{"id":385,"date":"2024-12-18T13:43:43","date_gmt":"2024-12-18T03:13:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/?p=385"},"modified":"2024-12-18T13:46:55","modified_gmt":"2024-12-18T03:16:55","slug":"solving-political-problems-at-the-expense-of-international-student-policies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/2024\/12\/18\/solving-political-problems-at-the-expense-of-international-student-policies\/","title":{"rendered":"Solving Political Problems at the Expense of International Student Policies?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Case for International Students\u2019 Admissions Reform in Australia<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Dr. Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva<\/span><\/strong>
\nFlinders University<\/p>\n

\n
POLICY PERSPECTIVES #18, December 2024<\/h5>\n

Recent debates about the housing crisis in Australia have reignited <\/span>discussions<\/a> about the nation\u2019s immigration policies. While some suggest that reducing overall migration could ease pressure on the housing market, others have specifically <\/span>identified the growing number of international students as a key contributing factor<\/a>. The blame here is that international students <\/span>create excessive competition<\/a> in the rental market, and thus, make it harder for locals to secure affordable housing.<\/span><\/p>\n

In response to these concerns, the government proposed a controversial bill <\/span>to cap the number of new international student arrivals<\/a> at 270,000 for the coming year. This measure was presented as a way to reduce temporary migration numbers and address housing shortages. However, the bill failed to pass the Senate last month <\/span>after being opposed by the Coalition<\/a> and the Greens party. While some universities welcomed this outcome, the broader issue of framing international students\u2019 impact on the housing crisis remains unresolved.<\/span><\/p>\n

What is missing from this debate is the distinction between short-term migration <\/span>pressures and the commercialised nature of international student admissions. These are distinct issues requiring separate solutions. Australia\u2019s higher education system, renowned globally for its excellence, <\/span>heavily depends on full-fee-paying international students<\/a>. This makes many universities prioritise commercial incentives, offering places to students who meet relatively lenient eligibility <\/span>criteria<\/a>. A more sustainable approach would involve reforming the admissions process rather than relying on blanket caps.<\/span><\/p>\n

Higher education is Australia\u2019s largest services export, generating billions of dollars annually. This export was worth <\/span>$48 billion in 2023<\/a>. Universities rely on international students for the majority of their revenue. A blanket reduction in student numbers tied to housing concerns ignores this economic reality and risks tarnishing Australia\u2019s reputation as a liberal, democratic, and welcoming destination for international education.<\/span><\/p>\n

Instead of imposing caps, the government should consider implementing stricter admissions criteria to regulate international student enrolment in a more equitable and transparent manner. While domestic students must meet rigorous ATAR or equivalent entry requirements, international applicants often only need<\/a> to fulfill English language proficiency benchmarks and provide certificates and academic transcripts proving completion of secondary (for undergraduate courses) or undergraduate studies (for postgraduate courses).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Research on international education has consistently highlighted the <\/span>commercialised nature of higher education<\/a> in Australia and emphasised the need for quality assurance. Other researchers question international student admissions, in particular the <\/span>admissions requirements on the English language<\/a> for applicants from non-English-speaking backgrounds. In the globalised and commercialised higher education sector, some institutions prioritise attracting more students for financial gain, while <\/span>others adopt international student recruitment and admissions processes<\/a> that are in line with their reputation and branding. It would be prudent for the Australian government and higher education providers to reassess their international admissions criteria to ensure that students are adequately prepared for academic success. This includes evaluating whether the students being admitted can effectively communicate in spoken and written English to fully benefit from their educational experience in Australia, rather than merely using their time here to learn the language while pursuing their degrees.<\/span><\/p>\n

While the failure of the bill to pass in the Senate may have brought relief to universities\u2014particularly larger institutions whose international student numbers would have been significantly affected, resulting in financial losses if the bill had become law\u2014it is important to note that the concerns prompting the proposed policy remain unaddressed. The issue has likely been deferred to the next parliamentary session, leaving universities uncertain about how similar measures might impact them in the future. What is missing from this debate is the recognition that migration policy and international student policies are distinct matters that require separate solutions. The claim that international students overwhelm the rental market and contribute to the housing crisis <\/span>is largely unsubstantiated,<\/a> revealing <\/span>the politicized nature of the issue<\/a>. The report by the Property Council of Australia found that <\/span>International students accounted for just 4% of Australia\u2019s rental market<\/a>, making them an unlikely cause of the housing crisis. The report states, while international students have returned to Australia post-COVID, their presence does not align with the surge in rental prices. Notably, rents began increasing in 2020, a time when international student migration was virtually nonexistent, as most students had returned to their home countries: \u201c<\/span>Between 2019 and 2023, median weekly rent increased by 30 per cent. Over the same period, student visa arrivals decreased by 13 per cent.\u201d<\/a> What is evident, however, is that Australia\u2019s economy heavily <\/span>relies on its higher education export industry<\/a>, fueled by international students studying in the country.<\/span><\/p>\n

The real concern within international student policy lies with \u201cdodgy\u201d applications and \u201cat-risk\u201d providers that may recruit <\/span>non-genuine students who are believed to exploit student visas as a pathway to employment and permanent residency<\/a>. Addressing these issues requires targeted reforms rather than conflating them with broader housing or migration debates. To address these challenge, universities should prioritise reforming international student admissions criteria <\/span>instead of framing students as scapegoats for housing or migration issues. Strengthening academic and English language requirements, for example, would not only help attract genuine students who plan to study and contribute as skilled migrants but also ensure a better academic environment for all learners.<\/span><\/p>\n

Advances in internet access and online learning resources <\/span>have made it easier<\/a> for non-native speakers to acquire English skills. However, concerns persist about the ability of some graduates from leading Australian universities to express themselves fluently in English or effectively present academic topics. This issue underscores how commercialised admissions processes have become\u2014students with sufficient funds are often granted admission, regardless of their preparedness. Increasing the minimum English language requirements would not only help ensure that incoming students are academically prepared but would also create a fairer classroom environment for both teachers and domestic students. A higher overall level of English proficiency would enable course designs and assessments to be more equitable for all learners.<\/span><\/p>\n

By raising eligibility requirements, Australia can ensure that international students are better equipped to contribute meaningfully to the education system and the broader economy. This approach would balance the sustainability of Australia\u2019s higher education export sector with public concerns about dodgy or non-genuine student cases and the quality migration into the Australian society. Most importantly, it would reflect the values of transparency and fairness, which should guide policymaking in a democratic society.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Dilnoza is a Lecturer in Government at Flinders University.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Her research interests include securitisation theory, the nexus of security and policymaking in higher education, the geopolitics of Central Eurasia, Russian foreign policy in Central Asia and the politics of higher education internationalisation.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dilnoza completed her PhD in Political Sciences and International Relations at the Australian National University. She was a Visiting Research Fellow in the Central Asia Program of Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dilnoza\u2019s research has been published in highly regarded journals such as Europe-Asia Studies,<\/span> Journal of Political Ideologies, Central Asian Survey, Problems of Post-Communism, and Central Asian Affairs. In addition to her research, Dilnoza’s teaching has been internationally accredited, and she is a Fellow of the UK Higher Education Academy.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Case for International Students\u2019 Admissions Reform in Australia Dr. Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva Flinders University POLICY PERSPECTIVES #18, December 2024 Recent debates about the housing crisis in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3919,"featured_media":387,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[618,453],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-385","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-democracy","category-policy-perspectives"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/385","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3919"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=385"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/385\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/387"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=385"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=385"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.flinders.edu.au\/jeff-bleich-centre\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=385"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}