Australian outbound student mobility: Recent Development and Possible Ways Forward

(1)

Australian International Education Conference 2006 – www.idp.com/aiec

Australian outbound student mobility: Recent Development and

Possible Ways Forward

Rob Malicki1

1 Global Innovations Group, Macquarie International, Macquarie University, North Ryde NSW 2109,

1.0 Introduction

Outbound student mobility has been slowly gathering momentum in Australia over a number of years. It has gradually found its way first into the internationalisation and strategic plans of institutions and, more recently, has been gathering increasing support and momentum at higher levels.

Outbound mobility crosses many disciplines at many levels. Students interact with university staff who then submit funding requests to government, who in turn may have discussed arrangements with other governments around the world. The European Union and Bologna Reforms are perfect examples of how student mobility has been carefully and deliberately placed at the front of intricate interactions across borders. They are a great model of success with more than a million students having utilised schemes such as Erasmus.

So where does Australia stand in the whole scheme of things?

The number of Australian students studying overseas as part of tertiary degrees has been slowly but steadily growing. But where do other sectors such as schools and vocational training fit in this mix? Is there greater value in overseas study at tertiary level or are other levels equally important? Surely involving all sectors will be important as Australia as a whole moves forward in this highly internationalised world.

This paper will review a number of major developments in outbound student mobility in Australia over the past few years. It will discuss some of the major issues that have been raised as part of the National Forum on Outbound Mobility – a series of events around Australia in 2006 that seek to address aspects of outbound mobility at various levels – and possible ways to move forward on those issues.

Finally, it will consider some developments and innovations that could take place to better connect Australian mobility with mobility schemes around the world. Are we recreating the wheel or are there some fundamental changes that we could make to better share our resources, build our capacity, increase our profile and learn from others?

1.1 Key Words

Student mobility; exchanges; university; outgoing programs; Erasmus; national forum; Bologna reforms; European Union

(2)

2.0 Australian Student Mobility:

Recent Developments

2.1 The National Forum on Outbound Mobility

The National Forum on Outbound Mobility was first conceptualised in December 2004. At the time, the current Minister for Education, Science and Training, Dr Brendan Nelson, had identified

outbound mobility of Australian students as an area of interest in his statement ‘Engaging the World through Education’ from October 2003. However, between this Ministerial statement (at the highest policy level) and the day-to-day operation of outbound mobility programs (at the most practical hands-on level), there was no uniform strategy or understanding of how best to facilitate these programs.

The National Forum on Outbound Mobility was proposed to be a way of beginning to fill that gap. The National Forum (‘NFOM’ henceforth) initially had a four-fold purpose:

To facilitate, at a national level, ways of increasing outbound mobility. To achieve this by giving clear feedback and indications of future needs to regulatory bodies.

To link institutions more closely with government-level bodies who can assist with outbound mobility, such as key areas within DEST, consulates and high commissions from many countries.

To provide a first class professional development activity for practitioners of

international education who are at the front-line of trying to increase outbound mobility within institutions.

To raise the public profile of studying overseas Australia-wide through media coverage and by increasing the ‘value’ of mobility amongst employers

The National Forum on Outbound Mobility sought to begin to tie together the large number of existing structures and programs that exist within outbound mobility. It is an ongoing process that will help to unify existing strategies, highlight areas of best practice and identify areas that require further work and policy.

Some existing structures, programs and policies designed to aid outbound mobility are: UMAP

OS-HELP

The Australian Exchange Fair Circuit

National Study Abroad and Exchange Special Interest Group (through ISANA) State based study abroad and exchange interest groups

DIMIA’s policy on third country exchanges

Interactions with consulates and high commissions Institutionally based policies and programs

Benchmarking studies (through AUIDF, IEAA, IDP and other groups/individuals) Research

2.2 National Roundtable on Outbound Mobility April 3rd_{, 2006} Held in Brisbane as part of the AEI International Education Forum

Summary of the major outcomes and discussion points from the National Roundtable 2.2.1 Major Statements and Announcements

The following statements and announcements were made by various delegates – these can be found in full in the Minutes (section 4)

• The Government and AEI are 100% supportive of mobility and will be doing significant work in the area later this year

(3)

• Government priority is still in the Asia-Pacific region

• DEST will be creating a web portal on mobility later this year – to include the areas of tertiary, vocational and schools

• UMAP contribution will be increased from $1.4 million to $1.6 million, with individual grants being increased from $4000 to $4500 for students. Reporting requirements will be

simplified

• There will be a doubling of Cheung Kong grants from 100 to 200 per year

• OS-HELP loan scheme report will be finalised shortly by DEST – this will show the trends in requests and uptake of OS HELP around Australia

2.2.2 Major Points of Discussion and Outcomes

The following are a number of the major points that were raised and discussed, or outcomes that were achieved as part of the roundtable

• AEI to take up the idea of a National Advisory Council on mobility with the new minister for Education, Science and Training

• AEI to call for a meeting in May of interested parties to discuss a possible budget for mobility development in 2007. Budget will need to be based on data and research

• Data collection and benchmarking

o AUIDF benchmark will be the definitive study on mobility this year. It will be effectively a census on mobility at tertiary level – this census to be complete by August in time for AEI to use the results in looking to set a mobility budget in 2007.

• Identifying outcomes of outbound mobility and increasing employer awareness will be a key issue

• Outbound mobility research

o IEAA beginning a lot of research

o QETI also beginning a research project on employer outcomes

• Problems with DEST reporting requirements for institutions regarding exchanges – AVCC to take this up with DEST Sector working group

• Looking at breathing life back into UCTS and possible creation of an Australian Credit Transfer Scheme modelled on ECTS

• Resource sharing, such as documents etc, to shortly begin via the ISANA webpage

• Next meeting of this National Forum group to be held at AIEC Conference in Perth in October

2.2.3 The major points of action as summarised by the Chair

The Chair of the National Roundtable summarised the main points of action identified throughout the afternoon as follows.

1. National Advisory Council will happen; initiative will come from either AEI or us (i.e. universities)

2. Taskforce on data collection should be established to work closely with AUIDF and other relevant groups

3. Feedback from the AUIDF survey will be provided at the AIEC conference 4. Greater links between state governments and higher education like QETI

5. Further research examining student exchange, community perceptions, etc. This is being raised through BHERT, SIDA, IEAA

(4)

7. Establishing targets to include postgrad & undergrade, and VET sector and consider school levels. Research must be established before we can set targets

8. Circulate the DEST 2004 report

2.2.4 Major questions for future consideration

• How can we increase the uptake of OS-HELP?

• Massive increase in short term programs – where do they fit in the whole picture?

• Exposing businesses to the value of internationalised graduates – what are the barriers for businesses and how can we add incentive?

• Data collection review – best way to distribute, publicise and utilise results?

• How do we facilitate research and postgraduates going overseas?

• Can we set specific definitions for outbound mobility?

2.3 National Roundtable on Outbound Mobility October 10th_2006-10-09 Major areas of discussion included:

- Reviewing the 2005 benchmarking data of Australian universities outbound mobility - Reviewing some of the broad outcomes of recent research

- Establishing a concerted public relations campaign targeting both specific and general media sources

- Some consideration of the main barriers to outbound mobility was also undertaken. The full minutes for the Roundtable will be available by late October 2006.

2.4 Consular Roundtable on Outbound Mobility

Hosted by the Canadian High Commission on June 29th₂₀₀₆

The concept of the Consular Roundtable was to begin discussions between some keys

stakeholders as to ways they could work together to increase student mobility. These stakeholders included a number of consulates and embassies, AEI, the AVCC and practitioners from around the country. The focus of the afternoon was around sharing ideas and looking at future ways of

working together.

A full summary of the meeting can be found online. 2.5 National Post-Exchange Student Conference December 4th_{2006, UNSW, Sydney}

The National Post-Exchange Student Conference was initially conceived as a way of: - Offering Professional development and networking for students

- Offering a quality controlled and industry standard re-entry program (thus sharing resources)

- Expose returned students to industry groups

- Raise the profile of student exchange and promote the benefits of it to industry and the wider community

The scope of the conference has evolved somewhat from the original concept. The conference is now seeking to engage all students who have completed an exchange experience (either offshore or here in Australia) and to provide them with:

- Professional development – particularly in equipping them with skills to best ‘promote’ their international experience to future employers. This will be done through workshops focusing

(5)

on the specific skills they have gained overseas as well as generic workshops on interview skills, resume building etc.

- An opportunity to consider their future international options – be they studying, traveling, volunteering or working overseas. This will be done through a ‘Future Opportunities Marketplace’ that will also be open to the public.

- Access to a network of other students who have completed a similar experience

- Access to high profile personalities who have a wealth of international experience – this includes business people, international aid organizations, media personalities and More than 200 students have already pre-registered for the conference in 2006.

This event has got the potential to be much larger, and more wide-reaching, in the future. In many ways, completing international students have acquired the same skills (and even more) than students who have completed an exchange.

2.6 Australian Exchange Fair Circuit

The first plans for the Australian Exchange Fair Circuit were launched in April 2004 through ISANA’s Study Abroad and Exchange special interest group. The idea was born from the fact that a number of Australian universities already held institution-based ‘Exchange Fairs’ to which they invited their international partner universities in an effort to promote their Student Exchange Programs.

The concept was that in coordinating the timing of these fairs, and encouraging participation from all Australian universities, the country as a whole could significantly increase the attractiveness for international partner universities to come to Australia to participate in such fairs. Essentially, institutions would run their own individualised fairs, with the timing of the fairs being centrally coordinated and listed on a special ‘Exchange Fair Circuit’ web page.

The strength of this model is that outbound mobility typically does not attract the same budgeting considerations as other international activities. By collaborating on a national level it allows for the maximum exposure of outbound mobility around the country given the minimum resources provided. It also allows institutions to commit as much or as little resources towards their own individual fair as they have capacity to do so.

In 2006, New Zealand institutions have also joined the circuit, so this has become a regionally-significant event. The Australia-New Zealand Exchange Fair Circuit will run again in 2007.

2005

o 27 Australian Universities held fairs as part of the circuit

o More than 100 partner institutions represented

o Participation also by consulates, education and travel groups

o Universities spent more than $100,000 on the fairs (including 1400 working hours worth of preparation)

o Total expenditure by all involved was more than $500,000

o More than 9000 students attended the fairs, compared to the 4400 students participating institutions currently send on international programs

2006

o 29 Australian universities participating, 6 universities from New Zealand also participating

o Only 18 surveys back so far

o 65 plus partner universities from overseas made more than 100 visits at Fairs plus 42 visits outside of official exchange fair days

o 266 representations of other institutions around Australia ie. by students etc.

o 11000 students attended (only 18 surveys back, so real figure much higher)

(6)

o $94000 spent by universities

o About $10000 worth of sponsorship

o 65 international partners attending from overseas, coming from 17 countries

o More than 200 institutions being represented (including representation by students) around the country

(7)

3.0 Looking to the Future

3.1 Changes in Funding Processes

Outbound mobility is currently supported by a number of different funding bodies including institutions, government and scholarship funding bodies.

Some of these schemes, however, are out of date and do not meet the current needs or demands of the student population. They lack prestige and focus.

The UMAP scheme, focused on mobility in the Asia-Pacific region fits into the category described above. Whilst the intention of the scheme is fantastic, there is too much red tape and not enough prestige for students who receive a grant. For the most part, students are not even aware of where their grant has come from or to how lucky they are to have that money.

Recent data from the AUIDF/IEAA benchmarking study into outbound mobility shows that a large proportion of students are undertaking their international experiences outside of UMAP countries. It is admirable that the Australian government have supported the UMAP scheme, when the reality is that most of the UMAP countries have not directly supported the scheme with funding.

This funding could better be spent in setting up a scheme that looked at all the regions of the world. This scheme needs to be mainstreamed into the government’s other scholarship schemes so that students realise the prestige there is in being selected for one of these grants.

This suggestion is also consistent with data from the World Economic Forum’s Global

Competitiveness Report for 2006/2007, which shows that 15 out of the world’s 25 most competitive nations (sometimes called ‘innovator’ countries) are in Europe. Surely Australia (which is in the 25 leading nations) is interested in building partnerships and collaboration with these leading nations? The Asia-Pacific is very important, but there is definite weight to the argument that engagement with the most competitive nations can only serve in Australia’s interests.

If we were to work more closely with the most competitive nations on mobility, it would also become easier to attract funding from the multinationals who are active in those countries. Private enterprise needs to be encouraged to participate much more in such funding schemes – as in the way the Cheung Kong organisation has funded a large number of outbound mobility grants for North Asia. A focused effort could certainly attract regionally specific funding arrangements for grants (such as Cheung Kong).

The government’s second major support mechanism for mobility, OS-HELP, also needs to be reworked. Uptake has been relatively low by institutions which could be due, anecdotally, to the 20% loan fee amongst other things. Admittedly, the scheme is still very young.

The principle behind OS-HELP is an excellent one, but once again, more needs to be done to promote the scheme and increase its availability to a wider group of students (it is currently limited to undergraduate students in their 2nd_{year of study completing and activity for credit). Expanding}

the scheme would certainly increase uptake.

If Australian looks at other nations who run loan/grant schemes, there are quite possibly some excellent lessons to be learned - from the Scandinavian nations in particular.

3.2 An Australian Mobility Credit Scheme (a national ‘currency’ for international experience) The European Union has the European Credit Transfer Scheme (ECTS) to facilitate movement of its students across borders within Europe.

(8)

Australia has been part of the UMAP effort to create a UCTS – UMAP Credit Transfer Scheme. This has, unfortunately, failed to lead to any concrete outcomes.

What would advantage Australian institutions would be to develop an Australian Credit Transfer Scheme. This could be similar to ECTS in the sense that it would be a number system that would fit over the top of the myriad of credit systems that currently exist inside Australian universities. It would not necessarily have to look at translating ‘grades’ into a common language, as the ECTS model does, but this could be developed with time.

Such a scheme would have several benefits.

1. Common international credit ‘currency’ – this would benefit employers, students,

researchers etc in assessing exactly what has been done overseas and how that translates back here in Australia

2. Easy to apply – institutions wouldn’t need to modify systems. It could simply be a ‘translation’ sheet that anyone could use to judge equivalencies between institutions 3. It could potentially open up exchange programs from different universities to other students

ie. MQ students going on a program run by Western Australia

4. It would dramatically simplify the cross-institutional credit system inside Australia 5. Could allow for a country-wide ‘previous international study/credit database’ An example of how this could be quickly and easily achieved:

Create a ‘translation’ of each universities credit systems and give it a common value. For example, a standard full-time load at University A might be 12cp per semester. At University B it might be 30 credit points per semester and at University C it might be 5 credit points per semester.

University A =12cp per semester University B = 30cp per semester University C = 5cp per semester

If the common ‘exchange’ credit system used a stand formula, for example 30 cp per semester, then a formula can be quickly established for each institution to allow its own credit scheme to be ‘translated’ into the common ‘Exchange’ credit.

3.3 Partnerships and Collaboration

Outbound mobility, for the time being, has focused very much on the tertiary sector. If a truly Australia-wide strategy is to eventually be adopted it is crucial for the other major education sectors to be involved. Both the schools and VET sectors currently have mobility in various forms but there are the inevitable questions:

- What are we doing to support practitioners in these areas (professional development, network, funds, access to information)?

- What information are we collecting about the students who are going on programs in these sectors (numbers, demographics, benchmarks)?

- What are the needs of the students in these sectors (funding, programs, support)? The second part of the whole partnerships question regards private enterprise. Currently there is no united front for outbound mobility, the is no clear message to business that mobility has benefits (to graduates, organisations and the community). Research is currently being undertaken on employer perceptions of mobility and there is research on outcomes of mobility for students, but this is not being communicated in a concise or consistent manner.

There is certainly a way to address this and this leads in to some of the ideas and questions posed in the sections below.

(9)

It is clear now that outbound mobility needs to have its own brand. Inbound programs (both short and long term) have the Study in Australia brand, and the time has come for outbound mobility to develop a similar image.

Having an outbound mobility brand would have a wide range of extremely significant benefits: 1. Allow organisations, people etc to ‘subscribe and support’ it – from the Prime Minister to

famous personalities and on

2. Allow private enterprise to get serious benefits to sponsoring mobility – i.e. Through brand association

3. Send a clear message to the public – especially students at all levels of study – that mobility is something that is valued and worthy of undertaking

4. It would reveal the true scope of how big outbound mobility in Australia already is and would allow us to monitor the continuing growth with ease and accuracy

5. Provide a united front to the media

6. Would prove to the world that Australia is completely serious about making Australians more mobile for their education

The mobility brand needs to be attractive to people and organisations – it needs a set of images and principles to go with those images.

The government, as part of the Brisbane Communique, are already working on plans for an ‘outbound mobility web portal’, which is planned to be cross-sectoral. This is the perfect starting place for a brand and a crucial tool for increasing the value of mobility.

The value of an outbound mobility brand cannot be overstated. The European Union, arguably the world leaders in mobility, have a flagship in the form of Erasmus. A mobility brand would be the symbol of Australia’s flagship.

3.5 An Outbound Mobility Organisation

The big question is how serious are we about outbound mobility?

The European Union has the Erasmus program – more than a million students given an experience in another country. Australia has equally developed IDP to promote Australian education around the world, which has had huge success over many years. There is now an opportunity to put Australian mobility at the forefront of global mobility by creating an outbound mobility organisation.

3.5.1 Roles of an organisation and benefits

• Quality Assurance and Accreditation

Most inbound programs, be they degrees or shorter programs such as study abroad, are accredited by a central body. This should be equally, if not more, important for students leaving Australia on various programs. An organisation like this could provide standard guidelines for quality assurance and could accredit providers of outbound mobility programs (be they universities, working holiday programs, internships, volunteering organisations etc) as being satisfactory to a national standard.

There would be value in this for students and organisations alike – showing that the provider of the program had attained a certain level of quality and preparedness.

• Branding

An organisation could effectively ‘own the mobility brand. It could oversee who used the brand and ensured they reached a national standard for quality. Having the brand owned by an organisation would ensure its correct usage and maximum impact. This becomes important for some of the points listed below.

(10)

An organisation could become a national mobility ‘champion’. Mobility takes so many shapes and forms that having a united front being presented to both students and enterprise would have distinct advantages. Various people and institutions would be able to publicly support an outbound mobility organisation – from the Prime Minister to well-known identities to

corporations.

Immediately anyone would be able to look at mobility and see people and groups from all over the country saying ‘Yes. Mobility is important and we support it’. The value of this in terms of marketing to students is immeasurable.

An outbound mobility organisation would also be able to promote the benefits of mobility vigourously to private enterprise – thus continuing to raise the profile of mobility.

• Fund-raising

An organisation charged with maintaining the mobility brand and with profiling mobility around the country would be in an ideal position to be sourcing scholarships and opportunities from the private sector. Currently there is no one who is responsible for this, but a concerted effort by an organisation with the brief would certainly be successful – perhaps in attracting millions of additional dollars worth of grants for students. It could also be responsible for building partnerships with private enterprise, international education organisations, government departments and providers.

• Collating opportunities (a one-stop shop)

The world is full of opportunities – both those offered by Australian providers and those offered offshore. Collating these opportunities is a massive job and certainly one too large for any institution. An outbound mobility organisation, carrying the brand and the brief of developing mobility, would be the ideal place for these opportunities to be listed. Eventually, any student or person wishing to take any particular program would be able to approach this organisation to discuss their options – anything from an exchanges to practical training, volunteering or research.

This in turn increases the value for private enterprise to sponsor the organisation as there will be a great number of people using its resources.

3.5.2 Establishment and budget

The ultimate goal of such an organisation would be for it to become self-sufficient with funds sourced from the private sector or obtained through commissions.

To begin with, it could be funded by governments (state and federal); through pledges from institutions and private enterprise.

Any organisation would be the lynchpin in Australia’s mobility effort – and it could be done now with modest resources but exponential outcomes. We already have the expertise to make it happen – but we need to support it to let it fly.

4.0 Acknowledgements

Thanks to Alan Olsen (SPRE Ltd.), Rob Lawrence (Prospect Group), Macquarie International, Paula Dunstan (ISANA International Education Association), Dennis Murray and IEAA, AUIDF 5.0 About the Author of the Paper

Rob Malicki is the Global Programs Coordinator at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia. He has worked for several years with semester and year-long exchange programs and now looks after the development and promotion of Macquarie’s outbound short term programs.

Rob served as the Study Abroad and Exchange chairperson for the ISANA International Education Association from 2004-2006 and was the founder, and now facilitator, of the National Forum on Outbound Mobility. He chaired the Steering Committee for the Australian Exchange Fair Circuit

(11)

from its inception until 2006 and is the chair of the Steering Committee for the National Post-Exchange Student Conference.

Rob has completed a Master of Arts in International Communication and holds a Diploma of French, both from Macquarie. He has studied and worked in Denmark, the UK, USA and France. When not working or surfing, Rob loves cycle touring in remote locations around the world.

6.0 For More Information

Copies of relevant reports can be found at:

http://www.4shared.com/dir/1013123/3f42fe66/NFOM.html password: nfom2006