Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

International students and Hales Institute - the tip of a dangerous iceberg

By Wesa Chau - posted Tuesday, 16 March 2010


It may be entirely coincidental that the latest private college in financial crisis, the Hales Institute, specialises in cooking and hairdressing training - the very courses the Federal Government removed from its priority list this month. But with Hales heading into receivership and another thousand students in limbo, the government needs to take care not to strangle our third largest export industry.

Hales’ $7 million debt did not accrue suddenly, but it and a number of other colleges have felt the brunt of a policy change that overnight meant 20,000 international students have completed vocational courses that no longer give them points towards permanent residency.

Colleges that have invested heavily in previously approved courses now face an uncertain future, as students dry up. And Hales will not be the last to face financial strife.

Advertisement

This is happening because the government is trying to solve one problem - a perception that people with the “wrong” skills (hairdressing, cooking) were being welcomed to Australia in place of the “right” people (rocket scientists, brain surgeons?). We don’t know who these “right” people are because the government hasn’t released its list of “approved” courses. In the meantime, along the way, it has caused another problem: destabilising a major industry.

Unlike Douglas Adams in his Hitchhikers’ Guide to the Galaxy, Immigration Minister Chris Evans couldn’t simply blast the world’s surplus hairdressers, management consultants and “telephone sanitisers” into space as unwanted accessories. He did the next best thing, announcing a “general skills migration review” that relegated cookery, hairdressing and others off the demand list, in favour of professions weighted towards the tertiary sector.

This may be great domestic politics, and we welcome a sensible review of a system that allowed fly-by-nighters to spring up in the past decade to take advantage of immigration laws designed to fill the nation’s skill gaps, from hospitality to mining.

And there is no doubt that there are rotten apples in the barrel that need to be removed - like private colleges rorting the visa system and charging students fees up to $20,000 a year to do courses that cost Australian students only hundreds of dollars.

But the Minister’s sledgehammer has not just fallen on the vultures, it risks damaging long-established reputable colleges and the 212,000 students placed in jeopardy under the revamped system. The sector is in shock, and with no grace period for implementation the effect is being felt now.

Students who pay to study in Australia, and have a secondary aim to seek permanent residency after they finish their course are now left directionless.

Advertisement

If the government believes Australia requires fewer cooks and hairdressers the policy change makes sense, but if the intention is to fix the problems with international education, it is taking the wrong path and moving too quickly.

Has the government thoroughly examined the effects on the international education sector, the economy, local businesses and other sectors that have close links with education such as tourism?

Let’s have a look at this one by one.

The unfortunate reality is that many private operators were opened solely to target the market now being effectively shut own. There will be a ripple effect on the sector, with more private colleges likely to close in the near future.

Where does this leave the current students who have already paid for the courses and wanting an education? Where is their safety net?

International education contributed $17.2 billion to the economy in 2008-09. Instability in the sector caused by perceived racial violence and immigration policy have already caused students to leave Australia. Those who were planning to come may now decide to study in other countries.

The strong Australian dollar also means that other countries are more attractive to international students. Like all policy changes, there will be a time delay before the full effects will be felt locally.

With the likely drop in student numbers, businesses that serve a large number of international students - such as phone companies, ethnic grocery stores, some local restaurants, education and migration agents - will experience the side effect of the drop in businesses.

There is a strong connection with international education and tourism, because parents and friends of international students come for holidays and to attend their graduation at the end of their degree. If students go elsewhere to study, so will this tourism.

The major problem lies with shonky operators who do not provide quality education to those who are here, damaging students’ work prospects and Australia’s reputation as a quality education provider.

The final responsibility here lies with the government. Why did the government allow third rate private colleges to pass quality audits? How can colleges continue to provide misleading photos on their websites indicating a friendly, relaxed environment with grassy areas for work and study, when they operate in a cramped office building with small classrooms and a wafer-thin syllabus?

Shonky providers would not exist if the government didn’t issue them with a license.

It seems the government is panicking and instead of removing the providers and agents who have misled students into believing that there is a short cut to permanent residency, they punish the students instead.

If this is the path the government insists on taking, it must also provide sufficient support for affected students, including the assurance that if providers close down, legitimate student living expenses will be reimbursed.

The announcement by Education Minister Gillard that an extra $5 million will be put into the Education Services for Overseas Students Assurance Fund shows the government knows that policy change can be costly. But if international students lose confidence in Australia’s ability to run a robust system, the cost to our economy will dwarf that.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

34 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Wesa Chau is a speaker, thinker, advocate and consultant, with expertise in diversity, working cross-culturally, international students, young people and disability.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Wesa Chau

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Wesa Chau
Article Tools
Comment 34 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy