Monthly Archives: April 2009

Use of “Agents” by US Institutions

Standard

In my quick analysis of the higher educational landscape in the US, there
appears to be several categories of institutions:

1. Those that are against the use of agents because they have a
philosophical, moral, and ethical disagreement with the very idea of paying
someone to recruit a student.

2. Those that use agents, but rather not speak about it publicly because
they are concerned that it may affect their brand or image

3. Those that use agents and are open and enthusiastic about it
4. Those that wish they could use agents, but do not have the support of
their top administration.

5. Those that are researching the idea, but are yet to make a decision.

6. Those that have no interest at all in the topic because international
student recruitment is not high priority.
What did I miss?

In the meantime, UK, Canadian, and Australian universities are efficiently
and enthusiastically using agents to achieve their recruitment goals, while
US institutions are waiting and watching.
Further, many international students are making institutional choices based
on what their agent tells them. Sometimes they make the right choice if
they are working with the right agent, and at other times they realize too
late that they received the wrong advice. US institutions interested in
international student recruitment must engage in open discussions on this
issue if we are to attract the best and the brightest. Is anyone aware of
list of US institutions that use agents?

Dr. Uma G. Gupta is the President of USAsiaEdu, a higher education
consulting company, that offers cross-cultural recruitment, retention,
and transitional services for institutions. She can be reached at
exec@USAsiaEdu.com

Advertisements