Login / Join
Immigration Daily News Hidden cameras catch dodgy education brokers agreeing to use fake documents for student enrolments as if it’s all just routine.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 4675
- 5 Comments
Hidden cameras catch dodgy education brokers agreeing to use fake documents for student enrolments as if it’s all just routine.
ABCs 4-Corners investigation this week reported that education agents in China are blatantly cheating the enrolment system and putting at risk Australia’s education industry. The report reveals an industry in “a sorry state: corruption, widespread plagiarism, cheating and exploitation.”
Every University the ICAC (the Independent Commission Against Corruption) had spoken to has said they have had problems with their brokers at one time or other in regard to false documentation for the purposes of enrolment, according to the report.
THE IRONY IS THAT THE UNIVERSITIES SEEM TO HAVE NO QUALMS about continuing to use these unregulated brokers who are colluding with students to falsify documents for entry into Australia. The risk then is that these unregulated brokers are going to put applicants through to the university with fake qualifications, or who they know have cheated on tests, or who are trying to undertake some sort of visa fraud.
The ABC used hidden cameras in their investigation of some of the biggest education brokers that recruit for Australian universities in Beijing and found some were willing to accept forged documents; and others were advising students on how to avoid the tough English language requirements.
Among the named agencies were EduGlobal and Shinyway – which recruits on behalf of many Australia’s most prestigious universities.
However, the problems don’t stop at the enrolment stage. The report revealed that ICAC has received complaints of students being exploited, students cheating, and students bribing academics, and academics being pressured to turn a blind eye to student performance. Academics on the program say that there is an “unwritten rule to pass students”.
“Universities are fully aware there are problems with international student businesses they operate,” Dr Robert Waldersee, Executive Director of Corruption Prevention, ICAC told the ABC, adding that “The conditions within the university are conducive to corruption.”
Chancellors from various universities, provided statements to the ABC about the matter, but refused to appear on the program to answer the allegations of corruption and misconduct.
The government has been aggressively promoting the education industry internationally. It is an industry which generates an estimated $16.5 billion per year. Trade Minister, Andrew Robb said Australia could teach 10 million international students within the Asia-Pacific region within 10 years if new policies were adopted.
However, major reform is required to protect the integrity and growth of the sector. The government recently ordered ‘a major research and scoping project into a quality framework for education agencies, marking a substantive push forward towards a possible national accreditation or ratings system’.
The Migration Alliance has been lobbying against DIBPs registration of these education brokers and has called for all persons giving immigration assistance to be Registered Migration Agents. Documents on the internet indicate that Shinyway and Eduglobal are registered with the DIBP as “Agents Participating in Electronic Visa Application Lodgement for Assessment Levels 2 and 3.”
The ABC did not discuss DIBPs role in the registration of education brokers. Will DIBP stay under the radar or put out a statement and come clean on the matter? It surely needs to state what action they will take against the brokers named in the report and on their register; and more importantly how exactly they plan to deal with the matters raised in by the ABC in connection with education brokers.
Comments
-
Friday, 24 April 2015If there would be no education agents, there would be no problem. Simple. There would be no students either, as the illusion that they'll just keep flocking to Australia without local trusted guidance and happily pay serious tens of thousands for Australian education is sooo illusory it is already funny. Eliminate the agents and you have just poured the baby out with the bathwater.
OR, you can regulate them, just like RMA-s are regulated. "Offshore agents going rough" of course, because they are completely unaccountable for their actions. MA is lobbying hard against unregistered immigration practice especially overseas, where exactly is this situation with education agents any different? The education agents that run an Australian registered company and office are more forced to do the right thing for simply being onshore and held accountable more easily, while the offshore ones get away with any lie and cheat. But why would they fear anything? The Australian law does not apply to them, and colleges/universities accept students from anyone who recruits them in big numbers they are so desperate for the money. So if you want a change, change THIS! Make agents accountable and force offshores to either ally with a regulated onshore agency or cease to recruit for Australia. Isn't that the same RMA-s fight for in the immigration assistance arena?
Off the record, I am an RMA... -
Friday, 24 April 2015
Hello all, I am an RMA, I've lived and worked in China since 1987, though in recent years live in Australia and commute to China.
Edith is correct, without the agents, there would be no students. In all the years that I've recruited students, the last institutions to produce creative marketing initiatives were the TAFE's with their 2+2 programs (2 years of TAFE operated study in China and two years to a bachelor degree in Australia). Since then, the marketing programs have oscillated between adding more agents, cutting the number of agents, putting higher hurdles on agents and so it goes. The whole recruitment program is operated by agents.
But the problem goes beyond defrauding the universities, the same agents who create the fraudulent documents for the university processes, do the visa applications. The DIBP has curtailed RMAs from making online visa applications, but encourages and support the education agents in the continuance of the fraud on the DIBP. -
Monday, 27 April 2015
Couple of thoughts for the reports are;
For the regulations, I think Australia should have a guide line for the education agents like for RMAs (not by government though). IEAA is currently is doing research on the quality assurance framework for education agents. https://www.ieaa.org.au/news/ieaa-to-scope-quality-assurance-framework-for-education-agents
For the US, they says US does not have education agents but then what is American International Recruitment Council (AIRC http://www.airc-education.org/)? My understanding is that AIRC was founded in 2008 following Australia's international education model.
Lastly, the report says "Since 2012, the government asked universities not DIBP to determine who gets visa to enter country to study ..." Is Streamlined Visa Processing (SVP) on 24 March 2012 could be summarized as giving the decision power to universities? Then what we have done as RMAs? SVP should be abolished giving the right to DIBP who should be doing the job so that universities can focus on the quality of education not the risk management of SVP. -
Tuesday, 05 May 2015
I have run an education agency in Australia and overseas for over 20 years.
This huge industry needs to be protected by some practical (and realistic) rules and regulations.
There should be an authority to set guidelines for both onshore and offshore agents. Australian Educational institutions must take part to work with the same directions.
University and private Vet sectors have different problems when dealing with agents.
For example, private Vet colleges should stop allowing the upfront commission deduction on tuition fee, especially by the offshore education agents. Commission/agent fee must be paid to traceable invoices only,however the agent fee should be collected when the job is done ( after the course commencement). The upfront fee deduction creates problems if money being handled by a dodgy agent when it comes to refund if student visa not granted.
Those students don't read refund policy (in English) and never realise their rights to have full tuition fee refunded from school and from the agent if they don't get a student visa. Just a thought.
J T Sydney
Immigration blog
As soon as the universities stop paying commissions to third parties and stop encouraging clients to deal with their selling agents the more transparent and cheaper these arrangements will be. I simply do not accept the hypothesis sought to be advanced by some commentators that these "problems" of false documentation, the selling of inappropriate course etc by offshore agents are going to disappear with the formulation of some national code. the obvious solution is to shut down education agents and to charge RMAs with the responsibilities that attach to this very important industry.