Campus Review Volume 27. Issue 07 | July 17 | Page 13

campusreview.com.au election of Donald Trump has served to stop this momentum. On the one hand, former president Barack Obama was proposing six-year post-study work right visas for any overseas students enrolling in US-based STEM degrees. On the other hand, Donald Trump’s negative profiling of predominantly Muslim and Latin American countries may partly account for Australia’s recent surge in enrolments from nations such as Malaysia, Brazil and Colombia. THE ACADEMIC ADVANTAGE Undeniably, the comparative academic quality of our nation’s education institutions is key to our continued overseas student numbers growth. As Universities Australia’s Belinda Robinson noted recently in Campus Review: “We know that international students are attracted to Australia by the excellent quality of the education we provide and the calibre of both teaching and research here.” Our public TAFE Institutes and high quality private education providers are also becoming increasingly recognised for their niche advanced technical skills training and flexible multiskilling units of competency delivery. In recent consultations by the Federal Department of Education and Training about reforms to the National Code, a strong case was made by the Council of International Students Australia (CISA) about the academic rationale for studying in Australia. As the vast majority of their student members come from Asia, CISA suggested that most had been taught under a traditional pedagogy based on rote learning. They maintained that the key attraction to study in Australia was a pedagogical approach that emphasised creative thinking and critical analysis. When this is combined with the ability to gain a qualification, in English, that is globally recognised, then the academic pull factor for Australia becomes apparent. THE FLIP SIDE: STUDENT SERVICE DELIVERY While the focus on world’s best practice in teaching and learning is laudable, our nation has come under increasing criticism for not providing sufficient priority to the non-academic services delivery areas. Access for international students to course-related employability opportunities is a vexed issue. At one level, Australia provides the ability for any overseas student to undertake paid part-time work (full-time in semester breaks) in our economy. At another level, our industrial relations system, combined with genuine concerns about workplace exploitation, works against providing ready access to course-related internships. Rightly or wrongly, competitor study destination countries, including Canada and the USA, have created a culture that is conducive to widespread internship access. In a similar vein, Australia has lagged behind other nations in adequately resourcing on-campus career advice services. Research conducted for the Australian Universities International Directors’ Forum (AUIDF) noted that best-practice UK universities resource their careers service at 4–5 times the level of their Australian university counterparts. Happily, there are moves afoot to meaningfully address the employability challenge here. The creation of a National Work Integrated Learning Taskforce which includes employer peak body, government and education provider representatives is clearly a step in the right direction. The publication by the International Education Association of Australia of employability guides for international students, employers and education providers is also providing meaningful assistance. But even if an international student does find course-related international education paid employment in our economy, their sense of not being treated fairly becomes apparent as soon as they decide to use public transport to travel to campus or their workplace. As a result of the vagaries of our federal system of government, they might receive a full public transport concession, or even a discounted ticket, if they are studying in one state, but will have to pay full fare in another. Despite the best lobbying attempts of international education stakeholders over many years, state and territory governments choose not to accept the damage that such punitive policies inflict upon Australia’s reputation as a study destination. Notwithstanding all of the above, there is no doubt that most overseas students enjoy the opportunity to study in an open, democratic society such as ours. The fact that Australians are largely supportive of diversity in its many forms also puts us at a great advantage over many other nations. However, there is one particular area of student service delivery that has the potential to cause our burgeoning international education sector to be derailed: Australia has not given sufficient priority to adequately accommodating its growing number of students. PURPOSE-BUILT STUDENT ACCOMMODATION ICEF Monitor recently highlighted a Student.com analysis of the cost of living for students across a range of cities. The analysis was based on accommodation reservations for 40 or more weeks by approximately 8000 students. While New York City, Boston, London and Washington were ranked the most expensive (in US dollars) for accommodation, Sydney came in the seventh most costly study destination city in the world. According to ICEF, the study underscored that “affordability is a major decision factor for prospective students as cost of living accounts for a significant proportion of total student spending.” Savills Real Estate also recently published a global cost tracking study which suggested that the significant cost differential from country to country explains in part why destinations such as Germany and China have earned an increasing share of tuition- fee-paying international students. In its report, Savills argued that it anticipates increasing numbers of students will choose value over traditional academic reputation. On a positive note, Student.com pointed out that, “across Australia, the UK and the US, cities with larger supplies of purpose-built student accommodation tend to be more affordable than cities that are undersupplied”. All of this, they suggest, underscores the importance of large- scale private equity investments that are now helping to expand the stock of student housing in the most expensive cities. Given the lack of appetite for many of Australia’s universities (let alone TAFE and private education providers) to invest in their own on campus student accommodation, it is apparent that we need to encourage a diversity of safe, affordable accommodation options if we are to meet this key student service delivery need. There is no doubt that Australia’s education institutions have upped the ante on the priority they are giving to genuine student service delivery. However, as competitor study destination countries increasingly focus on this area, we would do well to think of student services not as an ancillary but as core business. ■ Phil Honeywood is CEO of the International Education Association of Australia. 11