People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 53
IMPLICATIONS OF LOW ENGLISH STANDARDS AMONG OVERSEAS
STUDENTS AT AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITIES
Bob Birrell
The results of the English tests required of overseas students who obtained permanent residence visas in 2005–
06 after graduating reveal that at least a third scored below the level normally required for employment as
professionals in Australia. This article explores how students with limited English gained entry to Australian
higher education courses in the first place and how they subsequently passed their examinations. It also examines
the responses to this situation on the part of the Australian Government and of the Australian accrediting
authorities whose task is to assess the adequacy of students’ credentials (including English) within their jurisdiction.
CURRENT IMMIGRATION
REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGLISH
SKILLS
Since 1999, people granted visas under
Australia’s General Skilled Migration Pro-
gram, which covers most of the migrants
granted permanent residence on account of
their skills, must demonstrate a minimum
standard of English language proficiency.
This is band 5 on the International English
Language Testing System (IELTS) test.
This test is available in two formats—Ac-
ademic and General Training. The
Department of Immigration and Multicul-
tural Affairs (DIMA) uses the General
Training format. Universities use the Aca-
demic format when selecting students for
their course programs.
There are four aspects of English (called
modules) tested, which are reading, writing,
listening and speaking.
1
The listening and
speaking modules are the same for both
formats. However in the Academic format
greater attention is given in the reading and
writing modules to educational related tasks
than is the case for the General Training
format. Applicants for permanent residence
must reach level 5 on each of the four
modules covered by the General Training
test. DIMA defines this standard as
‘vocational’ English and awards intending
migrants who achieve this standard 15
points under the points test employed to
assess skilled migrants. Those who achieve
6 or higher on the test receive 20 points.
They are referred to as ‘competent’
speakers.
The focus of this study is the English
standards of migrants who were granted
permanent residence (PR) visas in 2005–
06, with particular reference to former
overseas students who have completed
tertiary courses in Australia. This is the first
group of former overseas students for whom
reliable data on their level of English has
been available. Around a third of this 2005–
06 group did not achieve the ‘competent’,
band 6 English standard. This obviously
impacts on their prospects of obtaining
professional level employment in Australia.
It also raises questions about how overseas
students with poor English gained entry to
Australian university courses in the first
place. DIMA will not issue a higher
education student visa to a person located
overseas unless they attain band 6 on the
IELTS test. Furthermore, how did the
overseas students in question manage to
complete their university courses
satisfactorily, if at the time they took the
IELTS test they were not ‘competent’
English speakers?
Finally what does this evidence tell us
about the English language standards
required by Australia’s accrediting
authorities? The Australian government has
devolved the responsibility to assess
whether the credentials of applicants in their
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 54
respective fields, like accounting and IT,
meet Australian occupational standards to
profession-specific accrediting bodies. In
most cases these accrediting bodies are
professional associations like the Australian
Computer Society in the case of IT or
Engineers Australia in the case of
engineering. The accrediting bodies may
specify the level of English required in their
field. For example, the Australian Nursing
Council requires a minimum band of 7 on
the IELTS test before it will accredit an
applicant to proceed with a permanent
resident visa application as a nurse.
OVERSEAS STUDENTS AND
OPPORTUNITIES FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
In 1999, the Australian Government intro-
duced a suite of reforms to its skilled
migration selection system. Among the
most important of these was the granting
of incentives to former overseas students
to encourage them to obtain permanent res-
idence on completion of their courses.
These incentives included additional points
for Australian training and the waiving of
the job experience requirement that skilled
migrants applying offshore had to meet.
Policy-makers thought that persons
who had been trained in Australia, in
English, would be more attractive to
Australian employers than their
counterparts trained overseas, especially if
the overseas training had been conducted
in a foreign language in a non-western
educational setting. In mid-2001 new
onshore visa categories for overseas
students were introduced which permitted
foreign students to apply for permanent
residence without having to leave Australia,
as long as they applied within six months
of completing their training.
The main entry point is the onshore
Source: DIMIA 2005–06, unpublished
Table 1: Visas issued by major occupation group and subclass of visa, 2005–06, General
Skilled Migration Program (GSM)—principal applicant only
Occupation group Visa Subclass Total
Subclass Subclass All other GSM
880, 881 136 GSM visas
& 882 visas issued
Accountants, Auditors and Corporate Treasurers 6,595 2,619 488 9,702
Computing Professionals 3,589 2,755 729 7,073
Building and Engineering Professionals 1,484 1,745 811 4,040
Food Tradespersons 952 394 154 1,500
Nursing Professionals 229 1,136 107 1,472
Miscellaneous Business and Information Professionals 432 96 897 1,425
Mechanical Engineering Tradespersons 4 1,057 325 1,386
Electrical and Electronics Tradespersons 25 787 391 1,203
Sales, Marketing and Advertising Professionals 186 94 779 1,059
Structural Construction Tradespersons 3 543 306 852
Other Occupations 1,884 3,367 4,413 9,664
Total 15,383 14,593 9,400 39,376
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 55
independent overseas student visa category
(visa subclass 880). In addition there is an
Australian sponsored overseas student
category (visa subclass 881) and a
designated area overseas student category
(visa subclass 882). These latter two visa
subclasses give further points concessions
to applicants sponsored by a relative who
is an Australian resident and, in the case of
the 882 subclass, if the relative lives in a
‘Designated Area’ within Australia. The
numbers in these two visa subclasses are
small relative to the 880 visa subclass.
In a numerical sense these policy
initiatives have been spectacularly
successful. There were 5,480 onshore visas
issued to principal applicants who were
former overseas students under the three
student visa subclasses in 2001–02. By
2005–06, this number had grown to 15,383.
As Table 1 shows, by 2005–06 the number
of visas issued to principal applicants in
these onshore visa subclasses was similar
to the number issued under the main
offshore skilled visa subclass within the
General Skilled Migration program. This
is the Skilled Independent visa category
(visa subclass 136).
However, the onshore student program
has generated difficult migration
management problems, since subsequent
research has shown that many of the
overseas students visaed have subsequently
struggled to find professional level
employment in Australia.
2
A key reason is
difficulties with English, something which
was obviously not anticipated when the
initiatives described above were
implemented. The issue would be of less
concern if it were not for the rapid growth
in the numbers involved and the impetus
for further expansion. The following
analysis provides background on the factors
driving this expansion. The study then
reviews the data available on the English
language skills of overseas students.
THE ONSHORE STUDENT
PROGRAM: IMPETUS FOR
GROWTH
Australian educational institutions have
contributed to this growth. Most univer-
sities, and in recent times TAFEs and
private providers in the Vocational and
Education Training (VET) sector, have
sought to attract overseas student enrol-
ments. They have done so by vigorous
recruiting and in some cases by establish-
ing metropolitan campuses catering
exclusively to overseas students which
specialise in the courses that meet the
specifications of the relevant accrediting
authority. The largest entrant into this
market is the Rockhampton based Cen-
tral Queensland University, which has
inner city campuses in Melbourne, Syd-
ney and Brisbane.
The expansion in overseas student
enrolments in the higher education sector
appears to be driven by interest on the part
of overseas students wishing to obtain PR.
This generalisation is based on evidence that
most of the growth in overseas student
enrolments in the higher education sector
has occurred in courses which potentially
lead to a PR outcome within two years and
from students who come from countries
with a high propensity to seek a PR visa.
Table 2 shows the recent pattern of
enrolment of overseas students by course.
Almost all the growth has been within the
Business Administration, Management
category, which include courses in
accounting, which satisfy the relevant
accrediting authority requirements.
Unfortunately, it is not possible to isolate
accounting enrolments from the
Department of Education Science and
Training’s (DEST) data set. However,
inquiries with the relevant university
departments indicate that courses which
meet the accounting accreditation
standards for immigration purposes are the
main beneficiaries of the growth shown in
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 56
the Business Administration, Management
category shown in Table 2. The table
indicates that there was a sharp increase in
the number of commencements in this field,
apparently at the expense of IT. The likely
reason is that since September 2004
accounting has been listed on the Migration
Occupations in Demand List (MODL).
People with occupations on the MODL are
allocated an extra 15 points on this basis
and a further five points if they have a firm
job offer in that occupation from an
Australian employer.
3
Overseas student applicants with
acceptable qualifications in a MODL
occupation are virtually assured a PR visa
as long as they can reach DIMA’s minimum
language standard of ‘functional’ English.
By contrast overseas students completing
IT courses in Australia currently do not have
access to MODL points. There are some IT
skill specialities listed on the MODL. But
the Australian Computer Society requires
at least one year’s work experience in the
relevant speciality before it will accredit an
applicant for MODL points. Consequently,
students with an IT degree may not score
sufficient points to obtain an 880 visa,
Source: Australian Education International, unpublished
Table 2: Overseas student commencements at Australian universities by selected fields of
education and provider type, 2002 to 2005 (onshore students only)
Provider type Year Change
2002 to 2005
Selected fields 2002 2003 2004 2005 Number Per
of students cent
Government
Business Administration, Management 20,990 23,092 25,237 28,105 7,115 34
Computer Science, Information Systems 10,798 9,871 10,848 8,129 -2,669 -25
Economics 2,333 2,964 2,823 2,850 517 22
Education 1,196 1,615 1,940 2,111 915 77
Health, Community Services 726 765 899 1,135 409 56
Language Studies 282 425 500 564 282 100
Medical Science, Medicine 881 1,035 1,075 1,191 310 35
Nursing 614 788 1,169 1,513 899 146
Services, Hospitality, Transport 900 1,081 1,288 1,351 451 50
Other 16,997 18,076 18,276 17,403 406 2
Total 55,717 59,712 64,055 64,352 8,635 15
Non-government
Business Administration, Management 576 412 391 484 -92 -16
Computer Science, Information Systems 217 116 74 60 -157 -72
Other 885 1,128 1,262 1,353 468 53
Total 1,678 1,656 1,727 1,897 219 13
Total 57,395 61,368 65,782 66,249 8,854 15
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 57
especially since DIMA increased the pass
mark from 115 to 120 on 1 April 2005.
Partly as a consequence, as Table 2 shows,
commencements in IT contracted in 2005.
Table 3 shows that almost all the growth
in overseas student enrolments in the higher
education sector from 2002 to 2005 has
come from North East Asia (predominantly
China) and from Southern and Central Asia
(mainly India). The great majority of these
students are enrolled in accounting and IT
courses.
Further substantiation of the proposition
that enrolment growth on the part of
overseas students is linked to the pursuit of
a PR outcome is shown in Table 4. This
indicates that students from South Asia, and
to a lesser extent China, have a high
propensity to seek PR after completing their
courses. Some 74 per cent of those from
India obtained an onshore student visa
(Table 4). By contrast, students from the
countries where enrolments have been
stable or declining have a relatively low
propensity to apply for PR. These countries
include Hong Kong, Singapore and
Malaysia which, a decade ago, dominated
the overseas student market.
ENGLISH LANGUAGE
STANDARDS OF OVERSEAS
STUDENTS
Since mid-2004 former overseas students
who apply for an onshore student visa have
been required to take the IELTS test. Prior
to mid-2004 it had been DIMA’s practice
to deem them as having achieved ‘compe-
tent’ English or 6 on the IELTS test and
thus they were not required to take the
IELTS test. The expectation was that most
would have achieved that level in order to
gain a student visa and, in any event, would
since have honed these skills while living,
studying and working here for at least two
years. The decision to require a test de-
rived from anecdotal evidence picked up
Table 3: Overseas student commencements at Australian universities by region of
citizenship, 2002 to 2005 (onshore students only)
Source: Australian Education International, unpublished
Region Year Change
2002–2005
2002 2003 2004 2005 Number Per
of students cent
Americas 3,284 3,394 3,347 3,407 123 4
North Africa and the Middle East 894 1,072 1,197 1,417 523 59
North-East Asia 18,634 20,750 24,304 27,150 8,516 46
North-West Europe 4,268 4,221 3,999 3,663 -605 -14
Oceania and Antarctica 295 285 233 262 -33 -11
South-East Asia 19,960 18,625 16,835 15,209 -4,751 -24
Southern and Central Asia 7,338 10,360 13,347 12,720 5,382 73
Southern and Eastern Europe 834 832 753 692 -142 -17
Sub-Saharan Africa 1,792 1,769 1,733 1,691 -101 -6
Unknown 96 60 34 38 -58 -60
Grand Total 57,395 61,368 65,782 66,249 8,854 15
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 58
by DIMA officers that some former stu-
dents’ English language skills were short
of the ‘competent’ standard, despite having
completed the courses for which they had
been enrolled.
The results of the first year of testing,
which were reported in the Evaluation of
the General Skilled Migration Categories,
showed that many applicants did not
achieve the ‘competent’, band 6, standard.
4
There were problems of interpretation with
this first set of data, since some of those
visaed in 2004–05 were not English tested
because they applied before the mid-June
starting point of the test requirement. Data
for the program year 2005–06 give a better
indication of the English language skills of
former overseas students since all of those
visaed had to take the test. Table 5 indicates
the results for the 880 visa subclass by major
country of citizenship.
Overall, 34 per cent of those visaed
under the 880 visa subclass did not achieve
the ‘competent’, band 6, English standard
on each of the four modules. This group all
reached 5 or 5.5 on all four modules of the
IELTS test. If they had not reached this level
they would have been ineligible to proceed
with their visa application. Some 43 per cent
of those from China fell short of the
Table 4: Onshore overseas higher education student completions in Australia 2004 and 880,
881 and 882 Visa approvals 2004–05 by country of citizenship
Source: DEST 2004 completion data and DIMIA 2004–05 visa issued data, unpublished
Note: *Excludes Hong Kong and Taiwan
Country All 880 Visas 881 Visas 882 Visas Rate of
completions approved approved approved completers
2004 2004–05 2004–05 2004–05 to visa
approvals
(per cent)
China* 7,061 2,655 92 53 39.7
Malaysia 4,805 1,113 99 83 27.0
India 3,455 2,433 47 68 73.7
Indonesia 3,405 1,408 112 44 45.9
Singapore 3,226 440 47 19 15.7
Hong Kong 2,906 863 85 44 34.1
Thailand 2,147 200 25 18 11.3
Taiwan 1,313 231 29 12 20.7
Korea, Republic of (South) 1,058 474 44 13 50.2
Japan 935 248 6 2 27.4
Canada 820 37 0 0 4.5
Viet Nam 714 200 24 27 35.2
Bangladesh 681 436 28 11 69.8
Sri Lanka 583 360 37 51 76.8
Other countries 9,186 1,880 180 163 24.2
Total 42,295 12,978 855 608 34.1
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 59
‘competent’ English standard. This is a
significant figure because, as noted, China
is the main source of growth in both the
numbers of overseas students enrolled in
Australian universities and of those gaining
PR under the onshore student visa
categories.
Table 5 shows that English deficiencies
are widespread across the other main source
countries. Even in the case of students
coming from countries where most would
do their secondary education in English,
there was a sizeable minority who could not
achieve the ‘competent’ English standard.
Two examples are Singapore and India,
where the proportion not achieving 6 was
17.8 and 17.3 per cent respectively. Almost
all of the students who gained permanent
residence despite only reaching IELTS band
5 (the English language threshold for
migration purposes) did so because their
nominated occupation (predominantly
accounting) was listed on the MODL. The
extra points they received on this account
more than compensated for the low score
(15 points) they received on the English
selection item.
Are the English language results
recorded by DIMA typical of the larger
overseas student population? They certainly
represent a sizeable share of all overseas
students who graduate in Australia. As
Table 5: 880 Visa approvals by language score and country of citizenship, 2005–06
Source: DIMIA 2005–06, unpublished
Note: *The dataset contained 1,196 ‘blanks’ on the language score variable, these cases have been omitted.
Country Language score Total* Per cent with
15 20 language
IELTS 5 IELTS 6 score of 15
China, Peoples Republic of 1,820 2,389 4,209 43.2
India 376 1,793 2,169 17.3
Malaysia 187 610 797 23.5
Indonesia 240 509 749 32.0
Hong Kong 293 390 683 42.9
Bangladesh 201 278 479 42.0
Korea, Republic of (South) 249 200 449 55.5
Sri Lanka 87 259 346 25.1
Singapore 46 212 258 17.8
Thailand 89 86 175 50.9
Japan 64 110 174 36.8
Vietnam 50 102 152 32.9
Pakistan 35 106 141 24.8
Taiwan 63 70 133 47.4
Nepal 57 62 119 47.9
Other countries 260 823 1,083 24.0
Total* 4,117 7,999 12,116 34.0
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 60
shown in Table 4, just over a third of all
overseas students who graduated in
Australia in 2004 (at the undergraduate or
postgraduate level) obtained a permanent
residence onshore student visa in 2004–05.
This calculation is based on the assumption
that the great majority of onshore student
visas in 2004–05 would have been issued
to students graduating in 2004 because they
are required to complete their application
within six months of finishing their
Australian training. The 2004–05 visa issued
data has been used because the Department
of Education, Science and Training (DEST)
has not released data on completions for
2005. The calculation does not take into
account those who gained a visa after
completing a trade course. However their
numbers were small in 2004–05.
The variation in the rate at which
students completing university courses
obtained an onshore visa imply that this
group may not be representative of all
overseas students studying in the higher
education sector in Australia. Because the
Chinese make up such a large share of those
gaining a visa (19 per cent in 2004–05)
compared with 16.7 per cent of those who
completed courses in 2004, there may be a
slight bias towards students with weak
English. On the other hand, as indicated
above, the data on the 12,116 former
overseas students for whom Table 5
provides information on their English level
exclude those who did reach IELTS band 5
and thus were not able to proceed with a
visa application. There is no information
available as to the size of this group.
There is no alternative source of firm
evidence concerning the English standards
of overseas students who graduate from
Australian universities, since universities do
not test the English skills of those who exit
their programs. This is one of the reasons
why there has been widespread speculation
on the issue. The DIMA results fill a big
hole. Though they cover only a subset of
all overseas students these results provide
an evidence-based window on the English
language skills of this subset. They also
happen to be a very important subset, since
they are now permanent residents of
Australia under the Government’s skilled
migration program.
THE MEANING OF IELTS
ASSESSMENT LEVELS
According to the language specialists con-
sulted in the course of this research there is
a large gap between bands 5 and 6 on the
IELTS test and between bands 6 and 7 or
above. Those who have reached band 5,
according to the IELTS Information for
Candidates brochure, have a ‘partial com-
mand of the language, coping with overall
meaning in most situations, though likely
to make many mistakes’.
5
Their communi-
cation capacity is well short of that required
to meet Australia’s higher education stand-
ards or the standards of employers of
professionals. Band 6 is much better. Those
who have reached this standard can man-
age normal commercial and social
relationships. But people who have reached
this standard are still not capable of con-
ducting a sophisticated discourse at the
professional level. As Mary Jane Hogan
(IELTS Chief Examiner, Australia) put it in
a personal communication, many would still
be at the stage of translating from their na-
tive language to English as they speak, listen
or read. It is only at band 7 that they begin
to think in English and thus are capable of
picking up the nuances of what is written
or said when acting as professionals. This
is why medicine and nursing authorities in
Australia require a minimum band of 7 be-
fore an overseas student or a person trained
overseas is permitted to practice as a doctor
or nurse. It is also why there is very strong
evidence that former students who have not
advanced beyond level 6 find it very diffi-
cult to obtain professional level positions
in fields like accounting.
6
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 61
HOW PRECISE IS THE IELTS
ASSESSMENT MEASURE?
During the course of 2005–06, there was a
three month rule in place, which stipulated
that PR visa applicants could only take an
IELTS test once every three months. Thus
those students wishing to take the IELTS
test prior to applying for PR, in effect, had
at best only two opportunities. If they did
not succeed in achieving level 5 on each of
the four modules it would be unlikely they
could take a further test because the visa
application had to be lodged within six
months of the completion of their Austral-
ian course.
Thus the results shown in Table 5
represent the outcomes from a very limited
number of attempts. Specialists who have
conducted IELTS tests indicate that overseas
students often achieve quite different
individual band scores on each of the
modules assessed. For example, a student
from India, especially one who had studied
in English at a regional Indian university,
may do quite well on the reading and writing
modules but poorly on the speaking module.
Those from China who normally would not
have studied at a secondary school or
university in English may find writing, as
well as speaking in English, tough going.
The varying results across the four
dimensions may also reflect the applicant’s
familiarity with the format of the test. Those
unfamiliar with the way the test is structured
may struggle with what is required on one
or other of the modules being measured.
Since 1 April 2006 the three month rule
no longer applies. Applicants can take the
test as many times as they like, even on
consecutive days if they can find a place at
one of the IELTS testing centres and can
afford the fees (currently $240 per test).
Demand for such places has escalated. It is
arguable that the proportion of applicants
who obtain a minimum 5 or 6 on each of
the modules will increase as a consequence
of them becoming familiar with the test. If
so, DIMA will receive more visa
applications as a result, especially from
those who could not gain 5 on all four
modules at their first attempt. This may not
mean that the English standard of those
applying for PR has improved, but rather
that applicants are coping better with the
demands of the IELTS test.
Clearly, the IELTS test results have to
be interpreted cautiously. Nonetheless they
provide a reasonably objective confirmation
of what has seemed obvious to many
university academics. This is that some of
the overseas students they encounter have
a limited command of English.
ENGLISH STANDARDS IN
AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITIES
There are two questions flowing from these
findings. The first is, how is it that those
who could only achieve ‘vocational’ Eng-
lish at the time of their PR test, gained
entrance to a higher education course in the
first place? As noted, for entrants to the
Higher Education sector, band 6 is required
before such a visa will be issued. The sec-
ond is, how did these students pass their
university examinations?
The key to the first question is that those
unable to reach the ‘competent’ standard
when seeking PR probably never reached
this standard. (It seems implausible that their
English could have deteriorated while in
Australia.) There is strong supportive
evidence for this hypothesis.
According to DIMA’s student visa
statistics, in 2005–06 there were 60,197
visas issued offshore which entitled the
recipient to begin studies in Australia’s
higher education or postgraduate research
sector. All would have had to possess
English language skills equivalent to the
band 6 IELTS standard before being offered
a university place. In the same year there
were 39,045 higher education and post
graduate research visas issued onshore. In
the case of those from China, there were
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 62
11,115 offshore visas and 11,528 onshore
visas. There was a similar ratio with several
other non-English-speaking background
countries. These countries include Hong
Kong, Korea and Taiwan. By contrast, the
great majority of higher education student
visas granted to students from India were
issued offshore. The implication is that East
Asian students (whose English tends to be
relatively weak) had to find an alternative
pathway into higher education in Australia
that did not require them to first achieve
level 6 on the IELTS test, whereas those
from India did not.
Almost all of those issued a higher
education visa onshore would have entered
Australia on some other student visa where
the English language requirements were less
stringent than for a higher education visa.
This could be a primary or secondary school
visa (IELTS 5 required for direct entry or
IELTS 4 if a preceding English language
course was included in the package), a non-
award course (5.5 required or 5 if the student
was contracted to take a preceding English
language course), a VET course where the
standard required was 5.5 or an English
Language Intensive Course for Overseas
Students (ELICOS) (where the visa allows
students to enter at band 5, or in some
circumstances 4). Once in Australia these
students subsequently moved into university
courses. Although they have to obtain a new
higher education visa before doing so,
DIMA does not require a further English
test. The Department will issue a higher
education visa if the student has completed
the required English language course or a
foundation year course provided by a
university, TAFE or private provider, or in
the case of those attending a secondary
school if they complete the year 12
Certificate of Education.
The universities do not require an entry
level English test for onshore applicants.
Like DIMA, they presume that the English
language, school and foundation year
courses deliver students who have the
requisite English skills. To judge from their
level of English as tested by DIMA prior to
their visa application this assumption is
unjustified.
Another likely contribution to the IELTS
test outcomes at the time of the PR
application is the standard of English
required for the issuance of a higher
education visa offshore. Though it is band
6, applicants can achieve this level if their
average score across the four modules
reaches 6. Applicants who have particular
weaknesses, perhaps in writing or speaking
English, may achieve an average of 6
because they do better than 6 on the other
modules tested. Once in Australia, if their
social life is contained amongst their co-
nationals, where they predominantly speak
in their home language, their spoken English
may not improve. When they confront the
DIMA English test prior to applying for a
permanent residence visa, they must score
at least 5 on each module. Any deficiency
on one of the dimensions, such as speaking,
will lead to failure.
HOW DO THEY PASS THEIR
EXAMINATIONS?
There is a mountain of anecdotal material
that many overseas students struggle to meet
their course requirements. Similarly, the
coping strategies are well known. Univer-
sities cope by lowering the English demands
in the courses they teach. This can be ac-
complished in subjects like accounting and
IT by focussing requirements on problems
which do not require essay writing skills,
or by setting group assignments in which
the students with better English help out.
Students cope—where they are required to
write essays—by getting help from col-
leagues who are competent English
speakers.
To my knowledge very few universities
confront the English language problem by
requiring a formal English test and then
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 63
mandating supplementary English courses
for students who are deficient. There is
widespread recognition of the English
problem. But if a particular university takes
unilateral action to require remedial courses
this would add to the fees the overseas
students must pay and put the institution at
a competitive disadvantage relative to the
competition.
PROFESSIONAL ACCREDITING
AUTHORITIES AND ENGLISH
LANGUAGE STANDARDS
As noted, some accrediting authorities, as
in the nursing and medical fields, already
require a minimum band 7 as one of their
criteria for accreditation. But the accredit-
ing authorities covering accounting and IT,
which are by far the two most significant
occupations for onshore permanent resi-
dence visas (see Table 1), have not specified
minimum English standards. They have
effectively defaulted to the DIMA minimum
specified for the General Skilled Migration
program, that is 5 across each of the four
modules measured in the IELTS test.
This is clearly unsatisfactory, since those
with level 5 English appear to have difficulty
in functioning as professionals in Australia.
The Australian Government has devolved
the responsibility of determining whether
applicants have the qualifications to work
at the professional level in their chosen field
to profession-specific accrediting bodies.
These bodies are not fulfilling this role if
they do not take account of the applicants’
English communication skills. In
accounting, IT, engineering and the like,
there is increasing emphasis in the
workplace on communication with clients
and colleagues rather than on narrow
technical skills. The Australian Computer
Society, for example, has not come to grips
with this situation.
7
Nor have the accounting
bodies. However the director of education
in CPA Australia has recently stated that the
CPA would support a minimum IELTS level
of 7 for accounting.
8
The Minister for
Immigration and Multicultural Affairs,
Amanda Vanstone responded by reminding
the CPA and the other two accounting
accrediting bodies (the Institute of Chartered
Accountants and the National Institute of
Accountants) that they have the power to
set a higher standard. The accrediting
authorities have been reluctant to act. One
stated concern was that they did not want
to take on the function of checking language
skills.
9
PROSPECTS FOR CHANGE
It is unlikely that the universities will act
unilaterally on the issue. Their main con-
cern is to maintain growth in their overseas
student enrolments. They are self govern-
ing, autonomous bodies, not subject to
competency audits. There is an audit mech-
anism conducted by the Australian
Universities Quality Agency (AUQA). It
focuses on the processes universities put in
place to deliver good teaching and research
outcomes. For example AUQA has recent-
ly completed an audit of Central Queensland
University (CQU).
10
It is at times quite crit-
ical, as with CQU’s dependence on casual
teaching staff in the metropolitan campus-
es serving overseas students. However there
is no reference at all to the English language
standards of the overseas students enrolled
or to what this might mean for the quality
of their educational outcomes.
The overseas students themselves
continue to enrol despite the impact that
their English language shortcomings may
be having on the learning process. They
want a good education, but for a large
minority the prime concern is to secure a
credential which will lead to PR.
The one powerful institution in Australia
which has a strong motive to take a lead in
this situation is DIMA. As noted above,
former overseas students currently
constitute nearly half of the migrants
selected under its points tested skilled visa
People and Place, vol. 14, no. 4, 2006, page 64
References
1
See <hhtp://www.ielts.org/>.
2
B. Birrell, L. Hawthorne and S. Richardson, Evaluation of the General Skilled Migration Categories,
Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Canberra, March 2006, p. 76
3
For further detail of the current points system and the implications of MODL listing see ibid, Chapter One.
4
ibid., p. 30
5
IELTS, Information for candidates, May 2006
6
ibid., pp. 84-87; B. Birrell, The Changing Face of the Accounting Profession in Australia, CPA Australia,
2006
7
B. Kinnaird, ‘The impact of the skilled migration program on domestic opportunity in information
technology’, People and Place, vol. 13, no. 4, 2005, pp. 73–74
8
Australian Financial Review, 22 November 2006
9
Australian Financial Review, 27 November 2006
10
Australian Universities Quality Agency, Report of an Audit of Central Queensland University, February
2006
11
Joint Media Release Senator Amanda Vanstone, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and
Julie Bishop, Minister for Education, Science and Training, 8 May 2006
12
ibid.
categories. If these graduates lack the
communication skills needed in today’s
skilled labour market this presents a serious
threat to one of DIMA’s objectives, that is
to supply skilled workers in areas of
shortage which are crucial to the functioning
of the Australian economy.
Reflecting these concerns, the
Australian Government is about to short-
circuit the situation described above.
Following the publication of the Evaluation
of the General Skilled Migration Categories
report in March 2006, the Ministers for
Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and
Education, Science and Training announced
that from mid-2007, the ‘base level of
English language proficiency’ needed to
gain a general skilled migration visa will
be increased.
11
This is likely to mean that
the threshold English language requirement
for such visas will be raised from 5 to 6 on
all four modules of the IELTS test. The two
Ministers also indicated that they favour an
increase in the points awarded to applicants
with English above band 6.
12
This leadership increases the likelihood
that the accrediting authorities will take a
tougher line on English standards. As
indicated, CPA Australia has already
announced its readiness to do so and my
discussions with assessing authorities
suggests that they are likely to converge on
band 7 as the appropriate minimum standard
for professional occupations. It will take
little administrative effort to implement this
standard. All the accrediting authorities need
to do is to require that applicants submit the
results of their English language test—
required as part of their visa
application—along with their academic
credentials when they seek accreditation for
immigration purposes.
These prospects imply that universities
will have to pay closer attention to the
English language standards of overseas
students. If there is no guarantee that
students will be able to meet the higher
English language standards when they
finish their courses then those with an
interest in PR are less likely to enrol in the
first place. It is to be hoped that this sets in
place a virtuous circle as universities strive
to provide courses which will meet both the
curriculum demands of the respective
professions and the necessary
communication standards.
