Skip to main content

Researching in International Education

It has been a while since I’ve updated this blog.  No doubt this is a cardinal sin of blog keeping, but one I’m sure gets broken fairly consistently.  Life sometimes gets in the way of documenting what’s going on.  But there has been lots going on…deregulation, funding cuts, federalism – there is not a space in higher education in Australia that is not full of policy conversations and conundrums.

However, despite the craziness, yesterday I was lucky to attend the annual IEAA midwinter Researchers Seminar.  I think I’ve been to every one of these since they started in 2009, when I was in the first throws of my thesis.  Every one I’ve been to has provided insight, interest, and (and I’m not sure if this is a good thing) lots of ideas for PhDs.  It is a great place for people who work and research in international education to network, share ideas, and find out what is going on in the research space.  The MC/Chair of yesterday, Assoc. Professor Chris Ziguras (RMIT), made an excellent point about the way the day has evolved over the years.  At the start the different between those who worked in international education and those who researched in international education was vast.  There were some, like me, who did both.  But much of the ‘research’ wanted by the industry was market intel, data crunching and working out where the next cohort of students is coming from.  The industry, and research in the space, has changed so much since then – for the better.  There is a much better connection between what is needed, what is wanted, and what is being done in international education research.

A great case in point is a project undertaken over 3 years by Deakin (led by Prof Jill Blackmore and Dr Cate Gribble) and IDP Education, funded through an ARC Linkage grant.  Forgive my very basic summary, but the project looked at how international students got work (or didn’t) in Australia after their study.  The migration settings, the expectations, and the responses to this cohort of industry and industry representative bodies.  Seeing the outcomes of the study yesterday was interesting, if for no other reason that the outcomes are not a huge surprise to me, having worked in the industry for 10 years.  But, what is important is that it is no longer a hunch I have.  This has been researched, formally investigated and will soon be published.  That we can turn our hunches into proof is a great thing for the industry, and for the students who will benefit from the policy and practical changes that flow from that.

The other really important outcome, for me, from this day, was a realisation – or an affirmation perhaps – that I’m on the right track when it comes to my research interest.  What I’m thinking about are the connections between international education and public diplomacy (soft power is the other term – which is what I used in my thesis).  The New Colombo Plan (unfortunate name aside) will be providing some excellent case studies for testing my hypothesis around the ideas – so perhaps it’s time to pull my finger out and get cracking.  The “Old” Colombo Plan provides the foundations to build on, with more research and evidence to highlight the excellent diplomatic outcomes from these scholarships. 

Perhaps the next blog post will not be so far away, as I test out some of these ideas in print…