If this student recruitment model is cracking… what could a reinvention mean for global education

By Antonio Aragón

“The aggregator is dead. Long live the AI-gregator!” 

That’s the verdict from Martijn van de Veen, Chief Business Development Officer at ICEF. 

A hot take, perhaps, but one that captures the pulse of where global education recruitment is heading.

Back in 2019, aggregator platforms were the darlings of EdTech, bringing thousands of institutions, agents and students into one digital marketplace. 

In 2025, they’re being ghosted by those same stakeholders. 

So: are aggregators dead? Dying? Or simply evolving into something new? 

I’ve worked at the heart of the aggregator wave. Now, as the model shakes, I’m taking a closer look at what’s changing and why it matters more than ever. 

The rise, and crash, of the ‘revolution’

Since the pandemic, political pressure, policy shifts, shrinking budgets, and rising student expectations have reshaped the landscape of global education. 

In that context, one question keeps surfacing: 

Was this ever truly a revolution, or are we now reckoning with its unintended consequences?

The aggregator model was built on a seductive promise: scalability, efficiency, and digital access to global student markets. 

Platforms like ApplyBoard, MSM Unify, Adventus and most recently, UniApplyNow, Leverage and Leap Geebee have grown fast by digitizing access to thousands of agents and institutions. 

And for a while, it worked.

But efficiency came at a cost. In the rush to scale, stakeholders were sidelined, leading to a breakdown in transparency, trust, and quality. 

Negative public perception soon followed. 

Colin Lumsden, VP of Global Development at dialogEDU puts it bluntly:  

“The aggregator name, in either mass or sector media, is tarnished, ” he says. “The model needs to be refined to be the right program for the right student for the right market.”

We all know what went wrong 

Two things: Trust and Control.

Behind the polished dashboards and sleek analytics, a more complex reality was unfolding. Many institutions had little to no visibility into the true source of their applicants. Some unscrupulous players exploited this loophole, first exposed in 2022 by the Fifth Estate and later in a 2024 CBC News investigation led by Kevin Maimann. 

In a separate report, Nic Mitchell from The Pie News, highlighted how some universities had started to confront the legal and reputational risks of outsourcing recruitment to poorly vetted sub-agents. Master agents, those who sit at the top of the hierarchy, often farmed out institutional relationships to sub-agents with little oversight, creating what AgentBee (2022) called “an opaque web” that obscured accountability and undermined student trust.

Matthew Halliday for University Affairs also documented the experiences of students who arrived in Canada with unmet expectations, many misled about employment, housing, or immigration policies. 

But let’s be clear, all the responsibility shouldn’t rest solely with the aggregators. Institutions must also take responsibility for how they manage these partnerships and for ensuring clarity in who recruits their students, and how. 

Because when oversight is weak, the impact is felt most by those on the ground. 

Some legitimate agents would admit off the record, and you’ll hear it, ‘aggregators hijacked their autonomy’, reducing trusted counselors to anonymous users, erasing local brands, and prioritizing volume over care. With up to 30% of commissions withheld by the platforms, many agents simply found the financial model unsustainable.  

Jon Kolber, Founder of ILAC, would agree.

“The aggregator model acts as a middleman and takes a cut from the agent,” he says, “every experienced agent will build their own relationship with universities and expect full commission for their time and advice.” 

Though his former company operates a recruitment platform, Kolber views the approach as low-margin, but believes it still holds potential. 

“In order to be relevant,”  he says, “the model must be a ‘real value add’ tool and service to the agent.” 

Post initial publication of this article, Jenny Nieveen, CEO of UniApplyNow, reached out to add her voice to the conversation. While they don’t consider themselves an aggregator, she acknowledges the benefits tech-enabled platforms can offer when grounded in values.

“We’ve seen the decline of players who prioritized monetization over students,” she said. “At UniApplyNow, we’re educators first. We partner with agents to help grow their businesses responsibly. Technology matters, but service matters more.”

And yet, for many agents and sub-agents, the aggregator model has indeed delivered results, fueling growth, driving student mobility, and helping transform these platforms into ‘giants’, especially during the pandemic. 

The giants fall quiet  

ApplyBoard. Adventus. All contacted. None replied by publication.

That silence speaks volumes. 

When asked to answer questions about the future of their model, the loudest players in the room chose not to speak.

ApplyBoard, once a rising star for EdTech success, has faced internal challenges, layoffs, and public criticism. As William Guo wrote in a viral LinkedIn piece, their ‘growth-first’ strategy prioritized expansion over quality, ultimately revealing cracks in the aggregator model’s foundation.

For Bhanu Vashishth, Vice President International Business Development and Strategic Advisor to the President of Conestoga College, not all the responsibility should lie on the aggregator. 

“They offer immense potential, but their true value can only be realized through active, hands-on collaboration between institutions and platforms.”

For Vashishth, there should be continuous engagement from both sides. 

Sanjay Laul, founder of MSM Unify, says that things are changing.  

“We’ve completely reshaped our mission and vision. Unify is no longer just a student recruitment platform, our focus is shifting from simply helping institutions grow, to helping nations build through education, training, and workforce development”. 

In other words, Mr. Laul suggests that the aggregator model is already a thing of the past. 

If so, the consequences are already surfacing and public confidence has unraveled. For institutions, agents, and even students, patience has worn dangerously thin.

The response? A shift in power.

Entering the age of independent platforms

In over 20 years of senior roles across global education, I’ve witnessed first-hand how dedicated agents are to guiding students through life-changing decisions. 

That’s why they seek to own the narrative and adapt to remain relevant. 

There seems to be a quiet, perhaps bold, shift toward decentralization.

What does that actually look like? 

I am seeing the rise of what I would call independent, micro-platforms: small, tech-enabled, locally owned recruitment hubs that empower agents to build their own brands, work directly with students, and serve the markets they know well. 

What sets them apart is their mindset.  

As one unnamed agent put it: 

“These micro-platforms don’t ask for permission. They earn trust,  speak with their own voice and meet students on their terms”. 

It’s a shift that others in the sector are watching closely. 

Virginia Machivello, AVP Global Business Development at Centennial College, shares a future-facing view. She sees potential for agents, including aggregators, who embrace AI models. 

“ Those who adapt, understand policy shifts and match students properly, might just survive,” she says.

Add to that a new generation of students demanding authenticity and autonomy in their decision-making, and you have the perfect conditions for transformation.

For Rodel Sta Ana of Study in Asia, the shift comes down to one simple truth: 

“Students don’t enroll with logos, they enroll with people.”

Perhaps this is the wake-up call the industry needs.  

Today’s students are more informed, more skeptical, and more determined to take control of their futures. They are looking for authentic human connections to help them shape their study abroad experience.

The future may not be platform-free  but platform-different

So why ask if aggregators are dead? 

Because, fairly or not,  ‘aggregator’ has come to symbolize a turbulent chapter in international education, one marked by unchecked growth, limited oversight and mounting policy backlash. While aggregators are not solely to blame, the concept itself has borne the brunt of criticism for enabling a volume-driven model often disconnected from student outcomes.  

That’s why this question matters. 

Because it is not just about whether a business model is cracking, it’s about whether we’re ready to turn the page and build a more transparent, accountable, and sustainable future for global education.

I share the conviction expressed by Virginia Machiavello, when she says: 

“Education is a better weapon than guns. As some countries raise walls, we need models to send students back home equipped to lead change.” 

Her tone is hopeful, yet firm. 

“This chaos we got into,” she says, “could birth something better.” 

Colin Lumsden also sees hope, but only with radical change: 

“Clarify. Diversify. Build trust. Align with economic goals and governments. Otherwise? The classic aggregator definition is too damaged to continue.”

For ICEF’s van de Veen, it’s simple: 

“ The only way forward is a combination of AI for smart matching, and human expertise for the nuanced guidance and support that technology can’t replicate” 

What comes next then and who will define it? 

One thing is clear to me, the future of international recruitment is no longer about scale alone. It’s about trust, outcomes, and shared power that benefits all the different stakeholders. 

Whether through nimble independent micro-platforms, agent-led collectives, or AI-driven tools that put students in control of their own journeys, we are seeing a redistribution of influence. 

AI is accelerating this shift by enabling personalized support at depth without erasing the human touch. 

What is emerging isn’t just decentralized. It’s dynamic, student-centered, and built for a new era of transparency, accountability, and collaboration. 

What’s most compelling is how, on the ground, agents and students are building new models independently and on their own terms. 

…And this is just getting started.

References

• 1. University Affairs – The murky world of unregulated international student recruiters
• 2. The PIE News – Is the term aggregator becoming a dirty word?
• 3. ICEF Monitor – Are agent aggregators changing the dynamics of international student recruitment?
• 4. LinkedIn (William Guo) – ApplyBoard’s rise and fall: a cautionary tale in EdTech
• 5. AgentBee – Sub-agent networks and risks to universities
• 6. CBC: The Fifth Estate – How recruiters in India use false promises to lure students to Canada 
• 7. CBC News – Provinces cracking down on private institutions 

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect any organization unless noted. This is an independent, unsponsored platform with full editorial freedom. Sources, both published and personal, are cited with respect and responsibility. While full objectivity is elusive, care is taken to present diverse perspectives and involve multiple voices, allowing readers to form their own conclusions. Disagreement is welcome. This space values critical inquiry, nuance, and dialogue over consensus. 

Outright disrespect is not allowed.