• Sunday, May 27, 2012
  • Print
  • Comment (6)

Study Abroad: Revenue Drain or Stream?

Study Abroad: Revenue Drain or Stream? 1

Christophe Vorlet for the Chronicle

Enlarge Image
close Study Abroad: Revenue Drain or Stream? 1

Christophe Vorlet for the Chronicle

When it comes to study abroad, university officials must constantly balance their overseas aspirations with the bottom line.

We believe it's important for students to learn other languages, learn about other cultures and countries, and graduate from college prepared for a global society. Yet we struggle with the "business" of international education. It costs more and more to provide the services students want, a challenge during today's tight fiscal environment.

On the other hand, many higher-education institutions and others have found ways to generate revenue from study-abroad ventures. The World Bank estimates that $300-billion is spent each year on global higher education, and study-abroad and other international programs are a growing portion of it. The three major sources of revenue are: colleges and universities and their entrepreneurial professors; international institutes and schools; and so-called third-party providers, which offer overseas study programs, student recruitment, or other services.

I propose that greater cooperation is needed between these parties as budgets shrink. Through creative collaboration and partnering, we can make study abroad affordable for everyone and open the floodgates to participation by undergraduates.

The financial challenges of operating a study-abroad program differ from one college to another.

Many private universities have found ways to generate a surplus even after direct and indirect costs have been met. They do this by charging full tuition to participate in a study-abroad program, and using a portion of it to support outsourced services on behalf of students and to pay for other expenditures. Their revenue exceeds cost, but they provide top-quality services to students. While this practice is controversial, the universities say that revenues are necessary to keep functioning at the high-level students expect.

The public universities are not as fortunate. Tuition at these institutions is usually not enough to cover study-abroad expenses, and students often cannot afford to pay more than they are already paying for college. What's more, aside from student-exchange and faculty-led programs, many universities choose to waive their own tuition to help students pay the fee to third-party providers or tuition to the foreign institution. While many public universities have an administrative or universitywide fee to support study-abroad operations, it is usually not enough, and they lose money on every student who studies away.

So the question remains, How can colleges and universities meet the ideals of study abroad without losing money, especially during the economic difficulties and cutbacks that many are facing?

The third-party providers and receiving institutions can do more, like providing support staff and services to the institutions that feed them so many students—and so much money. It's time that we share more. Instead of asking well-equipped receiving institutions to exclusively admit students who come through them (at a higher price), third-party providers could collaborate with universities to create fewer, "mutually beneficial" niche programs that would generate a more natural flow of students. The revenue from these programs could be shared by all partners and provide ways for faculty members to get involved, as well, helping to internationalize the universities and receiving institutions.

The market for third-party providers started about 20 years ago, with hopes to provide better service to students who study abroad. Before that time, the most common form of programming was student exchange. Without the Internet, it was more difficult for students to directly enroll at receiving institutions overseas. Now, many of the receiving institutions offer full-fledged, professional services to students, and the role of the third-party provider is changing.

For example, Australearn recently added Eurolearn and Asialearn to its portfolio. International Studies Abroad and Academic Programs International have expanded their operations to the Middle East.

We can't all set up a branch campus and run our own programs abroad, but we can form better—and fairer—partnerships and collaborations that empower each other and our students. We can also rethink our approach to the "approved programs lists" when there are thousands of academically sound and rigorous study-abroad options to fit any student's unique goals. It's time to be less controlling and proprietary, and more collaborative and sharing. Instead of spending time and money leveraging relationships to get on the gatekeepers' "lists," third-party providers and host institutions could be working with study-abroad directors and academics to develop programs that meet important learning goals and foster global citizenship.

There are many ways of doing this. Here are three examples:

  • In Faculty-led 360: Guide to Successful Study Abroad (Agapy, 2010), the authors describe a two-way cooperation in which a university in Ukraine offers a substantial discount on student housing in exchange for student lectures in English to local students. Americans earn TESL certificates or ESL endorsements by teaching at a public elementary school and a local orphanage, while Ukrainian students, completing degrees in English translation and interpretation, work alongside the American students as translators, language instructors, and guides.
  • Lorenzo de' Medici, the Italian International Institute, has its art-restoration and archaeology students work on projects in Italy and around the world. Governments and cultural organizations sponsor students to come to their countries to restore their art and excavate history. Students have worked on convent frescos and marblewood cathedrals in India, paintings in Brazil, bronze sculptures in Argentina, and archaeological excavations in the Mediterranean and Middle East. In Italy, they have restored works from many renowned artists. Professors and students also research restoration, providing real-life solutions to professionals. They have remedied serious problems, such as the large stone statues on Easter Island, which were being destroyed by dangerous lichen. Not only are these international programs paid for, but they benefit students, communities, and humanity, too.
  • The Appalachian College Association, which has 36 members, and the Knowledge Exchange Institute, which runs study-abroad programs worldwide, created a partnership for professors to recruit students and teach programs customized by the institute. This broadens the student pool from about 1,500 students at an individual college to 40,000 across all the member institutions. Faculty members are paid by the Knowledge Exchange Institute for teaching and for successfully recruiting students. The institute also provides a $500 scholarship to each Appalachian College Association student.

These types of creative partnerships can help expand study-abroad opportunities for students. With careful planning, study abroad can be a cost-effective investment that strengthens students' education, transforms the culture of an institution, and builds a community of global-minded alumni.

Wendy Williamson is director of study abroad at Eastern Illinois University, author of Study Abroad 101 (Agapy, 2004) and co-founder of facultyled.com and AbroadScout.

Comments

1. rosemaryfeal - October 08, 2010 at 11:20 am

This resource may be of interest to those in foreign language departments:

Best Practices in Study Abroad:
A Primer for Chairs of Departments of Foreign Languages

http://www.adfl.org/resources/index.htm

2. studentroads - October 08, 2010 at 03:11 pm

Wendy, great article about the business of study abroad. You highlight how schools can think outside the box to maintain and expand their programs. Cutting back now, when study abroad is increasingly important in a student's education, would undo the great efforts that study abroad champions have made to get us this far.

I would like to add that the lifetime value of a student is greater than the tuition fee, so leaking money now on a study abroad program (an unfortunate reality on some campuses) should rightly be seen as an investment in the student's success, which will be returned over a lifetime.

Also, we should include governments into the mix as many countries around the world have recently established substantial funds to increase the number of foreign students at their universities (including on short-term, semester or year long programs).

Robin - www.StudentRoads.com

3. wendywilliamson - October 08, 2010 at 05:36 pm

Robin, thank you very much. I'm glad you liked the article. Being a Returned Peace Corps Volunteer (RPCV), I've learned a thing or two about maximizing resources to meet goals. Great points you made! I agree.

4. panrimo - October 12, 2010 at 08:05 am

Nice article, Wendy. I think it's one of the few--but growing--arguments for stronger collaboration with third party providers. What about Panrimo?!

Tony
www.panrimo.com

5. abier - October 12, 2010 at 10:07 am

A welcome article on an on going important issue. Thank you. Institutions and international education offices would be well advised to encourage consideration of study abroad and related "costs" within the context of the overall institutional mission, and economic terms such as "marginal costs", "profit margins", etc. I recently had a discussion with a third party provider about the costing of full year program in the U.K. The provider insisted that my 22K price was impossible (which is was not, and was also inclusive of all program related costs including travel) and insisted the program would be a minimum of 32K+--the difference was in the expected profit margin my office and that of the provider needed to build further programs (site visits, faculty travel, advertising, communications, staffing, infrastructure, etc. Location is another factor for programs--I would venture to say that three students could spend a semester in China for what it might cost one student in Paris. A third, frequently unexamined issue, is the source of faculty pay for leading long or short-term programs and who pays "replacement costs" if necessary. Faculty salaries can be incorporated into short-term program fees, in lieu of tuition, however, at a former public institution, it was the single, largest line item of the program fee. And a parting comment, if a cross cultural experience, experiential learning opportunity, or study abroad can be viewed as central to an institution's mission to educate for the 21st century, why not incorporate its cost into the tuition charges (as is done, for example with technology updates or information resources--formerly known as libraries, into the tuition of the institution and designate a term when a student would obtain this experience at no additional cost?

A. Gail Bier, Senior International Education Consultant
agailbier@gmail.com

6. archman - October 14, 2010 at 12:51 pm

I can think of one way to immediately reduce study abroad costs, enforce curricula content and contact hours.

Having run many study abroad courses myself, and done a great deal of research on other programs throughout the U.S., I have found that the vast majority of (non-language) courses woefully shortchange on contact hour and coursework hour requirements. The numbers simply aren't there. On average for the courses I have examined, the credit hours for a course only match up to 50-60% of the contact/coursework hours.

At another disturbing (but not as severe) level, is the widespread lack of either interest (or competency) in study abroad faculty to implement rigorous curricula. Increasingly, study abroad programs are being run by faculty who treat the classes as personal vacations or personal research trips. The students are there to simply foot the bill. I can tick off many, many examples I have directly witnessed (and indirectly heard from students) where this has been the case, at schools throughout the U.S.. What is REALLY sad is hearing about such cases from the directors of field stations... I have been told of figures as high as ONE-THIRD for courses that massively shortchange their students (in learning).

I do not recommend 3rd party study abroad services. They are, in most cases I'm aware of, even worse at monitoring/enforcing academic content than the universities. They are particularly bad at vetting instructors for academic qualifications.

Add Your Comment

Commenting is closed.