In January 2010, Australia-based Navitas sealed its first U.S. deal, a 10-year contract with Western Kentucky University.  Since then,  the company has signed three more  agreements – with the Universities of [...]]]> Inside Higher Ed reports that U.S. colleges are increasingly turning to for-profit pathway programs for international students in a bid to boost revenues.

In January 2010, Australia-based Navitas sealed its first U.S. deal, a 10-year contract with Western Kentucky University.  Since then,  the company has signed three more  agreements – with the Universities of Massachusetts at Boston, Dartmouth and Lowell.

Students entering the Navitas program at Western Kentucky will need deep pockets.  According to the fee schedule, the costs are over $22,000 for three semesters, plus a mandatory $1,000 medical insurance charge. The pre-master’s program is nearly $10,000 and runs just one semester.

With the U.S. recession clobbering college finances, other for-profit pathway providers are swooping down upon campuses across the country with promises of bountiful new revenue streams from full fee-paying international students. Study Group International, recently purchased by a U.S. private equity firm, is setting up programs at Dean and Fisher Colleges, and Madison University. Meanwhile, Kaplan International which already runs a “Global Pathways Program” at Northeastern University opened its second program earlier this year at the University of Utah.  And UK-based INTO has signed long-term contracts with Oregon State University and the University of South Florida.

INTO’s joint ventures with Oregon State and South Florida generated headlines earlier this year when the Commission on English Language Accreditation initially revoked the accreditation of the two universities’ English language institutes after they were taken over by INTO.

Ironically, the rising number of private pathways programs comes at a time when the U.S. Congress is looking at new rules to reign in the more questionable practices of many for-profit colleges. Surely it’s time to shine a similar light on Navitas, Study Group, Kaplan and INTO?

This briefing was produced as part of UCU’s campaign against INTO’s plans to set up a joint venture with Queen’s University Belfast in January 2009. It was aimed at the university’s governing body.

Developed from an initiative led by the UK’s University and College Union, unions from North America, Europe, Australasia and Africa sign deals at an international [...]]]> Half a million academics from around the world have joined forces to create a series of new international agreements that will help safeguard academic standards at home and abroad.

Developed from an initiative led by the UK’s University and College Union, unions from North America, Europe, Australasia and Africa sign deals at an international conference – Challenging the global market in education – held at the Institute of Education in London. The agreements make specific references to protecting academic freedom and monitoring the work of private companies in higher education.

The unions are concerned at a growing international market in tertiary education that has seen universities in the UK, America, Australia and Canada open lucrative campuses in the Middle East and East Asia, and say they will use the agreements to hold institutions to account for their overseas ventures.

Signatories will report abuses like those at the Singapore campus of Australia’s James Cook University, where a lecturer was suspended and dragged before a court of law for wearing a pro-democracy t-shirt. The conference will commit unions to discouraging staff and the academic community from working and sharing research with institutions with bad overseas records.

The agreements will also allow the unions to share intelligence and work on joint campaigns against private companies who are looking to set up public-private partnerships with universities to recruit international students. The unions oppose the creation of a two-tier workforce in higher education and believe that in-house alternatives carry far less risk to the reputation, academic standards and financial well-being of universities. The private firm, INTO, for example, has been overwhelmingly rejected by staff at every UK university that has been polled on whether or not the institution should work with the company.

Building international solidarity: A multilateral international agreement to defend education against global marketisation