International Recruitment Post Covid-19

Alfredo AveroBy Alfredo Varela Associate Vice President Global Affairs The College of St. Rose Albany New York June 15, 2020.

Inside Higher Education just published another a series of articles outlining the expected severe downturn in international student enrollment. Citing mostly large state institutions, this latest article predicts declines of 10% to 30% in new and returning students. During a recent CNN interview, Scott Galloway, Professor of Marketing at NYU Sterns School of Business 20 to 40% of schools, will start a “death march.” Here, rather than focus on the dire outcomes of such predictions, we must shift attention to the work required if institutions are to eventually turn the tide on this crisis.

Yes, this is an existential crisis. Especially for smaller private institutions, this is a moment of great reflection on their mission and history. Can institutions remain true to their core values and continue? Such questions are for those at a different level of decision-making. For those of us “in the trenches,” we must work, roll-up our collective sleeves, re-focus, regroup, and move forward.

Here are some very frank and concrete suggestions directed mainly at smaller private institutions. What comes next for us as individuals and collectively will rely on the work we do now.

Looking Forward

 While domestic recruitment has been affected by the current crisis, there are additional factors that have resulted in a long-term downward trend. International recruitment has been for many institutions a market to make up for losses due to demographic shifts in the US. As a result, the disruption felt by COVID19 in regards to new and returning international students has become a significant concern. In order to approach recovering, there are numerous barriers each institution must address. For example, the general anxiety of parents and students, financial issues created as the result of the crisis, travel restrictions, and the fact that most consular offices remain closed or are offering limited access. These are only the most visible challenges facing international students and are largely out of our reach to change.

With these issues likely to continue for the next few months, any institution hoping to see some recovery in their overall enrollment and retain diversity among their student population must make a long- term commitment. It will take 2-5 years before a full recovery takes place.

Here are four areas of consideration for maintaining and eventually increasing international student enrollment.

 1. Focus on direct contact and specific markets.

“Fortune always favors the brave” – PT Barnum

 Keeping health and safety primary, institutions that will recover most quickly are those that return to the markets in-person the soonest. Rightly so, the world has become concerned about issues of health and safety. However, now more than ever, students (and more importantly, their parents) must be assured that institutions are committed to providing the support needed to do everything possible to keep their children safe. Often large networks of familial ties support international graduate students, so this applies to them as well.

There will be no demonstration of this commitment more potent than being “there” in-person.

While international travel may continue to be difficult, there will be opportunities that are more safe and available. Supporting a local representative in-market could be an alternative, if they are chosen and managed carefully. Temporarily relocating a current employee overseas could also be an option. In either case, this could avoid issues related to travel between targeted destinations and the US. Where regional travel is possible, a well-placed employee could cover several markets and build true brand recognition.

Virtual fairs and meetings will be saturated in the coming months. Distinguishing an institution apart from the many others will be difficult, if not impossible. An immense concern is the “Brand Effect.” At live events, one ‘brand name top-50 school’ will attract a large number of students, but only to that one table or a few others in the room. Having attended such events, it is not impossible to turn such potential disasters into a positive, either through proximity to that school or some alternative attraction. A public announcement about a give-away or special scholarship could attract some “overflow” from such as school. Such actions will be much more difficult in a virtual arena where all students see is a series of logos or banners on a website.

Virtual events can still be productive, but they will have to be very well thought-out and executed. Separation from the herd is essential. Every piece of social media and each online event must literally burn the memory of your institution into the psyche of those who experience it.

Remember, every other institution will be attempting to do the same.

Domestic international students (international students currently in the US attending high school or a community college) represent a market already the focus of many institutions. For the coming fall, many universities are relying exclusively on these students to save them from a total disaster in international enrollment. However, moving forward, institutions must recognize that the same challenges and concerns that will limit international students at the college level might doubly affect high school students. Online classes, concerns about housing, or lack of homestays, travel restrictions, and of course, health concerns are likely to have a greater impact on this pipeline, and likely for a longer period. One only needs to ask themselves, “If I have concerns about sending my young adult away to college this fall, then how much more would I be concerned sending a child 1000’s of miles away from home?” Institutions should anticipate that this market will narrow for the coming recruitment cycle if not longer.

In the end, choosing regions and the entry for each market is key. Those staff and partners most closely aligned with international students must be trusted for their experience and on-the-ground intelligence to identify opportunities. It will be a highly fluid situation; responsiveness and focused action are required.

2. Know where you can strategically pullback resources or where to invest.

Have the courage to follow your heart and intuition.” – Steve Jobs

 This will likely be the most controversial of these suggestions. However, in the short-term recognizing resources will be limited; the best opportunity for future growth may be in maintaining budget lines dedicated to marketing, travel, student-centered events, and anything that will increase brand recognition. If it saves budget-lines and permits some or all of the regular recruitment activities to continue, institutions should look to strategic staffing options.

This will be less complicated if a comprehensive international office is already in place. Alternatively, this may be an opportunity to consolidate some offices and bring them under the direction of Enrollment Management. As a comprehensive office for all things Global, an institution can reassign some responsibilities, rely on Graduate Assistants for some administrative tasks, and focus efforts on the recruitment and retention of international students.  It is important that a senior international official remain responsible for the strategic implementation of the international recruitment strategy in addition to essential duties such issuing and maintaining SEVIS records.

Of course, this is recognizing that while there may be some reduced demand in the short term for services a Global office would traditionally provide and that the university will look to replace staffing as international student enrollment and study abroad participation is rebuilt. This will result in a temporary reduction of some services and a time lag in addressing requests. Again, the focus for the coming year should be on recruitment and retention.

3. Re-imagine “the international campus.”

“You cannot swim for new horizons until you have courage to lose sight of the shore.” – William Faulkner

 While the presence of international students enhances the atmosphere of a campus and provides opportunities for domestic students to interact with other languages and cultures, looking forward, we must be open to other models to ensure the sustainability of the institution. Innovative partnerships and new models of delivery must grow out of this crisis. As has been said recently, “we cannot simply rebuild, but we must build better.”

Looking at alternative modes to deliver programs and degrees is essential. Offering degree programs overseas with limited or no on-campus presence is something to be considered. A set of completely online programs would put an institution in competition with a large number of other providers. This mode of delivery can be challenging to manage across time zones and is often viewed as having a very low value in many overseas markets, even though the degree may be the same. Some combination of in-person and online instruction, potentially partnered with a local institution, is likely going to be more successful. The option of students being able to come to campus for a summer or semester will further increase interest, though not all students may take advantage of this option. The University of Arizona has already launched what they call the “Global Campus,” but this does not mean the market is not still open to others.

Institutions must think creatively and without fear, nor permit the past to dictate the future.

4. Commit to the long-term or decide to shift direction.

“The best way out is always through.” – Robert Frost

 As has been stated at the onset, this crisis is an existential threat to many institutions. As a result, it is not a time to be timid or reserved. Institutions either commit to a vision of what the university will be in 100 years or face the inevitable now. Some institutions may decide no or limited international exposure is best for them.  While many will feel is the wrong decision, even this choice will require some continued work to wind-down processes and obligations. If the commitment is to an institution with a clear set of international connections and perspectives, then, as best as possible, strategic investments must be made and acted upon now.

Unfortunately, now is not a time for half-measures. We must move forward, whatever that may look like. Standing in place will only result in being swept over by the current wave of events.

cropped-edu-alliance-logo-square.jpgEdu Alliance Group, Inc. (EAG) is an education consulting firm located in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates and Bloomington, Indiana USA. We assist higher education institutions worldwide on a variety of mission critical projects. Our consultants are accomplished university / college leaders who share the benefit of their experience to diagnose and solve challenges.

EAG has provided consulting and successful solutions for higher education institutions in Australia, Egypt, Georgia, India, Kazakhstan, Morocco, Nigeria, Uganda,  United Arab Emirates, and the United States.

Edu Alliance offers higher education institutions a wide range of consulting services. If you are an organization that wants to know more how Edu-Alliance can best serve you, please contact us at 

Higher Education and the Revolution of 2020

By Dr. Barry Ryan,  President Emeritus of Sofia University, California and Edu Alliance, Advisory Council Member May 24, 2020. 

The Plague quote

 Neither should do so.  Of course, the precise timing of its arrival, nature of the beast, it’s spread, and duration may have been unpredictable.  To use legal language, though, we all “knew or should have known” that a pandemic was coming.  Yet the world was woefully under-prepared.

The immediacy of the threat to the health of millions upon millions around the planet was overwhelming – not just medically, but emotionally and psychologically as well.  It was followed closely by the realization that an economic disaster was unfolding concomitantly with the plague itself, escalating worldwide fear and stress like little else in history.  In a very few short months, life on earth changed.

Higher education has, obviously, not been spared.  University research resources and hospital systems have been turned to as trusted sources of scientific knowledge and hope for the development of treatments and vaccines.  But what about the non-scientific research aspects of higher education?

Simple questions have not generated simple answers.  Campuses were closed, residential housing emptied, students sent “home” (very difficult for many, particularly international students).  Faculty and staff, likewise, wondering whether their jobs would survive and, if so, in what form?  Administrators, boards, presidents felt the full burden of making decisions that, perhaps for the first time in their professional lives, had life or death consequences.

In such a crisis, the immediate impulse was to try to save the Spring academic term (and preserve some vestige of “normalcy”) by pivoting to online delivery of course content for those already underway.  Was there any other choice?

That decision, though, was fraught with challenges.  Some institutions had well-developed online programming and experienced faculty.  A few, of course, were already exclusively online in all their programs, while others had at least one entire program available in that format and approved by accreditors.

But many institutions had little or no such capacity, experience, or resources.  Online curriculum delivery was not merely a matter of hooking up a Zoom link and providing “chalk and talk” from the instructor already partway through the course.  Some, particularly smaller institutions, didn’t have the IT resources to make even that possible or to support such rapid change.

Many faculty members who were pressed into some sort of online format had no prior experience, no training, and little support.  Often, the courses themselves had never been designed for the online world.  Such curricular development takes time and expertise, neither of which was sufficiently available.

In many cases, the quality of instruction slipped, at best, and both students and faculty added confusion and frustration to their already heavy burdens of anxiety and fear.  The questions came louder and more frequently – is this what I’m paying for?  The financial concerns increased, especially given the unfolding economic disaster and job losses hitting students and their families.  Had their education, which now looked very unlike what they had expected, become an unnecessary luxury?  Did it have sufficient meaning any longer?

In-person events, including athletic, performance, and commencement ceremonies, were taken off the calendar.  Many of the summer courses are not face to face and what will campuses look like in the Fall and beyond?

The answers have been, understandably, tentative. I’ve been in touch with a dozen presidents. All are struggling with the strong desire to “re-open” their campuses as soon as possible.  However, this plague and the efficacy of efforts to diminish its effects do not operate on a timeline of our choosing.  The economic damage to colleges and universities is already enormous, and each week, only deepens the losses.  There is an almost overwhelming compulsion to return to normal.

It is clear many students (and their families) have little appetite for having to bear the costs of an education that is online only, without the “college experience” that they had expected.  Many faculty have similar concerns about that same thing. How long will they go along with an online solution?  The California State University Chancellor announced that the Fall of 2020 classes will be online (with a few small exceptions) for the nation’s largest system.  Will those students accept online, or look elsewhere, or nowhere?  Will they come back in January, if at all?

Will new students take a “gap year”?  Or shift their enrollment to community colleges, at a fraction of the cost?  Projected first-time freshmen enrollments were already a challenge for most traditional institutions, even before the plague.  Will international students even be able to attend institutions in the US, this Fall or even in 2021?  These are health care and political questions with a national election in the US in the midst of it all.

What to do now?

There will not be a “return to normal” for vast swaths of American higher education.  Ever. This pandemic has acted as an accelerant for massive changes in how colleges and universities function. It had already begun in recent years but has now become a tsunami.

The technological changes and the virtual nature of education that is being forced upon us all are irresistible and unavoidable.  Yes, preparation for high-quality online curricula and delivery modalities, with well-trained faculty and robust IT support, must happen.  But the technological aspect is only one of the catalysts for a revolution in higher education as we know it.

Another element that has been simmering, but now reaching the boiling point, is the value proposition of higher education in its traditional forms.  It is most obvious from students and their families, who anticipated a “college experience.” It is characterized by a residential campus, multiple levels of interaction with everyone in the campus community, and face to face instruction and support, are now demanding refunds and reduced tuition for what is perceived as a pale online/virtual substitute.  Cost/benefit analysis will not generate kind results for much of higher education.

Even beyond the spring 2020 context, the reality of vastly increased online aspects of higher education will accentuate the demand for new value propositions, reflecting new operating realities.  Colleges and universities need to plan now about how to meet what will be increasing demands – from students and their families, but also consumer advocates and even governments.  This change is coming, and it is unstoppable.

A hugely significant aspect that has received little attention may turn out to be the biggest game-changer of all: the role of corporations in educating their prospective employees apart from traditional higher education.  It has already begun, as large companies – tech and otherwise – have tired of asking for changes in traditional higher education, so their workforce will be better prepared.  They are already engaged in developing their own educational systems, focused very specifically on the demands of their research, development, production, and marketing.  No degree necessary.

I believe there are three enormous challenges for higher education institutions in the midst of the pandemic:

  1. Technological preparation, curricular design, and instructional excellence for online modalities
  2. Improvement of operational efficiencies and pricing to create a better and more convincing value proposition regarding the worth of a variant of traditional higher education
  3. Develop market-sensitive higher education programs that include practical “clinical” training that demonstrates higher education’s competitiveness with corporate, educational alternatives

It is foolish to attempt to predict precisely what all this will look like, and what the results will be.  But this is not just about the pandemic.  It’s about how life and higher education went through revolutionary changes that began in earnest in 2020.

Camus, again: “Once the faintest stirring of hope became possible, the dominion of plague was ended.”  Note carefully:  the plague did not end when hope stirred.  But its dominion did.  We must be prepared for the opportunities when that occurs – much better than we were for its onset.

Barry-RyanDr Barry Ryan is President Emeritus of Sofia University in California and from 2013-19 served as a Commissioner for WASC Senior College & University Commission. He has extensive background in teaching, academic administration, accreditation, and law.  As a first generation college student, he fell in love with higher education in all of its many forms.  Barry has served in large public universities, as well as in non-profit, faith-based, and for-profit institutions of all sizes, in traditional and online educational contexts.

Barry’s international experience is equally varied.  He has focused on international education and throughout his career, established programs for US universities throughout Latin America and Europe.  As part of a long history of involvement in regional accreditation, he has just completed his second term as a Commissioner with WSCUC (“WASC”).  Barry has also worked with HLC and SACS, as well as a number of programmatic accreditors, including the ABA, APA, ACPE, CACREP, ACOTE, CODA, ACBSP, CCNE, CAPTE, and ATS.

In university settings, Barry has lengthy and recognized service as a faculty member in multiple disciplines.  He has been in the roles of department chair, founder and director of a center for teaching and learning, dean, vice president, provost, and president.