Since the introduction of policies of marketisation in the culture of academic life in the late 1970s, the academic system in the UK has been exposed to dramatic changes (McNamara and Harris, 1997). Whereas the marketisation of HE, Furedi
(2011) argues, provides better value for money and empowers universities to be responsive to the demands of society, the economy, and students, this move has introduced many rituals of commodification. These rituals include university ranking, student surveys, quality control, and auditing, etc., which have led to an increase in state intervention in the management of university life (Furedi, 2011).
In the UK, the national approach to cross-border education is revenue-generating, i.e. promoting the higher education system to fee-paying students so as to control a large share of the educational market worldwide (Kinginger, 2009;
OECD, 2004).
One of the most influential consequences of the marketisation of HE in the UK is the tremendous expansion in international students numbers, or what Furedi (2011, p.2) calls ‘the international student bazaar’. While in 1973, there were 35,000 international students in the UK, the numbers rose to 95,000 in 1992 (McNamara and Harris, 1997) and in 2013-2014, the numbers increased to 435,500 including EU students (UKCISA, 2015). In 2012, it was reported that the UK attracts one in 10 students who study abroad, generating around £8 billion a year in tuition fees alone, and this figure could rise to £17 billion in 2025 (BBC, 2012).
In spite of the lucrative business of attracting more international students in UK HE, their presence has sparked a heated debate in the UK wider political spectrum, where they are counted as migrants. Former immigration minister, Damian Green, insisted on counting international students in the UK immigration figures, ‘[a] student who comes here for a six month language course doesn't count as an immigrant but if you come here for three years, or four years, or five years, then you are not a visitor, you are an immigrant under the international definition, so we count you as an immigrant’ (BBC, 2012). Following Cameron’s
‘no ifs, no buts’ election pledge, the government pledged to cut the total net migration to the UK to below 100,000 (BBC, 2011). In pursuit of this target, there were series of changes to the student visa system and more changes are expected to take place, e.g. Theresa May’s proposal to ban international students from working during their studies (The Independent, 2015).
There were many initiatives taken by some UK HE officials in an attempt to negotiate the situation of international students. An example of this is a May 29,
2012 letter to David Cameron, signed by nearly 70 university chancellors, governors and presidents. Part of the letter reads:
In an age of increasing global mobility, the number of individuals considering a university education abroad is growing rapidly. In this market for talent – and export income – the UK performs
exceptionally well, with 9.9% of the total market share in 2009, and export earnings of £7.9 billion. International students also play an important role in towns and cities up and down the country, and contribute significantly to local economies. There is a clear
opportunity to build on this success, with forecasts suggesting that export earnings from this activity could more than double by 2025.
International students also bring significant cultural richness and long-term political and social benefits to this country, and return many benefits to the countries from which they come.
However, global competition for international students is intense and a number of other countries are increasing their efforts in this area.
We therefore ask you to consider how your government can do more to support our universities in their international activities. In particular we request that international university students be removed from the net migration statistics for policy purposes, bringing us into line with our major competitors. We believe that this would help government by creating a clear differentiation between temporary and permanent migration, help universities whose international character is essential to their future success, and help the UK by contributing to economic growth.
(UK Council for Graduate Education, 2012)
In spite of these attempts, international students are still counted in immigration statistics and aggressive visa restrictions continue to be implemented. On 6 April 2012, the Tier 1 post-study work visa scheme was closed to all new applicants (UK Border Agency, 2012). This scheme used to allow UK international graduates to stay in the UK for up to two years to work. The new work visa regulations, under Tier 2 scheme, require international applicants to be sponsored by a trusted employer and to earn at least £20,000 per annum (Paton, 2012). Current proposals call for increasing this threshold pay and tightening the conditions under which an international applicant can be sponsored (BBC, 2012). The most recent change in student visas was introduced with effect from 6 April 2015 and it entails paying an immigration health surcharge (UKCISA, 2015).
Thus far, it seems that institutional discourses surrounding international students in UK HE are charged with doubt and mistrust despite the obvious economic and
non-economic benefits they bring to the country. This adds extra pressure on the shoulders of ‘international students’ in the UK who not only grapple with a new language, academic culture, lifestyle, and the consequences thereof on their identities and perceptions, but they are also thrown into an inhospitable system that pumps their fees and daily expenditure into its economy, limits their life choices by visa restrictions, and expects them to ‘integrate’ in and embrace the values of the ‘host’ community, to speak ‘good’ English, and most importantly to leave soon after their courses finish.
Finally, this chapter has presented two pivotal reference points to contextualise the study by looking at what is traditionally known as the ‘Arab World’ and what is institutionally referred to as ‘international students’ in the UK. The next chapter engages with the theoretical underpinnings of the study.