Bis research paper number 128 The wider benefits of international higher education in the uk

Variable 
Grouping 
% of international 
students in UK 
Proposed % of 
interviews 
Achieved % of 
interviews 
Country of 
origin 
China 
India 
Other Asian nations 
Middle East 
Low income nations 
Latin America 
High income 
22 
13 
25 
10 
31 
2 
16 
17 
17 
16 
10 
20 
10 
10 
15 
16 
16 
10 
17 
15 
11 
Current country 
of residence 
Country of origin 
UK 
Other 
80 
10 
10 
77 
16 
7 
Gender Female 
Male 
47 
53 
50 
50 
50 
50 
Level of study 
Undergraduate (UG) 
Taught Masters (PGT) 
Postgraduate research 
(PGR) 
39 
47 
14 
25 
65 
10 
25 
65 
10 
Subject of study STEM (& medicine) 
Business/finance 
Arts & humanities 
Social sciences 
Other 
38 
31 
7 
17 
7 
30 
30 
15 
15 
10 
34 
24 
19 
20 
3 
HEI type 
Research-intensive 
Other
58 
42 
60 
40 
61 
39 
HEI location 
England 
Other UK nation 
83 
17 
80 
20 
86 
14 
Funding source Self-funded 
Scholarship 
Other sponsor 
68 
18 
14 
60 
30 
10 
63 
33 
4 
Current 
occupational 
sector 
STEM/manufacturing 
Education inc HE 
Business/finance 
Health/social care 
Media 
Government/public 
Law 
Retail/logistics/services 
Other 
20 
15 
15 
10 
5 
15 
5 
5 
10 
23 
19 
14 
4 
4 
8 
6 
14 
8 
Positive 
experience 
Yes 
Somewhat 
No 
50 
40 
10 
63 
26 
9 
Extent of links 
Professional % personal
Only personal 
Few/none 
60 
30 
10 
42 
42 
15 
Table 3
Interview sample characteristics: target and achieved proportions and distribution 
in international HE cohort. Cohort data for 2011/12 from HESA
19 

---

The Wider Benefits of International Higher Education in the UK 
The agreed ‘target’ characteristics of the interview sample are outlined in Table 3. 
Stratification of the sample was conducted by selecting and inviting small groups of 
graduates to interview from within the volunteer pool, with repeated iterative adjustments 
on the basis of the characteristics of those actually taking part in interviews. This required 
substantial and persistent effort and communication amongst the interview team, 
particularly given that a proportion of graduate volunteers who had been selected were 
then not available for interview within the timeframe for the primary research. 
As can be seen from Table 3, this rather labour-intensive, iterative process delivered an 
actual interview sample which closely matched the target proportions for most of the key 
characteristics, particularly gender, level of study, institution type and, crucially, the country 
groupings. For some other characteristics the ‘match’ to target was more approximate, but 
some interviews at least were achieved for every targeted sub-group of all key variables. 
More detail on the characteristics of the sample achieved, including the countries of origin 
of the graduates and their individual HE institutions, is given in Appendix 1.
The match against target for the more subjective characteristics of positive experience and 
extent of links was not quite so high, but the sample did deliberately include a significant 
number of examples anticipated to be less ‘positive’ overall, to counter risk of positive bias. 
Classification against these two factors had to be made on the basis information supplied 
by the graduates prior to interview, whereas we found from detailed information provided 
during interviews that these earlier responses were not always consistent. While this did 
not affect the inclusion of ‘negative’ examples, the proportions of the respective sub-
groups of ‘positive’ respondents were somewhat different once the interview information 
was taken into account. The targeted proportion for those with established professional 
and personal linkages turned out simply to be too high an estimate, in comparison with the 
circumstances of graduates in reality.
As part of the iterative selection and invitation process, potential gaps in the range covered 
by the original sample – such as certain subjects of study – were identified, which we 
attempted to fill by issuing invitations to specific target groups within other alumni 
networks, including a number of institutions and scholarship schemes. The list of alumni 
groups that supported the project in this way is given in Appendix 1.
In numeric terms, eligible volunteers within the original sample from the i-GO study 
comprised around 180 graduates. Around 100 other volunteers came forward as a result 
of our contacts via other alumni groups. It was from this combined group of 280 graduates 
that we drew the final 100 graduates for interview.
The interviews were conducted by the interviewers within the research team over a period 
of five weeks in early 2013; the duration of each interview was 35-50 minutes. The 
‘portraits’ of interviewees and transcripts of interviews were analysed to identify reported 
benefits and other results of interest, which were then grouped and used as the basis for 
coding of the interviews. This process was conducted largely on a ‘bottom-up’ basis, i.e. 
the specific benefit types were identified from the interviews rather than using a 
classification from previous literature, but taking into account what was available from the 
literature and also the research team’s prior experience.
20 

---

The Wider Benefits of International Higher Education in the UK