KEY POINTS:
A study by Deloitte and an International Student Barometer update have confirmed that New Zealand's international education sector is losing ground to other countries.
The Ministry of Education has identified a number of other problems, one of which is the inefficiency of an industry populated by a large number of small providers, with varying levels of experience and expertise.
But the real problem is that New Zealand's laws and regulations do not safeguard the standard expected by Asian customers in particular. "Ghetto education" is a term frequently used by Chinese parents to refer to ill-equipped schools operating in run-down buildings but boasting a big name.
Unregulated agents, who aggressively recruit students by "selling" those schools in return for a large commission, are another contributing factor.
The 1986 Fair Trading Act does not necessarily stop those schools from passing themselves off as "national" or "international" institutes, or "Auckland" or "New Zealand" academies.
In China, the law reserves such titles for reputable educational providers whose name matches their national or regional status. Big names and their perceived standing are, therefore, attractive to Chinese students and their parents.
But upon arrival and discovery of what they really are, their hearts sink, and so does New Zealand's reputation.
For Chinese students and their parents, this country has a credibility issue.
That is relevant because the reputation of the industry and the associated image of the country determine, to a large degree, what kind of candidates are being targeted.
Reported crimes involving people of Asian ethnicity in recent years were committed predominantly by international students, not settled migrants. Ordinary New Zealanders do not often understand the difference, which means that the whole Asian community is unfairly held responsible.
Tension between Asians and the locals is unashamedly apparent.
However, Asian communities here cannot do anything about this unless the Fair Trading Act is improved so that at least the names of those schools are representative.
A licensing system to regulate agents would also provide greater protection to prospective students and prevent them from being exploited by unscrupulous operators.
Some quality schools, who could not afford or are unwilling to pay a hefty commission to such agents, have complained they are less competitive than schools that are willing to do so.
It is alleged the money paid to the agents as commission could be as much as half the entire tuition fee paid by the students. Licensing would help to ensure all education providers operate on an equal footing.
So far, bad publicity has raised fears and increased watchdog attention in many Asian countries. China's Ministry of Education, for example, has started a website to update information about which schools can be trusted and which cannot.
The coverage of crimes involving international students has also scared off many potential students.
Unsurprisingly, the number of international students has dropped from 127,000 in 2002 to 93,000 last year. Numbers from China, in particular, have plunged - from 66,000 in 2003 to 32,000 last year.
By contrast, international student numbers in Australia have grown by 6 and 11 per cent in the past two years, to 384,000 last year. This includes sustained growth from China, India and Korea.
The present situation is grossly unfair for those good students who are genuinely studying here. Equally, it is not fair for good reputable schools, whose names are tarnished by the cowboys in the industry.
For many concerned parties, the whole export education industry lacks vision and a long-term strategy.
Its policy, matching this country's immigration laws since 1987, is volatile and unpredictable.
The inevitable result is that New Zealand, compared with its rivals such as Britain, the United States and Australia, is losing ground in the recruitment of high-quality and desirable students.
More importantly, if immigration defines who future New Zealanders are, those international students - at least some of them, according to the current immigration policy - will determine who our future immigrants are.
LOSING OUT
* The number of international students has dropped from 127,000 in 2002 to 93,000 last year.
* Chinese student numbers have plunged from 66,000 in 2003 to 32,000 last year.
* International students in Australia have increased 6 per cent and 11 per cent in the past two years, to 384,000 last year.
* Those figures include sustained growth from China, India and Korea.
* Raymond Huo, an Auckland lawyer, is chairman of the KiwiAsian Development Forum. He also produces and presents bilingual news review talkshows on Radio Chinese AM936 and Sky TV 312.
