The give-and-take case for overseas students

The vision of open access is clouded by a world market where money reigns supreme, argues Lalage Bown.

The criticism of exclusivity lobbed at certain British universities implies, however incoherently, that higher education should be open to people of talent, regardless of their economic status. When the students come from abroad, however, we take it for granted that they are commodities in the knowledge economy.

Student mobility is rising worldwide (55 per cent between 1990 and 1996) and Commonwealth host countries, including Britain, are vigorously and successfully entering the world market for international students.

Many countries fear intellectual and economic marginalisation if more effort is not put into improving their stock of human capital. But there is a growing imbalance in people's access to higher education abroad depending on their country of origin.

Two factors reducing participation are differential fees charged to non-nationals and the decline in the number of scholarships and awards. Of students moving between Commonwealth countries, only 6 per cent were from the most disadvantaged member states, although these states comprise a significant proportion of Commonwealth populations.

To add to the unevenness, women benefit less than men from opportunities for international study. There is a small representation of women in some subjects, such as engineering, and a smaller proportion of women in postgraduate research than at lower levels. There has been a creditable improvement in the gender balance of international students, but rhetoric has proved stronger than action - for instance, in the allocation of scholarships between women and men.

The decline in student mobility from the most disadvantaged countries and the slow change in gender balance are two themes in a report due out next month by a working group of the Council for Education in the Commonwealth and Ukcosa - the Council for International Education. The report makes a number of recommendations to the November conference of Commonwealth education ministers in Canada.

There is a lot of material on the United Kingdom, partly because the working group was researching and writing from a UK base. The new borderless learning, through technologies associated with the internet, has great potential for knowledge exchange without the need for people exchange. While it poses threats to indigenous scholarship, it could be used to produce high-quality learning materials and offer a virtual international experience for those who cannot easily travel because of work, family or cost.

There are doubts as to whether it can remedy the problems of marginalised countries, which have less access to the technology. It is estimated that half the world's population has never even made a telephone call.

The movement of knowledge, in any case, should not displace the movement of students. There are benefits to institutions and nations, and to the world academic community, in the exchange of international students. Visiting students take home new knowledge and perspectives, and all students involved in the encounter should gain greater cultural understanding and, therefore, be better prepared for a world drawn closer by new communications.

Host institutions benefit in the strengthening of disciplinary offerings and of research teams. They also benefit financially. Midway through the 1990s, total fee income to British universities from international students was calculated at over Pounds 700 million.

While students from beyond the European Union pay serious money to study in Britain, those from the EU enjoy the same fee subsidies as British students. Since this became the case, EU students have been the largest group in British institutions from outside the UK - 83,819 students out of 174,096 international students were from the EU in 1998-99.

For all of us in academia who believe in the community of knowledge and in sharing ideas across national boundaries, the ever-increasing flows of students to countries other than their own must be refreshing and welcome. But there remains (and I am speaking personally here), a discomfort in the collision of values between the vision of open access and the vision of a market place where money is a factor in preventing that access.

In Britain, policy changes have (for very respectable reasons) meant the fading away of scholarships and awards previously in the gift of development-oriented agencies, such as the British Council. The Australians balanced higher earnings from foreign students with scholarships for poorer people from poorer countries. Perhaps we should be thinking in the same way.

Lalage Bown is emeritus professor of adult education at the University of Glasgow. She chaired the Council for Education in the Commonwealth and Ukcosa working group on student mobility, but writes in a personal capacity.

Teaching, pages 30-31