September 2009 — Volume 3, Issue 5

Strategy needed to protect "Brand Australia"

No one can say that it hasn’t been a challenging time to be University Australia’s
Lead Vice-Chancellor on International Education, argues Professor Daryl Le Grew

Unscrupulous operators in the private education sector, students ill-informed by shady agents, and assaulted, robbed and vilified by thugs, have left the sector reeling and wondering how international education, so globally lauded, could so suddenly be embroiled in controversy.

Media, blogs, government members and officials from the countries of students impacted by these issues have pursued a similar theme of criticism and occasionally, understanding and support. Others have issued veiled criticism and concern for their students studying in Australia, somewhat ironically in parallel with their critique of Australia’s export industries.

Rightly or wrongly, the whole Australian education sector, universities included, has been tarred by the brush of a few unscrupulous and incompetent operators.

Decades of careful planning and development, finessing of global markets, redefining international education products and services and building a highly successful and iconic brand for Education Australia with great outcomes for graduates has been placed at risk. Indeed, much of the work of UA over recent weeks of turmoil has been directed to ameliorating and reassuring our students, our agents, our alumni, the Australian Government and other governments, the media et al, that Australian universities continue to be the global benchmark for international education.

At the time when other education sectors went quiet, UA took the lead. We did not deny problems but acknowledged them and went to work on consultation, diplomacy, good thinking around actions that could help solve immediate problems and strategic initiatives that could help avoid future problems. This was, we considered, a wake up call and one that could cause us to rethink our models of internationalisation, the total experience for students in Australia and how we, as universities, might better relate to other providers in the sector. Realising that universities provide for only one third of the total half a million international students in Australia, drives home the fact that we have an interest in how the whole sector performs. What has become clear is that, whilst we might differentiate what universities do from the vocational sector et al, the international marketplace does not differentiate between us and, in the hands of a rabid press, can just as easily damn the blameless as culpable.

Simply having a UA response to the fury around us was inadequate. No matter how sensitive our UA 10 Point Action Plan is, no matter how hard we work to differentiate and separate ourselves from the activities of others, we realised that we cannot distance ourselves from the gaps in policy and/or administration that had allowed this situation to fester.

Clearly, a response was required across all Australian education. The upshot has been a coming together of the peak bodies of the various sectors comprising international education. Not surprisingly such a caucus quickly established common ground and, for the first time, has begun to prepare the ‘export education industry’ for concentrated action to resolve problems and to address the future.

What is now clear is that a fragmented approach to the various levels and types of provision, the state-by-state differences in provision and pastoral care and lack of compliance with the requirement of Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS) registration and the Education Services for Overseas Students (ESOS) Act is no longer acceptable.

Nor is the fragmentation of government policy acceptable or, rather, different interpretations and points of emphasis among and between the various government agencies, federal and state, the lack of significant due diligence in regulatory control. Checking of compliance has been slack with little effective capacity to cross reference across the various sectors and identify the poor performance of some operators operating below a reasonable horizon line.

This has been a powder keg, with a slow fuse and fairly recent detonation. Now is the time to rethink, to review our current practices, tighten regulatory compliance, weed out shady operations, reconceptualise the student experience, their travel, workplace, accommodation and their health care. Most importantly, we must rethink ways in which they can feel safe and welcome – to be at home in our Australian multicultural matrix.

If any society can do this, then we can.

Yes, we do need to reassess the efficiency and efficacy of our regulatory environment in international education. However, it’s not that long ago that our ESOS legislation and the CRICOS regulation process was seen to be the global benchmark. It still is. The problem, however, is that across fragmented government agencies and a sector more entranced by competition than by collaboration, we have let bad practices slip into the sector. We don’t need more legislation or regulatory devices. Rather, we need better compliance, auditing, quality assessment, agent registration and service standards, built into what already exists.

To advance this there are some fundamental changes needed. Government must concentrate on developing and strengthening inter-governmental understanding, agreement and cooperation regarding education and the central role that Australia plays in its future.

Equally, can the education sectors better harmonise and coordinate their missions? Can we, as universities, better understand our colleagues in the vocational education and the school sectors? As a whole sector can we set up better consultation and partnership agreements with government? Can we work and perform as Education Australia, with parity of esteem and mutual support?

And above all, can we, at last, develop sound “international education policy” and, dare I say it, a “development strategy” for what is now Australia’s third largest export industry?

Bringing the export education sectors and government together will help to establish future strategies and to set longer term goals. Working together we can sustain and enhance what is universally regarded as one of Australia’s finest achievements – generations of graduates who are superbly educated and trained and who have intercultural and international perspectives that inform their world view and their humanity.

*Professor Daryl Le Grew is Vice-Chancellor of the University of Tasmania and Universities
Australia Lead Vice-Chancellor on International. He is also an ALTC Board member.