According to the Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2015/16:

Australia
22 of 40 Australian universities are in the world's top 400 - those 22 universities enrol 65% of Australia's university students. 65% of Australia's 1.3 million students are in universities in the world’s top 400.

USA 
112 of over 3,000 four year degree granting institutions in the USA are in the world's top 400 - those 112 universities enrol 20% of America's 13.4 million students. 20% of 13.4 million US students are in universities in the world's top 400.

UK
46 of 161 UK universities are in the world’s top 400 - those 46 universities enrol 33% of the UK's 2.3 million students. 33% of 2.3 million UK students are in universities in the world’s top 400.

Just one way of looking at the rankings results.
​

Discussion about the significance of international students for Australian universities often centres around their revenue contribution, and the risk associated with maintaining or growing enrolment levels in a system with a greater proportion of international students than almost any other in the world. This ignores the importance of international students in classrooms and on campuses around Australia, bringing different perspectives and helping local students develop a global mindset, including for about 15% of local students participation in overseas mobility programs. Acknowledging the need for a more comprehensive appreciation of Australian universities’ internationalisation programs, this article continues the focus on enrolment and revenue, to clarify the extent of the reliance or otherwise of Australian universities on international students.
 
Each year Australian universities report enrolment and revenue data to the Department of Education and Training (DET). This data set is a rich source of information about enrolment, revenue, academic success and attrition rates. Of specific interest are proportions of students who are international, proportion of revenue sourced from international students, and academic success of students. 2014 enrolment data are now available, with finance data released around November each year.
 
In 2014, 24.3% of students in Australian universities were international.
 
Proportions of University Students who are International - all Modes

Proportions here include students studying outside Australia, either online, at branch campuses or in offshore partnership programs.
 
In 2014, 18.7% of university students studying onshore in Australia were international. Recently, growth in international students has not kept pace with growth in domestic students.
 
Proportions of University Students who are International - Onshore

Open Doors and OECD data show that Australia’s proportion of international students compares with UK 17%, Canada 16%, USA 4.2%.
 
In 2013, 16.3% of total revenue at Australia’s universities came from international student tuition fees.
 
Proportion of revenue from international students

​Does 16.3% represent unhealthy over-reliance? I don’t think so. There is risk involved in managing any revenue source. Far worse to be over-reliant on government revenue. The prosecution respectfully presents as evidence recent shenanigans in Australia purporting to be informed policy debate about university funding, with a starting point of 20% reduction in government contributions. Give me business risk any day.
 
Finally, international students commencing bachelor degrees in Australian universities in 2014 passed 85.2% of what they attempted in first year, higher than domestic students (83.4%), the third year in a row that international students have bettered their domestic peers. Australian universities pay attention to the academic success of international students.

Originally published in The Pie News 2/10/2015  

Footnote: Australia in 2012 had the second highest proportion of international students among its undergraduate population of any OECD economy, behind Luxembourg.

Approach

Using data from the Australian Government’s Higher Education Information Management System (HEIMS) we examined enrolments of international students at Australian universities in two postgraduate business courses, the Master of Business Administration (MBA) and the Master of International Business (MIB).

Onshore and offshore enrolments over a three-year period (2011-2013) were examined.  This is the most up to date data, 2014 data not being available until mid 2015.

The analysis focused on those Australian universities offering the two designated courses. Data allowed for analysis in numerous ways, including as a time series.  However, for initial purposes, findings are presented for 2013 only.

Selected charts and tables are presented in this summary of findings.  Sets of charts and tables were prepared for the Australian universities as a whole as well as for the Group of Eight (Go8), Australian Technology Network (ATN), Innovative Research Universities (IRU) and Regional Universities Network (RUN).  The full sets are not shown here for reasons of brevity. Substantial tabulated data form the basis of the analysis.

The analysis was framed in two main ways:

 1.     Benchmarking all Australian universities offering the designated courses (each course examined separately)
2.     Benchmarking universities within designated network groups (Go8, ATN, IRU, RUN).

Benchmarking measured data according to two criteria:

1.     Proportion of enrolled international students within each course compared with the national average and with the average for the designated university group;
2.     Market share represented by enrolled international students compared with the national average and with the average for the designated university group.

The findings reveal substantial differences in international student enrolments among Australian universities for these two courses. Equally, within like groupings of universities, where greater uniformity in enrolment patterns might have been expected, there are significant differences between universities. 

Master of Business Administration (MBA) findings

In 2013, a total of 16,301 students were enrolled in Australian MBA courses, on and offshore. 6,949 or 42.6% were international students.   56.7% of those 6,949 international MBA students were enrolled onshore, the rest in offshore courses. 29.9% of onshore MBA students were international.

Onshore MBA analysis

39 Australian universities reported enrolments of international students in MBA courses in 2013. 6 universities had international MBA student numbers exceeding 50% of total MBA enrolments. Federation University led the pack on this basis with 77.9% of its MBA students being international, followed by the University of Southern Queensland (75.9%), Charles Darwin University (71.3%), James Cook University (71.1), Flinders University (66.7%) and Central Queensland University (53.4%).

The majority of universities however enrolled proportions of international students well under the average. Enrolment numbers as well as enrolment proportions were tiny in some cases.    

HEIMS data also allow examination of market share.  In 2013 the ATN universities, for example, attracted 10.3% of the total market share of onshore international MBA enrolments (Table 1).  The number of international enrolments amongst the ATN universities varies widely however, with some of the ATN universities having very small numbers of international MBA students.  University Technology Sydney enrolled 75.1% of international students in MBA courses at ATN universities, followed by RMIT (13.4%).  Market share for the remaining ATN universities was small in comparison. Apart from University Technology Sydney, ATN universities enroll far fewer and far smaller proportions of international students than Australian universities generally.

Table 1: Proportion of International Students in Onshore MBA Courses, ATN Universities 2013

Beginning next Thursday 2nd April in Townsville Austrade will commence a series of consultations workshops around the country to develop a long term international education market development strategy for the next decade. Austrade's plan, Australian International Education (AIE) 2025, will focus on Austrade's specific remit, to assist education providers and other organisations to maximise their potential in growing their international education business. The consultation workshops will provide an update on development of the plan thus far, an opportunity to listen to the sector's views on further development of that plan and a forum for participants' to discuss challenges to and opportunities for future growth. Trade Minister Andrew Robb in the Higher Education Supplement on Wednesday wrote that he has asked Austrade to "work with the international education sector this year, including with non-traditional players, to develop a long-term market development strategy out to 2025 ... (complementing) ... the work of federal Education Minister Christopher Pyne, who is finalising a broader national strategy for the international education sector."  He posited that Australia could teach up to 10 million students in the region in the next 10 years "if we adopt a wide range of different models across higher education, vocational education and training and secondary levels." That's some sort of challenge for the sector. But it could mean that education could challenge for the position of Australia's #1 export if we approach anywhere near those sort of numbers. To achieve this, we need to be thinking about innovation and disruptive technologies, not just standard modes of interaction and delivery.

The UK, Canada and New Zealand have all released international education strategies in the past two years, in each case with a focus on increasing international student enrolments. Competition for international students, those who travel overseas for their education and those who access international education at home, is intense and can only be expected to become more so, and not only from our traditional rivals. We need a plan if we are to compete successfully, and we need a coordinated approach to business and market development. Sounds to me like the Chaney recommendations are starting to be implemented. Imagine being part of a country whose major contribution to the world is education and education opportunities, instead of coal and iron ore.

I'd like to see that.

People are easily confused.

Which is fair enough given how complicated the world is. We just want things to be simple. So here I was in October last year, 6 months into running an independent consulting firm, and suddenly I’m Chief Executive of Education Adelaide.

People were confused.

It’s simple really. In May 2013 my colleague Dennis Murray and I undertook a review of Education Adelaide, at the request of its Board and the Department of Further Education Employment Science and Training (DFEEST) in South Australia. Education Adelaide had been advised that its government funding, $1.56 million annually, was to be cut from the middle of 2015. That essentially rendered the organisation incapable of doing anything useful.

Education Adelaide’s mission to promote Adelaide as an education destination to international students finds expression in two distinct and important activities:

1)    the implementation of a destination marketing campaign which supports the student recruitment activities of institutions; and
2)    post-arrival student and community engagement activities, which contribute to high satisfaction rates among international students in their experience of living and studying in Adelaide.

Its role is particularly critical in the face of competition from other cities in Australia trying to attract international students, and something no other entity in South Australia has the resources or expertise to replicate.

The review was intended to identify future sustainable funding models, but it was clear early on that without government funding (about 60% of the total budget) there was no way to replace that amount of money. Government funding had to at least be partially restored in order for Education Adelaide to be viable. To further compound the situation, long-standing Chief Executive Denise von Wald, having led the organisation with aplomb through the proverbial “interesting times” over 8 years, decided enough was enough and accepted a role in London with Tourism Australia. Who wouldn’t? The Board wisely decided that until the funding situation could be sorted out, there was no point going to market for a new Chief Executive, and I ended up in the role on an interim basis, with a simple and clear task – business as usual while working with Board Chair Bill Spurr to have funding reinstated, then look for a Chief Executive for an ongoing appointment.

Too easy.

At the same time the Board was generous enough to allow me to continue the development of my consulting work, which was starting to take off. Feast or famine, as they say. The logistics were biblical.

Did I mention that while all this was going on, I was coaching my son’s cricket team back in Melbourne? With the help of a great parent group. They won the premiership – here’s a photo.

Well done, boys. That’s James on the left holding the shield.

Long story short, an impending state election in March 2014 had everybody fired up about identifying the industries that were going to save South Australia’s economic bacon, given the demise of the automotive industry and the uncertainty facing the economy as a whole. In the lead up to the election, on the back of a subtle but persistent lobbying effort, both sides of politics committed to levels of funding that would assure Education Adelaide’s future. At $879 million worth of exports in 2012/13, international education is a big deal for the state’s economy. Recent figures show 2013 calendar year exports at $924 million, so it’s not only big, it’s growing again. Aggregate year on year growth in commencements to March 2014 was around 22%, slightly ahead of the national trend. So funding Education Adelaide makes sense, and always did.

The effort of the Education Adelaide team in a year in which they lost their funding and their Chief Executive, and then got stuck with me for 8 months, was remarkable. Recently they launched the Destination Adelaide video, one of our major pieces of work during my time there, and testament to the team’s ability to focus on the job at hand during tough times. It’s also a fine example of destination marketing. The news gets better - new Chief Executive Karyn Kent (via Tourism Australia and the South Australian Tourism Commission) takes up the role this week. And Education Adelaide board member Hieu Van Le has just been announced as South Australia’s next Governor – a fine man and a fine story. South Australia was founded on the dream of free men and women being rewarded by the fruits of their labour – Hieu is the modern representation of that ideal. A Vietnamese "boat people" refugee who has never stopped contributing since he arrived on our shores.

There’s a lesson in that, I’m sure.

Stephen Connelly, a Victorian, was Chief Executive of Education Adelaide from September 2013 to April 2014. He does not support the Adelaide Crows or Port Power, but he did see David Hookes hit five 4’s off one Tony Greig over in the Centenary Test in 1977, and has a soft spot for Darren Lehmann, a fellow Australian cricket coach.  

Or Hundreds and Thousands. Some people are numerate, some people are literate, and some people just like sport. Last time I blogged, and it’s been a while, I wrote that come summer, with the Ashes back in our keep, and with what Alan Olsen and I described as the ‘green shoots’ of an international student recovery in Australia, we would all be in Nirvana Down Under. Well, I hate to say I told you so but … I got it half right. We got the Ashes back, as predicted.

Green shoots, on the other hand, was a significant underestimate of what was going on in international education in Australia. More like fecund growth, to quote Roy and HG. The following chart, courtesy of Alan Olsen using AEI data, shows the growth in commencements for all sectors for onshore international students in Australia by semester, from 2003 to the end of 2013.

Now that’s what I call a recovery.

Alan writes:

“ … starts across all sectors are up 9.3% in 2013 because starts in first semester were up 2.5% and starts in second semester are up 17.4%. Significant turnaround.”

This is also the case sector by sector: first semester is either flat or showing marginal growth, whereas second semester is, well, fecund. The English language sector is the stand out. Alan again:

“Starts in ELICOS are up 21.0% in 2013 because starts in first semester were up 14.5% and starts in second semester are up 26.8%.”

English language colleges are seeing the highest number of commencements in 4 years, particularly in university language centres, which bodes well for university commencements in both Semester 1 and 2 in 2014.

There are further signs of a recovery well under way. Hobsons Australia has again shared its enquiry data.

This slide updates the previous slide provided to GlobalEd Services by Hobsons, adding enquiry data for quarters 3 and 4 in 2013 and the first quarter of 2014. As the A$ has fallen, so enquiry levels have jumped, aided by stability in the student visa regime and post-study work rights, as I previously commented. With Streamlined Visa Processing (SVP) being rolled out to institutions other than universities, we can expect to see positive impact among non-university higher ed providers over the next 12 months.

All the signs are there that the current recovery has some time to run yet. In October Alan and I modelled that revenue from international students would recover to $16.389 billion in 2015, on the strength of 531,000 enrolments. Given the rate of the current recovery, I’m inclined to wait and see as far as enrolment and revenue predictions are concerned, and stick to sport, where at least I have some track record. I already have my tickets to the cricket world cup final in Melbourne next year – no surprises which team I’m tipping to take home that prize.

With thanks to Alan Olsen of Strategy Planning and Research in Education (SPRE), and Stephen Reimann of Hobsons Asia Pacific.

This Friday I should be presenting at the EAIE Conference in Istanbul. The title of the presentation is “The intersection of internationalisation and national interest”, chaired by Francisco Marmolejo from The World Bank, and co-presented by John Hudzik of Michigan State University and Joanna Newman of the UK Higher Education International and Europe Unit. Unfortunately, work commitments have meant I can’t make the trip so my colleague, Helen Zimmerman, current President of IEAA, will be filling in for me. Helen and I have developed a presentation that probably deviates somewhat from the session description in the program guide, examining from an Australian perspective the impact of federal or national government actions on the internationalisation activities of higher education institutions. Those of you in Istanbul can get along to the session yourselves to see what Helen, John Joanna and Francisco have to say.

What has been interesting though for me in finalising the presentation with Helen this week is the context of the changed federal government in Australia. Does it really make any difference to international education what kind of government we have?

Australian governments have had a tendency to oscillate between indifference to international education on the one hand, and intense panic-stricken scrutiny on the other, with occasional bursts of more level-headed engagement. The last few years have been particularly fun. Since 2009 we have had a Senate enquiry into the welfare of international students, a review of the Education Services for Overseas Students (ESOS) Act, a Strategic Review of the Student Visa Program, the development of a White Paper entitled “Australia in the Asian Century” which emphasised the importance of education links, an International Education Advisory Council (IEAC) which produced the paper Australia – Educating Globally, establishment of the Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency (TEQSA) with oversight of quality and compliance in the higher education sector, including matters related to onshore and offshore internationalisation activity, and the introduction of Gold Class mobility programs by both sides of politics, Asia Bound and New Colombo. Outcomes have included the Council of Australian Governments’ (COAG) International Student Strategy of Australia (ISSA), a Tuition Protection Scheme (TPS), Streamlined Visa Processing (SVP) for universities and Post Study Work Rights (PSWR).

Anyone planning to attend the Australian International Education Conference (AIEC) in Canberra (ACT) in October would do well to start learning those acronyms and initialisms. There will be a test at the start of the conference, and remedial classes for those who fail.

Will the new government undo recent initiatives of its predecessor and put us through another five years of reviews? Hopefully they have too many other things on their mind, like a Senate full of car enthusiasts and sport nuts.

What is interesting though is that Australia – Educating Globally and New Colombo are still very much on the table as live issues. The IEAC was “asked to contribute to the Government’s development of a five-year national strategy to support the sustainability and quality of international education…” In effect it sets out a plan to develop a plan:

"A national strategy for international education will position Australia to respond in a coordinated manner to the unique education and research opportunities arising through the internationalisation of education. A national strategy would be a significant contributor for shaping future generations of highly skilled and educated global leaders."

I’m tempted here to point out that I called for a national strategy for international education at the AIEC in Hobart in 2002. Oh well.

Of the seven key issues identified by the IEAC as vital for the future success of Australia’s international education enterprise, Coordination is the first and in my view the most important. The call for a “joined up” approach by government and industry stakeholders is not new, but with the force of some eminent Australians now also making the point let’s hope the new government is listening.

New Colombo is an interesting one. The objectives of the initiative are appropriate and laudable. No-one would argue with the idea that more exposure to and engagement with Asia by numbers of bright young Australians on exchange and internship programs for one or two semesters should produce benefits – it is exactly the type of soft diplomacy advantage, leading to real trade and other benefits down the track, that industry representatives have been banging on about for years. The challenge is that overwhelmingly longer term mobility activity is focussed firmly on Europe and North America. Asia is the number two regional destination for the 12.3% of Australian undergraduates who participate in outbound mobility during their degree programs, but this is heavily weighted towards short-term mobility, primarily study tours. 85% of outbound mobility to China is short-term, and there are some very real structural barriers to reversing that trend. If New Colombo is able to recognise and support all forms of mobility, the impact will be more widely felt.

Friday’s presentation will, among other things, compare what institutions and governments are interested in, and how those interests intersect with regard to internationalisation. I’m interested in what Australia’s new government will prioritise when it turns its attention to Australia’s largest services export and greatest opportunity for engagement globally, especially in our region. And how it organises itself to support the significant efforts and achievements by education providers at all levels across the country.

In the meantime, send me your acronyms and initialisms. I’m compiling a list FFR (for future reference).

Guest blog by Alan Olsen, Director of Strategy Policy and Research in Education

We know the value of the A$ has a significant impact on Australia’s ability to attract international students. Steve Reimann from Hobsons Asia Pacific has kindly shared some slides showing the relationship between the A$ and enquiry levels for Hobsons’ Australian university clients, and between the A$ and commencement performance. They make for interesting viewing.

The first slide shows enquiry performance between the second half of 2006 and the first half of 2013. As the A$ rose from US$0.75 in 2006 to US$0.95 in 2008, enquiries from international students fell. When the Aussie fell off a cliff at the end of 2008, enquiry levels jumped for two quarters, then fell again dramatically during 2009 as the dollar began its inexorable rise towards US$1.05 (mid-2011). The chart shows though that enquiries began to fall even before the value of the A$ had increased by much in the early part of 2009, impacted by the student safety concerns of the time, the closure of a number of private colleges and subsequent dislocation of students, and the ensuing confusion about the student visa regime. Well we remember the Perfect Storm.

What I find interesting about this slide though is the persistent high value of the A$ between Quarter 2 2011 and Quarter 4 2012, and the counter-intuitive performance of enquiries, which increased dramatically in 5 consecutive quarters, in spite of the high dollar. Anecdotally, and here supported by the stats, the introduction of Streamlined Visa Processing (SVP) for universities, followed by Post-Study Work Rights (PSWR), steadied the market. Getting these settings right seems to have counterbalanced the strength of the A$, for a time at least. The first two quarters of 2013 show a considerable slowing of the enquiry trend, due possibly to the persistently high A$. Other settings can only have a positive impact for so long – eventually the currency bites. I would expect however that the now lower A$, seen dropping in the chart already in Quarter 2 2013 and currently around US$0.90, will mean increased enquiry levels for the remainder of 2013 and beyond.

The next slide is interesting as well.    

This slide measures Higher Education commencement quarterly variations against the AUS$/US$ exchange rate for the same period. Performance is as expected, with the decreasing trend in 2009 following the perfect storm becoming a rather depressing state of affairs during 2010-11, but with visa and work rights settings in place commencement performance improves. In spite of the drop in enquiry levels in the first two quarters of 2013, it may be that the recent sudden fall in the value of the A$ will mean those lower enquiry levels won’t translate into diminished commencement performance later this year or next.

Positive enquiry and commencement performance during 2012/13 in a context of a high A$ was also helped by our friends in the UK shooting themselves in the foot over the same period with confused messages about how welcome international students are, much as we had managed to do in Australia a few years earlier. They may have the Ashes, temporarily, but we have a falling A$, supported by SVP and PSWR. When we get the Ashes back next summer we will all be in Nirvana Down Under.

The final two slides show interesting contrasts between two of Australia’s top five source countries for international students. 

Vietnam (above) remains solidly price sensitive, while Indian students (below) pay close attention to visa and work settings. Compare Quarter 2 2013 in the two slides.

Note the quarterly commencements data used in these charts is a modification of the Australian Education International monthly commencements data.

Thanks again to Steve Reimann and the team at Hobsons Asia Pacific for providing the slides.