Student mobility is big business. Behind the process of getting students to apply to and then attend a university or college thousands of miles away from home is an industry that’s worth billions of dollars a year. And one of the OGs of that industry is a company called IDP, which grew out of an Australian government scheme beginning in 1969, and which for the first 37 years of its existence was owned by a consortium of Australian universities.
Over the decades, IDP diversified away from simple student recruitment in a number of ways. It also left university control about 20 years ago and evolved into a publicly listed company on the Melbourne Stock Exchange, which at one point was worth over $10 billion. Few companies have had a better view of the explosion of international student enrollment in Anglosphere countries over the past decade, and few have been more exposed as one by one those countries began to turn away international students over the past three years.
With me today to talk about all things IDP and student mobility is IDP’s Christine Wach. She’s IDP’s Senior Vice President of Partnerships and Stakeholder Engagement. We cover a lot in this interview, from the company’s historical evolution to the current state of the international education market, who the new big players are, and how the market will evolve over the next few years.
It’s an interesting blend of past and future from an observer who’s had lots of time to think about both. And so without further ado, let’s turn things over to Christine.
The World of Higher Education Podcast
Episode 4.31 | How IDP Sees the Next Era of International Education
Transcript
Alex Usher (AU): Christine, tell us about how IDP started. Why did Australian universities feel the need to create a joint service to recruit students abroad? Everyone else in the world just goes out individually and does it. Why did they do it differently?
Christine Wach (CW): IDP has a pretty interesting origin story. We were started by the Australian government in 1969 as the Australian Asian Universities Cooperation Scheme, or AAUCS. Initially, we were really focused on skills exchange programs with academics from Southeast Asia and Australia, specifically in the areas of agriculture and food science.
At the time, we were a not-for-profit, and this was all done in collaboration with Australian universities. Our initial goal was really to build capacity with Australia’s Southeast Asian neighbours. Over time, that work developed into a broader international education mission.
In 1981, we transitioned and became the International Development Program, or IDP Education, as we’re known today. It wasn’t really until 1986 that we shifted our model to a more commercially focused student placement business, which is one of the things we’re most famous for today. That happened when the Australian government changed the rules to enable international students to study in Australian universities at scale.
Given that we already had strong university collaboration at our core, it was a very natural step to become a leading student placement provider — formerly known as an agent — for students coming to Australia.
I think over the years we’ve grown and our model has evolved to cater to more destinations, but through it all our purpose has remained consistent. At the heart of everything we do is supporting students and really transforming people’s lives through international education.
AU: You were started by the government, and your ‘clients’ were universities, but eventually you became, as you say, an independent corporation. How did that happen?
CW: The shift happened gradually as we expanded from a university consortium initiative into a large-scale international education services organization. As our footprint grew, IDP needed more flexibility and more capital to invest in new markets, technology, operations, and capabilities — things that are really harder to build under a purely sector-owned structure.
A major milestone for us was when we listed on the Australian Securities Exchange, or ASX, in 2015, which really helped fund growth. It really positioned us for global scale. Some universities still remain shareholders in IDP today.
AU: So, in a sense you’re public, but you still have significant institutional shareholding. But you were growing quite big before 2015. What were the key events that made IDP what it is before the IPO? What were the things that really pushed you to become the kind of big multinational company that you are?
CW: There are so many milestones in our history given that we’re almost sixty years old, but I’ll call out a few that I think have really defined us the most.
In 1989, we established IELTS, and we co-own IELTS with the British Council and Cambridge University in the UK. It’s gone on to become the world’s largest and most trusted English test for high-stakes migration and academic study.
In 2009, we shifted away from just focusing on Australia and began supporting students to study in other destinations. Originally, the second destination was the US, but now we send students to the US, Canada, the UK, Ireland, New Zealand, and more recently, Malaysia as well.
That’s really key to who we are today. Our commitment is still to place students in the right country, right program, right course, and right school to set them up for success.
In 2017, we acquired the Hotcourses Group, which really boosted our digital capability and shifted us from being a bricks-and-mortar company to a multi-channel experience, which we’re known for today.
And then in more recent years, you’ve seen us evolve how we deliver the IELTS test, change our models for how we connect with and support students, and introduce new service lines. We now have things like Student Essentials, which is designed to support students once they arrive in their destination country with things like accommodation, banking, insurance, et cetera.
More recently, we’ve also been shifting to become more AI-enabled and more flexible given how fast-changing the market is right now. But even as we evolve and become more AI-enabled, at the core of IDP we still keep the human connection and student support central to everything we do.
AU: I’ll come back to the AI thing in a second. But your big lines of business right now are IELTS and student mobility. Do you view Hotcourses as a separate line of business?
CW: Yes and no. The Hotcourses site still exists as IDP Hotcourses, but we integrate it as a service for our clients, so it’s all part of IDP. Initially it was run separately, but now it’s really merged into the IDP world.
AU: Would you call those your three main areas of business, or are there others we haven’t touched on yet?
CW: The two largest and main lines of business are traditional student placement and language testing. We also have marketing services, which include Hotcourses, and data and research services, which we call IQ Services.
That’s where you’ll see things like our Emerging Futures research series — we’re currently releasing Emerging Futures Nine, which is our student research. That team is based in London and manages all of that work.
We also have some smaller lines of business too, including language teaching in Southeast Asia and some UK-specific services for the domestic university market there.
AU: That’s pretty diversified. So how does AI fit into all that? Is AI mainly something you’re using in marketing and student placement, or does it have a more horizontal effect across a larger percentage of the business?
CW: I think it’s definitely the latter. From our student surveys, we know students are already using AI heavily in their search process. Research is showing that about sixty percent of searches are now zero-click searches, meaning people don’t actually end up landing on a website. So that’s transforming all aspects of our business.
Operationally, internally, we’re also using AI-enabled services in student counselling, and we’re doing a lot of research and development around AI in language testing as well. So really, it’s having an impact horizontally across everything we do.
AU: Christine, I want to turn now to market conditions over the last few years, because it’s really been a rollercoaster — and not just here in Canada. In 2021 and 2022, we saw a huge explosion in international student numbers right across the Anglosphere: the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand — well, not New Zealand in 2021, but still, the big jumps in numbers post-COVID.
Now, I understand why supply increased. There were more universities wanting to accept international students because, you know, it meant more money. But what was behind the increase in demand? Why did hundreds of thousands of students suddenly decide they had to study abroad? That’s the part I never really see discussed very much. What’s your guess?
CW: There are a few things. Obviously, there was rising global mobility and more skills-driven career pathways. There was also the digitization of student decision-making — students were able to research and compare more options online than ever before.
I think there was increased demand for higher-quality institutions and more practical options available in the major English-speaking destinations. But I also think there was a connection to migration that people weren’t really talking about before COVID.
For the first time after the pandemic, we started talking about migration and education together. During the pandemic, provincial governments and institutions here in Canada worked closely to align policies that allowed students to enter Canada, and I think that really contributed to the huge growth in demand and students seeing the opportunity.
When we look at our student research, ROI — particularly around employment opportunities like co-op education, internships, and post-study or post-grad work permits — are major driving factors for students and parents.
I think the opportunity to study in the Big Four destinations was driven largely by that connection.
AU: Staying on the subject of that explosion of international students in 2021, 2022, and 2023, do you think universities and colleges in the Anglosphere actually did right by that growth in international students?
Students want a quality experience, but there were so many people coming into these countries for education — and I’m not just talking about Canada. The UK was arguably an even bigger case. Did institutions manage to provide a quality experience to all these students, or did they fall short? And if so, why?
CW: In many places quality did hold up, but obviously the rapid growth exposed a lot of capacity constraints.
First of all, I think a lot of institutions genuinely did care, and still do care, and they worked really hard to support students arriving into a post-pandemic environment — especially students who may have been onboarded remotely from their home countries.
But when volume grows faster than accommodation, staffing, and local services, students feel it most in areas like housing affordability, wait times for support, consistency of onboarding, wellbeing services, and job opportunities.
I think the lesson is that sustainable growth needs coordinated planning, so that enrolment growth, housing supply, and student supports all scale together.
This is also consistent with what we’re seeing in our Emerging Futures Nine research. Students are weighing destinations much more carefully now, with things like cost of living and overall value playing a much larger role in decision-making.
That lived experience — especially around housing — becomes central to the reputation and long-term demand of a destination or institution.
AU: These are some pretty big changes in student mobility. How does it affect IDP? I mean, obviously you’re moving into Malaysia, and I would guess that’s one consequence of the recent changes. But are your fortunes kind of indifferent to where students go, or does the shift away from Anglophone countries affect your bottom line disproportionately?
CW: IDP is diversified across destinations and services, so we’re not tied to a single country in the way a mono-destination model might be. But policies in major destinations still matter because they influence volume, conversion, and student confidence in those destinations.
And conversion is a big thing — not just the number of applications, but what actually converts into enrolments.
Our research consistently shows that students want clarity. They don’t like this constantly changing landscape. So we use our research and insights, including Emerging Futures Nine, to understand where student preferences are heading, which destinations are gaining traction, and what factors — like cost, safety, work rights, and employability — are shaping student and parent decisions.
When a large market tightens rules or signals uncertainty, demand shifts. That’s where our diversification gives us an advantage, and we see those shifts reflected in student placement volumes and related services.
We also see it in our IELTS data — where students are planning to go eighteen or twenty-four months out, and how language testing volumes shift accordingly.
So the short answer is that we’re somewhat insulated because of our diversity, but we’re definitely not completely immune, just like anyone else. And as you mentioned, our expansion into Malaysia is one example of how we’re responding to those changes.
AU: IELTS, I imagine, is much more insulated from change than the student mobility side of the business, right? Because no matter where students are going, they still need IELTS.
CW: They need IELTS, yeah. They need a language test. It’s still impacted by broader trends, but because it’s global, it’s definitely more insulated.
AU: Walk me through how you think the next four or five years will play out. Who knows what’s going to happen in the US, and who knows what policy changes will happen here. The UK certainly has political instability that may affect international students. Do you think international student numbers are likely to come back in the Anglophone world? And if not, who among the rest of the destinations in Emerging Futures Nine is best placed to grab new students?
I’ve seen a few countries just flat out say, “We’re going to replace falling domestic student numbers with international students.” The higher education minister in Poland said that a couple of weeks ago, and I remember thinking: they’re all going to run up against exactly the same problem we did in Canada, right? They’re not going to do it in a coordinated fashion, and they’ll run into housing problems, et cetera. So, who is best placed to avoid messing up the way Canada messed up, if things don’t return in Anglophone countries?
CW: I think things will return, though it depends on the country. For the Anglophone countries, we think the next four or five years are going to be defined by more managed growth.
Canada is obviously focused now on quality and on the U15. I mean, all the universities and—
AU: We can’t go down. There’s no falling below where we are.
CW: We’re at the bottom. Hopefully, we’re at the lowest point. And we are seeing signs of interest, improving visa conversion rates, and I met with a U15 institution the other day in Toronto, and they’re seeing the same thing.
So I’m actually optimistic about Canada, but again, I think it’s quality, managed growth. A couple of weeks ago in Ottawa, everyone was talking about global talent connected to economic outcomes, so it’s much more structured. I think most of this change is actually good for Canada, but it’s time for us to grow again.
Underlying demand remains strong, we think. The big swing factor is going to be policy stability. That’s where, in the US, there’s less certainty. Students and families respond very quickly to uncertainty around visa rules, work rights, and cost of living — but especially visa rules and work rights. We’re seeing that in a major way in the US right now.
Our Emerging Futures Nine survey shows, once again, that students are shopping globally more than ever. Seventy-eight percent are seriously considering more than one destination, so we’re going to continue to see growth shared across a wider set of markets.
I think that’s important for universities and regions to keep in mind when they think about marketing. They can’t do it the way they used to. They need to be much more specific and bold.
Interestingly, Emerging Futures Nine still shows that the traditional Big Four destinations remain the top first choices. They seem to own that space of career confidence. Students and parents trust that they will deliver on what they’ve promised in the past: employability, post-graduation work permits, safety, stable rules, et cetera.
For the new destinations, any country that scales quickly without coordinated planning is going to feel pressure, just like Canada did. I think the difference is whether governments and institutions can align enrolment growth with accommodation strategies, local infrastructure, and student supports, so that growth is intentional and sustainable.
That’s what Canada needs to do, and what all destinations need to do.
AU: Christine, thanks so much for being with us today.
CW: Thank you so much, Alex. My pleasure. Thanks for having me.
Alex Usher: And it just remains for me to thank our excellent producers, Tiffany MacLennan and Sam Pufek, and you, our listeners and readers, for joining us. If you have any questions or comments about today’s episode or suggestions for future ones, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with us at podcast@higheredstrategy.com.
Join me next week when our guest will be Marcel Levi. He’s president of the executive board of the Dutch National Research Council, or NWO. We’ll be talking mainly about the work of the Dutch Knowledge Coalition, of which the NWO is a part, in the recent national general elections, and also how countries like the Netherlands are positioning research and talent as key drivers of economic competitiveness. Bye for now.
*This podcast transcript was generated using an AI transcription service with limited editing. Please forgive any errors made through this service. Please note, the views and opinions expressed in each episode are those of the individual contributors, and do not necessarily reflect those of the podcast host and team, or our sponsors.
