International Recruitment Agents Report
Context
Over a number of years, the Students’ Union has raised various concerns over
the recruitment process which the University employs internationally, and
particularly the use of ‘international recruitment agents1’. These concerns have
resulted largely from students engaging with the Advice and Representation
Centre2 due to problems they have incurred either upon arrival or later on during
the course of their studies. This report is being compiled at the current time
following a series of discussions between Jo Goodman, the current Students’
Union Welfare Officer and Chris Marlin, the Pro Vice Chancellor (International).
Concerns
The concerns on the part of the Students’ Union largely centre on the following
areas:



The role of the recruitment agents – i.e. relationship with
student/University departments
The accuracy of information imparted, particularly around academic
issues, housing and employment
The way in which agents are incentivised
This report will now explore each of these three areas in greater detail.
The role of recruitment agents
A recurring theme in the student cases that have come to the attention of the
Students’ Union is the apparently close relationship between the student and the
agent who recruited them prior to the student’s admission to Sussex. They often
feel that the agent has gone out of their way to help them get to Sussex and that
their interaction was more akin to a friendship than a professional relationship.
While there are clearly advantages for the student in feeling that someone is
working on their behalf, this brings added difficulty if the student is unaware for
example of the incentivisation process and the fact that the agent has something
personally to gain through successful recruitment of the student. It can also lead
1
In this report, the term ‘international recruitment agents’ will refer to those working on behalf of
the University of Sussex, though not normally directly as an employee of the institution. These
agents will often work as part of an organisation located in a country where Sussex targets its
recruitment which is then contracted by the University to work on its behalf.
2 All students who seek advice or representation from the Students’ Union are entitled to
confidentiality and their identities will therefore be protected in this report. Some students have
been happy for us to disclose information regarding their cases to the University, and some
among these have met with PVC Chris Marlin to discuss their individual circumstances with the
support of the Students’ Union Welfare Officer Jo Goodman.
to high levels of upset and disappointment if this friendship ceases following the
student’s recruitment, often when they encounter difficulty with their course or
experience at Sussex and feel that they require and are entitled to the same level
of support from the agent that they received prior to arrival – this is exacerbated
where they feel that they have a close friendship with the agent. On more than
one occasion students have remarked that they have made various attempts to
contact the agent who recruited them post-arrival and have failed to get any
response whatsoever, some even going to the effort of sending their parents to
the agent’s office in their home country on their behalf in order to get a response.
It seems therefore that there is a need for students to have a greater
understanding of what the role of the agent is from the outset – if they are to be a
friend and advocate of the student, this must continue beyond the point of
successful recruitment, whereas if they are to be largely working in the interests
of themselves, their organisation and the institution, this must also be clear so as
not to give the student false expectations and to feel retrospectively that they
have misplaced their trust. The British Council’s Guide to Good Practice for
Education Agents recommends that agents should “act at all times in the best
interests of students or prospective students as well as (UK) partner institutions”
suggesting that the optimum relationship is one where the agent is seeking the
best possible outcome for both the student and the institution. In order for this to
be achieved, it is vital that the student is absolutely clear on the boundaries and
context of their relationship with the agent.
There is also concern regarding the level of relationship that the agents have with
the institution and various departments within it. It seems that although they may
receive regular updates on things changing within the University, as well as
visiting on an occasional basis, there seems to be little requirement for them to
either put students directly in touch with the relevant department, direct them to
recent University publications or web pages or to check that information is up to
date and correct. Following on from the various experiences the Students’ Union
has had with these cases, there is a strong feeling that the role of the agent
should be more akin to that of a signposter rather than a comprehensive guide to
the institution and all processes within it. We would not expect any member of
staff working on a daily basis on Sussex campus to have a full understanding of
the way all University departments work and it therefore seems unrealistic to
effectively expect this from representatives working at a distance. The
implications of the current role of agents with regard to imparting information will
be discussed in greater detail in the next section.
If the role of international recruitment agents were to be clarified to that of an
informed signposter, it seems that there could be a significant impact on
student’s abilities to take control of their own individual situations. If students are
empowered to communicate directly with departments with the support of agents,
they are more likely to arrive well-informed and in a position to make the most of
their studies, as well as resolve any issues they encounter themselves rather
than seeking continued contact with the agent. This could be an opportunity to
encourage personal independence and development from before the student
even arrives at Sussex.
Accuracy of information imparted by agents
The British Council’s Guide to Good Practice for Education Agents states that
agents “shall not knowingly or by a failure of professional standards provide or
disseminate false, incomplete or misleading information” in order to allow
prospective students to make an “informed judgement.” However, inaccuracy of
information provided by recruitment agents is probably the most frequent
complaint that the Students’ Union receives from students who have been
recruited in this way. Some of this information appears to simply be outdated
whereas some appears to entail a tendency to ‘oversell’ the offering at the
University or to involve an element of easing the student’s concerns. While it is
understandable why an agent working to targets and incentives may wish to
overstate certain elements of study at Sussex in order to finalise the student’s
recruitment, as has previously been discussed with both Chris Marlin and Marcus
Williams, Director of Student Recruitment, the most effective recruitment agent is
a satisfied alumnus and a University’s reputation is built on the experiences of
those who study there, both through formal mechanisms such as the
International Student Barometer, but also through informal social and familial
networks which may have an even greater influence in many international
contexts. In order to create these satisfied students, it is vital that expectations
are met and therefore the context in which these expectations are set, the period
of recruitment, requires special scrutiny in order to ensure that these
expectations are realistic from the outset. The three areas in which the issue of
misinformation most frequently comes to the fore are with regard to academic
provision and course content, issues around housing and those around
employability both during the course and following. This report will now explore
each of these areas in greater detail.
Academic matters
For many international students, the global reputation of a degree in the UK is
often a significant driver in them choosing to come and study here and therefore
one of the key areas where they require accurate information prior to application.
Cases seen by the Students’ Union have variously involved misinformation
regarding departments’ connections with professional bodies, course content and
crucially the level of prior knowledge/experience required for the programme. It
has also previously included cases where students’ levels of English have been
insufficient to be able to succeed at their chosen course and there have been
allegations that this has been masked by agents through forged language
certificates and editing of research proposals. These factors can have a huge
impact on an individual’s ability to make the most of their course, succeed
academically and can lead to high levels of dissatisfaction throughout the
student’s time at Sussex. This is therefore an area which appears to be in need
of review in terms of how agents interact with prospective students and how
these students interact with information about their chosen course of study.
Housing
The second area where the Students’ Union have come across significant issues
is that of housing. Students often find that they cannot access the
accommodation that they believed they would be able to on arrival and this
applies to both University managed accommodation and the private rented
sector. I will first address the issues with University managed accommodation.
Several students who were told that they would be able to stay in University
accommodation by agents found on arrival that either they were not eligible or
that there was no record of communication from agents to the Housing Office to
secure their accommodation. This has led to many students incurring additional
costs through needing to stay in temporary and often expensive accommodation.
It seems that a system in which students are required to interact directly with the
Housing Office to establish their housing status would be preferable to the
current system where agents act on their behalf and due to the scale of students
they are dealing with may come into difficulties with ensuring that accurate
information is submitted on behalf of each individual student.
In addition to this, several students on arrival in the UK, particularly this year
following the housing shortage have expressed surprise at the requirements of
the private rented sector with regard to guarantors. Many students appear to
have arrived with the understanding that securing accommodation in Brighton
and the surrounding area would be relatively simple and were then faced with the
prospect of having to supply often six months rent up front in order to secure
accommodation. In addition to this, our recent Rate Your Landlord survey3
indicates that many more international students were only able to sign for
accommodation after they have begun their studies (41.9% of international
students as opposed to 19.3 % of home students) and, worryingly, 38.6% of
international students signed for a property before viewing it (only 11.9% of home
students do this). 17.9% of international students report being unable to sign for
a house due to the extortionate up front deposits required. It is vital that in order
to have a positive experience in the private rented sector whilst at Sussex,
students are able to access adequate and accurate information, whether this is
through direct contact with the Housing Office or simply being directed to the
Students’ Union’s Moving On publication and being aware that support is
available. There is also the option on the part of the University of acting as a
guarantor for students who are unable to provide a UK homeowner as guarantor
in order to allow them to access the housing market – a recent Unipol/UKCISA
report on Managing Accommodation for International Students suggests that this
is a practice which is becoming more and more common among universities in
3
Results as of the 23rd January 2011 at which point there had been 569 respondents, 55 of
whom were international students (non-EU). The survey remained open after this date.
the UK and that those institutions who have taken on this responsibility “have
suffered negligible losses as a result”4.
Employability
The final area in which concerns have frequently been raised by students is
employability. Many students report having been told that finding part time work
opportunities to fund their studies in the UK would be relatively simple, only to
find on arrival that this is not the case and therefore finding themselves in
unanticipated financial difficulty over the course of their time in the UK, potentially
even leading to them needing to intermit or drop out entirely. Students have often
also expressed disappointment at the level of opportunity there is following study
to attain work experience relevant to their area of study. For many, part of the
appeal of a degree in the UK is the opportunity to use the post study work visa to
gain experience in the field of their choice. However, many have found that in
practice there is little available due to the fierce levels of competition which they
had not been made aware of. Some have even found that the area they wished
to work in is in a ‘protected’ category, meaning that UK applicants would be
favoured over them. More accurate information in this area would allow students
to make better informed choices regarding study in the UK, as well as preventing
students potentially either needing to leave for financial reasons once they’re
here or having a less than positive experience due to lack of employment
opportunities. There are also issues to explore regarding specific careers support
for international students which could be an area in need of review in conjunction
with the Careers and Employability Centre. Clearly much of this will be subject to
the Home Office and UK Borders Agency decisions regarding the future of post
study work visas and the international student visa system as a whole.
Incentivisation
The final area of concern for the Students’ Union is that of incentivisation. As far
as we aware, currently agents are remunerated in addition to their basic salary
on the basis of how many students they have ‘successfully recruited’. The
Students’ Union would like to encourage a broader understanding of what is
meant by this; is it genuinely a ‘success’ to have a student’s foot in the door
given that they may go on to face any or all of the difficulties explained above or
can it only be considered as such once that student has graduated from Sussex
having had a positive experience? We urge the University to review the
incentivisation process in order that it reflects whether that agent’s work has led
to success for both the student and as a result, for the reputation of Sussex as an
institution. While we understand that the University is concerned about
‘oversurveying’ students, as far as we understand there is currently both an
4
Findings from the UKCISA/Unipol report on Managing accommodation for international
students: a handbook for practitioners, 2010, see page 34
Access at: http://www.ukcisa.org.uk/files/pdf/about/material_media/accommodation_guide.pdf
‘acceptors and decliners’ survey and one for post-arrival. If we are to move to a
longer term view of experience and ‘success’ it seems that the best approach
would be to integrate these surveys which effectively both monitor the student’s
first point of contact with the institution and add a commitment to a survey or
focus groups towards the end of the student’s time at Sussex to monitor
specifically whether expectations were met – i.e. whether the expectations set up
by the agents were realistic.
In addition, it is vital for the accountability of both the agents and the institution as
a whole that any incentivisation system is transparent and that students are
aware of the relationship of the agents to the institution.
Recommendations
From this report we would like to draw the following recommendations:









A review of the role of agents with a view to moving towards a more
facilitative focus, acting as an assistive signposter for students.
Greater clarity for students both in terms of their relationship with the
agent and the agent’s relationship to the institution.
Better channels of communication for students and agents to interact
directly with various departments of the University, particularly schools
and the Housing Office.
Students to be directed to University and Students’ Union publications and
web pages rather than receiving the majority of information verbally as this
makes it difficult to ensure accuracy and clarity.
Students to be encouraged to be more proactive during the application
process in order for them to be better equipped to act independently on
arrival.
More clarity provided to students regarding the University’s housing
application process – particularly around the various deadlines and
requirements, as well as regular updates on their application’s progress
Greater support in looking for accommodation in the private sector –
guidance on standard practice including that of charging several months’
rent up front. Many universities act as guarantors for students in this
situation in order to enable them to access accommodation in the private
rented sector.
Greater levels of objective information provided to students at the point of
application regarding the availability of both part time work during their
course and post study work in their chosen field, as well as an idea of
what support is available to them. The opportunity to provide more tailored
support for international students in this area could also be explored.
An integration of the ‘acceptors and decliners’ survey with the post-arrival
survey in order to accommodate for further research such as an exit
survey later on in the student life cycle to examine whether the

expectations set out pre-arrival have been met through students’
experiences of study at Sussex.
Incentivisation to be based partly on the findings of this research rather
than simply on numbers of successful recruits in order that agents are
aiming to provide the institution with satisfied graduates as opposed to
simply students enrolled at the University.
Conclusion
We hope that the findings and recommendations of this report will be given due
consideration and that the University will consider taking action to implement the
changes highlighted. It is the belief of the Students’ Union that a full review of the
international recruitment process could be of enormous long term benefit both to
future students and to the institution itself through the positive impact improved
student experience could have on the reputation of the University. It is suggested
that a working group with representatives from both the University and the
Students’ Union be established with the express purpose of looking at the
recommendations, reviewing existing working practices and considering
implementing changes on the basis of this report and any other information
available to it.