Student visa plans attacked

Listen carefully. Do you hear that? That is the sound of the seismic shift in government policy which will define the higher education sector for the next decade. And, worryingly, it does not sound good.

The 31st of January marked the end of the consultation period for the review of the student immigration system. The proposals outlined by the home secretary Theresa May have been described as “radical”, “dangerous” and “damaging” to the university sector, and such changes are expected to have a huge effect on the international student body.

Major proposals include raising the English language requirement, removal or reduction of the post study visa and a radical overhaul of the dependence system.

One of the major frustrations for universities is that under these plans is the apparent assumption that all degree courses and all students will require the same level of mastery of English.

Under the new proposals, students would be expected to achieve a B2 grade under CEFR, Common European Framework for Languages, in English, rather than the previous requirement of a B1 grade, roughly comparable to a jump from GCSE to A-level English. Not only will it be compulsory that overseas students who are over seventeen demonstrate a higher level of proficiency in English than many university undergraduates have done, they will also need to do it in a particular ‘secure’ exam yet to be announced by the government.

The change will severely affect potential students who intend to study in the UK for a few years before applying to university here, such as doing A-levels or pre-university foundation courses. Tom Millns, Chief Executive of English UK, believes that this is invaluable to the students. He explains that “they do three things: subject top-up”, “improve a student’s English language skills” and they also give students the skills to be independent learners. English UK estimates that around 70-80% of students that are currently on such courses would not be able to satisfy the language requirement. At Imperial, around 53% of overseas students have studied in the UK before applying to university.

For current students, the major concern is the removal or reduction of the post-study work visa. The two year period on the post study visa is often used to gain valuable work experience and enhance the CV. Dominic Scott Chief Executive of UKCISA, UK Council for International Student Affairs, emphasizes how important the work experience is and argues that it demonstrates to potential overseas employers “that their degree has real currency in the labour market”.

The proposals will not be welcome news to postgraduate students either. If the plans go ahead in the current form, all students under the tier four visas will either not be allowed to bring a dependant if the period of study is under 12 months, or if the period is over 12 months that dependant will be unable to work. Dominic dismisses the notion as “ridiculous” and believes that it could “entirely undermine our research base”.

The main reasons behind the proposals are the perceived abuse of the student visa system and the unsustainable mass migration to the UK.

As the government tries to fulfil its pledge to halve net migration by 2015, it is easy to see why the government is so keen to tighten student immigration laws. The document outlining the proposal quotes a figure of 139,000 of migrants to the UK including dependents using the student route out of 184,000, around 76% of total net migration.

Speaking to the Guardian on the 1st of February, immigration minister Damian Green, argued “too many [students] come to do courses below degree level as a cover for staying and working” and believes that the proposals outlined are vital to stop abuse of the student immigration system.

However, students do not stay in the UK forever and the figure of 139,000 includes any person who is planning to stay for more than 12 months. A survey of around 1500 students conducted by the International Student Barometer showed that just 3% of students were intending to eventually settle in the UK after their studies.

Dr Sharon Bolton, Head of International Student Support at Imperial, likens the government response to “using a sledgehammer to crack a nut”. She believes that a much fairer system would discriminate between sponsors, institutions which can issue a certificate which is necessary when applying for a visa via the student route. Sharon argues that since the government already has a ranking system of trustworthiness of the sponsors in place , the new immigration laws should not penalise those institutions where no evidence of immigration abuse has been found. There is no exact date for the proposals to be finalised and implemented. However, the much criticised highly skilled worker cap took just 6 months to become part of the system. As Professor Edward Acton, Vice Chancellor of the University of East Anglia so dryly observes, if the proposals are not changed, “the catastrophic effects on universities, will for a period, actually make the home fees matter slightly fade from centre, so grave will it be.” Comforting.