Category: Education

Nigeria has been one of the most important new sources of students for leading study destinations worldwide in recent years. But it has become an increasingly high-risk market due to internal macro-economic turmoil including the depreciation of the Nigerian naira, which has made study abroad more expensive for prospective Nigerian students.

Data shows the turbulent nature of the market

The chart below, based on pageview data across Studyportals websites over time, shows that Nigerian student interest in study abroad rose dramatically between 2021 and 2023, then began dropping, with a significant decline noticeable at the end of 2023 and through the first months of 2024.

Studyportals data shows a marked decrease in Nigerian activity on their platform for all disciplines in March 2024 compared with April 2023. The study fields most affected are Business & Management (-23%) and Applied Sciences (-33%).

Studyportals points out: “As Nigeria is the 4th top source country by volume of student interest for bachelor’s and master’s programmes, this decline is bound to create challenges for universities.”

UK universities the most exposed to risk from falling Nigerian demand

In terms of risk from current trends in Nigerian student demand, UK universities are arguably the most exposed, as (1) they have relied greatly on Nigeria for overall international enrolment growth and (2) a new policy enacted by their government is already having a profound effect on Nigerian student applications.

That policy, which went into effect in January 2024, prevents the family members of international students, other than those in postgraduate research-oriented programmes, from entering the UK on a sponsored study visa. Not coincidentally, there was a 44% decrease in sponsored study applications to the UK in the first three months of 2024 versus those same months in 2023.

Between 2017/18 and 2021/22, the number of Nigerian students in the UK grew from 10,685 to 44,195, a 314% increase and the second highest rate of growth after India (517%). Last year, Nigeria was the third largest market for the UK after China and India.

Particularly popular among Nigerian students have been one-year taught master’s programmes in the UK – but these programmes no longer allow international students to bring their dependants.

In 2022, almost half (45%) of all dependant visas were issued to Nigerian students, while Indian students claimed the next largest share (29%).

Studyportals data shows that Nigerian demand for the UK is down more than it is for other destinations, and Studyportals notes the impact of policy on this trend:

“While the average decline in interest from Nigeria, for the US, across the top 100 subdisciplines for is -12%, for the UK, it is -53%. The decrease is likely linked to the new British government policy that has banned dependent visas, and the announcement of a review of post-graduation work visas. This, combined with the economic struggles that Nigeria is currently facing, has made it quite difficult for Nigerian students to consider studying in the UK, which can be seen in the 76% decrease in visa issuances that has been noted in January 2024 by Enroly Data Insights.”

In terms of absolute Nigerian student demand (Studyportals page views) between April 2023 and March 2024, these are the trends in the destinations hosting the largest numbers of Nigerian students:

• UK: -55%
• Canada: -12%
• US: -13%
• Germany: -7%
• Australia: -21%

Once again, it’s interesting to look at policies when observing the differences between the above declines. Nigeria is now Canada’s fourth largest market (45,965 students), up 322% since 2017. This growth rate suggests that Canadian institutions are definitely vulnerable to the macroeconomic issues challenging Nigerian students’ families. But at the same time, they may gain a competitive edge in Nigeria because of two new developments in Canadian immigration policy:

• The length of work permits for international students graduating with master’s and other advanced degrees is increasing to three years;
• Dependants of international students at the graduate level remain eligible for open work permits (unlike those at the undergraduate level).

What’s more, the study permit approval rate for Nigerian students applying to Canada doubled from 2020 to 2023 to 40%. This is still lower than the average of 60% across all international student applicants, but the doubling will not have gone unnoticed in Nigeria.

Germany, which also experienced a lower relative decline in Nigerian student interest on the Studyportals platform (-7%), has recently increased in-study work rights and is aiming to double the retention rate of foreign graduates by 2030.

As for Australia (-21% in student interest), it is possible that news of record-high visa rejection rates is circulating in Nigeria as it seems to be in Southeast Asian countries. But Nigeria is only Australia’s 32nd largest student market (under 3,000 students), and thus Australian educators are less exposed to risk from this market.

The US policy climate as it relates to international students has been stable in 2024, though as in Australia, visa rejection rates have been surging. Still, IIE data for 2022/23 show that the number of Nigerian students in US colleges and universities grew to 17,640, up 22% from the previous year, and IDP Education shows that the US has moved ahead of the UK, Australia, and Canada as the most preferred destination among international students.

For additional background, please see:

Erasmus+, already the world’s largest student mobility programme, will play a significant role in a new goal set by European Union members to boost regional and global mobility through the rest of this decade.

The European Council, composed of national ministers from each EU country, has accepted a recommendation from the European Commission (which proposes and implements policies for the EU), to increase opportunities for European youth to learn, train, and study in other parts of Europe as well as in non-EU countries.

The adopted recommendation is called “Europe on the Move,” and these are its targets:

• At least 23% of higher education graduates should have a learning mobility experience by 2030.
• At least 12% of vocational education and training (VET) learners should also have this experience by 2030.
• At least 20% of all learners “with fewer opportunities” should have learning experience in another EU country by 2027.

The new targets are ambitious, given that a 2022 Eurobarometer survey of Europeans aged 15–30 found that only 15% of respondents had participated in learning, training, or study in another EU country. This compares to 24% of Australian undergraduates, 16% of American undergraduates, and 7% of undergraduates who had participated in some type of international learning or training experience as of 2019.

The previous target for EU mobility was 20%, established as part of the Bologna Process in 2009.

To achieve the goals of “Europe on the Move,” the European Commission recommends “strengthening language-learning at all stages of education and training, raising awareness about learning mobility opportunities, and improving recognition of learning outcomes obtained as a result of mobility.”

It also calls on “existing synergies and complementarities between the EU programmes that address learning mobility, such as Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps, and other funding instruments at EU, international, national and regional level, such as the EU’s Cohesion Policy funds, in particular the European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund Plus, with its Aim, Learn, Master, Achieve (ALMA) initiative.”

In 2022, Erasmus+, on its own, enabled 1.2 million participants to undertake learning, training, or study abroad with a budget of €4 billion. It enabled 26,000 projects and involved about 73,000 organisations. It was given a boost to its budget for the 2021-2027 period in a goal of ensuring that more EU students have the opportunity to learn outside their country at least once in their studies.

Commenting on the new EU initiative, Caroline Désir, Minister of Education, French Community of Belgium, said:

“Mobility has long been at the heart of the EU project. Learning abroad can provide valuable skills and a stronger sense of the EU’s common values. Today’s recommendation will help expand opportunities for everyone to take advantage of the immense benefits that come with learning, studying or training outside their country of birth.”

For additional background, please see:

Following months of speculation, the UK’s Migratory Advisory Committee (MAC) has concluded its “rapid review” of the Graduate Route, the immigration stream that is so popular among international students wanting to work in the UK after completing their studies. The MAC has advised the government that the Graduate Route does not need to be reconsidered or withdrawn.

In a letter dated 14 May 2024 to the Home Secretary, Professor Brian Bell, Chair, Migration Advisory Committee, wrote:

“We have not found evidence of widespread abuse on the Graduate route, where we define abuse as deliberate non-compliance with immigration rules, and we conclude that the route is not undermining the integrity and quality of the UK higher education system …. We recommend retaining the Graduate route in its current form.”

The government has not yet indicated whether it will accept the recommendations of the review.

Restricting Graduate Route could lead to overcorrection

The MAC determined that the termination, in January 2024, of student dependants’ right to accompany international students to the UK (unless students are in research-oriented postgraduate programmes) is already having a profound effect on migration levels to the country and on the volume of students that will use the Graduate Route. They caution that restricting the Graduate Route would risk “overcorrection.”:

“The changes to the rules on student dependants which were implemented in January and are in effect a change to the dependant rules of the Graduate route, will likely have a significant effect on Graduate route usage going forward … Implementing additional restrictions or closing the route now could risk overcorrection. Given international student fees help make up the financial deficit that universities have from teaching domestic students and research, any significant restrictions to the route should only be considered once the structural funding issues in the higher education sector have been addressed.”

More transparency around agent use recommended

At the same time, the MAC also found that “some agents and subagents recruiting international students are mis-selling UK higher education and exploiting students in the process.” They consider that “most agents play an important role in promoting the UK and in supporting international students,” but they also “found some examples of bad practice from certain agents.”

The MAC has two recommendations to respond to this concern:

1. That the Government establishes a mandatory registration system for international recruitment agents and subagents which encompasses the quality controls in the voluntary Agent Quality Framework, consulting with the Devolved Administrations to ensure UK-wide coverage.
   
2. That universities should be required to publish data on their spend on recruitment agents and the number of international students recruited through such means annually as a starting point to improving disclosure.

Better data is a must

A standout recommendation made in the letter was the need to ground policies – and policy changes – in solid evidence and accurate data:

“We recommend that the Government should only open new migration routes or make significant policy changes when it has a clear plan for how it will collect and monitor data to assess the effectiveness of the route against its objectives and understand wider impacts.”

Reviewing and clarifying which data is used to make decisions is also recommended, and the MAC found that some of the data they were asked to consider in their review was not the appropriate data for their task:

“We note that some of the data you referred to in your commissioning letter was incorrect. This data was not referring to those that had switched from the Graduate route to the Skilled Worker route, rather it covered those that had switched from the Student route to the Skilled Worker route. This takes us to our next recommendation; we recommend the Home Office undertakes a review of the data variables used for analytical purposes across the largest visa routes (including the Skilled Worker route, Student route and Graduate route) to develop a clear definition of what these data represent, and the quality of each variable collected.”

Early sector reaction

Responding to the report, Vivienne Stern, Chief Executive of Universities UK, said that the conclusions drawn by Migration Advisory Committee are “extremely important and welcome.” However, Ms Stern did not mince words in describing how destabilising the uncertainty around the fate of the Graduate Route has been for UK universities and international education stakeholders. In a statement, she wrote:

“The MAC’s recommendation that the Graduate route should remain on its current terms is extremely important and welcome. The uncertainty caused by the decision to review the visa has been toxic. We hope and expect that government now listens to the advice they have been given and provides categorical reassurance that the Graduate visa is here to stay.”

Ms Stern continued:

“As the MAC report makes clear, international students who remain to work in the UK on the Graduate Route are net contributors to the UK, important to our ability to compete as a study destination, and crucial to university finances. We understand the political pressure to reduce migration but, as the report makes clear, changes introduced earlier this year to prevent postgraduate taught students bringing dependants have already had a very significant effect. Recruitment ahead of September is already looking incredibly challenging, and the government should recognise this and that going further would be a serious mistake.

We agree there is room to improve, building on what universities themselves have done, to tighten agent management and increase resilience in the system.

What is needed now is stability – we need the Government to provide much needed reassurance to both universities and international students that the Graduate route is here to stay.”

Dr Tim Bradshaw, Chief Executive of the Russell Group concurred with Ms Stern’s positive assessment of the review, and like Ms Stern, he also wrote about the damaging effect of uncertainty around the Graduate Route:

“The MAC’s thoughtful review is crystal clear: the Graduate Route should be retained in full, finding no evidence of widespread abuse. “International students bring huge value to our university communities, offering global perspectives and important skills, and creating diverse learning environments. As the MAC recognises, they are also critical to the financial sustainability of our world-leading universities. Moreover, the Graduate route plays a crucial role in ensuring the UK is an attractive destination for global talent.

We recognise concerns around the behaviour of some agents and we would support targeted measures to address this. However, the overall message from the MAC is that the Graduate Route is achieving its objectives as set out by the Government. We would therefore urge Ministers to end the uncertainty and confirm as soon as possible that the route will continue in its entirety.”

“Post-study work is an essential part of the UK’s offer to international students,” reads a statement from the UK Council for International Student Affairs (UKCISA). “It helps to ensure that international students continue to choose a UK education and support a diverse intercultural learning environment for all students. It is one of the primary factors in their selection of a study destination. The Graduate route provides a flexible pathway for international graduates to gain work experience and complement the skills developed during their degree…The removal of – or restrictions to – the Graduate route would have a significant negative impact on the attractiveness of the UK as a study destination and therefore the financial stability of the sector and wider UK economy.”

Conservative politicians criticise review

Former immigration minister Robert Jenrick called the MAC review’s conclusions and recommendations “whitewashing” and laid the blame at the feet of Home Secretary James Cleverly. As reported by The Guardian, Mr Jenrick wrote on X (formerly Twitter): “The MAC’s conclusions have clearly been constrained by the narrow terms of reference deliberately set by the government … if you order white paint, you get a whitewash.”

Tory MP and ally of Mr Jenrick agreed and insinuated that the MAC was biased in favour of the higher education sector: “We are pursuing an arbitrary target, and the expansion of universities for their own sake.”

The Guardian reports: “Another Conservative MP said backbenchers were ‘piling pressure’ on Rishi Sunak to ignore the committee’s conclusions,” and that as relieved as university chancellors are about the findings of the review, “higher education leaders said they still feared No 10 could cherrypick elements of the report to justify a further crackdown.”

Higher education stakeholders have been told they can expect the government’s response to the report next week. Alex Proudfoot, the chief executive of the representative body Independent Higher Education, called for swift action:

“We urge the government to swiftly confirm they will follow their experts’ recommendation that the graduate visa be retained in its current form and commit afresh to working with the education sector to maximise the benefits that international students bring.”

Meanwhile, Times Higher Education reports that according to a government spokesman, ministers were “committed to attracting the best and brightest to study at our world-class universities, whilst preventing abuse of our immigration system” and had already “taken decisive action to address unsustainable levels of migration.” He said, “our plans are working, with a 24 per cent drop in visa applications across key routes in the first three months of this year, compared with the same period last year …. We are considering the review’s findings very closely and we will respond fully in due course.”

Changes to Graduate Route could threaten UK universities’ viability, warns the MAC

In the foreword to the review report, the MAC urges the government to consider the risks associated with an overhaul of the Graduate Route:

“This [international education] is a competitive market and students that are planning to study abroad unsurprisingly exhibit flexibility over country choice. There are two inevitable consequences of further restrictions. First, the government will likely fail to achieve the target set in the International Education Strategy. We have assumed that this strategy remains government policy as it was highlighted to us in the commissioning letter. Second, universities across the nations of the UK will experience further substantial financial difficulty leading to job losses, course closures and a reduction in research, and in the extreme it is not inconceivable that some institutions would fail.”

Moreover, the MAC review suggests that if anyone is looking to lay blame for UK universities’ overreliance on international student revenues, they might want to look elsewhere than the universities themselves: “As in social care, it is the failure to properly fund the sector that has led to an increasing overreliance on immigration.”

For additional background, please see:

The Australian government announced over the weekend that it will introduce legislation this week to further “support the integrity and sustainability of the international education sector”. An 11 May media release explains that the legislative package represents “the next step in delivering on the objectives of the Government’s Migration Strategy.”

The headline item from the announcement is that the planned legislation will allow Minister for Education Jason Clare to limit the number of new international enrolments that can be offered by Australian providers. The Australian newspaper characterised those new limits as a “soft cap”, which is “better than the alternative of a rigid limit on student numbers”. That softness, or flexibility, in the cap model arises from a provision that allows providers to recruit above a cap limit if they “establish additional, new supply of purpose-built student accommodation to benefit both international and domestic students and free up pressure on the rental market.”

The sector will need a great deal more detail on the implementation of the new cap before drawing any hard conclusions, but even so there is no mistaking that this represents a significant setback for Australia’s international education sector, which has been campaigning for months against any such limits on foreign enrolment.

In addition to the enrolment cap, the planned legislation will introduce a package of additional measures, some of which have been floated by the government previously. More specifically:

• Education providers will be prevented from holding ownership positions in education agencies;

• Registrations for new international education providers will be paused for up to 12 months; as will approvals of new courses proposed by existing registered providers;

• Institutions or schools seeking to register as international education providers will be required to demonstrate “a track record of quality education delivery to domestic students before they are allowed to recruit international students”;

• Dormant provider registrations will be cancelled;

• Registered providers under regulatory investigation will be banned from recruiting new international students;

• There will be additional data sharing related to education agents; and

• Agent commissions on onshore student transfers will be prohibited.

“Most providers do the right thing and are in education and training for the right reasons,” said Minister for Skills and Training Brendan O’Connor, in introducing the new measures this weekend. “They will benefit from a high quality and sustainable international education sector, and the Government’s efforts to crack down on non-genuine and unscrupulous actors who undermine integrity and trust in the sector.” At the same time, he added, ““Because there is no place for dodgy operators who undermine the strong reputation of the sector, we are making it tougher for bottom-feeders to take advantage of international students for a quick buck.”

Early sector response

Responding quickly to the government announcement, Universities Australia Chief Executive Luke Sheehy said, “Decades of careful and strategic work by universities and the Government has seen Australia grow to be a leading provider of international education. We can’t let this work go to waste…We will be working closely with the Government to co-design the policy settings needed to give the international education sector a strong and sustainable footing from which to grow into the future.”

Phil Honeywood, the CEO of the International Education Association of Australia (IEAA), added that, “Under the [pending legislation], the Federal Government is looking to allocate a limit on the number of new overseas student enrolments available to each CRICOS [Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students] registered provider.

While stakeholder consultations are being offered, this latest measure will send all the wrong messages, yet again, of Australia’s reliability as a welcoming study destination country. Coming on top of the recently announced changes to financial capability requirements, visa processing slowdowns and backlogs, prospective students and our education agents will feel incredibly let down. Other measures, such as big increases in student visa fees, are also anticipated.”

“Given that importance, any mix of policy settings must be considered, and nuanced. If the problems are neither simple nor one-dimensional then the solutions won’t be either,” said Group of Eight Chief Executive Vicki Thomson. “Consultation will be crucial to ensure we get the settings right.”

Framework for consultation

In their joint release over the weekend, Minister for Education Jason Clare, Minister for Skills and Training Brendan O’Connor, and Minister for Home Affairs Clare O’Neil also released a draft International Education and Skills Strategic Framework. The Framework elaborates on each component of the pending legislation as outlined above, and sets the stage for a government-industry consultation on the implementation of these new measures and other longer-term directions in Australia’s international education sector.

“The Government will consult with the sector on all aspects of the Framework over the coming months and release the final Framework later this year,” said the joint release, while Minister O’Neil added that, ““With international student visa grants back to pre-pandemic levels, the focus now shifts to ensuring numbers in the sector are managed more strategically over the long-term.”

The Framework sets out a broad range of consultative questions, including:

• “Are there further reforms governments should consider that will improve the quality and integrity of the sector?”
• “What more can providers do to improve the integrity of the international education sector?”
• “What factors should inform government’s approach to allocating international student enrolments across sectors, providers, and locations in Australia?”

“This Strategic Framework marks a significant shift for Australia’s international education sector,” concludes the draft Framework paper. “Government invites views from the sector and interested parties on the issues raised ahead of finalising the Strategic Framework later in 2024.”

“The Government is committed to the careful management of Australia’s international education sector, and to strengthening its quality, integrity and reputation. We seek to shape a sector which is sustainable in the long-term and which plays a leading role in delivering on Australia’s national objectives. Enhancing the quality and integrity of the sector, strongly aligning education outcomes with areas of skills needs, and continuing to build our innovative delivery models are just some of the key measures that will help advance Australia’s position as a world leader in education.”

There is little to argue with in those statements. But even so the sector will reasonably enough wonder about the nature of the upcoming consultation. That this week’s announcement of an enrolment cap (and related measures) came unexpectedly over a weekend – and with a framework already in place – will leave many to question if the government has set the stage for a real collaborative consultation or has simply laid down a roadmap for further reforms.

For additional background, please see:

The UK’s tightened immigration settings are having a profound effect on international student demand for educational programmes in the UK. In particular, the rule that took effect in January 2024 stipulating that international undergraduates and master’s students cannot bring their dependants is dampening demand from the key student markets of Nigeria and India.

In the first three months of 2024 (January, February, March), the latest data from the UK Home Office shows that 40,700 “sponsored study” visa applications were filed by international students, compared with 72,800 in the same period in 2023 – amounting to a 44% decrease overall.

The main driver of the decline is a dramatic fall-off in applications for accompanying dependants. In 2023, there were 39,900 “main applicant” submissions for study visas and 32,900 dependant applications. By comparison, in the same time frame in 2024, there were 34,000 submissions from “main applicants” (-15% from 2023) and only 6,700 for dependants (-80%).

Leaving aside dependant-applicants for a moment, this means that the volume of applications for “main applicants” has declined by just over -27% over the last two years.

The chart below shows the spike in applications from both main applicants and dependants in the months just after the May 2023 announcement of the ban on dependants (other than those attached to students pursuing post-graduate research degrees). The volume of applications then began to fall in September 2023. The “main applicants” volume picked up again in October-December 2023, but not to the same level as in those months in 2022. Dependants’ applications continued to decline through March 2024.

An accompanying statement from the UK Home Office adds that, “It will be necessary to await the peak in student applications for the next academic year (which usually comes in August/September) before we can see the full effect of recent policy changes and any other impacts.”

The student accommodation provider Sturents.com reports that according to UK government data, Indian student applications had already slipped by 13% in 2023 and Nigerian applications had plummeted by 63.5%. In contrast, Chinese students submitted more applications in 2023 for study in the UK.

Data from the student enrolment platform Enroly (used by about a third of UK universities) show that the trend of declining Indian and Nigerian demand in 2023 has carried through to this year. For India, universities had issued 34% fewer Confirmations of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) to students in the January 2024 intake compared with the January 2023 intake, and deposits were off by 38%. For Nigeria, CAS issuance was off by 71% and deposits were 22% lower than in 2023.

UK business schools, which deliver so many postgraduate-taught programmes, are also noticing the effects of the dependants ban this year. Just over three quarters (76%) of 50 UK institutions responding to a Chartered Association of Business Schools survey said that their non-EU enrolments had fallen in the January 2024 intake. And a Universities UK survey of 73 member universities found that on average, international student enrolments in postgraduate-taught courses starting in January 2024 were 44% lower than in January 2023.

Robert MacIntosh, Chair of the Chartered Association of Business Schools and Pro-Vice Chancellor for the School of Business and Law at Northumbria University said:

“These latest results show the potential for the government’s immigration policies to severely damage one of the UK’s most successful exports. The decline in international business student enrolments will limit a vital source of universities’ income which underpins the cost of teaching and research across subject areas far beyond business and management.”

UK universities are bracing for the results of a government review of the popular Graduate Route, which allows internationals students to remain in the UK for 2-3 years after completing their studies. That review, which intends to examine if the route is being exploited, is due to be released in the next couple of months.

In recent months, international students have also had to face a 65% increase to the Immigration Health Surcharge fee. The fee for health coverage rose to £776 per year in February 2024.

For additional background, please see:

The following feature is adapted from the 2024 edition of ICEF Insights magazine. The digital edition of the magazine is freely available to download.

There’s a good chance you already know where a lot of your best prospects are right now. Need a hint? Many of them are online, and especially on their favourite social media and messaging channels. Those students are exploring where they want to study, and they’re following the links savvy institutions are incorporating into posts and videos.

When students click on one of those links, where do they go? In many cases, to an institutional website. This is good, but not always ideal. That’s because prospects could instead be directed to a landing page designed to:

• Answer their top questions;
• Intrigue them;
• Persuade them to take an action that leads them closer to enrolment.

What is a landing page?

A landing page is a focused webpage designed for a segment of prospective students (e.g., international students in general, students from a particularly important target country, or students interested in a specific programme).

A landing page is meant to generate the most promising leads for an educational institution. Defining a clear goal to guide the design is essential. For example, you might want students to submit an application on the page, connect with a student ambassador, or fill out a contact form to request more information.

Institutions can also create a landing page for a specific campaign. This has the benefit of allowing a school to measure the success of a marketing initiative. For example, did the Facebook campaign in West Africa drive students to take an action on an associated landing page? Did a student fair in Bangladesh result in Bangladeshi students submitting contact forms on the landing page linked to the event?

Anatomy of a good landing page

UCLA developed an effective landing page for one of its continuing education programmes: its Certificate in Small Business Management and Technology. This is an example of a landing page targeted at a segment of students interested in developing a particular skill and certification to give them a boost in their current career as a small business owner or employee.

The page designers clearly knew:

• What kinds of questions and goals target students would have;
• What kinds of students should – and importantly, should not – apply to the course;
• What calls to action (CTAs) should be on the page: “Apply Now” and “Contact Us”.

1. Succinct explanation of benefits

2. Brief presentation of details

3. All-important video testimonial

4. Proof of graduate outcomes

5. Info to weed out unqualified leads (e.g., if students do not have required courses or adequate funds, they will not apply)

6. Call to action: Apply Now

7. Secondary call to action: Contact Us

The link to efficiency

Students want to find the exact information they’re looking for quickly, and they want their questions answered immediately. A good landing page can serve their needs. Similarly, a well-designed landing page allows admissions staff  to persuade best-fit students to press onward on the path towards enrolment.

For additional background, please see:

There is less than a week to go until the Australian budget is announced, and many international education stakeholders in the country are worried about what it might include. There is concern that the government is seriously entertaining a proposal the Grattan Institute made in February 2024 to raise international students’ visa application fee from AUS$710 (already higher than the fees in Canada and the US) to AUS$2,500. This more-than-tripling of the fee would remain non-refundable; students who were not approved for a visa would not receive their money back.

While the sector waits to find out if a fee hike will be part of the budget, it is adjusting to the announcement that the government has raised the minimum funds requirement for international students applying for an Australian study visa – the second increase in less than a year. As of 10 May 2024, primary applicants must show funds of at least AUS$29,710 (US$19,537), a 21% increase on the previous amount of AUS$24,505. By comparison, the new requirement is about US$5,000 higher than what students need to show on a Canadian study permit application.

The Australian government says the new minimum funds threshold aligns with a proportion – 75% – of the national minimum wage and that it “will better indicate the amount of money considered reasonable to provide a minimum standard of living while studying in Australia.”

Why would the government consider a visa application increase?

The rationale for significantly raising international students’ visa application fees, as proposed by the Grattan Institute, is that the proceeds from these fees would help to cover an increase in Commonwealth Rent Assistance for poorer Australians who are struggling with high costs of living and accommodation.

Housing, cost of living, and health care are top issues for Australian voters in 2024 and leading into federal election year 2025. While Commonwealth Rent Assistance has been linked to an overall increase in rental prices for those not eligible for it, a top-up to the programme is considered a likely feature of the budget according to political insiders.

The Grattan Institute proposal directly links high international student numbers in Australia to the housing crisis – a claim that has since been debunked by new research. The Grattan Institute likes the “immediate” impact that a fee hike would have in terms of being able to bolster the Commonwealth Rent Assistance fund and considers its impact to be in line with the government’s crackdown on non-genuine students and shady agents and institutions. It favours a fee increase over the idea of a levy:

“A levy [another idea that has been floated] would penalise our top-tier universities that are most attractive to international students, whereas higher student visa application fees would also discourage the growing number of international students who complete cheaper, low-value courses from coming to Australia.”

The Grattan Institute concluded its proposal with this assertion: “Australia’s international education sector delivers huge benefits to Australia, but it also leads to higher rents, hurting vulnerable Australians.”

The damage that could be done

There is little doubt that the optics of an application fee hike are attractive to certain segments of Australians – i.e., those made desperate by affordability issues and politicians on the receiving end of their frustration. But many point out that a massive hike in non-refundable application fees – especially at a time when student visa rejection rates are soaring – would quickly persuade international students to choose alternative destinations.

Abul Rivsi, writing in Independent Australia, disagrees with the Grattan Institute’s assertion that the fee hike would only dissuade students interested in low-value courses in Australia. He believes it will “mean that the best students, who generally have greater choices in where they decide to study, will more likely choose other nations over Australia” and he poses the rhetorical question: “Why risk a non-refundable application fee of $2,500 when the outcome is uncertain?”

Mr Rivsi (a columnist who is also a former Deputy Secretary to the Department of Education) cautions the government against imagining that an application fee would kill two birds with one stone (i.e., discouraging a certain segment of student from applying and providing more rental assistance to poor Australians). Instead, Mr Rivsi recommends “rethinking the overseas student program to make it genuinely focused on attracting only the brightest and best students … it should take note of the recent report of the University Accord to encourage overseas students to study in areas of long-term skill shortage.”

The chief executive of the Independent Tertiary Education Council Australia, Troy Williams, told The Guardian that a fee hike “would be consistent with the Australian government’s clear policy intent to reduce the size of the international education sector.” He says there is a misalignment between Australia’s international education positioning and its immigration policies:

“The former encourages international students to take up study in Australia and the latter seems to say that these students should stay home. There is a real inconsistency there.”

Paul Karp, The Guardian Australia‘s chief political correspondent, offered this assessment of whether the international student visa fee hike will come to pass in an April 2024 article:

“Demanding more cash for international student visa applications is an incredibly blunt instrument, but for its potential to raise revenue, dampen demand and rebuff [opposition leader] Dutton, it may prove irresistible for Labor.”

The Australian budget will be announced 14 May 2024.

For additional background, please see:

A new report asserts that there is no basis for blaming international students for the lack of housing (and lack of affordable housing) in Australia. Research commissioned by the Student Accommodation Council, a peak body for the country’s purpose-built student accommodation sector (PBSA), found no alignment between the return of international students to Australia – after borders reopened post-pandemic – and rents increasing.

Instead, says the report, entitled Myth busting international students’ role in the rental crisis, “rents began rising in 2020, when there was no international student migration and most students had returned home.” There is data to back the point: “Between 2019 and 2023, median weekly rent increased by thirty per cent. Over the same period, student visa arrivals decreased by 13%.”

Student Accommodation Council executive director Torie Brown writes in the report: “International students have been unfairly blamed for the rental crisis, yet this report shows that long-term structural issues in Australia’s housing market are the real cause for rental pressures.”

The research found that international students make up only 4% of all renters in Australia. Domestic students compose 6.2%, and the remainder are non-students. What’s more, the vast majority of international students do not live in the housing most in demand in Australia. Only 3% live in detached houses suitable for couples or families, while 74% live in PBSA close to universities.

The Student Accommodation Council attributes the housing crisis in Australia to “a complex web of supply and demand drivers …. including the rise of smaller and solo-person households, intrastate migration, rising construction costs, planning delays and a trend to re-purposing second bedrooms into home offices, amongst others.”

Now that international students have returned, however, there is a great need for increasing the supply of purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA). Vacancy rates in major Australian cities are currently around 1%, and rental prices have been climbing for months.

Unfortunately, the Student Accommodation Council says that looking at the pipeline of new PBSA currently (7,770 new beds), there will not be enough supply to ease pressure on the rental market from international students by 2026. That would only be accomplished if there were 84,000 beds ready by that time.

A key issue undermining progress at getting enough accommodation built, says the report, is cumbersome approval processes that delay completion of projects.

Go8 research echoes the findings

Separate research by the Group of Eight (Go8), which represents Australia’s leading research-intensive universities, also lays the blame for the housing crisis on supply-side issues, rather than excessive demand from international students. The policy paper, International students and housing and other cost of living pressures, argues that no matter how many international students were provided with visas, current supply chain dynamics dictate that there would still be a housing crisis.

Go8 Chief Executive Vicki Thomson writes:

“The number of international student arrivals has no direct bearing on underlying supply side factors which include decades of underinvestment; Government regulation, planning approvals, elevated construction costs and workforce shortages; supply chain disruptions; and weak productivity growth. Any plans to impose a cap on international students as one mechanism to ease housing pressure – especially during a domestic skills crisis – is short-sighted and risks putting a brake on Australia’s economic growth and prosperity.”

Like the Student Accommodation Council’s report, the Go8 report charts data underlining the myth that increasing volumes of international students over the past few years correlates with lower residency vacancy rates.

Ms Thomson encourages the government to consider how much international students contribute to Australia’s prosperity – a 0.8% increase in GDP in 2023 is directly attributable to these students:

“We caution against apportioning blame to one cohort of students who were responsible for most of the nation’s economic growth. In 2023, following a downturn during the COVID-19 pandemic, total spending by international students bounced back to $47.8 billion. International students contributed an 0.8 per cent increase in GDP over 2023 (more than half of the recorded 1.5 per cent economic growth) according to the National Australia Bank.”

The Go8 report concludes by saying that a Canada-style blanket-cap on new international student visas is not the way forward:

“If the Australian Government’s resolution is that net overseas migration numbers must be eased, a blunt instrument such as immediate caps on international students attending Australian universities is not a smart solution as already outlined.

The Go8 does support targeted interventions to tackle “ghost colleges and visa factories” together with strengthened English language requirements for visas to ensure the integrity of Australia’s (international) education and migration systems.”

For additional background, please see:

The following feature is adapted from the 2024 edition of ICEF Insights magazine. The digital edition of the magazine is freely available to download.

TikTok’s massive popularity shows no signs of abating despite growing concern that its parent company, ByteDance, could share users’ data with the Chinese government. The app is banned from government-issued phones in dozens of countries and is prohibited entirely in Pakistan and India. In the US, the possibility of a nationwide ban looms.

But young people in more than 160­ countries continue to flock to TikTok, unable to tear themselves away from watching, sharing, and creating addictive short-form videos on the platform.

Even if TikTok ceased to exist, short-form videos would remain a powerful marketing opportunity for international student recruiters. Video is by far Gen Z’s preferred type of social media content – students are also happy to indulge in Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts. In fact, savvy marketers already use apps that optimise videos across TikTok, Reels, and Shorts to extend their audience reach and ensure their video strategy can withstand shifts in platform access or popularity.

The key to creating short-form videos that resonate with students is to be funny or brilliantly intriguing. TikTok requires a radically di‹fferent tone than Facebook or X (formerly Twitter). Students will quickly dismiss boring, corporate, or overly promotional branded videos. They will, in contrast, engage with and share videos from brands that create entertaining and trending content.

Long-term ROI

A major benefit of short videos is that they can gain new viewers at any point, so their value can increase over time. For example, a video might be picked back up by TikTok’s For You Page (FYP) months after it was originally published. Ad campaigns can be adjusted so that a video can reach new audiences, increasing the potential for it to go viral.

For international student recruiters, short-form videos are an efficient way of reaching multiple markets even across language barriers: the videos are so short and visual that it doesn’t take an Einstein to get the gist, even if a viewer doesn’t understand every word. Ideally, your institution can make videos in prospective students’ first languages, but if not, any awesome video can make an impact because it’s visual and effects-based first and foremost.

5 tips for reaching prospective students with short-form videos

1. Do your research

• First, check out what your competitors are doing. What’s their approach and tone? How frequently are they posting? Is it working? The answers can inform your own strategy.
• Second, find out what’s trending. Hit “Discover” when you open TikTok, Reels Trends in Instagram, and Trending on YouTube to see popular effects, hashtags, sounds, music, and topics.
• Third, consider the type of content your target students already watch. Top categories for Gen Z include fashion and skincare; fitness and motivation; music and pop culture; study abroad, travel, and budget-friendly tips; food and cooking; and humour. The great thing about marketing to students is that they’re interested in so many things!

2. Tap into what’s trending in target markets

A global TikTok strategy can be challenging to execute given that TikTok’s algorithm prioritises local content. In-country representatives, agents, and alumni who have returned home can be very helpful here because they can share your videos in target countries. Other tips:

• Create captions and on-video text in prospective students’ languages;
• Interview current international students in their first language and have them share the videos with friends and influencers back home;
• Take part in TikTok challenges that are trending in target countries;
• Follow and engage with influencers in your top markets.

3. Don’t lecture

Build your credibility and personality through videos that are as fun as they are informational. Create a friendship-like relationship with your fans rather than speaking “at” them. Check in with your current international students to see if anyone is already making great short-form videos, and ask if they will apply their talent for the benefit of their school, too.

4. Give it a hook

Gen Z’s attention span is down to eight seconds, so you have very little time to convince students to check out your video. Here are some ideas for hooks to use in your video description:

• Ask a question viewers really want the answer to;
• Begin with a problem and hint that you have the solution;
• Be a bit shocking or surprising;
• Share a secret (like an early-bird discount);
• Present a bold fact (e.g., “92% get a job within 6 months of graduation”).

5. Comment and encourage comments

TikTok’s algorithm rewards frequent user engagement, and it looks for meaningful interaction. Take the time to respond thoughtfully to comments – TikTok ranks comments by how many “likes” they get, so boring responses won’t get you anywhere. Comment on others’ videos, too – it’s another way of increasing your visibility and presence on the platform.

For additional background, please see: