London's Metropolitan University: is higher-ed door too easy to open?

London's Metropolitan University is taking legal action after losing its right to admit non-EU students. The case has pitted efforts to tighten immigration against a lucrative international student industry.

Sang Tan/AP
Students and supporters protest outside Home Office in London against the potential deportation of thousands of overseas students after London Metropolitan University is stripped of its right to sponsor students from outside EU, Wednesday.

With an intake drawn from more than 150 countries at last count, London’s Metropolitan University has long been a magnet for overseas students attracted not only by the world-class reputation of Britain’s higher-education system but the prospect of going to school in one of the world’s most multicultural cities.

Yet this week, the school was forced to launch a legal action that goes to its very survival, following a decision by authorities to strip the 164-year-old institution of the right to admit students from outside the European Union.

Thousands of students now face deportation after the UK Border Agency (UKBA) found that more than a quarter of a sample of students studying at the university did not even have permission to stay in the country. Meanwhile, Metropolitan University, which enrolls 30,000 young people, including some of the UK’s poorest, has vowed to defend its reputation.

Amid street protests by distraught students, as well as claims and counterclaims that the university has been, variously, badly run or the victim of a confused regulatory framework, the controversy has led to tensions between a university sector eager to preserve the lucrative overseas student industry and a shift by the British government towards a more hard-line approach to immigration.

“In terms of immigration policy, two trends are currently working together – a drive to reduce the overall numerical level of net migration and within that, a particular focus on enforcement of immigration law,“ says Scott Blinder, whose research at Oxford University’s Migration Observatory focuses on public opinion toward migration and its impacts on elections and policy.

Research by the Observatory last year suggested a recognition among the British public of the legitimacy and value of overseas students, whose numbers make up the bulk of migrants in the UK. When asked what groups came to mind when thinking about a "typical" immigrant, less than 30 percent of those polled checked "students" – as opposed to asylum seekers and others. 

“So people are not so concerned about student immigration – but they are concerned about so-called illegal immigration and the overstaying of visas. This case falls in the middle of those two aspects of public sentiment,” adds Dr. Blinder.

Until recently, government moves to clamp down on the manipulation and abuse of student visas have focused on sectors such as English language schools and private institutions, while care has been taken not to risk damage to the university sector.

Overseas students are worth £5 billion (about $8 billion) per year to the UK, and the industry could be worth £16.9 billion (about $27 billion) by 2025, according to Universities UK, the organization representing the university sector.

Damian Green, immigration minister until this week, said last week that checks had revealed a "significant proportion" of students at the Metropolitan University did not have good English and there was no proof half the students were attending lectures.

Launching a legal action Tuesday against the UKBA’s ruling, the university contended that there was "no evidence of systemic failings" and accused immigration inspectors of ignoring information provided during their audit.

Earlier this week, an influential all-party parliamentary committee scrutinizing state expenditures condemned the UKBA for passing responsibility for student visas to universities before implementing proper controls. The committee said the number of migrants who took advantage of gaps in the system could have been as high as 50,000.

Meanwhile, hundreds of legitimate students have been searching for new university sponsors before their existing permissions to study in Britain expire.

Syed Rumman, a Bangladeshi overseas student and vice-president for education for London Met's student union, said that students’ lives were being “binned.”

“The UK is popular with students from abroad, especially countries with historical cultural ties to Britain, because the standards of education are world class and of course London is a thriving, multicultural city.

“But if I was involved I the British government," he continues, "I would be very worried about the future because many students at the moment are advising their friends and families to rule out coming to study here.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to London's Metropolitan University: is higher-ed door too easy to open?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today