The Headlines
Onshore winds
Australia has announced a raft of reforms in an effort to protect international students from being “poached” by unscrupulous agents and providers. How welcome is this move?
By Claudia Civinini
"This change will work to stop predatory 'second' providers."
Share this page
Change is afoot in the international education sector in Australia, with a raft of reforms announced in August and September.
The reforms come in the wake of a review of the visa system and a parliamentary inquiry, both of which probed the sector, the Nixon Review (Rapid Review into the Exploitation of Australia’s Visa System) and the Inquiry into Australia’s Tourism and International Education Sectors.
Branded as an effort to strengthen integrity in the international education sector and better protect students, the reforms have a number of targets. These include closer monitoring of student attendance, greater access to agent performance data – including completion and visa rejection rates – for providers and a ban on cross-ownership of businesses between providers and agencies.
Among the changes announced, one in particular made international headlines: the decision to ban agent commission on onshore student transfers, which was presented by the Australian government as a move to "remove incentives for unscrupulous agents and providers to ‘poach’ students".
Students can decide to transfer to another institution during their studies for a range of genuine reasons. However, onshore churn or course hopping, with international students transferring to a different institution with lower fees or easier course requirements once in the country, sometimes being ‘poached’ by unscrupulous agents, leaves the system and the students themselves open to exploitation – while causing problems for institutions and bona fide agents.
This is not a new concern for the global international education sector. The problem has been front of mind for the Australian sector for some time, with concerns that visa loopholes, uncapped working hours (which were recently recapped post-pandemic to 48 hours a fortnight – a higher level pre-pandemic) and rogue agents and providers were fuelling the practice.
The reforms announced in September build on those announced the previous month, one of which targeted the ‘concurrent study rule’ allowing students to enrol in other courses during their core studies.
"This change will work to stop predatory 'second' providers from enrolling students before they have studied for the required six months at their first provider," Education Minister Jason Clare said in a statement at the time.
"The Go8 has high retention rates and therefore the impact is minimal and likely to remain so."
Earlier this year, leaked government memos showed the government was aware that “large numbers of students” were exploiting the concurrent study loophole to transfer to cheaper providers and work.
Among those pushing for reforms to stop onshore poaching was the Association of Australian Education Representatives in India (AAERI) in a letter to the Australian Minister of Home Affairs in June petitioning for linking student visas to institutions, the association’s President, Nishidhar Borra, wrote that unethical onshore poaching and course hopping was a “serious concern to all” and that a “huge increase” in the number of newly arrived international students changing providers to enrol in lower-level programmes had been observed.
While specifying that these are genuine students, Borra said in the letter that students are young and impressionable and many “fall into this trap to few agents onshore and other RTOs who offer fee discounts, cash-backs, job promises, migration pathways and other freebies”.
As a result, the letter added that “institutes and agents who have spent a considerable amount of time and money on the recruitment activity overseas are losing revenue and rules are being flouted, [and that] there is an increase on fraud and the brand of international education in Australia is being affected”.
The move to ban commission on onshore student transfers, and the reforms in general, have been welcomed in the sector. Universities Australia Chief Executive Catriona Jackson says: “These latest steps the government is taking will help protect students from unscrupulous operators seeking to exploit them for personal gain. Enough is enough.
“Universities have called for action in this space and the enhanced monitoring and compliance measures announced today send a firm message to dodgy agents that we are cracking down.”
Vicki Thomson, Chief Executive of the Group of Eight (Go8), which represents research-intensive universities in Australia, tells QS Insights Magazine: “The integrity and reputation of Australia’s international education sector is paramount, and students must be protected from exploitation.
"The Go8 has high retention rates and therefore the impact is minimal and likely to remain so." She adds: "Nevertheless, we support any government measure which targets unscrupulous behaviour by what is a minority of agents."
Speaking to QS Insights Magazine, a spokesperson from the University of Sydney, also part of the Go8, says the institution welcomed the government’s efforts to strengthen the integrity of Australia’s international education system and protect the system and students from attempts at exploitation. A representative from RMIT University in Melbourne also echoes similar sentiments: “RMIT supports the government’s plans to introduce stricter regulations to govern international student activity onshore."
AAERI also welcomed the measures. Borra tells QS Insights Magazine that the recent announcements were positive, and they would protect the recruitment efforts of universities and their bona fide agents.
“Offshore agents put in a lot of effort in recruitment of students and onshore poaching of newly arrived students is on the rise,” he says. “We welcome the ban on commissions on such poaching, commissions can be paid for students who complete the initial course and look for further courses.”
He adds that agent regularisation onshore is “necessary”, and warned there is more to do, explaining that linking student visas to institutions will help “in many ways”.
“In countries such as NZ, UK and Canada, the student visas are linked to the institutions,” Borra highlights. “In this way students can change the provider but also need to lodge the new student visa application and prove their GTE (Genuine Temporary Entrant) onshore.”
How the measures will be implemented in practise, and how they will impact the sector, or students who genuinely want to transfer to another provider during their studies, will become clearer with time.
A University of Sydney spokesperson says that the institution was carefully considering how the government’s response to the two recent reviews of the migration and visa system might affect its students and its operations.
“[We] look forward to further details, including on how the specific planned limitations on agent commissions on student transfers between providers once in Australia would be applied.
“For all but the most exceptional cases, we support the plan to close loopholes that have allowed education providers to recruit international students who have been in Australia for less than six months with another provider, noting most higher education providers, including Sydney, have policies in place to prevent potential course hopping.
“We also know local agents can serve an important and legitimate role in supporting international students to navigate Australian university application processes as they transition from high school, as well as university students who wish to change their course partway through their studies for a range of reasonable reasons.”
It also remains to be seen whether this measure is sufficient to target the sector’s concerns.
While the intention of the proposals has been welcomed, Thomson believes the approach is not a silver bullet against unscrupulous practices. “We would caution that simply banning commissions is unlikely to address the issue of onshore poaching and other measures may be required to protect students.”
An interim report of the Inquiry into Australia’s Tourism and International Education Sectors, published recently, made several recommendations to the government. It warns that, while implementing the decision to ban commission on onshore transfer, the government ensure this also includes “‘marketing or equivalent payments to related entities and persons however they are characterised”.
In regards to agents, the report recommends a series of actions to strengthen agent regulation, and adds: “The Committee recommends the government accept that regulation of education agents is essential and long overdue, and that a model must be determined and implemented.”
