The Studymove analysis – including a forecast for the rest of this year and into 2027 – is based on commencement data from the first six months of 2026 as well as current student visa trends.

Flat or negative growth for higher education

For four consecutive years, there has been no growth in number of new international students in higher education in Australia, and this year the projection is for a -4% decline in commencements.

“It has been four years of basically no growth in commencements,” said Mr Ramirez. “Although we don’t have a cap system technically, obviously the policy framework has been constraining growth. And effectively, we’re actually having a ceiling on the number of commencements of about 210,000 [students per year]. I think this clearly shows that the cake is not growing. In order to grow your piece of the cake, what institutions are probably having to do is just to get market share from competitors.”

Robust onshore progression but declining flows from overseas

Mr Ramirez points out that policy settings are also shaping offshore and onshore enrolment trends. Faced with a AU$2,500 visa application fee and higher visa requirements in general, fewer students are applying from their home countries (about -10%). In contrast, the number of foreign students progressing from one institution or level of study to the next within Australia rose about +9%. Students are making the most of their time and education in Australia by securing more than one visa – but this does not translate into more new international students.

The impact on universities is growing

Onshore flows of students are increasingly determined by price: many students are choosing to progress to private education providers (where annual tuition is about AU$24,000) rather than universities (where students can pay more than AU$40,000).

And while universities received more NOSC allocations in 2026 than in 2025, most did not reach their quota. In fact, only five universities reached 80% of their NOSC allowance. Mr Ramirez points out that government policies are depressing overseas demand, so NOSC allowances are a weak predictor of new enrolments.

Visa rejection rates are high but not for all source markets

Driven by a significant spike in month-by-month rejections from January 2026 on, Australian immigration officials rejected about 21,000 higher education student visa applications from offshore applicants in the first six months of 2026. Refusals during this period were mainly concentrated in three key markets: India, Nepal, and Bangladesh. Should the rejection rates remain high, Mr Ramirez says international commencements could drop off by an additional -8% by the end of the year.

Recommendations for recruitment

With a smaller flow of incoming international students, Australian institutions must distinguish their offer not just from competitors in leading destinations, but also from each other. Market stabilisation means that growth will stem from gains in market share rather than in increasing the volume of new students.

Mr Ramirez advises universities to take a conservative and careful approach to revenue forecasting – fewer international students naturally reduces the tuition line, especially since most institutions are not benefitting from a significant uptick in domestic enrolments to mitigate the trend.

The policy environment is such that Mr Ramirez says that recruitment strategies should be laser-focused and based on a more nuanced understanding of diversification: reducing overreliance on established sources of students – but not by flinging a wide net across the globe hoping that it lands somewhere promising. Market characteristics of countries in emerging regions are unique and dynamic, and policy instruments affect demand differently not just at the regional level, but at the country level. A great deal of research is called for to determine whether a new market makes sense to invest time and money in.

Developing growth markets where institutions have developed brand image and strong relationships is a strategy made for these unpredictable times. Recruitment results will increasingly be determined by those relationships as they allow for more precise student targeting and understanding of outbound drivers.

“This sector has very, very strong roots,” concludes Mr Ramirez. “And those roots are actually based on people-to-people relations. For many, many years, this sector has been building relationships based on trust, based on understanding the needs of students, and at looking what is the best for students…we are not a commodity sector; we are a people sector.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Australia poised to further restrict immigration in bid to drive down net migration figures”
• “Australia: As visa applications from foreign students fall, the government has set the national target for new international students in 2027”
• “Australia: Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers”

The post Australia: Decline in international higher education commencements projected for 2026 appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

QS describes “a gradual reshaping of Indian student mobility by 2030” where the Big Four destinations remain central but with very different positions on the leaderboard. The UK is projected to overtake Canada and the US as the top destination for Indian students. Otherwise, key destinations in the EU are projected to see the fastest growth in Indian enrolments over the rest of this decade – albeit from a smaller base.

Further: “With transnational education and international branch campuses set to expand and mature in India, we could see further mobility changes,” cautions the report. “By 2030, significant volumes of Indian students may study at the branch campuses of international institutions, rather than travelling overseas.”

The overall picture is one of a broadening and more balanced distribution of Indian students, both within the Big Four and otherwise. While Canada and the US are both projected to see their Indian enrolments decrease through 2030, they continue host significant numbers. Germany is projected to see the largest gains with a forecast to nearly double its Indian enrolment, at which point it will have surpassed Australia as the fourth-largest host of Indian students.

“Demand from Indian students looking to study in the ‘Big Four’ is expected to remain substantial,” says QS. “But students’ choices are likely to be shaped by affordability, visa policy, post-study work opportunities and perceptions of long-term value.”

We recently highlighted the continuing strong growth of India’s middle class, and in particular its expansion outside of the major cities of Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Chennai, and Hyderabad as people move to smaller cities to escape high costs of living.

We noted as well that India’s middle-class families are cautious, careful, and looking for value for money. Where the affluent class is able to make decisions based on rankings and other markers of prestige, the middle class is more interested in institutions in destinations with welcoming policies, lower tuition and living costs, and strong post-graduate outcomes.

These are some of the same drivers that we see reflected in the QS analysis which concludes that, “Institutions in established destinations will need to work harder to defend their position, while universities in fast-growing markets have an opportunity to build visibility with Indian students looking for credible alternatives.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Changing landscape for student recruitment in India calls for new strategies“
• “The questions families are actually asking: Inside the student advising conversation in 2026“
• “What is happening to student mobility flows between the Global South and Global North?“

The post The outlook for Indian student mobility through 2030 appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

This naturally leads to another important aspect of the student experience: well-being and pastoral care. When we talk about student well-being in higher education, the conversation often focuses on mental health and access to counselling or other specialist services. These are undoubtedly important, but well-being is much broader. It encompasses a student’s sense of belonging, safety, confidence and connection, as well as the practical, academic, financial, cultural and personal circumstances that can affect their ability to study and thrive.

For TNE students, these considerations can become even more complex. This is something I have seen repeatedly through my own work with TNE programmes and through conversations with students, academics and professional services colleagues across different international contexts. The specific challenges vary considerably, but there are some recurring themes: uncertainty about where to turn for help, differences in expectations around support, cultural barriers to asking for assistance and, sometimes, simply not knowing who is responsible for what.

Well-being starts before the student enters the classroom

For students studying for a foreign qualification outside their home country, the challenges may begin long before they arrive at their institution. Immigration and visa requirements, healthcare arrangements, accommodation, financial pressures, employment restrictions and understanding local legal and administrative systems can all create uncertainty. For students and their families, navigating these unfamiliar systems can be stressful, particularly when they do not know where to find reliable information or who is responsible for helping them.

This is an important distinction in TNE. A student studying for an international qualification in their home country may have many of these practical support networks around them already. A student studying in a third country may have far fewer. For example, a student from one country studying for a qualification awarded by a university in another country, while physically studying in a third, may need to navigate three different national contexts. The academic relationship may be relatively straightforward, but the student’s lived experience can be considerably more complex.

In these circumstances, pastoral support cannot simply be an online counselling service or a contact number buried somewhere within a student portal. Students need clear information, accessible points of contact and confidence that someone understands the context in which they are living and studying.

The well-being challenge is not always where we expect it

Some of the most interesting conversations I have had with TNE students have been about difficulties that institutions may not immediately recognise as well-being issues. A student can have excellent academic results and still feel isolated. They may be living away from their family for the first time, struggling to establish friendships, adjusting to a new culture or feeling uncertain about whether they really belong within an international university community.

Language can add another layer. As I discussed in my previous article, language challenges are not necessarily about formal proficiency. A student may arrive with an excellent IELTS score and still struggle to understand local pronunciation, accents, colloquialisms, professional jargon or cultural references. The same can be true in reverse. Students studying in their own language may find themselves working with international academics or professional services colleagues whose communication style is unfamiliar.

These experiences can be frustrating and, over time, can contribute to anxiety, disengagement or a feeling of being an outsider. This is why well-being in TNE needs to be considered in the context of the whole student experience rather than as a separate service.

Cultural context matters

Well-being is not understood or experienced in exactly the same way everywhere. Attitudes towards mental health, counselling, disability, family involvement and seeking professional help can vary considerably between cultures. A student may recognise that they are struggling but feel uncomfortable disclosing this to an institution or seeking formal support.

There may also be different expectations around the role of academic staff. In some educational cultures, students may be accustomed to discussing personal or academic difficulties directly with teachers. In others, approaching an academic to ask for help may feel inappropriate or intimidating. The existence of a support service therefore does not necessarily mean that students will use it. Institutions need to consider how support is communicated, who delivers it, how approachable it feels and whether students trust the people providing it.

Should TNE students receive more support?

This is an interesting question, and one I think institutions should be willing to ask. I would argue that, in some TNE contexts, students may need more proactive support than students studying on the home campus, rather than simply the same level of support delivered differently.

That view comes partly from conversations I have had with students studying TNE in different parts of the world. What has struck me repeatedly is how much students can be expected to navigate independently when they are physically distant from the awarding institution. What may appear to an institution to be a relatively straightforward online support offer can feel very different from the student’s perspective.

A student on the home campus can often draw on a wide ecosystem of support almost without thinking about it. They may know where the library is, how to contact their academic adviser, where to access health services, who to speak to about accommodation or how to find student societies. A TNE student may not have the same ecosystem around them. Providing an equivalent email address or online portal does not necessarily create an equivalent support experience. In some circumstances, therefore, equity may require additional or more proactive intervention, particularly during transition points or when students show early signs of disengagement.

Who is responsible for pastoral care?

This becomes particularly important in partnership models. The local partner may know students much better and be best placed to identify changes in behaviour, attendance or engagement. The awarding institution may have specialist well-being expertise, established policies and formal escalation procedures. Neither institution should simply assume that the other is responsible.

In my experience, the strongest partnerships tend to establish clear responsibilities and referral pathways while maintaining a shared understanding that student well-being is a collective responsibility. This does not mean that every partner needs to replicate the full well-being infrastructure of the home campus. It means designing an appropriate support ecosystem for the local context and ensuring that students understand how it works.

Supporting the people who support students

There is also a staff dimension to this conversation. Academic and professional services staff are often the first people to notice that a student is struggling. They may see changes in attendance, engagement, academic performance or behaviour before a student ever contacts a formal well-being service.

Staff therefore need more than good intentions. They need appropriate training and development to recognise potential concerns, understand the boundaries of their role and know where and how to refer students for additional support. This is particularly important in TNE, where the person closest to a student may not be the person with access to specialist support.

I have also seen how much difference it can make when local staff and colleagues at the awarding institution have established relationships and understand each other’s roles. When those relationships exist, concerns can be identified and escalated much more quickly. When they do not, students can sometimes find themselves caught between institutions, with each assuming that the other is dealing with the issue.

Staff also need support themselves. International partnership work can involve significant demands, including working across cultures and time zones, managing complex relationships, dealing with difficult student situations and navigating different institutional expectations. Staff well-being matters not only because institutions have responsibilities towards their employees, but because staff who feel supported are better placed to support students. Professional development, peer support, clear escalation processes and regular communication between partner teams can therefore contribute to both staff and student well-being.

Families matter too

Conversations with students have also reminded me that the family dimension should not be overlooked. In many TNE markets, parents and families play a much more significant role in educational decision-making than institutions in some Western countries might expect. For students studying overseas, families may be particularly concerned about safety, accommodation, immigration status, academic progress and employability.

Clear and appropriate communication with families can therefore help build confidence in the institution and the partnership. At the same time, institutions need to balance family engagement with student autonomy, privacy and confidentiality. The role of families should be recognised without undermining the student’s independence.

Beyond the support service

Ultimately, pastoral care is not simply a service that students access when something goes wrong. It is an ecosystem that can involve the lecturer who notices that a student has suddenly withdrawn from class, the administrator who follows up after repeated unexplained absences, the local tutor who knows how to refer a student to specialist support, or a partner institution that understands when a change in behaviour represents a genuine concern rather than simply poor academic engagement.

These everyday interactions can be just as important as formal well-being services. Technology can certainly help. Digital check-ins, online counselling, well-being platforms and early-warning systems can make support more accessible and help institutions identify potential concerns. But technology should complement rather than replace human relationships.

Building environments where students can thrive

As TNE continues to expand globally, institutions will need to think increasingly carefully about what well-being and pastoral care mean across different contexts. The answer will not be identical everywhere. Effective support needs to reflect local cultures, regulatory environments, available services and student expectations while still maintaining clear standards and responsibilities across the partnership.

After speaking with students studying TNE across different countries and partnership models, I increasingly think the most important measure of pastoral support is not how impressive the formal support structure looks on paper, but what happens when a student actually needs help. Does the student know who to contact? Do they feel comfortable asking for help? Does the person they approach know what to do next? And, perhaps most importantly, does the partnership have enough understanding of its students to notice when something is not quite right?

Successful TNE is not only about enabling students to earn an internationally recognised qualification. It is about creating an environment in which they can feel safe, connected, supported and able to thrive while doing so.

In my next article, I will explore another important dimension of the TNE student experience: administrative clarity, and why seemingly small issues around information, processes and responsibility can have a surprisingly significant impact on student confidence and satisfaction.

– Dr Suzanna Tomassi is Executive Director of External Affairs at NCUK, a leading UK pathway provider, and Founder of CoachEd Global, a consultancy specialising in executive coaching and global education advisory.

She is a highly experienced strategic leader and board member with over 20 years’ expertise across UK Government and higher education. Her work focuses on internationalisation, governance, risk oversight, commercial growth, and organisational transformation. Suzanna’s career spans the UK Department for Business and Trade and four major UK universities, where she has shaped national policy, strengthened regulatory and quality frameworks, and led large-scale international expansion initiatives.

An expert in transnational education and global operations, Suzanna has driven multi-country growth strategies, co-authored accreditation guidelines, and facilitated major international investments in UK higher education.

For additional background, please see:

• “Language and communication in TNE: Building bridges across academic and cultural boundaries“
• “Academic support and learning resources in TNE: Delivering student success across borders”
• “Beyond borders: Why student support matters more than ever in transnational education”

The post Well-being and pastoral care in TNE: Supporting students to thrive across borders appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

• Considering a US$100,000+ fee for post-study Optional Practical Training (OPT) placements. The OPT work stream is among US universities’ top competitive strengths when recruiting talented international students, and research shows that more than half of international students would not choose the US if they could not access it.



• Applying greater scrutiny to Curricular Practical Training (CPT) placements, as articulated in two broadcast memos issued by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement department (ICE) on and . CPT allows a student (domestic or international) offered by a sponsoring employer through a co-operative agreement with the student’s school.

In the memos, ICE says that the Student and Visa Exchange Programme (SEVP) is showing an uptick in “CPT authorisations that do not meet regulatory requirements, specifically those not constituting an integral part of an established curriculum.” The insinuation here is that some institutions are promoting CPT as a general work route rather than as an essential curriculum requirement. The department warns: “If SEVP suspects that school officials are abusing CPT to create work opportunities rather than academic studies, they may be subject to additional scrutiny and action from SEVP and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), to include potential withdrawal of the school’s SEVP certification.”

The department cautions: “In any instance where an elective course is optional, making the CPT optional, the integral and required aspects of CPT would not be met … [CPT should be authorised only] if its absence would make the attainment of a degree an impossibility.”

The power of rhetoric

The State Department has neither imposed the US$100,000 OPT fee nor amended the CPT programme through law. However, the department is clearly communicating its concern around both programmes, and this is serving a two-fold rhetorical purpose:

• To warn prospective international students that access to work in the US is far from certain for them;
• To discourage universities from linking academic programmes with work routes in their promotional or operational activities.

Most universities are pausing their authorisation of elective CPT programmes while continuing their curriculum-linked CPT. Even though the memos are, as Carnegie Mellon has called them, “extra-regulatory,” they carry enforceable actions. If a university were be seen to be abusing the CPT system, it could have its SEVP certification removed and would thus be barred from enrolling international students.

Even though the guidance will be a concern for all universities and colleges, the cautions from ICE may be especially aimed at a small group of US institutions that are colloquially known as “” universities, and where the promotion of work-integrated learning via CPT placements is . The critique that attaches to such institutions is essentially that they are over-promoting or overusing CPT, and providing a mechanism for students to bridge visa status while they remain in the US in the hopes of transitioning to an H-1B visa or otherwise preserving their ability to work in the country.

A layered approach

A potential OPT fee and CPT warnings are just two layers of the Trump administration’s mission to limit opportunities for international students in the US. On 15 September, the new rule replacing Duration of Status (D/S) with an Admit-Until-Date (AUD) system comes into force. For those needing background on the importance of this change, we have covered this extensively over the summer, including in this article.  

The imminent end of D/S has created additional uncertainty for US universities attempting to update systems and advise students, and it appears to have already dampened demand for study in the US. International enrolments declined in 2025, especially in graduate programmes.

Graduate programmes “in crisis”

In July 2026, reported on the effects of the Trump administration’s approach to immigration and to higher education and science in general:

• “Cornell University enrolled 209 fewer new grad students last year, with declines across nearly all of its schools.
• Michigan State University paused admissions to most of its advanced programs in the humanities for a year to assess them for “long-term sustainability.”
• Massachusetts Institute of Technology has been shaken by a 20% drop in the federally funded research that made its graduate programs into an innovation powerhouse.”

Bloomberg interviewed Chevelle Newsome, president of the Council of Graduate Schools, who said that graduate schools are in a “crisis response” mode that “will take decades to recover from.”

Perception influences behaviours

For most research universities, restricting CPT as per ICE’s guidance is not a big deal. At prominent institutions such as UCLA, less than a quarter of international students participate in CPT – a fraction compared with the number participating in OPT. But what is a big deal is that international students are hearing that both OPT and CPT are under greater scrutiny. The government is creating a perception that work opportunities in the US are diminishing without even having to pass laws to that effect.

There are important developments on the horizon that aim to counter that perception by curbing the government’s ability to implement more restrictive policy. For example, NAFSA and seven other educational and business organisations have filed a complaint to halt the implementation of the fixed-term admission period for international students and other visitors.

The consortium is challenging the legality of the rule and has also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction that aims to prevent the rule from coming into effect. The request for an injunction will be heard in court in early September.

In addition, the upcoming mid-term elections (3 November 2026) may provide for some further balance in the US system. Amid rapidly deteriorating approval ratings for President Trump, that the mid-terms will return control of the House of Representatives to the Democrats. This would give the House more ability to counter executive action from the White House, including those concerning education and immigration.

Key developments for the new academic year

As of this writing on 3 September 2026:

• CPT: The Department of Homeland Security says, “Nothing about [CPT] regulations has changed. However, schools and employers should consider themselves on notice: under President Trump, abuse of this generous system will no longer be tolerated.”
• OPT: A new rule on OPT was on the agenda for 2026 but is now slated for publication in February 2027. A $100,000 OPT participation fee is under discussion, but it has not transitioned to the proposal phase.
• Duration of Status: Duration of Status (D/S) will be replaced by Admit-Until-Date (AUD) on 15 September unless a preliminary injunction is delivered before then. Current international students who have not returned to the US before that date will be subject to AUD despite first enrolling under Duration of Status terms. 

For additional background, please see:

• “US Department of State issued 23% fewer study visas to international students in 2025”
• “Updated: US Department of Homeland Security publishes rule to end Duration of Status for international students“
• “US coalition files lawsuit to challenge rule ending Duration of Status admissions for international students“
• “Report: US considering a $100,000 fee for Optional Practical Training” 

The post US government warns universities to limit their authorisation of Curricular Practical Training work placements appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

China and India

US colleges’ top two markets, China and India, saw steep declines of -28% and -57%, respectively. This has massive implications: For years, Chinese and Indian students have composed more than half of the total international student body in the US. Many colleges remain incredibly dependent on the continued flow of these students into their programmes despite efforts to recruit across a wider range of countries.

Diversification interrupted

To complicate matters, diversification is becoming more difficult because students in several growth markets are banned from entering the US (e.g., Nigeria) or are experiencing high visa rejection rates (e.g., Ghana and Nepal). It is no coincidence that:

• Visa issuances to Ghanaian and Nepali students dropped by -52% and -55%, respectively, in 2025 compared with 2024;
• The CommonApp platform (which receives a large number of all international applications to US colleges) registered fewer applications from Asian and African students, respectively, for 2025/26 programmes. The percentage drop was -34% for applications from Ghana.

Slow visa processing is also hitting the applications pipeline and causing stress for institutions and students alike.

The importance of the Indian decline

The huge drop in Indian visa issuances is particularly difficult for US graduate/STEM programmes. The number of Indian students pursuing graduate degrees is the number in undergraduate programmes.

Trends for India have been worrisome for some time. For example:

• More than 6 in 10 (61%) Indian students were rejected for a visa in the US in 2025;
• The vast majority (61%) of institutions participating in the survey for the IIE’s 2026 Spring Snapshot on International Educational Exchange said Indian application volumes had declined.

The decelerating trend for India will almost certainly continue. A new rule from the Trump administration abolishes the decades-old Duration of Status (D/S) system that among other things, allowed students to progress from F-1 academic studies to the Optional Practical Training (OPT) work stream. The new system requires students to ask for a visa extension from immigration authorities after they have been in the US for four years, with no guarantee they will be approved. Virtually all students will need an extension to participate in post-study OPT since it happens after the completion of four years of study.

A total of in 2024/25 – accounting for . The end of D/S – if it happens, since plaintiffs including NAFSA are now challenging this in court – will remove a key driver of Indian student mobility to the US.

The following chart was created by International Data & Recruitment Strategist Dave Amor, who posted it on LinkedIn. Mr Amor illustrates the decline of total F-1 visa issuances in the past year – and the extreme drop for the Indian market.

Broad implications

Earlier this month, based on the application trends reported by US colleges in the Institute of International Education’s (IIE) Spring Snapshot survey. NAFSA projects that there will be up to 111,000 fewer international students at US higher education institutions in 2026/27, resulting in close to US$3.4 billion in lost revenue and nearly 40,000 job losses. 

For additional background, please see:

• “Visa delays and policy uncertainty projected to reduce foreign enrolment in the US by more than 100,000 students this fall“
• “Decline in Indian demand a major factor in softer outlook for foreign enrolment in US higher education in 2026/27“

The post US Department of State issued 23% fewer study visas to international students in 2025 appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

Our co-hosts are then joined by special guests Gordon Scott, the CEO of Successful Graduate, and Sheenu Kathuria, CEO of EduNation Consultants. The group gets into a great discussion around how the employability conversation is unfolding with students and families now, and where expectations and reality around graduate outcomes diverge.

You can listen right now in the player below, and we encourage you to subscribe via your favourite podcast app in order to receive future episodes automatically.

For additional background, please see:

• “The questions families are actually asking: Inside the student advising conversation in 2026“
• “91ɬ��Podcast: ‘Good, steady, and disciplined’: New Zealand’s plan for sustainable international enrolment growth“

The post 91ɬ��Podcast: Beyond the brochure: What employability really looks like for students appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

When we talk about language in international education, the conversation often focuses on English language proficiency. This is understandable given the global reach of English-medium education and the role that English plays in many international partnerships. However, language and communication in TNE are much broader and more complex than this.

To begin with, language is not simply about the words we use. Communication is the thread that connects every part of a successful TNE partnership, from the student experience and academic delivery to partnership management, staff collaboration and external engagement, and creates shared understanding across all stakeholders. This distinction matters because TNE partnerships bring together diverse communities of students, their families, employers, academics, professional services staff, institutional leaders and other external participants. Each group may bring different linguistic backgrounds, educational experiences, cultural assumptions and communication styles. Therefore, the success of a partnership depends not only on what is communicated, but also on whether that message is understood in the way it was intended across all groups of stakeholders.

Beyond language proficiency

One of the challenges in discussing language support is that it is often framed primarily around student ability. Institutions may focus on entry requirements, language assessments, academic writing support, or additional learning resources. These are all important. However, language proficiency alone does not automatically translate into academic confidence.

A student may meet all formal language requirements and still find themselves uncertain about how to participate in seminars, interpret feedback, structure an argument or understand what is expected when asked to “critically evaluate” a topic. These challenges are not necessarily about a lack of ability. They are often about navigating unfamiliar academic cultures.

Higher education systems vary significantly in how they approach teaching and learning. Expectations around independent study, questioning ideas, engaging in debate, working collaboratively, or expressing disagreement may differ considerably between countries and institutions. The challenge is not that one approach is better than another. Rather, it is about ensuring students understand the expectations of the environment in which they are studying. In this sense, effective communication goes beyond helping students understand academic content. Instead, it is about helping them understand how to succeed within a particular academic context.

The hidden curriculum of higher education

Many students entering TNE programmes are also navigating what is sometimes described as the “hidden curriculum” of higher education – the unwritten expectations, behaviours and conventions that experienced students and staff may take for granted. This may include:

• What does a lecturer expect when they ask students to contribute to a discussion?
• How should students approach feedback from academic staff?
• When is it appropriate to challenge an argument or ask for clarification?
• What does academic independence look like in practice?

For students who are familiar with the academic culture of their institution or the country where they study, these expectations may feel natural. For others, they can represent a significant challenge. This is particularly relevant in TNE because students may be studying an internationally recognised qualification while remaining within their local cultural and educational context or they might be pursuing foreign qualifications outside of their home country and the country of the degree provider. As such, supporting students effectively requires recognising both parts of that experience. The goal should not be to replace students’ existing educational identities or experiences. Rather, it should be to help them develop the confidence and skills to navigate different academic environments.

Communication challenges within partnerships

While student communication is clearly important, some of the most complex communication challenges in TNE happen behind the scenes. TNE partnerships are, at their core, networks of people working together across geographical, institutional and cultural boundaries. This includes academic teams, professional services colleagues, quality assurance teams, administrators, senior leaders and external stakeholders.

In my own experience, some of the most challenging aspects of international partnership work have not necessarily been related to strategic alignment or programme design, but to the everyday communication required to make partnerships operate effectively. A phrase such as “student support”, “quality monitoring”, “course”, “module”, “term”, “credit” or even “engagement” may appear straightforward, but different colleagues may interpret these concepts in different ways. Expectations around timelines, decision-making processes, escalation routes, and responsibilities can vary considerably.

Many operational challenges within partnerships are, at their core, communication challenges. Successful partnerships therefore require more than formal agreements and governance structures. They require ongoing dialogue, opportunities to build relationships, and a willingness to understand how different teams operate.

Communication across languages and locations

It is also important to recognise that not all TNE is delivered in English. Across the world, there are successful international partnerships delivered in local languages, reflecting the needs of students, national contexts and institutional strategies. In these cases, language-related challenges may look very different.

For example, a local partner may deliver a programme in its national language, while colleagues at the awarding institution who are not part of the core delivery team, may not have sufficient language capability to fully engage with teaching materials, student feedback, or academic discussions. This can create challenges around communication, oversight, quality assurance and partnership engagement, possibly even feelings of exclusion or disengagement.

The solution is not necessarily for every colleague involved in a partnership to become fluent in every language used across the network. However, institutions do need to consider how they maintain effective communication and shared understanding when linguistic differences exist. This may require additional investment in translation processes, bilingual staff capability, local expertise, technology solutions, or simply greater awareness of where communication barriers may emerge.

The role of staff capability

Much of the conversation around TNE focuses on student preparedness, but staff capability is equally important. Academic and professional services colleagues working in international partnerships need opportunities to understand each other’s contexts, expectations and ways of working. This includes understanding differences in:

• academic cultures;
• administrative processes;
• communication styles;
• approaches to student support;
• expectations around decision-making and accountability.

Staff development therefore becomes an important part of effective communication. This is not simply about induction or familiarising colleagues with institutional policies. It is about creating opportunities for academic and professional services staff from both partner institutions to learn from one another, understand different educational cultures and develop the confidence to communicate across them. Joint training, staff exchanges, peer observation, collaborative curriculum development, and regular partnership meetings can all help create a shared understanding that ultimately benefits students.

The strongest partnerships I have encountered are those where staff relationships are actively developed (and often in person) rather than assumed. Regular communication between teams, opportunities for knowledge exchange, and genuine collaboration help build the trust required for partnerships to succeed over the long term.

Communication beyond the classroom

Effective communication in TNE extends well beyond the partnership itself. Students are rarely the only audience institutions need to engage. Parents, employers, professional bodies, government agencies and local communities all play an important role in shaping perceptions of international education.

Clear communication is particularly important when explaining the value of TNE qualifications. While awareness of international education continues to grow, there can still be misconceptions about how TNE programmes compare with degrees studied on the awarding institution’s home campus. Institutions therefore need to communicate consistently that students are working towards the same academic standards and learning outcomes, while also highlighting the additional benefits many TNE graduates develop, including intercultural competence, adaptability and the ability to operate across different cultural and professional environments.

Employers, too, increasingly value graduates who can work confidently across borders and cultures. Helping external stakeholders understand these strengths not only benefits graduates, but also reinforces the credibility and long-term reputation of TNE partnerships.

Technology can support communication, but not replace it

Technology has transformed the way international partnerships communicate and frankly, how we liaise with others across all industries. Virtual meetings, digital learning environments, collaboration platforms, and increasingly sophisticated AI tools have made it easier for teams and students to connect across borders. However, technology can support communication, but it cannot replace human understanding.

A translated document may communicate words, but it does not always communicate meaning. A virtual meeting may enable discussion, but it does not automatically build relationships. As TNE becomes increasingly digitally enabled, institutions will need to continue investing not only in platforms and systems, but also in the human connections that allow partnerships to thrive.

Building shared understanding

As TNE continues to expand globally and competition grows between nations and individual providers, language and communication become increasingly important. The future of international education will involve partnerships between institutions, countries, and communities with increasingly diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. The most successful partnerships will not simply remove language barriers. They will actively create shared understanding between students, staff, institutional partners, employers, and wider communities.

Perhaps the most important question institutions can ask themselves is not simply whether information is being communicated. It is whether that information is being understood in the way it was intended. Because ultimately, effective communication in TNE is not about ensuring everyone speaks the same language. It is about ensuring everyone understands the same purpose. In the end, successful TNE partnerships are built not simply on shared programmes, but on shared understanding.

In my next article, I will explore another important dimension of the TNE student experience: wellbeing and pastoral support, and how institutions can create environments where students feel supported, connected and able to thrive across different international contexts.

– Dr Suzanna Tomassi is Executive Director of External Affairs at NCUK, a leading UK pathway provider, and Founder of CoachEd Global, a consultancy specialising in executive coaching and global education advisory.

She is a highly experienced strategic leader and board member with over 20 years’ expertise across UK Government and higher education. Her work focuses on internationalisation, governance, risk oversight, commercial growth, and organisational transformation. Suzanna’s career spans the UK Department for Business and Trade and four major UK universities, where she has shaped national policy, strengthened regulatory and quality frameworks, and led large-scale international expansion initiatives.

An expert in transnational education and global operations, Suzanna has driven multi-country growth strategies, co-authored accreditation guidelines, and facilitated major international investments in UK higher education.

For additional background, please see:

• “Academic support and learning resources in TNE: Delivering student success across borders”
• “Beyond borders: Why student support matters more than ever in transnational education”

The post Language and communication in TNE: Building bridges across academic and cultural boundaries appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

This is the most serious sanction that can be levelled against a licensed sponsor. Revocation of the sponsor licence means that Bloomsbury, formerly the London School of Business and Management, immediately loses the ability to sponsor international students under the UK’s Student Route.

This means that it can no longer issue Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS). Any CAS already issued also now becomes invalid, and any pending visa applications based on a Bloomsbury CAS will be refused. The Institute will also be removed from the Register of Student Sponsors.

The revocation of the Bloomsbury Institute’s sponsor licence on 5 August 2026 follows the suspension of its licence on 9 June 2026, from which point it was forced to also suspend recruitment of international students.

The Institute’s licence was in the balance this year because Bloomsbury had not maintained compliance with the Basic Compliance Assessment (BCA) requirements. As the Home Office explains: “The Basic Compliance Assessment is an annual check that all sponsors must pass, measuring visa refusal rates, course enrolment and completion.”

Those BCA thresholds tightened this year, but Bloomsbury was assessed against the earlier benchmarks, which required that all sponsors maintain a visa refusal rate of less than 10%, an enrolment rate of at least 90%, and a course completion rate of at least 85%.

“Student sponsors must meet the standards required to retain their licence,” said the Home Office. “Failure to meet these standards represents a serious breach of its duties as an international student sponsor, and as a result, [Bloomsbury’s] licence was revoked.”

Effective 1 June 2026, the BCA thresholds were further strengthened such that visa refusal rates must be maintained below 5%; the course enrolment rate must be at least 95%; and the course completion rate must be at least 85%. Perhaps unnecessarily, the Home Office notes as well that, “The Bloomsbury Institute would also have failed to meet the new, stricter standards.”

A largely international student body

For 2024/25, the most recent available reporting year, HESA data indicates that the Bloomsbury Institute enrolled a total of 1,035 students. More than 800 of those, or nearly 80%, were international students, with the lion’s share (93%) coming from Pakistan.

The revocation of the sponsor license necessarily places the study programmes of those students, and even the future of the institution, in question. The Home Office says that its priority now is to “minimise disruption for international students already enrolled” at Bloomsbury.

To that end, the Institute “will be permitted to continue teaching its current sponsored students for a short period,” the term of which is not specified. Students who cannot complete their studies within that window will be supported to transfer to another institution.

Needless to say, those provisions are an important feature of the Home Office announcement. The headline is that a UK institution has had its sponsor licence revoked. But of course, behind that headline, are the many affected staff and students who now must deal with the uncertainty that accompanies this sanction against their institution.

For additional background, please see:

• “Narrowing bands of compliance: How the UK’s new RAG system will impact international student recruitment“
• “UK universities bracing for a further decline in international enrolments“
• “England: Government ‘remains of the view’ that the International Student Levy should go ahead; implementation planned for August 2028“
• “UK: Sponsored study visa issuances down, rejection rates up, and more“

The post UK Home Office revokes Bloomsbury Institute’s student sponsor licence appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.