If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
When universities say they want to increase internationalism
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
surely international student by their nature tend to come from wealthy backgrounds?
the only students i see who have real problems with day to day finances are the UK students at my university, surely the univerisities are doing this just to increase the money they're getting, not for any real academic reason?
my university for example along with oxbridge is increasing the amount of non-eu based students to 40% over the next few years - it's turning it into a international finishing school for the elite imo since most of these students just piss off to america or their home country after
surely the other countries should be investing in their own universities? there are some mighty fine universities in the developing world
the only students i see who have real problems with day to day finances are the UK students at my university, surely the univerisities are doing this just to increase the money they're getting, not for any real academic reason?
my university for example along with oxbridge is increasing the amount of non-eu based students to 40% over the next few years - it's turning it into a international finishing school for the elite imo since most of these students just piss off to america or their home country after
surely the other countries should be investing in their own universities? there are some mighty fine universities in the developing world
0
Comments
Also you will notice that a very large portion of academic staff in the UK are foreign, surely the fact that we 'pinch' so many foreign academics means we should return the favour and educate their students.
A way of rephrasing the problme might be, why do so few UK students go to study abroard rather than why do so many come from abroard to study here?
Higher education is one of the UKs most successful industries, we should embrace this fact.....
That's the problem, right there.
the poaching that exists, only exists on people at the top of their fields really...
i'm learning in my home city, which very multi-cultural as it is, so we dont need to 'top it up' in any sense, in the the london borough next to my university (Camden) i'm sure there's plenty of bright children with huge potential who will never see the life as a student at my university
the globalisation of the higher education sector as we know it is an excuse for international rich kids
viewing it purely as an industry makes the problem worse also....
Another brilliant post, well done.....
But your argument only makes sense if you can show me that the university sector is 'full' in some way so that British people are being turned away, and that universities are selecting people on their ability to pay rather than there aptitude, neither of which is true, which leaves your arguments in atters.....
Higher education is a global industry, going back on this would be disastrous. We should be happy that so many people want to come here because it show that we have a world class higher education system.
Britian probably has the second best university sector in the world, we should be happy about that.
You are in danger of sounding like a right-wing immigration basher.......
yes chinese student eat our geese
seriously though it's mainly because their countries should be investing in their own higher education sector so theres larger capacity worldwide, and more competiton worldwide, which would lead to 'in theory' better quality research which is what universities do mainly to get money
Do you know any British people who considered going abroard to do there degree (other than languages) almost certainly not I would imagine, why is that?
And one of the reasons why other countries universities aren't as good is one you won't like at all, they are free.........
money - why i didn't go uni up north, because i knew if i got into trouble in london i could stay at home if need be and i like to be close to my family/school friends also
i considered it, but thought it wouldn't be worth it really as for my subject, the university i go to is one of the best in the world, despite its shabby appearance
not really, australia recently privitised theirs - ours our private bodies already, the government just gives them lump sums for taking students like a contract - it's impossible to look at the university sector as free or fully private, as a funding scheme somewhere inbetween the 2 tends to work best (why UK universities are on the up despite some funding issues, my universities debt is decreasing and has been doing so for 2/3 years now, and the top up fees system in reality still leaves the government paying mainly for the undergraduates)
University is free in Frnace and Germany and the people from there that I know consider them to be inferior to british universities, hence you more likely to find Eu students in Uk the UK students in the EU, though there are other reasons as well of course.
Yes, I have met rich non-EU students.
On the other hand, most of the ones I've met are here on scholarships and the likes and haven't had money to go home for the one month long christmas vacation. So basically, they've been living in what resembles a ghost town, as so many people here are students who've gone home for the vacation.
A guy I spoke to hadn't even been home once since he started uni 2½ years ago, and won't until he finishes his degree.
Basically, our universities do not have enough money. I'm involved in student representation at the uni where I'm doing a doctorate, and was similarly involved at the university where I did my undergraduate degree. The current university is an ex-polytechnic with ambition to perform well in the second division of UK higher education, challenging some far-longer established universities. My previous university is in the Russell Group (if it is still called that?)
At both of them I have sat in meetings discussing how each department can achieve a budged cut. One was 5%, the other 3%. Every department, spending less money - after inflation, so an even larger cut in real terms - than the previous year. When a member of staff leaves my current university the post is frozen for 3 months to save money.
Unless we significantly increase public money going to universites from central taxation, or significantly increase the fees paid by home/EU students, or increase the number of full-fee international students, our universities will quite quickly lose the ability to teach anyone effectively.
New halls of residence? Refurbished bars? Data-projectors in lecture theatres? Office hours with tutors for one-to-one advice on a problem? Up-to date computers in the computer rooms? All of these things and more cost money and are significant cause for student complaint when they're not there. Something has to bring in more money, and probably the least painful one is the increased recruitment of overseas students. Plus, it's the one which can make university a more exciting and diverse place to study, so it gets my vote!
my views on actual funding are rather complicated, since i support having fees to an extent, but the government should partially fund also at the same time
im not on about the top up scheme as we know it :banghead:
anyway was on the phone, i said what you said a bit earlier - i swear before i devised an entire system of university undergraduate funding
Oh for fucks sake, do I have to spell everything out in words of one syllable? Aren't you bright enough to read between the lines or think about things?
For the hard of thinking - treating education as an "industry" (i.e. a commodity, driven by profit and market forces) and the subsequent cutting of government subsidy, leads to universities having to find other ways to get their income. One way is to increase the amount of foreign students as they pay large fees to study.
There? That better?
How on earth can you not treat university like an industry? It has workers and costs to meet, premises to manage etc, or does the word offend you so much that it must be burned out o your conscience?
How exactly does 'treating it like an industry' lead to cutting of govt subsidy (evidence?)
Of course education is a commodity, it takes resources to provide it thus it is a commodity......
Private American universities get very limited government subsidies yet don't have to resort to accepting 'sub-standard' international students to get more money.
Btw, I am not saying international students are sub-standard because that’s obviously not true. I’m referring to the accusation made by some (not me personally as I don’t know enough about this) that some British universities accept someone simply because they’re an international student and will bring in more money – and so wouldn’t have accepted them were they a British student paying less.
If it was what I actually wrote. But it isn't is it?
So the "market" knows best eh? You can judge the success (or othewise) of everything in the world by how profitable it is?
I guess it’s something that will probably vary between universities. I believe the teacher I know who claimed that to be the case did their PhD at UCL or KCL so perhaps London unis are worse in their opinion. Don’t really know though but from the universities point of view the uni is always going to need more money and so naturally they will favour international students somewhat. For instance I know of people with outstanding grades accepted by Oxford that were rejected by LSE – and an Israeli student with a pretty average IB mark who was accepted to LSE. Not exactly evidence but certain unis like LSE definitely would seem to favour international students because it results in more money.
LSE take in more than 50% international students
i know of people rejected however because they were good at taking exams but not much else, especially for things like medicine/law
I think language is the main reason that few British students study abroad.
True, there are always some people with 14 A*’s or something and 6 or 7 A’s at A-level who thinking that gives them some kind of ‘right’ to a place at Oxbridge then get turned down.
And I’m sure that’s probably because they didn’t perform at interview or whatever and didn’t seem a well-rounded person – and that’s probably because doing 6 A-levels or something ridiculous will mean they won’t have much of a life.
Oxbridge don’t actually have a particularly high applicants/per place ratio, I think it’s about 3-4 applicants/per place. Bristol, LSE and others are far higher. Although I guess that’s because applying to Oxbridge is such a hassle people only bother if they think they can get in, although Oxbridge do complain that while they’re pressured to accept more state applicants not enough people from state schools apply.
But yeah it seems a little unfair how it’s Oxbridge that is always the victim of these sob stories from people with so many A’s who didn’t get in. I applied to Oxford and didn’t get in and like everybody else who didn’t get in I got a lengthy feedback letter from the tutors who interviewed me explaining why I didn’t get in and advice. Whereas other top universities like UCL and LSE I’m sure will have to like Oxbridge reject many candidates and from what I hear don’t give any personalised explanation to people they reject.
For some students in other countries they can get help with the cost of their university education from their own local authorities regardless of where they choose to study.
There is a guy on my course from Belgium and he get finantial support from the local government in Belgium. If I went to university there on the other hand I would get no such help from my LEA.
and when i say interational student i mean non-eu ones, as EU students just pay the maximum amount a UK student would have to pay ie £3000/year - and many european countries pay for their students, scandanavian students do VERY well, tuition fuilly paid and living costs