A lot of people are following the current discussion among our American colleagues about the use of agents in the recruitment of international students. The National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC) has charged a special commission with making recommendations about the practice, and as recently reported in the Pie News and Inside Higher Ed, a "pre-release version of the commission report" is having a bit of an each way bet - urging NACAC to lift a ban on the practice, while at the same time discouraging it. The recommended phrase “should not” rather than “may not” is seen as sending a strong message about use of agents, but would not amount to an outright ban. The report states that “best practice” would be for institutions not to use agents, which makes me wonder – best practice in what?
To answer this question we need to go back a step and ask the question “why use agents at all?”. In my view there are two main reasons, equally important.
The first is to enable universities to compete effectively in the global competition to recruit the best possible students. Some of us are lucky enough to work at institutions which through their history, position, reputation and research performance don’t have to do much at all to attract significant interest from prospective international students. Most of us are not. Most institutions need to be more proactive in attracting the type and mix of international students needed to optimise the diversity and size of their on-campus enrolment. IIE tells us that there were a little over 600,000 international undergraduate and graduate students in US higher education institutions in 2012 (Fast Facts), 120,000 of them (or 20%) at just 20 institutions. Based on that concentration of international students in a small number of institutions I would suggest that most American universities have not optimised their on-campus international enrolments to the extent they would like to. Agents provide reach into source countries in ways that most universities cannot otherwise achieve, particularly with limited international office resources. And as NACAC itself admits, about 20% of institutions (those that are prepared to fess up) are already using agents.
The second reason for using student recruitment agents is service provision. I recently submitted an enquiry to Education USA about study opportunities in the US. The automated email response I received (“Dear Connelly?”) included the following FAQ information:
There are so many schools in the U.S. How do I decide which school to apply to?
To research undergraduate study opportunities go to:
http://www.collegeboard.com/student/csearch/index.html
Take the time needed to browse through the different search areas to find schools that match your preferences and needs, choosing locations in the US in which you would like to live and continue your studies. Then go to each university’s website to learn more, research their requirements for application, and check their admission deadlines.
Go to each university’s website? I have just been doing that with my daughter who is researching exchange opportunities. Easier said than done. Even universities with sizeable international student populations have pretty poorly organised websites when it comes to information for prospective international students. The ‘do it yourself’ approach just isn’t going to cut it if American universities want to compete with the more seasoned recruiting countries.
Is using agents to recruit international students risky?
Absolutely. But it is manageable. The NACAC report rightly points out the complexities and challenges of international student recruitment via agents. Jumping in with little or no experience would be a recipe for disaster, and organisations such as the American International Recruitment Council with agent certification, and NAFSA with webinars on approaches to student recruitment, provide evidence of the current efforts in the US to devise a system that works for institutions and for students. NACAC’s Statement of Principles of Good Practice that ethical college admission is a ‘cornerstone’ of the organisation indicates the seriousness of the debate. Domestic student recruitment and international student recruitment are different, but there are ways to ensure that service provision to prospective international students is conducted ethically, and that breaches are punishable.
Within the context of regulatory frameworks, accreditation systems, professional development, benchmarking and institutional accountability it is possible to devise and implement a best practice approach to international student recruitment that serves the dual objectives of institutions seeking to internationalise, and students seeking the best possible study options.
To answer this question we need to go back a step and ask the question “why use agents at all?”. In my view there are two main reasons, equally important.
The first is to enable universities to compete effectively in the global competition to recruit the best possible students. Some of us are lucky enough to work at institutions which through their history, position, reputation and research performance don’t have to do much at all to attract significant interest from prospective international students. Most of us are not. Most institutions need to be more proactive in attracting the type and mix of international students needed to optimise the diversity and size of their on-campus enrolment. IIE tells us that there were a little over 600,000 international undergraduate and graduate students in US higher education institutions in 2012 (Fast Facts), 120,000 of them (or 20%) at just 20 institutions. Based on that concentration of international students in a small number of institutions I would suggest that most American universities have not optimised their on-campus international enrolments to the extent they would like to. Agents provide reach into source countries in ways that most universities cannot otherwise achieve, particularly with limited international office resources. And as NACAC itself admits, about 20% of institutions (those that are prepared to fess up) are already using agents.
The second reason for using student recruitment agents is service provision. I recently submitted an enquiry to Education USA about study opportunities in the US. The automated email response I received (“Dear Connelly?”) included the following FAQ information:
There are so many schools in the U.S. How do I decide which school to apply to?
To research undergraduate study opportunities go to:
http://www.collegeboard.com/student/csearch/index.html
Take the time needed to browse through the different search areas to find schools that match your preferences and needs, choosing locations in the US in which you would like to live and continue your studies. Then go to each university’s website to learn more, research their requirements for application, and check their admission deadlines.
Go to each university’s website? I have just been doing that with my daughter who is researching exchange opportunities. Easier said than done. Even universities with sizeable international student populations have pretty poorly organised websites when it comes to information for prospective international students. The ‘do it yourself’ approach just isn’t going to cut it if American universities want to compete with the more seasoned recruiting countries.
Is using agents to recruit international students risky?
Absolutely. But it is manageable. The NACAC report rightly points out the complexities and challenges of international student recruitment via agents. Jumping in with little or no experience would be a recipe for disaster, and organisations such as the American International Recruitment Council with agent certification, and NAFSA with webinars on approaches to student recruitment, provide evidence of the current efforts in the US to devise a system that works for institutions and for students. NACAC’s Statement of Principles of Good Practice that ethical college admission is a ‘cornerstone’ of the organisation indicates the seriousness of the debate. Domestic student recruitment and international student recruitment are different, but there are ways to ensure that service provision to prospective international students is conducted ethically, and that breaches are punishable.
Within the context of regulatory frameworks, accreditation systems, professional development, benchmarking and institutional accountability it is possible to devise and implement a best practice approach to international student recruitment that serves the dual objectives of institutions seeking to internationalise, and students seeking the best possible study options.
RSS Feed