Category Archives: Education Reforms

May 1 2012

Why IB (INTERNATIONAL BACCALAUREATE) doesn’t fit into the INDIAN scheme of things?

Before you assume that I am opining that Indian year 12 boards especially the ISC to be better than IB, allow me to indicate in clear terms that I am not saying that at all. IB possibly is an advanced curriculum and superior program. The contention of this blog is to talk of IB’s suitability to India… Thats it. Read it and make your own decision.

I am often asked by parents on whether they should opt for a school that offers IB curriculum for their wards. This blog hence is an attempt to consider this question from an Indian perspective.

In Indian Schools that offer the IB Diploma, the curriculum steps in post the Year 10 Indian board. Hence it is safe to conclude that the students who take the Year 10 Indian board have studied in a different delivery model as compared to the IB. It should be easy for most to do this adjustment though can tell you that since it differs from the way many of us are taught through our earlier ten years, it will require some adjustments for some of us.

Many new schools that offer IB give an impression that it is easier to get admission into an Overseas University because of IB as compared to ISC. Having counselled students to overseas options for over 21 years now, I can tell you with full certainty that this is a mere perception only and not really backed by facts. There will only be a few (very few such as Cambridge) Universities and few (very few such as Medicine) courses at certain Universities around the world which may not accept the ISC or the CBSE. Let me also indicate that the admission to the US Universities are based more on the SAT than on the Year 12 board of exams. Hence an ISC student with good SAT has the same chance of getting into an US option as an IB student with the same SAT. ISC is well accepted around the world especially where the admission is based on Year 12 board results such as in UK or Australia or NZ or another commonwealth country. For the students who are still not sure, take a look at the website of a “Russell Group” UK University or “Group of Eight” Australian University and you will find the ISC percentage requirement and the IB Score requirement. Compare the two and some may even conclude that the ISC percentage required for admission to be more achievable for an Indian as compared to the IB score required for the same institution especially for an Indian student. (With a percentage of 85-90% in Indian Boards, one can get into most Engineering programs in Commonwealth Countries and is this % difficult to get for a student seeking Engineering!!! If you have 75-85%, most of them will still take you in through pathway options. Hence if this is not so difficult to get in, how does IB make it easier. For US all have to take the SAT.)

The acceptability of the IB Diploma for admission in India is also a huge issue. While the IB website indicates that AIU recognizes IB Diploma as equivalent to Indian Year 12 and also provides us with a copy of the document that states its equivalence, the AIU website still provides an equivalence document that doesnot list this. This can either be due to an un-updated AIU document but at the same time it is clear that the IB is not being given priority by AIU, enough for it to be listed along with other equivalent Year 12 qualifications from around the world. You take a look at the AIU equivalence document as provided on AIU website.

As an Indian student, you may still go by IB claim and accept it as equivalent. However, now comes the issue of acceptability by the various Universities in India. Most Schools that actively took up the IB program are coming to grasp with some cold realities.

  • Only a handful of Indian Colleges (not even all Colleges under an University) accept the IB. Where it is accepted too, there is no clear idea on the equivalence of IB score to the Indian board percentage. These colleges are primarily in Mumbai and some in Delhi. One of the Schools based in NCR provides a list of colleges that accepted the IB students in recent past and that list doesnot include even St Stephens which has possibly the more flexible of the entry requirements and which is aspired to by school leavers from elite schools.
  • In some cases even if the IB score is accepted, a student is looking at entry only a year later. The reason is that most Indian Colleges close their applications well before the IB results are declared. IB does indicate that there are predited scores provided to the students but doesnot indicate that most of the colleges in India donot accept the predicted scores.
  • The schools that offer the IB indicate that students should be able to take the IIT entrance as IB is acceptable. This is also mentioned on the FAQ on their websites. I wonder at this half information. Most IITs will want the final results to be in by June, I understand and this is not possible under IB system. Secondly, IB doesnot prepare the student in the way IIT or most Indian Engineering institutions admit the students and hence the chances of entry is poor and I am yet to come across a student who has joined an IIT after an IB board. It may be difficult after an ISC too but it is not impossible. With IB it seems closer to impossible.
  • The entrance exams to various options from Engineering to others happen in the month of May and IB exams clash with these dates. This is another reason for unsuitability of the IB for an Indian student.

Let me put out some posers…

  • Did you know that British Engineering Undergrad degrees which are of 3 years duration mayn’t be accepted by AIU to be equivalent to and Indian Engineering degree? You may consider taking a look at my earlier blog on this and also note the comments of the British Council that indicate that the situation “may” change in future.
  • Did you know that if you want to work as a Lawyer or Doctor in India, you rather do your first degree which is the eligible qualification in India? Post graduation can be overseas. Overseas qualification will pose a challenge with eligibility in these professions.
  • There are talks that the electoral reforms may mean that those contesting an election in India should be “at least” a Bachelors… This may mean that many of the current politicians who have undertaken 3 year Engineering degrees or degrees that resulted due to study partly in India and partly overseas and hence not the full 3 year of normal degree or 4 year of Engineering be considered as “not a Bachelors”. This poses and interesting situation with regards to degrees of elsewhere conducted elsewhere and their validity in India.
  • Diplomas in Hotel Management at top Hotel Schools worldwide that also offer an additional component of one year post the diploma that leads to a distance run Bachelors degree are also not considered as Bachelors by Indian guidelines.
  • And such equivalences are relevant even to those Indians who are not seeking a job back in India. Yes, even an entrepreneur who wants to set up a Petrol Pump in India (an example) needs an equivalence certificate to demonstrate that his Engineering degree is valid in India and there is a case that I am aware of that even after studying at a top University overseas he has not managed to get one.

It is hence important to refer to the AIU guidelines. Fair or Unfair, this is India.

One of the rationale given by elite schools in India in cajoling their students to opt for the IB curriculum is that it is very difficult to get into Indian top institutions due to low capacity with them and hence it is safe to opt for IB and then proceed on overseas. This is a damaging advise generally. Increasing Capacity of Indian Institutions: The capacities in India for Undergrad options are increasing. The number of IITs, IIITs, NIFTs… have increased and many of the new campuses have begun to admit students. Their quality will improve. There are reforms taking place in India that will give credence to the Year 12 board in Engineering entrance to IITs and reduce the focus for specialized coaching. Must add quickly that the coaching for admission tests are not likely to disappear but with increased requirement also for school percentage, it will decrease. This is the intent. Many of the colleges are also beginning to increase their capacity. For example, St Xaviers in Kolkata has started an evening session for B Com and hence in turn doubling the capacity. This works wonderfully in keeping the cut-offs in check. BIT Mesra has now offered non-Engineering degrees. Similarly there are some quality providers in private sector whose degree has been given equivalence by the AIU. Such as of Amity. Setting up of Universities of Technologies within several states have helped regulate a number of private institutions too and lift their standards. Happening already and the example are the various colleges under WBUT which did not exist a few years ago. More work is to be done but it is indeed the current focus. Don’t rule your Indian options out. Don’t assume that you will only be studying overseas for your undergrad when you are in Year 9 or 10. Maybe you will or maybe you will study overseas at the Postgrad level. This decision should be taken a little later. 

My summary comments:

ISC or CBSE are far preferable to an IB for an Indian student. All options in India are open for such a student while almost all options open internationally to IB students are also open to them. For admission to better US Universities, students from ISC or CBSE have to take the SAT and so do IB students. No differential. Some say that IB students take less time to undertake the degree overseas as they get credits. This is nothing but a marketing hype. The credits don’t ‘normally’ lead to less time. In some cases, students replace the credits with other subjects or other interests and I am told that boys from ISC and CBSE can also get the same credits if they claim the same. An Indian student who is planning his school education with the aim to study overseas thereafter is alright but one who is planning his school education knowing clearly that he may not be able to apply in India is making a huge mistake. For some students, the costs for overseas education means that it is considered only at the PG level. The cost for Undergraduate education overseas can be anywhere from Rs 50 Lakhs to Rs 1 crore and beyond which only a few families can budget. Others keep this saving for use at the Masters level. There are students who can afford this without much issue but I have not come across a school that clearly prepares the parents of boys in Year 10 for it in terms of this expected funding prior to selling the IB option to their boys. For all professional fields such as Engineering, Medicine, Law … it is far more advisable to keep the Indian options open at all times as these professions requires you to do the first degree in India or else you have to later clear screening requirements which is not easy. And the final thought that even with all planning it can happen that some emergencies or visa difficulties may lead to your plans for overseas education to be altered at the last moment and then you may have to consider doing your undergrad in India. I have seen it in reality. Hence, despite the fact that IB “may” be a better board and curriculum, ISC or CBSE are more suited for India and Indian students. Maybe it will all change in five years but at this time This is what I advise as a counsellor.

Mar 27 2012

Australian Streamlining implemented, Post Study Work detailed… imperfections continue to linger!

This is an interesting week indeed. I have also just returned to the chaos after spending a few weeks in Australia that allowed me to hear and share the viewpoints of several others in the industry…

Flashing the disclaimer of it remaining a “developing story”, both the concepts evolving out of the Knight recommendations are laudable and certainly aimed at propping up the languishing industry. It is certainly the caffeine that International Education wanted and now it’s the time for looking into the nuts and bolts of the details  since there are several anomalies that needs fixing before it is too late.

Streamlining “key” Anomalies:

With no template or prototype available to Universities, there are several approaches to the streamlining. This is a possible cause for some chaos.

The “grander” Universities believe that they donot need so many checks since “wrong students” donot come to them at all. This is possibly true to an extent since stricter entry requirements, stricter attendance norms and higher fees do work as a screening by itself. MY WORRY: It is possible that there may be some students who begin with the grander University to be able to get an easy visa and then change institutions… What is the insurance? Catching the agents will not be a good idea since the students can be exposed to other influences once they are on-shore and may find the studies easier or fees cheaper elsewhere…

Most Universities are working on redrafting their forms so that they can collect some financial commitments from the students and know on how the studies will be funded. This is totally in line with the requirement but MY WORRY: Some of the Universities want the financial sponsorship details along with the initial application when the student at that time is not even 100% sure that he will get in and/or he will choose this institution from the various other options that he has. This is a wrong move and will actually deter the applicants. The better idea is what some others are implementing… which is : The initial application doesnot ask financial details… The offer letter thus generated is conditional to financials and hence before the issue of eCOE, the University is able to satisfy itself.

A linked issue is with regards to checks and the role of agents or University’s contracted local staff. Who will take ownership to the genuineness of the applicant? Frankly, the agent alone should be asked to also sign a pre-verification-checklist prior to request for eCOE. Only the agent is in the position and also having the skill-set that is required for the verifications. I am of the firm view that the current skill-set of the local contracted staff of Universities is not suitable for verifications of documents at all while it might be fine for the other roles… Infact, my recent interactions with University senior staff surprised me that many Universities donot really know why they have an Indian office… A clarity will not just help them but will help the staff and also the agent. With hardly any market left in B level cities and hardly any paper applications in the system now… the only area that comes to my mind as a ground for having a local staff is to enable out-reach activities and institutional linkages. To ensure that this happens, one would need the right qualification and skill-set though. Also remember that most Universities have already pruned their agent lists and there are only a few agents left for the recruitment staff to work with. The student numbers for Australia is also about 10% of what it was two years ago and though growing, not likely to reach the 2008-09 level ever again.

Post Study Work Anomalies:

There is a recent FAQ on PSW on the immigration website. it clearly indicates that students graduating and applying for PSW must have studied for 2 academic years (92 wks CRICOS completed in a minimum of 16 months) and in a course that leads to a Bachelors, Masters or PhD.

The details also go on to indicate that packages that total to 2 years is fine but a Masters cannot be packaged with a Graduate Diploma and hence implying that all components of a package should be either a Bachelors, Masters or PhD.

Wow.. Heads, you lose; Tales, I win…

The above just defeats the purpose of the AQF. How does a student studying a quality 1.5 year Masters be eligible for the PSW if he cannot add a Graduate Diploma or a Grad Certicate to his Masters… Asking him to study another Masters is grossly unfair indeed. In the same line of thinking, a student who studies at a TAFE can package into a Bachelors degree and be required only to study another 1.5 years to get a Bachelors degree and will also benefit from the introduced streamlining with this genuine and appropriate packaging BUT will not be eligible for PSW even after having studied for well over 3 years in Australia.

I also read somewhere that the students should have applied and started their “first” student visa after 5th November 2011 since the PSW is dependent on the student having been assessed under GTE when they first entered Australia. This is a disadvantage to those who are Australian alumni and are returning to Australia to study a next level program of study. it is also a disadvantage to a student who may have started their Bachelors in 2011 and graduating in 2013 and 2014. Something is not right. Australia does pride in offering a FAIR GO…

Come On Policy Makers at DIAC. Fix these and fix them quickly… PSW is a decider in the game!

This is not my only post on the topic and you can certainly look out for more commentaries to this developing story. My interest is purely to ensure that the industry wakes up and the new laudable changes are implemented correctly. After spending more than two decades here, I seem to sniff the areas that stink.

I know the immediate response for some will be to dislike my open criticism even though it is clearly pro-active and constructive. Am reminded of saying of KABIR that most Indians must have heard from their elders…

Nindak niyare rakhiye aangan kuti chhawaye;
Bin sabun pani bina nirmal karat subhaye.

(Keep a critic near you in your backyard for they will help you cleanse yourself without soap and water)

FOR ACCURATE AND UPDATED INFORMATION ON STREAMLINING AND POST STUDY WORK, PLEASE CONSULT WWW.IMMI.GOV.AU . THE ABOVE IS ONLY A PERSONAL COMMENTARY OF THE BLOGGER AND NOT MEANT TO BE COMPLETE OR ACCURATE.

Feb 22 2012

Streamlining lesson for Australian Universities: “be careful what you lobby for! “

My last blog gave an agent’s perspective to DIAC’s innovative streamlining and that it indicated my observation of “surrender” on part of the Universities. Now I attempt to cover the perspective of education providers. That blog generated a lot of interest and there were questions on “what is all this about?” and honestly, I needed to dig deeper to understand it myself. Not sure if I am ready with my predictions but somehow the gut feel is not one that is too optimistic.

I need to base this blog on material evidence and sources and hence will take help of publicly available information and tie-in my comments to the sourced quotes.

ALL 39 universities have finally opted into the government’s streamlined student visa processing system amid warnings of the serious risks they face if any eventually fall short of Immigration Department standards.

Although most universities are believed to have been rated by the department at the low-risk level 2, it is understood a few have been rated at the higher risk levels 3 and 4, meaning they will have to raise their performance to avoid dropping out of the system.

But they will have time to improve and will not be held accountable until a review in March next year, when those still rated at level 3 will have a further six months to improve.

This is what THE AUSTRALIAN reported this day. However interestingly, DIAC “has agreed to keep risk assessment levels confidential to avoid them becoming a proxy for quality”. But with more than two people knowing something, it cannot be confidential. Quoting THE AUSTRALIAN…

According to industry rumours, only two universities were rated initially at the lowest risk level 1, but both these were thought to have relatively small international student numbers. The university of Notre Dame is rumoured to be one of these.

I agree that it is easy for an University from Freemantle with hardly any recruitment activities in higher risk countries to have an AL1. The bulk of the Universities are in AL2 and once again “rumours” have it that two Universities that have figured lower in the AL are CQU and University of Ballarat. Some would say “understandably so!!!” as they chose to partner with private vendors to offer their programs who in turn worked like private businesses “alone” till they were forced to change (or have they!). These Universities, by themselves, are fine institutions otherwise.

My take is that the whole game of exposing the Universities to the Immigration’s AL mechanism is far too risky. It is now a done deal for DIAC that all the Universities have “opted in” and hence have become “participating” in the streamlining. Clearly this has not been an easy decision. Professor Dean Forbes, Deputy VC at Flinders University has been quoted by the newspapers today indicating that

“For many Australian universities, the inevitable consequence of losing access to the streamline program will be a significant reduction in international students and a precipitous decline in revenue,”

Digging deeper, I come across the full arguments of Professor Forbes. In a paper titled ASSESSING AND MANAGING RISK IN INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION: A POST KNIGHT REVIEW INSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE  that includes the thoughts influenced from his discussions at a recent meet and also discussions with members of the Universities Australia advisory group. I would assume that this is not an internal document as it is publicly available and will be quoting verbatim from this well structured article.

Last December DIAC informed universities about their Overall Risk Ratings (ORR) based on hitherto unseen student visa data. Measured on their international students visa performance universities were allocated into one of four bands.

The challenge crystallized.

  • Optimists wondered how to get promoted to a higher level
  • Pessimists were concerned with how to avoid relegation
  • And some of us were thinking, we must do this, but what are the risks, and will I lose my job if I get it wrong?

I seem to be agreeing to most of what Professor Forbes writes when he indicates…

THE RISKS FOR UNIVERSITIES

The initial area of risk for universities was about the decision to opt in or opt out of the streamlined visa program. Where they had a real choice by being classified as AL1 or AL2, this was a relatively straightforward trade-off between risks and rewards. It was more complex for universities categorised in AL3 or AL4.

For those that opted into the streamlined program, the area of risk shifted to the performance of the university. This centres on the ORI, which will be calculated on a six monthly basis. This is a short period; too short in my view. A rolling figure over 24 months would even out the impact of short-term blips.

Deterioration in the visa performance of international students would see the university drop down the AL range and lose access to the streamlined program.

Now for people such as us he interprets the factors that could precipitate a slide down the AL…

So what are the specific factors that could precipitate a slide down the Assessment Levels? Essentially, universities have greater responsibility for enrolling only bona fide students. That sounds straightforward: right? Well, no. DIAC’s assessment of students will be at the AL1 level, which is less rigorous than it is for AL2-AL4 countries. If there is a mis-judgement of an international student by either DIAC or a university it will affect the university’s ORI, and hence jeopardise their access to the streamlining process.

Universities are not required to do anything, but will still be held accountable. At the same time, they will need to manage the risks around the interpretation of visa requirements and of the information they have access to, and the risks of seeking out and assessing private information that may contravene privacy legislation.

There are five specific risk areas for universities that need to be managed. They must:

1. Undertake a financial assessment of students in order to be sure that students can meet their obligations. Some universities may outsource this function or work with banks on assessments

2. Ensure the students meet the appropriate English language requirements. DIAC has identified what it believes are appropriate levels of English for university study

3. Deal only with student recruitment agents that have a high level of integrity and success with the students they recommend. Coincidentally, DEEWR/DIISTRTE has recently released a Statement of Principles for the Ethical Recruitment of International Students by Education Agents and Consultants

4. Where visas are packaged with partner education institutions, ensure the partners standards are at the same level as the universities

5. Be confident that students are Genuine Temporary Entrants (GTE). That is, they are not intending to stay in Australia on a long-term basis

Universities have for some time dealt directly with four of these five areas. The exception is the judgment call about whether a prospective student is a Genuine Temporary Entrant. The real difference is that the risks for universities is significantly higher. Some of the risk previously taken by DIAC has been shifted to the universities. These are risks by proxy.

Under the current regime, if a university misjudged a student it was dealt with on an individual basis, as for any other student issue. DIAC managed the consequences. If the national visa data demonstrated that there was a pattern in a particular country, and students were not complying with the visa requirements, DIAC adjusted the AL for the country. Under the streamlined process the adjustment will be based on the university with which the student is involved. If a negative pattern emerges, as measured by the ORI, the university will be penalised.

While I can say BEST OF LUCK to the Universities and say it with a lot of sincerity and a little sarcasm, I was drawn to the newsletter of ANU where they have informed that the University has decided to “opt in” to the streamlining. I guess they thought that some will “opt in” and some will not. The fact that all have had to “opt-in” could actually be another interesting scenario. Just wait for two years and get ready for another Knight Review into the whole process that may just summarise that only those who take the hefty visa fee that includes costs for verification and manpower need to spend it too. I am not the only one saying this.

The University of Adelaide’s pro-vice-chancellor (international), Kent Anderson, said although streamlined processing was positive, the government was effectively shifting responsibilities and costs on to universities.

The documents quoted extensively above can be of big help in understanding the new innovative visa mechanism from an insider’s perspective. (The Australian article is on this link and  You can access the  paper of Professor Forbes on this link) Can’t agree more with Professor Forbes when he concludes…

Overall the next 12 months promise interesting times for international heads in universities. The lesson of all this for universities: be careful what you lobby for! 

Jan 24 2012

I predict shrinking of On-shore student recruitment in Australia from 2013

When Internet reached inner confines of India and when the young started browsing at broadband speeds, it resulted in airlines cutting out the intermediaries or lowering the commissions paid to the agents and hence drove many travel operators out of business. The same was forecasted also for the education agents and many western commentators believed that students will now access the information online, put in applications online and then will not need the services of an education agent. They also hence influenced the “so called experts” within the education sector to devise strategies that worked from this assessment. However, there was one major error in the calculations. Overseas students did not need the agent only for assistance with applications into institutions. They also needed the agents for help through the student visa process with advise that came out of their experience. Though authorities did not approve, the agents also were the first port of call for students seeking education as a pathway to migration and whether the education agents offered migration process or not, they had to respond to the student’s queries on the courses that met the migration requirements. While the education information could be provided through online searches and online counseling, student visa guidance and also some “tips” on the migration pathway, could only be taken through the education agents “face to face”. Education Providers too realized this and more so realized that converting online enquiries to “bums on seats” was far more complex than through the services of the agents.

The above applied to offshore and onshore education agents and the business opportunity that came their way. A perfect business model indeed and win-win for all…Education Providers, Students, Agents and even Government Agencies. DIAC relied on selective agents worldwide to vet the visa lodgments. Austrade and AEI worked closely with agents to boost forex earnings and also to focus on certain markets. In Australia, several migration agents extended their activities to include education counseling.

However the last two years has seen a changed environment. Whether it is for good or not; is subject to another article. Here we just note that the environment has been altered.
A tightening of the residency visa regulations means that those who entered Australia desiring their education to be a pathway to migration had to look for changed courses and quick-fix solutions and handholding locally to find solutions.
Onshore agents were not recruiting students from offshore locations and suddenly found themselves moving students from diplomas to degrees and from one MODL occupation linked course to another SOL linked program.

This churning of the students already in the system gave an illusion of the market existing when the reality was that the new students entering Australia from India had declined by over 75% last two year.

The reality is also that the churning of the students in the system only has a short life span. There is likely to be very few students seeking changes from diploma to degree or any other such movement in 2013. Further, since the first visa to private institutions and to vocational providers has already become so difficult, it is less likely that the industry will see the same kind of numbers again. Students already in the University system are less prone to the churning phenomenon anyways.

This is only one aspect of the changed environment… The Post-Study-Work visa announced this year post-Knight review means that a “near-guarantee” is being linked to the student visa for degree students. Though this is a welcome move, it is something that will make many onshore education and migration agents uneasy. The “guarantee” means that the students will be able to work for 2-4 years on completion of the program and this was not dependent on the occupation and whether it had migration outcomes. This “guarantee” means that the students will not be seeking help from migration or education agents on-shore anymore from 2013 to the same extent as has been done currently.

And… the streamlined system proposed for the Universities and also other guides issued to them have meant that most Universities are going to be using less and less number of agents even in the overseas markets. Education Agents are going to be required even more but since the institutions have to be accountable for them, they are likely to be even more discerning. I will not be surprised if they limit their new agents only to certain markets around the world and reduce their onshore contracts.

Well, in light of the above… my gut feel is that migrations agents will be busier with employee and state nomination categories, family migrations and other such categories that require handholding beyond the information that is currently available in public domain. The skill level of the migration agents will also be challenged and personally I feel that this will drive some of them also out of business.

What bothers me is the fact that some registered migration agents due to their helplessness or greed are cutting corners in overseas markets through sub-contracting or otherwise and hence bracketing others in their industry also as suspicious. I may indicate that in India, AAERI was forced to suspend 4 agents recently for suspected-student fraud and even though the matter is still under police/authorities investigation, 2 of the 4 agents are registered (and continue to be registered) migration agents in Australia though functioning through sub-offices in India. Technically, the Australian legislation does-not reaches India and this is where a loophole exists allowing onshore-regulated agents engaging in unregulated activities overseas.

I shall hesitate in generalizing and shall acknowledge that many of the agents are ethical and genuine in their intent. However like what happened with offshore education agents over last two years, scape-goats too have to be found. I fear that Australia has found them in the onshore education agents and in the offshore activities of the onshore migration agents…

Nov 9 2011

What’s happening to UK Education? Who and what are driving the agenda? Will the “wrong” bring votes?

I have written on it earlier and am now seeing many comment on the same lines… A write up in Guardian shouted WE MUST TACKLE VISA ABUSE, BUT NOT AT THE COST OF GENUINE STUDENTS… It elaborates that “Tough talk on immigration will frighten away the talent our colleges need.” (See LINK)

UKBA and the various spokespeople have learnt the use of negative vocabulary to such an extent that it become difficult to imagine anything positive in UK being an attractive destination for International Students. Yes, when they summarize with delight that their clampdown and measures are “beginning to bite” and when they claim that there has been a “wide spread” abuse of student visas, you begin to notice that they are not really complaining or pointing a finger to the abuse as such but actually scoring a political point through all this that the system in place by the previous regime was leaky… Let me make it clear… An International Student, An education agent and An institution recruiting students are all legit in making use of the available options and liberties. The job of making the policy is not theirs and if they have made use of the options then they should not be held responsible at all…

Coming back to the topic… I agree with the writer that…

International students are much sought after across the world. They bring valuable cultural, diplomatic and economic benefit with them. They contribute £5bn to UK earnings each year, making a huge difference to local economies. The students come to the country and then leave, without recourse to public funds. Of those who stay, many end up teaching and carrying out world-leading research. In a deeply competitive and global market, inter–national staff make up a large proportion of university staff, without whom many departments would not be viable, or at best would be significantly weakened.

The above advantages are more of an immediate term benefits that international students bring. I would like to add that the long term benefits are far reaching too. There are political and diplomatic advantages that international students deliver. I noticed that one of the reasons why “two years ago”, UK received less negative press in India when it was facing the same issues as that in Australia over college closures, why the unhappy student stories reached Indian media coverage to lesser intensity and why the Indian political class did not focus on the UK issue to the same level as they did with the Ozzies… is the fact that most of the players controlling Indian media, Indian polity and also Indian academia were all possessing some British education themselves. If you noticed the NEWSHOUR debates in those times, you could hear the British Educated commentators and image-builders talk in quite nasty terms on Australian history and made it look so inferior to the British strengths in education. I want to also state that whenever I interact with the Head-Master of a leading Indian School who is a thorough Brit himself, I find a clear disdain for any introduction of Australia to his school. I felt offended when he told me offhand that the students from India will face “racial bias” in Australia. I just did not expect it from him as he should have clearly seen the hype that was built up in a purposive manner by certain players at that time. And if he did notice the inaccuracies, he as the senior most in a school with responsibility of using “Knowledge as Light” should have corrected the mis-perception in the student mind-space…

Returning to the topic, I do think that the damage that the UK policies are inflicting is far worse. It is gradually building the word in the country that “Indian students are NOT WELCOME” in UK anymore and this message is due to the direction that the Government of the country has taken. How sad indeed… I referred this as “colonizers being fearful of reverse colonization” in an earlier blog and I would maintain that this “fear” too is such a negative word and destined to bring in more fear. Let the unemployment begin at the Universities once the number of International students come down… God Bless the country…

Before I close, I want to share the quality of perspectives that often comments to write-ups bring to the table… The quoted article had a comment by a reader:

The abuse of so-called “student” visas has been an open scandal for years. Hundreds of thousands of people with negligible skills and no intention of studying got in this way. Hundreds of bogus “colleges” flourished.

During all this time, reputable universities sat back and did nothing about it, as though it did not concern them. Well, they are now reaping the bitter fruit of their poisonous indifference. If you have no morals and turn a blind eye to scams, don’t be surprised if when the crackdown comes everyone things you are as bad, or almost as bad, as the scamsters themselves.

As to your point about genuine foreign students, you say:

“International students are much sought after across the world. They bring valuable cultural, diplomatic and economic benefit with them.”

I agree with this up to a point. But many postgrad science and engineering courses in the UK are now 100% Chinese. Is that really what we want? To be a knowledge giveaway for our industrial competitors? What about educating our own slightly-less-talented youth? Surely the national payback from that is many times higher than the once-off fees from the foreign students ?

And this is how another reader rebutted the above comment:

Another unthinking example of our current Government’s habit of ruling by gimmick without the wit to think through the consequences.

By carelessly making all foreign students feel unwelcome they risk a substantial loss of much needed national income. They risk the closure of many university departments who remain financially viable only through the high fee income from foreign students, and, although hard to quantify, they will diminish our global influence through the ‘soft power’ accruing from this sector.

As usual, they formulate and express policy not because it is in the interests of this country, but in order to appeal to the prejudices of the ill-informed (as illustrated already by some of the comments above).

“But many postgrad science and engineering courses in the UK are now 100% Chinese. Is that really what we want ?”

Hardly 100% I am sure – but it’s a sure bet that British students in these departments would be denied the opportunity of they weren’t kept viable by the foreign intake.

At least the Chinese Government have the wit to seek the very best education for their brightest – unlike ours. The high proportion of Chinese post-grads in many places is simply due to the fact that the necessary finance is available to them – unlike our own students for whom the provision of grants is woefully and short-sighted inadequate.

Don’t you agree that the comments to an article or even a blog are so useful in completing the story… This is where the internet is scoring over the print…

Aug 10 2011

We often criticize private education providers; sometimes we are wrong too… They donot just grab opportunities, they take lead too.

There is an advert in THE AGE that clearly holds the mirror to the Australian Government. This advert released by ACPET is simply repeating what has been said so many times already that it has ceased to startle us. An industry body that has always been acknowledged as a stakeholder is not advertising to get the desired attention of the government is something that is bothersome indeed.

 The Age 10 Aug 20110001.tif

Dodgy Colleges and Shonky agents have for far too long been held scapegoats for the chaos that runs in the industry and I guess it is now time to include Australian Government’s snail-pace approach to policy changes post various reviews (we saw it with the Baird review and now with the Knight review) into the factors that has possibly run Australia out of the reckoning even for non-Dodgy institutions and for non-Shonky agents. Time is of essence and we are all losing time. Some Universities (not just institutions) are losing budgets and staff too. Australia loses friends within and outside.

Come on Ozzie, you can do better. Even Indian ministers and bureaucrats do things quicker. I guess I am wrong when I make this comparison but it will bring you to ponder on the similarities between India and Australia once again. India deserves Australia and Australia deserves India, with or without me.

Feb 18 2011

Mirroring of Immigration Policies leading to a boring and flat world indeed…

A perfect theory till NZ played spoiler. I present my “cut and paste” hypothesis suggesting that immigration policies are being copied from one nation to another.

There was a time when the immigration policies, post study work and part time privileges varied from one country to another. These gave certain competitive advantages to each other. Even within UK there was a difference in post study work opportunities between Scotland and England. While there is no real reason to believe that those differences harmed anyone, over the last few years, too-frequent exchanging of notes and aping of regulations has not just led to similar and sometimes exactly-same privileges being offered by one and all.

 

Australia offered part time work permission for 20 hours per week and the UK started copying that. NZ and others too followed each other. Ireland and Canada introduced work permission and what was exactly-same was the number of hours each of them allowed the students to work during the study semester.

Then arrived the post-study-work privileges. Scotland introduced the Fresh Talent Initiative allowing students to work for 2 years post study. No just rest of the UK followed course, even Australian experts who often precede others in their initiatives, found logic in it to introduce a 485 subclass visa for graduating students to gain experience post their studies with an option to move on to other more permanent visa categories. NZ too around the same period introduced a job search visa that allowed students to find a job and then get a work permit. Canada too has a work permit though often that route is taken as a pathway to permanent residency. The OPT (Optional Practical Training) option in USA offers roughly the same goal. Hence the students had an option to gain some experience even without the permanent residency option.

The speeches of the immigration ministers too seem to be a cut and paste jobs.

“We have been clear that we will do nothing to prevent those coming here to study degree level courses and will protect our world class academic institutions above and below degree level. So the universities, all of whom are highly trusted sponsors of foreign students, should not worry. We want to make sure that every student who comes to this country is a legitimate student following a legitimate course.”

“Stricter control will be in the best interest of legitimate students. Some of those who come to study at less reputable institutions are genuinely in search of education which they do not receive. They may have been misled by questionable agents overseas or by these colleges.”

I will not be surprised if any of you assume the above to be from the speech of the Australian Immigration Minister. The reality is that this is an extract from his UK counterpart and that too very recently. The same content and very similarly drafted.

Not just them even media is ensuring generalizations. The quickest scapegoats they find in any conflict related to international students to be the education agents. The recent hungama over the US’s Tri Valley University scam once again got the agents to be seen in bad light for no fault of theirs. Now there is sufficient evidence that most of the students who ended up in Tri Valley were not recruited or counseled by agents in India at all but had moved from other institutions in USA exploiting loopholes in the system. The visa office too had bungled in some cases in giving the visas. Anyway, media and also some experts targeted agents and suggested that Indian Government should regulate dodgy agents.

In cricket, New Zealand has a reputation at being spoilers even if they cannot win. My theory too promoting a flat world was spoiled by this beautiful island nation. It is a delight to read the statement of NZ Immigration Minister Jonathan Coleman of yesterday.

“Not only does New Zealand gain from the economic benefits of having them study here, many international students stay on providing longer-term benefits by contributing their skills to our workforce and economy,’’ Dr Coleman says.

‘’Another plus for fee-paying foreign students is the recent introduction of interim visas which allows them to continue studying while applying for visas to further their studies. This will smooth the enrolment process for education providers.’’

The press release goes on to say: Students from India had the highest rate of transition to work (72 percent) followed by students from China (43 percent). Similarly, students from India also had the highest rate of transition to permanent residence (47 percent), followed by students from China (23 percent).

The research also found 68 percent of former international students were in fulltime employment 18 months after gaining permanent residence. Nearly one-third – 31 percent – worked in professional occupations and 62 percent worked in a skilled job.

Full text on this link.

While Minister Coleman may have played spoiler to my “cut and paste” theory, he has indeed re-established NZ’s reputation at being a thinking country and one that avoids aping other nations.

Whether right or wrong, it is indeed ensuring that our world is not totally flat. We don’t know the future though.

 

Feb 16 2011

“Overseas Education Agents” following “Computer Training Institutes”

As I was driving to my place of work this morning, Green and Orange posters announcing Overseas Education Fairs of two companies (both holding it on the same day) jostled for my attention. It is not the posters per se that is causing me to pen my thoughts but certainly it reminded me of the era when I also put up posters for my computer institutes. Two years ago, we would have all frowned on such posters being put up on the streets and would possibly have thought of it is crass commercialization. I am guilty of putting these posters up too. Times have changed and we have changed with time. Albeit lowering our own set parameters of standards. There was a time when we did not advertise in the classified columns of the newspapers in our industry but today that seems to be the most sought after spot.

What I was reminded of was the phase through mid-nineties when similar promotions were carried out by computer training institutes. In those days, I had franchises of a national brand in multiple locations and the computer training industry was the industry to watch. Brands such as NIIT, APTECH and BRILLIANTS commanded huge franchise fees and were the attractive business propositions for people such as myself and my friends.

There are many parallels between the two industries.

  • What the Computer Institutes did in 1990s, it seems that Overseas Education Consultants are doing today. Mass promotions using posters, danglers, kiosks, bill boards… and classified advertising.
  • Franchising was the way for the computer institutes to set up shop around the country and Franchising has and is being used by many amongst us to expand. The logic being that if Coke and Pepsi and McDonald and KFC can franchise, why we can not… Why indeed not?
  • Computer Institutes promised jobs and Overseas Education consultants promise part time jobs and some even go on to assure migration.
  • Fairs and Exhibitions were/are used by both to lure students and sell dreams.
  • Both had the ultimate seller as: post study jobs overseas.
  • Scholarships being used as bait are often advertised by both the computer institutes and overseas agents.

I can go on and on listing the similarities and now that the point is made, would move on to share my fear…

  • Computer training institutes shut shop when the end users realized that for their day to day computing they did not need to be taught the programming languages and in the Overseas Education Industry too we are seeing many students moving away from agents when they feel that there are certain steps that they can do on their own without any hand holding.

Maybe I do need to be reminded that specialized and focused computer training institutes of that era have continued to survive through continuous adaptations and only the fringe ones have close shop. This is true indeed and possibly overseas education counselors will survive too with certain adaptations.

I would hope that all the like minds will meet and set some basic parameters that we all adhere to so that the quality and standards of the service are maintained. Amongst them will be issues related to the correctness of advertising. There have been adverts with agents listing over 60 institutions across several countries at an exhibition and students attending such fairs return with comments that they were surprised to see as few as 5-10 stalls and the agent pointing to a disclaimer in the advert that the ad is a general one and that not all the advertised institutions will attend the event. This is clear misrepresentation and I may say even cheating of the students and shows the agent in a poor light over his or her own standards. This blog is not about naming or giving examples but believe me, more than one agent is guilty of this conduct. I am willing to even stop putting up the street-side posters if we all can agree that it lowers the standards of the game that we play.

Talking of exhibitions, I do think that all of us give an impression that ours is the best and the biggest of the fairs. The person getting confused is the student and there is a fatigue setting in his/her mindset. And he stops attending any of the events. The same institutions get sold by all and sometimes on the same day. The days of huge turnouts in exhibitions are now over and most of us go back happy if we have 100-200 at our events. Come on guys, we can do better. We can lift our game for sure.  There are ways out. Why should we try and compete with exhibitions organized by British Councils and/or Austrade as they are not agents and hence why can we not avoid placing our dates around these two fairs. Why have deceptive adverts such as one that I saw that did not even list the name of the organizing agent and used a similar-sounding email and web-link that gave an impression of the event being organized by the Canadian government. To be honest, sometimes I can understand the zeal to get that extra business.

I guess I am now drifting from the topic of the blog and must put it to an end before I am seen to be tearing into my competitors. Honestly, I am equally guilty and want to share an artwork (from a gallery in Berlin) that was exhibited at the recently held Art Summit in Delhi where one of my company’s poster is seen prominently on the streets of Kolkata. The artist, I am informed is acclaimed Suhasini Kejriwal and the work is priced at around Euro 10000. The point being made is simple: lets lift our game and lets work together to ensure that the overseas education consultants don’t end up like the computer training institutes. Let’s continue to think and develop standards that apply to all including me.

Feb 7 2011

INDIA: New law on overseas university agents (in the offing!)

Newslinks today inform: A new law making it mandatory for all education agents to register with the Indian government or face fines or jail terms, has been proposed in the wake of reports that some recruitment agents have misled students into joining fake universities abroad, such as the allegedly dubious California-based Tri-Valley University.

However, the interesting thing is that I(yes) have been quoted extensively even though I have never met the journalist or given an interview on the proposed bill in the last few months for sure. Either the journalist picked up one of my earlier comments or has begun to understand my thought process, I would possibly have stated as has been quoted. Just yesterday I was watching Manoj Shyamalan’s SIGNS and hence, even this thought that someone can read my mind and quote me without meeting or corresponding with me is quite freakish. Anyway, will let it be… Guys, take it that I said what has been written!!! Only that my name is Ravi and not Rajiv… Global Reach indeed is an education consultancy that I head as its Managing Director (not director). Read on rest of it on this link.

Sep 10 2010

UK Immigration Minister signals “review” of student visas… Has UK learnt its lesson? I doubt.

Deccan Chronicle reported on 7th September that British immigration minister, Mr Damian Green, is due to announce a crackdown on student visas. (See link.)

Mr Green, in an interview with Radio 5 Live on Monday morning mentioned his India visit. “I’m going to see if [visas] are benefiting university students. We’ve found people calling themselves collegiates but instead had a room above a kebab shop … I recently came back from India where I saw rows of shops where literally every other shop was offering visas to study in England. The authorities in India want to cooperate, as they don’t want their students conned by unscrupulous agents there,” he said.

Guys, are you surprised!!! Ever since UK lifted the flood gates more than a year ago, I have been predicting that a “review” will be needed sooner than later…

In an attempt to better understand what the Immigration Minister is saying, I visited the speech made to Royal Commonwealth Society by Home Office Immigration Minister Damian Green on 6th September 2010. Here are the excerpts from that speech:

Of course it is true that there have been many changes in the system since 2004 so it would be wrong to extrapolate directly, but the possible consequences are clear. If we continue to have a fifth of each cohort of students staying long term we will have very high net migration numbers indeed.

To those who say that these are precisely the brightest and the best who Britain needs, I would say let’s look at the facts. We estimate that around half, I repeat, around half of the students coming here from abroad only, are coming to study a degree level (or above) course.

Most people think foreign students come here to attend our top universities and of course these are the students we want to attract. But the real picture of the parts of Britain’s education system that attract foreign students is much more varied. It includes the publicly-funded further education sector, private vocational colleges, language schools, independent schools and many partnerships between higher and further educational institutions. The foreign students attending these various establishments may, or frankly may not be, the brightest and the best.

I want a student visa system which encourages the entry of legitimate students coming to study legitimate courses.  For me that certainly means students coming to study at universities, students who are equipped to study the courses to which they have subscribed and who fulfil their academic obligations, students who at the end of their period of leave return to their country of origin. That is good for the students concerned, it is good for the institutions they study in, and it is good for Britain. Indeed study of this kind has been one of our national success stories ever since Margaret Thatcher took the decision to expand our higher education sector and it certainly brings significant economic benefits to the UK.

However, it also means that we need to understand more clearly why a significant proportion of students are still here more than five years after their arrival. And we also need a system which can scrutinise effectively, and if necessary take action against, those whose long-term presence would be of little or no economic benefit. Of course we are the ideal country for others to come to learn English. But I want to ensure those who come here to study at language schools or any other institutions play by the rules and leave when their visas expire.

We estimate we are bringing more than ninety thousand people into Britain every year to do courses below degree level at private institutions.  We need to decide whether this is right and also whether it is the best thing in each case for the students themselves, given the high financial commitments required of them.  When I visited India last month I found the authorities and education sector representatives were happy to work with us to raise the quality of applicants and also to make life difficult for the unscrupulous agents who too often prey on them.

It is beyond dispute that Britain’s universities contain some of the best in the world and that they need to be competing for the world’s best students. The immigration system should help them in this. But this does not mean that every student visa issued is necessarily benefiting Britain.

So is he saying that the system put into place last year has not worked and that policy is going to be re-jigged?  Listen on to what he continues to say in that speech… (full text of the speech available on this link)

There is no doubt that by the end of their period the last government wanted to bring immigration under control. But we’ve learnt the Points-Based System is not enough on its own. It needs bolstering in two important ways. Annual limits on work visas, just as they have in other open and successful economies: and a much closer focus on who is qualifying under each section of our immigration system. We absolutely need sustainable immigration levels. This will relieve pressure on public services, and stop immigration being such a delicate political issue. At the same time, we must be confident enough to say Britain is open for business and study to those who will make this a better country, and a more open society.

Its like history repeating itself again and again and lessons of one country not being learnt by another. The Australian Immigration Minister Senator Chris Evans indicates this in his media release on 8th September when he states:

‘This was one of the factors which led to the unsustainable explosion in student numbers. Other countries, including the United Kingdom, are now dealing with the same problem and are looking to follow Australia’s example by tightening immigration controls.’

Senator Evans said Labor had already introduced regulations which were proportional to the risk posed by different categories of prospective students.

Australia now has a minority government akin to Britain and while the care-taking Immigration minister is not called Green, they have indeed got Greens in the government. (The new Immigration Minister will be appointed by the new PM, Miss Julia Gillard, next week…)

The story is the same and players are the same. The affected country is India. The private colleges woo students from India. And the interestingly the scapegoats will be the education agents from India who are so generally stereotyped as unscrupulous…

I am also an education agent and not unscrupulous for sure… Excuse me!!!