Former Exeter VC Steve Smith has been reappointed as the UK Government’s International Education Champion.
He’ll continue to support the government’s international education work, including engaging with governments around the world and promoting UK excellence and partnerships in all education sub-sectors.
More widely, with the change in government, officials are to conduct a review of the International Education Strategy, which the release says will ensure that it continues to be an effective tool in increasing the value of education exports, promote policy dialogue and reflect the priorities of education stakeholders, businesses and ministers.
This is the strategy, lest we forget, that aimed at increasing the total number of international students choosing to study in the UK higher education system each year to 600,000 by 2030 – a target met ten years early.
And judging by the immigration policy response since, at least for the last government, very much too early.
We’re not, of course, the only country that is keen to boost its education “exports”. It turns out that there are no end of countries who are keen to boost tertiary participation, less keen on paying for it, and very keen on plugging the gap via educational tourism.
I’ve never really understood how an international education strategy aiming to increase temporary migration of 600k was somehow silent on the issue of where those students might live.
So I thought it might be helpful to take a look at what other countries’ international education strategies do and don’t include – because we wouldn’t want to be left behind, trading on former glories, and so on.
Stories so far
First some background. When then Secretary of State Gavin Williamson wrote to the Office for Students in September 2019, he included something of a sting in the tail for a sector that was still busy popping corks at the news that the government would reintroduce post-study work visas for international students.
We will not be able to rest on our laurels”, he opined, and “it is critical that international students receive a world-class experience.” His direction to OfS was that he would like it consider steps to ensure international students:
feel integrated on campus; are supported in terms of their mental health and wellbeing; and [that they] receive the employability skills they need and are supported into employment, whether in their home country or the UK.
And there was more. It would, he said, be:
…critical to ensure the OfS makes public transparent data on the outcomes achieved by international students, including those studying wholly outside the UK, such as it does for domestic students.
And not only that:
…such data should also inform the approach the OfS takes to setting and monitoring compliance with its quality requirements.”
Not a lot came of that.
That year’s International Education Strategy had said that the UK government would:
…work with UUKi and the sector to identify and share good practice on how universities effectively support international students into employment and further study, both here in the UK and when they return to their home nation.
It also said that it would:
…work with the sector to enhance the evidence base on international graduate outcomes and to monitor the UK’s comparative position with respect to international student recruitment and the international student experience.
Not a lot came of that either.
The 2021 update said that OfS, together with the UK Council for International Student Affairs, would launch a project aiming to find “what works” in ensuring international students can “integrate and receive a fulfilling academic experience in the UK.
It was to explore the positive impact international students have on home students, and what longer term lessons can be learnt from their response to the pandemic on provider-level delivery and student engagement.
The main output from that seems to have been this largely forgotten report on “working in partnership to improve international student integration and experience”.
So what could be in a new strategy?
Ireland
The Emerald Isle’s previous go at a strategy talked a lot about internships and work placements, particularly with multinational companies – unsurprising given the presence of Google, Facebook, and Apple.
It also specifically called for an ethical approach to internationalisation, particularly in transnational education – including ensuring that higher education partnerships with developing countries do not exploit weaker regulations or economies.
It committed to an International Education Mark (IEM) and a corresponding Code of Practice – so it could say its providers were meeting high standards of academic support, welfare, and cultural awareness.
And while the UK bans international students from being self-employed, Ireland’s strategy encouraged universities to support student-led start-ups and spin-off companies.
Its new one – Global Citizens 2030 – goes further. It actually acknowledges that accommodation availability is a major constraint for international students and needs to be addressed when planning for the long-term development of the sector. It’s also highlighted alongside cost of living concerns.
Canada
The International Education Strategy (2019–2024) focused on creating “people-to-people ties”, crucial for international trade and global cooperation – suggesting that building a sense of community and belonging was a central part of its student experience offer.
The strategy supported integration services for students – including opportunities to work, start careers, and pursue permanent residency. Not something we’re likely to see in a country that refuses to admit that its long-term economic needs will need migration, but still.
Australia
In the Australian Strategy for International Education 2021-2030, there’s an acknowledgement that students’ living arrangements are directly linked to their wellbeing and sense of security – it notes that international students have been exploited in accommodation settings and sets a specific aim to improve awareness of legal rights and better complaint mechanisms to tackle the issues.
The strategy also encourages institutions to strengthen accountability for providing mental health services that meet the language and cultural needs of international students, and its Education Services for Overseas Students (ESOS) legislative framework requires institutions to take reasonable steps to provide a safe campus environment and inform students about available support services.
Efforts to connect international students both with local communities and each other are also in there – and it’s the most explicit in regulating agent behaviour, ensuring agents adhere to ethical practices. What has happened to that review of the agent code that UUK and Buila were promising – and where is DfE’s own one?
New Zealand
In New Zealand’s International Education Strategy (2022–2030), there’s an emphasis on regional distribution of students, encouraging students to settle outside of major cities like Auckland – mainly to alleviate housing pressures in urban centres and keep the rent down for everyone.
And there’s a dedicated International Student Wellbeing Strategy that focuses on economic well-being, education, health and wellbeing, and inclusion to make sure that students feel safe, welcome, and supported.
The Education (Pastoral Care of International Students) Code of Practice 2016 helps – that includes provision for addressing student complaints and ensuring that institutions take responsibility for student wellbeing, with accessible mechanisms for dispute resolution and complaints.
The strategy aims for 90 per cent satisfaction among international students regarding their overall experience in New Zealand by 2030. Nice.
Germany
In the German Internationalisation Strategy for Higher Education (2024–2034), there’s a specific focus on expanding and modernising student housing through social housing programmes to improve the living conditions for both international and domestic students – and there’s specific stuff on the integration of international students into local and university communities – with a special emphasis on intercultural training for staff to better support international students.
Language learning, including both German and English courses, is also mentioned as important to helping them feel more integrated and connected.
France
The French International Student Attractiveness Strategy (Choose France) includes a plan to translate its Lokaviz platform, which lists available student accommodation, into English. That helps international students access university housing and private rentals, providing information like rent, utility costs, and proximity to campus.
International students can also access to its Visale guarantee, a free rental deposit guarantee, making it easier to rent in the private housing market.
Here in a set of four countries that offer very little support to home students on housing, there’s not much to extend to international students – but you see the point.
France’s one also commits to every international student being assigned a dedicated advisor at their university, offering support before they arrive, and a plan to double the number of intensive French language programmes (FLE) offered to international students.
Latvia
A particular fave of mine comes from Latvia – its Agreement on Good Practice of Attracting International Students and Delivering Studies from Latvia includes clear commitments on rights to redress – international students have to be surveyed annually on their satisfaction with studies and living conditions, and results acted on.
Institutions have to include tuition fee reimbursement procedures in cases like visa refusals or interruptions of study due to external circumstances, providers are required to develop and implement selection criteria for agents (organisations or individuals) who are authorised to recruit students, and providers have to survey students about their experiences with agents and use the feedback to evaluate agent performance.
Finland
In the frozen north, the internationalisation strategy for higher education requires universities to integrate practical skills, entrepreneurial training, and internships into their curricula to help prepare international students for the global job market – with lots of focus on linking students’ academic work to potential business ventures.
There’s also no end of programmes designed to encourage local engagement and community building, networks to promote collaboration between Finnish universities, international research institutions, and innovation hubs, and a big part of Finland’s strategy includes maintaining connections with international alumni – offering support for those returning to Finland for work.
Netherlands
And finally to the Netherlands, where the Code of Conduct for International Students in Higher Education sets the framework for its institutions’ responsibilities towards international students. Like everyone else, it talks international cooperation and attracting global talent – but it does that by setting clear requirements over information about programs, admission and living conditions. Signing the Code is a prerequisite for granting student visas.
Agents or private providers involved in recruitment have to operate under formal agreements that meet the Code’s standards – if these standards aren’t met, institutions have to terminate such collaborations. And a National Commission monitors adherence to the Code, handling complaints and evaluating institutions’ performance. It even has the authority to impose disciplinary measures, like removal from the public Register of approved institutions.
Currency issues
One thing I’ve not found – which I think is a shame – is contingency plans for situations where a targeted country’s currency is devalued or collapses, especially if that country is a significant source of international students. Currency devaluation can severely affect students’ ability to afford tuition fees – as anyone working in a university which recruited large numbers of students from Nigeria can tell you.
A good IES ought to outline mechanisms to address challenges like that – expanded scholarships and financial help, underwriting deferred fee payments, a commitment to flexible payment plans, bilateral agreements with affected countries to stabilise exchange rates for education-related transactions, visa extensions or flexibility to allow international students from affected countries more time to complete their studies, and collaboration with with global financial institutions to explore assistance for students from countries in financial crisis.
A broader view
Having spent a bit of time reading them all, three things strike me. The first is that most countries seem to involve more than just their department for trade and their department for education – that the Home Office here doesn’t co-own our IES is an obvious “joined up government” problem.
The second is about investment. Most of the strategies I’ve seen underwrite their commitments not just with spend on promoting the country abroad, but with developmental spend to enable change inside universities. That’s a hole in our strategy, and one that needs to be filled – even with the devolution complexities.
But the third is that it’s tough to make things better for international students when you’ve not got much of a strategy for your home students beyond the previous government’s sabre rattling over low-value courses. Whether it’s on wellbeing or housing, outcomes or employability, the fact that other countries have their act together on students in general doesn’t half help.