Over the past two decades, the number of students leaving mainland China to study abroad increased from 39,000 in 2000 to 662,100 in 2018. Chinese students form a large share of international students in many countries including the United States, Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom. A British Council survey of 11,000 Chinese students over March–April 2020 found that 13 per cent were unlikely to return, 22 per cent were likely to cancel their study plans and 39 per cent were undecided.
The rapid increase of Chinese students studying abroad is a result of the rising middle class in China — sending children to study overseas is now framed as a lifestyle choice of middle-class families. Having an enriching life experience has already topped or equalled education quality as the most important reason for students to study abroad. Online learning can at best be a short-term solution during the pandemic because it does not offer the cultural and life experience that Chinese families are looking for.
But this does not mean that online learning is completely ineffective. It can supplement face-to-face teaching and potentially open new markets in skills training for mature students who cannot travel abroad.
The real risk for face-to-face teaching is whether the size of the Chinese middle-class will continue to grow post-COVID-19. The Chinese economy is clearly suffering from the lockdown and recovery will take time. Still, in May 2020 several top advisors raised the goal of doubling the size of China’s middle-income group over the next 15 years to 800 million people. Currently, students studying overseas mainly come from families earning more than AU$60,000 (US$41,100) per year. But the fastest growing group is the AU$20,000–AU$60,000 (US$13,700–US$41,100) income group.
There are still several more uncertainties. The Chinese population is aging quickly, and the net increase of families in the middle-income bracket does not necessarily mean that their capacity to send children abroad will increase as fast.
But the most serious challenge may be the Chinese government’s recent warning against travelling to Australia. The recommendation is a response to COVID-19 and allegedly increased racism. The pandemic certainly caused many problems for international students. But even before the pandemic, the number of students travelling to Australia was decreasing — often attributed to growing competition from universities in China. A more recent survey shows that even with the tension between governments, Australia is still the first choice for Chinese students. However, the UK has replaced the US as most popular among those students who use an agent.
International universities still retain the advantage in offering unique life experiences, but students will encounter difficulties when experiencing a new life abroad that can be overlooked. International students must deal with the cultural shock of studying in a foreign country and figure out how to set up a new life in a very short time. Most undergraduates have never left home before they travel abroad. Postgraduate students who lived on campus dormitories before they left China may struggle to follow conversations in English. When they seek support after facing a hostile reception, they are often ignored.
This narrative is frequently politicised by the media, causing further anxiety for Chinese students. Local students in the same age group — even without these constant challenges — often need emotional support, but counselling and wellbeing services do not always effectively accommodate for language and cultural differences.
It is high time for universities to recognise that as educators, the way they handle teaching and support may affect the wellbeing and the future of all students. As hosts of international students, universities must take the lead to coordinate and monitor support services. University staff members need to be trained and supported to provide such services as a part of their internationalisation strategies. The better prepared universities will be able to attract more international students.
Universities also need to communicate to wider society the extensive benefits that international education brings host countries. It is not about university staff getting higher pay and more funding, but an engine for broader economic growth. The resulting job creation ripples far beyond campuses. International students also subsidise the education of local students. Enhancing awareness of these benefits may help reduce public anxiety and increase domestic acceptance of international students.
Bingqin Li is Professor and Director of the Chinese Social Policy Program at the Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney.
Qian Fang is a post-doctoral research fellow at the Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney.
Li Sun is a lecturer at the School of Sociology and Social Policy at the University of Leeds.
This article is part of an EAF special feature series on the novel coronavirus crisis and its impact.
Having become friends with some international students over the last few years I can attest to the benefits they bring to the university: their different world view and life experiences are educational for the host country students who get to know them. They also offer breadth and depth to in-class discussions.
How universities in the USA will overcome Trump’s harsh and short sighted shift in visa policies in the context of online learning will be important.
“Having an enriching life experience has already topped or equalled education quality as the most important reason for students to study abroad.”
This comment,and,indeed, the entire article strikes me as rather disingenuous. I would invite comment from the authors in regard to the following.
Let us deal with the Australian context (and I am open to correction on any point I raise). A primary motivation for chinese students studying in Australia is the prospect of permanent residency, is it not? (I suspect this also applies to Canada and perhaps elsewhere). Indeed, it is intimate link between immigration (and immigration policy) and the tertiary sector that is its main ‘growth’ driver. (Surely,the evidence is in the statistics provided. The income brackets nominated would appear to be well below what is needed to sustain a student in Australia. A much greater incentive than a ‘good education’ must surely be at work to justify the sacrifice involved. Permanent residency?)
One can speculate how quickly things might change if the education/immigration link were broken — as it must be.
Of course, our universities love to claim that it is the quality of the education on offer that is the real difference. This, I think, is as disingenuous as the sentiments expressed by our authors.
Let us now address another aspect of this article:
“Universities also need to communicate to wider society the extensive benefits that international education brings host countries. It is not about university staff getting higher pay and more funding, but an engine for broader economic growth.”
This is a rather narrowly focused assessment of virtue of the tertiary sector as it currently exists in Australia. Australia’s population is growing very rapidly. A good many of the new Australians are former international students who, in time, secure permanent residency and then bring their families to Australia. This is all in the name of the economic growth model that the authors of this article clearly endorse and welcome.
It is not an economic model that is welcomed by an ever growing number of Australians, especially those with any kind of environmental awareness (and this, alas, appears not to be a concern shared by Binquin Li or Qian Fang). Our population-fed growth forever economic model (of which our tertiary education sector is now part) has no environmental future. It beggars belief that any academic holding university tenure in Australia is not aware of this!
Finally, let us draw attention to another observation made by the authors. China, they declare, has a rapidly ageing population. Now, this seems a very good reason for wishing to retain as many young chinese in China as possible (although, that said, I doubt the ageing problem is really a problem at all — but economists such as our authors routinely claim otherwise). Right now, the most able,affluent,and educated are taking any chance they can get to ‘fly the coop’ and head elsewhere to live. How is this to the advantage of China?
So, what does the future hold for Australia’s tertiary education sector? Well, there is no doubt that Australia ought, if its natural environment counts for anything (and it ought to count for everything!) reduce its rate of population growth. More than this, it ought to aspire to population stasis and this will necessarily require a reduction in our existing immigration levels.
Decoupling tertiary education and immigration would certainly take the heat out of our immigration program and that, of course, is what is needed for the tertiary sector to get back to where it needs to be: the provision of high-quality education primarily for Australian students. We might also facilitate the learning of the less advantage within our region, so that they might return home and make a difference.
Decoupling immigration and education would also be a boon for ‘ageing’ China. Many young students would study at home and many more would return home and make a difference where it was needed.
Let us, by all means, welcome those who wish to study in Australia for the sake of their academic endeavours — and not their other aspirations. But let us not continue pursuing our absurd ‘growth forever’ agenda which our three authors, too carelessly, endorse.
If our overseas students come to Australia, study, experience an alternative culture, and then return home to make a difference where it is most needed — at home — then we will have a model that works for everyone.
Thanks for the comment.
Indeed a lot of Chinese students would want to get PR. Getting PR used to be an important reason for going abroad to study. But the situation has changed. One needs to note that a lot of the students are the only child at home these days. Their parents do not necessarily want them to stay abroad. A PR offers travel convenience for people with Chinese passports. What is more, Chinese employers value international work experience. If you graduate and return without any experience, your salary would be much lower. These may all contribute to the fact that about half of the students want to get some work experience first and return. However, if you ask around, many people would also advise you that if you want to return, you’d better be quick. Because when more people get a degree from your field, you will have less bargaining power. About another 1/3 want to return straight away. This is based on a pre-COVID-19 survey (https://www.sohu.com/a/313720763_273660).
At the beginning of the article, we said that universities may want to have their own strategies. For example, they may not want to recruit more students. That is the call of the universities, not ours. But if they want to get more students, the points we have mentioned may be useful to consider. This article is meant to provide some background information on how Chinese students make choices before they travel abroad. It is not so realistic to ask teenagers to decide whether they want to immigrate after graduating several years. Decoupling immigration with education, therefore, should be determined by immigration policy of the hosting countries.
Graham: if you really care about the Australian environment and the welfare of Australians, you should be fighting the Murdoch press and the Liberal government: sworn enemies of the environment and of science, who are doing the utmost to destroy both.
The Australian policy of encouraging skilled migration is the envy of the world. When a student comes to an Australian university, their schooling is already paid for, and they pay Australians for the privilege of getting a university education. If they then stay in Australia, they pay far more in taxes than the cost of the public services they consume. This gives Australia the budget to have an environmentally friendly and prosperous economy. If we fail to do that, it is because of the Murdoch press and our pathetic government.
Stopping migration would kill the Australian economy, bring poverty and misery, and only increase support to anti environmental demagogues. It would be an unconscionably immoral act.
Well, maybe it is about time the USA started to increase the number of its own citizens attending college just like it did after World War 2 with the GI Bill and making college free or affordable that was once not available prior to the Great Depression and World War 2. The USA is becoming too dependent on goods and services and people from other countries to keep its economy running.
Agree.