There are currently four European countries that do not charge tuition fees
for university studies: Finland, Germany, Norway, and Iceland. Get set to strike
Finland off the list though. In the wake of a government proposal tabled in
October by Minister of Education, Science and Communications Krista Kiuru,
Finland will introduce tuition fees for non-European students as of 2016.
The proposal was unexpected. While the question of international tuition has been regularly debated in the Finnish parliament in recent years, it has not received strong support in political or academic circles. Indeed, earlier proposals to raise fees for students from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) have been widely panned by student groups in Finland. And a pilot project to levy fees at 19 Finnish institutions concluded earlier this year with no strong findings in favour of international fees, and little apparent enthusiasm for the subject among participating universities and polytechnics.
Minister Kiuru’s proposal would see fees apply for students from outside the EEA – that is, the 27 European Union members (ratification is pending for a 28th member: Croatia) as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway – beginning in 2016. While institutions will have discretion in setting their own fees, the government proposal prescribes a minimum tuition of €4,000 (US$5,000) per year, to apply only for degree programmes taught in languages other than Finnish or Swedish. Exchange students will not be affected by the new policy.
A recent item in University World News quotes, in translation, from a preliminary report on the impact of international students in Finland prepared by the Ministry of Education’s Centre for International Mobility, “The reported Statistics Finland figures show that, during the last ten plus years, the number of foreign students in Finland’s higher education institutions has tripled, being almost 20,000 in 2013. In particular, the numbers of students originating from Asian and African countries have increased substantially in recent years… Of the foreigners [who] graduated in 2011, more than two thirds were still in Finland a year after graduation, while two thirds of the ‘stayers’ were in employment.”
The most recent figures from UNESCO indicate that Finland hosted 17,636 foreign students in 2012, with the top 15 source countries accounting for nearly 70% of that enrolment as follows:
Samu Seitsalo, Director of the Centre for International Mobility (CIMO), adds a broader perspective as to the potential economic impacts of the tuition policy: “From a university and polytechnic perspective, it is a positive move, as it would mean more money for the institutions. As long as the proportion of people coming to study remains the same and the state continues to pay its part, the universities can use the tuition fees as they see fit. In terms of the national economy, however, it is a trickier issue. How that plays out will be largely dependent on how many students come to Finland from outside the EU and the EEA after tuition fees are implemented.”
Student groups and faculty associations, meanwhile, are firmly opposed and question the underlying business case for introducing fees for international students. Jarmo Kallunki is the education policy officer at the National Union of University Students in Finland and, he, for example, has laid out a detailed case against the introduction of international fees in a recent guest column for University World News where he:
The Swedish Higher Education Authority reports that non-EEA enrolment in Sweden dropped roughly 80% from fall 2010 to fall 2011 (the point at which international fees were introduced).
As the following table reflects, non-European enrolment has recovered modestly in the years since, in large part due to the recruitment efforts of Swedish institutions (and the country’s international education bodies) and with expanded scholarship support for visiting students.
Please note that the term “free mover” is used in the table to indicate students who come to Sweden outside of a formal exchange programme (including non-EEA students which accounted for about 61% of “free movers” in Sweden in fall 2010) and are therefore more likely to have been affected by the introduction of foreign student fees.
Incoming higher education entrants for Sweden by region and student category, 2010-2013. Source: Swedish Higher Education Authority
This sharp shift in enrolment from 2010 to 2011 is shown even more graphically in the following chart.
Incoming higher education entrants during the academic years 2003/04-2012/13, total enrolment as well as free mover and exchange enrolments. Source: Swedish Higher Education Authority
It doesn’t automatically follow that the impact on non-EEA enrolment would be the same in Finland as it was in Sweden. However, the similarities between the two countries are notable. They share a similar geography and competitive profile in the global education market. And Finland today has a level of international enrolment comparable to that of Sweden in autumn 2010.
One important difference, however, is that non-EEA students account for a slightly higher proportion of Finnish enrolment today (than was the case for non-European students in Sweden in 2010) – 60% for Finland versus 50% for Sweden – and may therefore have somewhat greater exposure to enrolment declines following the introduction of international student fees.
There are of course other variables that could mitigate any negative impacts arising from the introduction of international fees in 2016, such as any steps that the Finnish government and Finnish institutions take to expand their marketing and recruitment efforts, and also the expansion of scholarships or other financial supports for non-EEA students.
As we have noted in the past, such strategies can play an important part in countering any downward pressure on student numbers arising from tuition increases. No doubt such measures, along with other key implementation details such as the actual tuition rates established by Finnish institutions, will ultimately determine the long-term impacts of Finland’s new policy.
The proposal was unexpected. While the question of international tuition has been regularly debated in the Finnish parliament in recent years, it has not received strong support in political or academic circles. Indeed, earlier proposals to raise fees for students from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) have been widely panned by student groups in Finland. And a pilot project to levy fees at 19 Finnish institutions concluded earlier this year with no strong findings in favour of international fees, and little apparent enthusiasm for the subject among participating universities and polytechnics.
Minister Kiuru’s proposal would see fees apply for students from outside the EEA – that is, the 27 European Union members (ratification is pending for a 28th member: Croatia) as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway – beginning in 2016. While institutions will have discretion in setting their own fees, the government proposal prescribes a minimum tuition of €4,000 (US$5,000) per year, to apply only for degree programmes taught in languages other than Finnish or Swedish. Exchange students will not be affected by the new policy.
Inbound mobility today
Finland hosts roughly 20,000 international students today, including both exchange students from within Europe and visiting students from beyond the EEA. Roughly half of them stay on to work and contribute to the Finnish economy following their studies.A recent item in University World News quotes, in translation, from a preliminary report on the impact of international students in Finland prepared by the Ministry of Education’s Centre for International Mobility, “The reported Statistics Finland figures show that, during the last ten plus years, the number of foreign students in Finland’s higher education institutions has tripled, being almost 20,000 in 2013. In particular, the numbers of students originating from Asian and African countries have increased substantially in recent years… Of the foreigners [who] graduated in 2011, more than two thirds were still in Finland a year after graduation, while two thirds of the ‘stayers’ were in employment.”
The most recent figures from UNESCO indicate that Finland hosted 17,636 foreign students in 2012, with the top 15 source countries accounting for nearly 70% of that enrolment as follows:
- China (2,129 students);
- Russian Federation (2,107);
- Nepal (976);
- Nigeria (939);
- Vietnam (904);
- Estonia (772);
- Pakistan (603);
- Bangladesh (591);
- India (557);
- Sweden (556);
- Germany (525);
- Ethiopia (454);
- Iran, Islamic Rep. (401);
- Kenya (388);
- Ghana (382).
Reaction thus far
The Finnish government has sent its tuition proposal out for review by the country’s higher education institutions, and, as news outlet YLE reports, “It now appears that universities and polytechnics in the country are agreeing to the motion, as a comment round organised by the Ministry of Education and Culture shows that they predominately approve… A number of higher education institutions in Finland support the implementation of tuition fees, but wish to keep the authority to collect and determine the tuition amount themselves.”Samu Seitsalo, Director of the Centre for International Mobility (CIMO), adds a broader perspective as to the potential economic impacts of the tuition policy: “From a university and polytechnic perspective, it is a positive move, as it would mean more money for the institutions. As long as the proportion of people coming to study remains the same and the state continues to pay its part, the universities can use the tuition fees as they see fit. In terms of the national economy, however, it is a trickier issue. How that plays out will be largely dependent on how many students come to Finland from outside the EU and the EEA after tuition fees are implemented.”
Student groups and faculty associations, meanwhile, are firmly opposed and question the underlying business case for introducing fees for international students. Jarmo Kallunki is the education policy officer at the National Union of University Students in Finland and, he, for example, has laid out a detailed case against the introduction of international fees in a recent guest column for University World News where he:
- questions the competitiveness of Finnish education relative to other international destinations;
- outlines the current economic impacts of foreign students in Finland;
- argues that the introduction of fees for non-EEA students will “cause international student numbers to plunge” – with a corresponding decline in the foreign capital contributed by students for living expenses;
- and explores the longer-term impacts of students staying on in Finland after their studies.
A cautionary tale
Sweden introduced fees for non-EEA students in 2011 and non-European enrolment in the country promptly plummeted.The Swedish Higher Education Authority reports that non-EEA enrolment in Sweden dropped roughly 80% from fall 2010 to fall 2011 (the point at which international fees were introduced).
As the following table reflects, non-European enrolment has recovered modestly in the years since, in large part due to the recruitment efforts of Swedish institutions (and the country’s international education bodies) and with expanded scholarship support for visiting students.
Please note that the term “free mover” is used in the table to indicate students who come to Sweden outside of a formal exchange programme (including non-EEA students which accounted for about 61% of “free movers” in Sweden in fall 2010) and are therefore more likely to have been affected by the introduction of foreign student fees.
Incoming higher education entrants for Sweden by region and student category, 2010-2013. Source: Swedish Higher Education Authority
This sharp shift in enrolment from 2010 to 2011 is shown even more graphically in the following chart.
Incoming higher education entrants during the academic years 2003/04-2012/13, total enrolment as well as free mover and exchange enrolments. Source: Swedish Higher Education Authority
It doesn’t automatically follow that the impact on non-EEA enrolment would be the same in Finland as it was in Sweden. However, the similarities between the two countries are notable. They share a similar geography and competitive profile in the global education market. And Finland today has a level of international enrolment comparable to that of Sweden in autumn 2010.
One important difference, however, is that non-EEA students account for a slightly higher proportion of Finnish enrolment today (than was the case for non-European students in Sweden in 2010) – 60% for Finland versus 50% for Sweden – and may therefore have somewhat greater exposure to enrolment declines following the introduction of international student fees.
There are of course other variables that could mitigate any negative impacts arising from the introduction of international fees in 2016, such as any steps that the Finnish government and Finnish institutions take to expand their marketing and recruitment efforts, and also the expansion of scholarships or other financial supports for non-EEA students.
As we have noted in the past, such strategies can play an important part in countering any downward pressure on student numbers arising from tuition increases. No doubt such measures, along with other key implementation details such as the actual tuition rates established by Finnish institutions, will ultimately determine the long-term impacts of Finland’s new policy.
Did you enjoy this article? Then don't miss the next one! Sign up for free daily and/or weekly e-alerts today.
Related
France
repeals controversial foreign student and graduate visa
restrictions
Australia
enters visa talks with Greece as youth travel industry faces
crisis
Key
growth drivers behind increasing enrolment in Gulf states
Foreign-based
agencies may soon be banned from operating in China
Social
networks: students love Tumblr
South
Korean student mobility takes a dip
Is
employer engagement in education the next source of competitive
advantage?
Western
universities expanding joint ventures in China
No comments:
Post a Comment