IHEC submission to the MAC Rapid Review of the Graduate Route

We have submitted evidence to the MAC Rapid Review of the graduate study route, highlighting the importance of using correct and up-to-date information in making policy recommendations and decisions. We highlight that almost all the changes in numbers of students recruited by the 4 major English-speaking destinations are due to variations in the market share driven by national HE policy changes, as the overall growth rate has remained essentially constant at 3.9%, and the major factor driving changes in market share is the relative attractiveness of the PSW offer. We also highlight the need to recognize the different financial dynamics of major sending countries, and the need to attract “best and brightest” and not just the ‘rich and richest’.

Summary of the IHEC submission to the MAC Rapid Review of the Graduate Route:

• In 2012 the UK saw its first decline in international student numbers, followed by seven years without growth as a result of the decision to terminate post-study work rights. This was in contrast with other major English-speaking destinations, which had double-digit growth, most likely attributed to students who did not pursue HE in the UK. As a result, the UK’s drop to third place in the volume of international students recruited, behind the USA and Australia, was the major spur for the re-introduction of post-study work (PSW) visas
• Almost all the changes in the performance of the 4 major English-speaking destinations are due to variations in the market share driven by national HE policy changes, as the overall growth rate for these 4 countries has remained essentially constant at 3.9%, and the major factor driving changes in market share is the relative attractiveness of the PSW offer
• PSW is key for students from South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) as they generally fund studies from loans, whereas students from East Asia fund studies from family savings
• The 3 key countries in these regions, India, Nigeria and China, account for 56% of UK overseas recruitment, and so they pretty much define the dynamics of the sector as a whole
• Students only contribute to net migration when numbers are rising – when numbers are stable, they make no contribution – clearly the falls that have accompanied the recent policy changes will see net migration reduced as students who leave are not replaced, the double whammy the government did not factor in and we are having to deal with is that the re-introduction of PSW both increased the numbers and increased the time they can legitimately stay here before having to leave
• Because HESA data on enrolments is not now due until August this year, data will be 2 years out of date as soon as it is published, and the last “normal” year – was 2019 – so policies are being determined by visas issued, not students enrolled. Issued visas are an increasingly poor predictor of students in the country for the following:
  • Because masters programmes are for only 1 year and, the student places need to be replenished annually, as opposed to undergraduate students being in the UK for 3 years. The massive growth in master’s students means 3 times as many visas will be issued for the same number of students per year in the country over any given period
  • Students want certainty so they can secure a place in the face of visa policy changes in all the major destination markets. Increasingly, students are applying for multiple visas for several countries, but no account is made for the fact that many eventually end up studying elsewhere
  • Many master’s programmes are typically 9 months in duration, so they don’t reach the threshold for inclusion in the net migration figures – which is being in the country for 12 months or more. However, no account is taken of students who leave before 12 months (and should not have been included in the net migration numbers)
  • What has got lost in all this hot air is the fact the MAC came up with a great way forward in the MAC Report in 2018 on the impact of international students: “What is unusual about the UK is not how it calculates net migration‚ but the fact that net migration is the measure of migration that politicians focus on. If there is a desire to bring the UK approach to migration targets in line with other countries‚ it would not involve dropping students from the IPS figures but rather using a different data source‚ such as grants of settlement‚ to develop political or operational targets”. IHEC concurs that this would appear to be a much more sensible approach which would adopt a long-term view on the impact of immigration in contrast to the development of policies on the back quarterly statistical releases of immigration statistics.
• We also pointed the MAC at the most recent IHEC where we looked at the evidence for 11 common assertions about HE – it can be found here https://ihecommission.uk/resources/
• Our submission also included a comparison with overseas recruitment to Australia, a review of PSW offered by other countries and details of the significant data deficiencies in this area with partial, out of date data that was originally collected for an entirely different purpose, spread across multiple departments and where the Home Office does not make this necessary information easily available
• IHEC has foregrounded in central importance of the regional dimension to overseas recruitment. Not just the revenue it brings to regional economies but the contribution to addressing local skills gaps, promoting local investment and enhancing the social and cultural context. We recommend that any review of the Graduate Route has a similar core focus on the benefits of international higher education on a regional basis as part of ensuring economic and social development is enhanced across the entirety of the UK
• As a result universities are being asked to navigate a rapidly changing policy environment, driven by poor data, using the same poor data:

IHEC submission to the MAC Rapid Review of the Graduate Route: