent in 2015 to an annual figure of nearly $20 billion (AUD).

The post-Brexit UK market Meanwhile, the United Kingdom has found itself in some difficulty.

Heightened uncertainty abounds within the UK industry, as the British government prepares to exit the European Union and the Brexit only serves to exacerbate growing industry disquiet regarding the cessation of post-study work rights for international students.

Nevertheless, British institutions continue to see the benefits of using education agents, who now account for almost 40 per cent of the country’s international students.

The use of education agents was triggered in part by the first phase of the Prime Minister’s Initiative (PMI) in 1999 which set a target to recruit an additional 75,000 non-European Union students by 2005. With the initial target met ahead of schedule, the PMI was succeeded by a second phase (and new targets) in 2006. These two PMI phases ushered in a period of expansion for international education in the UK, one that was accomplished in part through the efforts of education agents around the world.

As higher education has gradually become more commercialised (for better or worse), UK institutions are growing more accustomed to employing professional marketers to help develop and manage their reputations and brands.

Agents perform an increasing number of important functions for British institutions, most notably the enhanced recruitment function that agents can deliver to augment the marketing and recruitment effort of institutions. The British Council has been responsible for leading a number of practice guides for agents and institutions, and developing training programs for agents.

Naturally, the UK is a signatory to the 2012 London Statement, the codified set of ethical practices agreed to by officials from the UK, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand.

Why do only a third of US universities use agents?

What is so different about the American market? Why do only the minority of universities recruit international students through agents? While no one officially counts how many US campuses pay agents (most of whom operate abroad), estimates indicate that between one quarter to one third do so.

Agents recruiting students for the US typically charge students (sometime exorbitant) fees for their services. This practice has already been established and it will be difficult to eliminate through legislation at a later stage.

Whether or not to allow the use of agents in the recruitment of international students is a contentious issue in the US and continues to be hotly debated.

Legislation currently prohibits the paid recruitment of domestic students, in part to prevent agents and institutions from incentivising recruitment and counselling based on profit rather than student need.

Moreover, paying agents a perstudent commission is illegal under US law when recruiting students eligible for federal aid – a ruling that ultimately applied mainly to domestic applicants. This stance was cemented under a ban Congress enacted in 1992 after agent-fraud concerns emerged.

US institutions’ current stance on the paid recruitment of international students is interpretive at best. Simply, paying commissioned agents isn’t illegal when recruiting foreigners who can’t access federal aid, nor is there any legislation that governs the use of agents for international recruitment.

This is not to say there aren’t those who believe that legislation should also apply to the use of agents when recruiting international students. Incentivisation could lead to a “cash for students” approach if not properly managed, resulting in an unstable industry and potentially damaging the country’s reputation. Critics can rightly point to Australia’s market decline in 2009–2012 as a prime example of when this has occurred. Worse still, competition could be destroyed as institutions with money could afford to pay more commission, effectively pricing smaller institutions out of the market.

Conversely, others believe that both students and institutions are placed at a disadvantage if they are not able to access the offshore expertise of agents. Their argument is that as institutions seek to attract more students from foreign markets, an intermediary with a firm understanding of both the source and destination countries, as well as the institution, will be crucial for cost-effective and sustainable growth. If anything, they would argue, well-trained agents promote ethical recruitment, as the costs associated with international travel can prohibit smaller institutions from properly counselling prospective students, resulting in lost opportunities.

Regardless of the legitimacy of any legal claims against the use of paid recruiters, the National Association for College Admission Counselling (NACAC) held a self-imposed ban on agents for members until 2013.

This discussion is completely foreign to many Australian education institutions, as agents are an integral part of international education recruitment in Australia and have been for several decades.

International students currently fill over one in five higher education places in Australia, and agents are responsible for recruiting 60 to 80 per cent of international students enrolled at an institution – upwards of 10 to 15 percent of all higher education.

However, the grounding for Australia’s agent model is quite different from what has developed in the US market, and it’s important to understand these key differences when attempting to compare the countries. The Australian model may not be applicable to the US, for a number of reasons.

First of all, agent activity is highly regulated in Australia, and agents are forbidden by law from charging students fees for university placements. Their revenue comes from the institution in the form of a percentage of the student’s first year tuition payment (10–30 per cent). Meanwhile, agents recruiting students for the US typically charge students (sometime exorbitant) fees for their services. This practice has already been established and it will be difficult to eliminate through legislation at a later stage.

Secondly, Australia only has 42 universities, the majority of which are public, not-for-profit providers.

All of them work with agents and it is possible for an agent to have a contract with every university, creating a more level playing field among institutions. This is not the case in the US where it would be virtually impossible for an agent to have contracts with all 4,000 higher education providers.

WINTER 2016 | 31

EDUCATION AGENTS

A US Institute for International Education report1 in 2012 identified ways that the US can benefit from the experience of Australia, as well as cases where the Australian example is not applicable to the US. One of the main differences is the high level of government regulation and support in international education in Australia, compared with the low level of government intervention in the US. Australia also has a number of private sector data collection efforts which augment the official government data. The report analysed the use of agents in international student recruitment in Australia, and its implications for the US market.

It is important to understand the significance agents could play for the US. While on the surface, other markets may prefer the industry’s sleeping giant to remain at slumber, the reality is global competition benefits students, institutions, industry professionals and agents.

Image: csfotoimages (iStock)

Thirdly, in a smaller system, it is easier for students to find their own way, and students often already know which institution they want to attend in Australia. On the whole, Australian universities are less differentiated from each other than US colleges and universities and location plays a larger role in determining the student’s choice – all of these factors lead to a much smaller potential for misdirecting students in Australia than in the US. With NACAC’s ban on education agents lifted in 2013, we might have expected to see a greater emphasis on supporting US institutions to engage more effectively with agents. NACAC has released new policies about the use of international education agents and has changed its ethics code to permit the use of agents for foreign applications if schools ensure integrity and transparency.

32 | VISTA

The shift by NACAC, whose members include most major US universities and many smaller ones, has opened the door wider for agents, but is yet to placate major concerns about agents, which include: ■■ Not

mandatory

■■ High

commission rates

■■ Concerns

practices

about ethical

■■ Multiple

applications – load on institutions

■■ Encourage

course swapping

■■ Fraud

risk

■■ Open

to conflicts of interest

■■ Could

degrade the quality of US higher education.

One critic quoted in the Wall Street Journal2 voiced his concern in very clear terms. Philip Altbach, a Boston College professor said “The growing reliance on agents is a terrible development, and it’s very widespread ... Why are American universities doing this? The answer is very simple: money.”

The agent debate is growing and creating a deepening division of opinion within the US higher education industry. Concerns about recruiting through paid agents are deepening as foreign student applications increase.

Part of the issue here appears to relate to the quality and size of the agencies concerned.

There is currently no legislated or voluntary code in the US that differentiates between the use of large established agencies with hundreds of employees, and individual agents who operate from the back of a moped.

Yet the use of agents in the US continues to grow. According to the ICEF Monitor, “US colleges and universities are facing increasing pressure to hit recruitment targets, and anxiety about not meeting them is creeping up.”3 This increase in pressure is partly being driven by the fiscal measures taken to counter Federal Government budget cuts to public colleges.

EDUCATION AGENTS

According to the State Higher Education Executive Officers association, per-student funding at public colleges fell 13 per cent in fiscal 2014 from 2009 nationwide.

As is the case in other markets, international students in the US pay full non-resident tuition fees.

Unlike the Australian market, when recruiting for US, some agents work for both the student and the college, taking commissions from both sides for a successful enrolment. That can incentivise concurrent fraudulent behaviour and client mismanagement, with students potentially paying to “ensure” an application’s success or being “bought” by an institution that is inappropriate to their needs.

While some institutions ban this practice and refuse to engage with agents who seek out double commission, the fact it is a serious concern, along with the other concerns above, highlights the areas in which the US legislative framework fails its international education system. It is a country stuck on the “What if?” not the “How best?”

It is clear that without a qualitative framework which understands the requirements of recruiting students, as well as the responsibilities involved once they have arrived, the US capacity to grow is severely inhibited. Its ability to become a world-leader in the provision of services to international students is far below where it should be. The US will continue to be left behind while Australia and all the other London Statement signatories grow.

Gordon Scott established Study Brisbane, is a former IEAA Board Member is the Owner of Gordon Scott Consulting and the Managing Director of successfulgraduate.com.

For outsiders, it is important to understand the significance agents could play for the US. While on the surface, other markets may prefer the industry’s sleeping giant to remain at slumber, the reality is global competition benefits students, institutions, industry professionals and agents. More choice, more perspectives and more ideas mean internationals get the best student experience, while collaborative ties raise the profile and offers of everyone.

Editor’s note: The American International Recruitment Council (AIRC) is also encouraging US universities to use its accredited education agencies. The AIRC’s 23 standards are more onerous than the proposed new Australian Education Agent Quality Assurance Framework (the feasibility study for which is currently with the Department of Education and Training).

Anton Crace is a marketing and communications specialist and freelance journalist working within the Australian international education industry.

1

IIE, US and Australian International Student Data Collection: Key Differences and Practices, Chow, P, May 2012

2

The Wall Street Journal, American Colleges Pay Agents to Woo Foreigners, Despite Fraud Risk, Chen, Te-Ping, Korn, Melissa, http://www.wsj.com/ articles/american-colleges-pay-agents-to-wooforeigners-despite-fraud-risk-1443665884

3

ICEF Monitor, Survey shows growing interest in education agents among US colleges, Nov 2014

WINTER 2016 | 33

THE SCHOLARPRACTITIONER DEBATE

Today, many who aspire to work in higher education are no longer classified only as faculty or as fully-fledged administrators; rather, they function as blended or thirdspace professionals.

34 | VISTA

Image: Ida Jarosova (iStock)

Heightened competition between institutions and changes in the traditional structure of higher education institutions in recent decades have created new challenges and opportunities for faculty and administrators. In the United States since the 1970s, there has been a gradual decrease in tenured or tenure-line research faculty, but substantial growth of contract faculty, adjuncts and those straddling academic and administrative responsibilities. Costcutting measures and declining public funds have meant fewer openings for traditional faculty-line positions; university priorities and operating procedures have shifted as a result. These changes have had a significant influence on the individuals who work in the broad range of professional categories in today’s academy; increasingly conventional faculty-administrator divisions have become blurred.

Today, many who aspire to work in higher education are no longer classified only as faculty or only as administrators; instead, they function as blended or third-space professionals, a term coined by UK researcher Celia Whitechurch. In the United States a more common label is the alternative-academic, or “alt-ac”, professional. The most negative view of these professionals might also include them in the “precariat class” or what Guy Standing of the University of London has termed those in the most precarious or dangerous of employment situations.

New roles in the higher education landscape Traditionally universities comprise four key stakeholders: ■■ faculty

with tenure, tenure-line, contract and adjunct status

■■ upper-level

administrators in leadership positions, such as president, provost, deans, centre directors and department chairs

■■ mid-level

staff who carry out the mandates of key decisionmakers and assist departments, administrative offices, and programs and projects; and

■■ students.

Within this arrangement there are two overarching categories of professionals: the faculty scholars who produce research, publish and teach in their areas of study; and the administrators who manage and facilitate the functions and productivity of the academy writ large.

Today hyper-consciousness of rankings, in particular, drives much of the decision making in international higher education activity. Institutions have sought to keep pace through innovation in study abroad and student exchange, university partnerships and branch campuses, and internationalisation at home.

WINTER 2016 | 35

SCHOLAR-PRACTITIONERS

Scholar-practitioners are products of a changing higher education landscape. Bernhard Streitwieser and Anthony C. Ogden look at this growing class of international higher education professionals who work in a space between data and decision-making.

Massification of higher education globally – and continued growth in study abroad participation and international student enrolments – has led to the establishment of more specialised offices staffed by highly trained personnel. The demands of fee paying students also calls for higher-order skills in the managers and staff charged with their academic and psycho-social wellbeing.

The fact that scholar-practitioners are so ideally situated to identify practical research questions and exist in a space between data and decision-making gives them exciting potential.

In this climate, universities have had to effectively and efficiently manage all aspects related to comprehensive internationalisation.

To do so, they have increasingly hired highly trained professionals to fill key leadership posts, who in turn have selected specialised staff to carry out their mandates. Many who now work in this complex environment exemplify a new class of professionals with higher-level academic training at the master or PhD level combined with finely tuned administrative skills. This combination exemplifies a hybrid scholarly and administrative profile – the scholar-practitioner – who did not exist on the same scale in previous generations.

Training scholarpractitioners for the future David Comp and John Heyl trace the earliest innovators in international education and ways they have critically shaped the direction of the profession to its present day form. Fiona Hunter and Laura Rumbley illustrate how training programs for international educators have grown significantly since 2000.

36 | VISTA

Today 277 graduate degreegranting programs in higher education prepare graduates around the world with competencies in comparative studies, globalisation, and internationalisation, among other domains. In the United States, Taylor Woodman and Katherine Punteney distinguish 87 graduate-level programs at 57 institutions offering six distinct program types with specific preparation for careers in student affairs, international education management, and administration.

Prospective employers increasingly seek candidates with specialised graduate education and preparation. In a 2013 survey of its membership, the Forum on Education Abroad found that more than half of respondents held a master degree and another 27 percent a PhD or EdD. In a 2014 survey of senior international officers affiliated with the Association of International Education Administrators (AIEA), 81 percent held a doctoral or professional degree. Given this depth of academic training, the fact that scholar-practitioners are so ideally situated to identify practical research questions and work in a space between data and decision-making gives them exciting potential.

The many activities that fall broadly under internationalisation provide a constant stream of data that can be studied using the instruments of quantitative and qualitative analysis. If this data is shared it can broadly inform the field. And yet, in a large survey conducted

by Mandy Reinig using the social media platforms of NAFSA, AIEA, EAIE and SECUSS-L, she found that while 52 percent of respondents held a master degree and 22 per cent a PhD or EdD, only 25 per cent conducted research as part of their jobs, citing lack of time as their main impediment.

Time for a paradigm change?

Encouraging nascent scholarpractitioners to engage in greater dissemination of their thinking will require important changes in the current paradigms that dictate the scope of work for administrators.

However, if institutional leaders and decision-makers are willing to modify their existing reward structures, hiring practices and budgetary priorities, much can be gained by capitalising on the unique potential scholarpractitioners bring to bear. The momentum in recent decades toward internationalisation has created new opportunities for the scholar-practitioners of international higher education.

Third-space professionals are increasingly required to have scholarly credentials, conduct research and evaluation and even engage in various forms of teaching and service.

Contemporary higher education should more systematically recognise and value the contributions they can make.

Further studies on the place, purpose and potential of scholarpractitioners in other educational contexts outside of the US has much to teach us. Indeed, many higher education systems around the world are responding to increased global mobility by offering lower tuition, more flexible and multilingual learning environments and innovative administrative structures.

In the recruitment of faculty and staff, promotion of junior talent, and contract and employment arrangements, new ideas are being tested out. Heightened competition for talent and external prestige worldwide are changing both the demands on the professoriate and also the possibilities for the administrative estate.

Understanding the pathways of those who enter the academy as faculty, administrators, or in positions straddling both worlds, as more and more now do, can provide important lessons about the changing nature of higher education throughout the world.

SCHOLAR-PRACTITIONERS

And yet, through an increasing number of established academic journals, book publishers and online platforms that now exist, thoughtful professionals facilitating internationalisation, education abroad and international student exchange are well positioned to disseminate their evidencedbased insights and advance the enterprise.

Bernhard Streitwieser is an Assistant Professor of International Education at The George Washington University. Anthony Ogden is the Executive Director of Education Abroad and Exchanges at Michigan State University.

This article is abbreviated from Higher Education’s ScholarPractitioners: Bridging Research and Practice (Symposium Books, 2016) and was originally published in International Higher Education, a quarterly publication produced by the Boston College Center for International Higher Education.

If institutional leaders and decisionmakers are willing to modify their existing reward structures, hiring practices and budgetary priorities, much can be gained by capitalising on the unique potential scholar-practitioners bring to bear.

WINTER 2016 | 37

CONFERENCES

August ACPET National Conference 2016 25–26 August Hobart, Australia acpet2016.com.au

September USMEXFUSION Online Academy: Building Institutional Capacity for Internationalisation at Home September–October Online usmexfusion.org/en/eventos2016 EAIE Conference 2016 13–16 September Liverpool, United Kingdom eaie.org/liverpool ANZSSA / ISANA WA State Conference 2016 16 September Perth, Australia Website unavailable English Australia Conference 2016 21–23 September Hobart, Australia englishaustralia.com.au ACEN National Conference 2016 28–30 September Sydney, Australia acen.edu.au/2016Conference

October IEAA International Research Roundtable 2016 18 October Melbourne, Australia aiec.idp.com/research-roundtable AIEC 2016 18–21 October 2016 Melbourne, Australia aiec.idp.com

38 | VISTA

Contact us IEAA Secretariat PO Box 12917 A’Beckett Street Melbourne VIC 8006 Australia +613 9925 4579 admin@ieaa.org.au

ieaa.org.au/vista