campusreview.com.au
there can be simmering resentment if high-performing graduates of
competitive local universities feel that they are beaten in the job market
by students who have not performed as well but have been able to
afford a place in an overseas university.
A financial means test is one of the core features of our student
visa screening process, requiring students to have sufficient funds
to travel to Australia, pay their tuition fees and support themselves
during their studies. As a result, the majority of international
students in Australia do not experience any financial hardship, but
those who do struggle financially find they don’t have access to
many of the safety nets available to domestic students, including
the ability to defer temporarily, reduce their study load, or access
various forms of social security. The challenge is that the less
stringent the student visa finance test becomes, the more students
are likely to experience financial hardship in Australia. Some have
argued for the finance test to be made more restrictive by raising
the amount of money students must have available for each year
in Australia and making the application of the test more rigorous.
This, they feel, will ensure that all students coming into Australia
are more financially secure during their studies. However, such
measures would seriously restrict access to those from less affluent
families and less-wealthy countries.
We do continue to provide funded places to sponsored students,
and in recent years, the number of Australian Government and
university scholarships for international students was higher than
during the Colombo Plan period, at an estimated cost of about
$720 million a year, with roughly half of the spending coming
from government and half from universities. About 85 per cent
of international research students are supported by scholarships
from the Australian Government, their home government or their
universities. However, these students represent a tiny fraction of
the hundreds of thousands of international students in Australia,
and nearly all of the students in bachelor and masters coursework
programs are self-funded.
The number of scholarships funded has declined significantly
under the Abbott-Turnbull Government, as have other forms of
foreign aid. This is happening at the same time as many funding
schemes in home countries for Australia’s foreign students are
facing sharp cutbacks, such as those in Saudi Arabia and Brazil.
Given the self-interested nationalist tone that has framed
international education policy since the 1980s, is there any way we
can mount an argument that broadening access to less-affluent
students and other excluded groups is in Australia’s national interest?
There are three considerations – scale, quality and diplomacy.
First, a desire to continue to increase the scale of onshore
international student numbers in Australia requires us to find ways
to make our education affordable to more students. Second, the
quality of student experience, for both international and domestic
students, is influenced by the ability of universities to select the best
applicants from a large and diverse pool, rather than acceptable
applicants from a very small but affluent pool.
A third reason for broadening access is that international
education has always been a huge form of social interaction
between Australia and the region, and has n