The Loss of Sponsoring License of London Metropolitan University - Literature review Example

International at London in the Context of Strict Visa and Immigration Rules: The Loss of Sponsoring License of London Metropolitan and its Effects on International Students and Higher Education in the UK May 21, 2015 Introduction Research Goals and Research Approach The paper aims to understand the experiences of international students after London Metropolitan University’s (LMU) loss of its Highly Trusted Sponsor (HTS) status in 2012. The HTS system was established so that universities, which benefit from easier migration for non-European Union (EU) students into the UK, should follow necessary conditions and procedures that will prevent these students from using the education system as a means for working illegally in the UK (Casciani, 2012). The paper is not limited to LMU, but it focuses on it, since it is the only institution whose license got revoked. The goal of the paper is to explore the experiences of international students at London Metropolitan University and other universities after LMU’s loss of sponsorship license. It believes that the ban has widespread impacts on international students, not only for those in LMU, but also those studying in the UK in general. Moreover, the paper includes a description of the actions, statements and interactions among the government and higher education organisations and members. The approach combines literature review and qualitative research. The literature review uses diverse scholarly sources to describe and understand how the loss of sponsorship and stricter visa rules affected international students and other important educational sectors in the UK. Qualitative research includes interviews and surveys on LMU students, particularly those who were studying in LMU at the time of the ban (2012 onwards). Significance of the Research The research is significant to higher education institutions, international students and the government of the UK because of the importance of international students to the latter’s academic, economic, political and social goals. The academic goals of recruiting international students include comparing international standards and improving responsiveness to the international dimension of teaching, research, and employability (Brooks, Waters and Pimlott-Wilson, 2012; Saubert, 2014). Economic goals refer to revenue generation from international students as students and their contribution to the economy as consumers and possible producers of services/products (McMahon, 2011; Saubert, 2014). International students are important to the economy because of the fees they pay to their schools and cost of living expenses in the UK (McMahon, 2011; Saubert, 2014). Political goals pertain to assessing national security and foreign policies in the context of international education (Casciani, 2012; Saubert, 2014). Social goals include interventions and programmes for promoting multicultural understanding and interactions and community and social development projects (Olivas and Li, 2006; Saubert, 2014). International students are important to the UK society because of the cultural diversity that they contribute to the latter (Olivas and Li, 2006; Saubert, 2014). The paper responds to the gap in literature that determines how strict visa and immigration policies and rules, as well as the ban on sponsorship of international students, have affected international students in the UK. The literature does not have specific focus on understanding the sentiments and thoughts of international students after the ban. Instead, it reports on the actions and testimonials of largely the government, educational institutions and student unions. International Students Population in the UK and Revenues The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) statistics reported that the United Kingdom (UK) had the second largest population of international students in the world, with a market share of roughly 13% in 2011, which made it second to the United States of America (USA) that had a share of 16.5% (Gil, 2014). Approximately 18% of students in UK higher education were international students (2012 to 2013), based on the findings of the Higher Education Statistics Agency (Hesa) (Gil, 2014). The UK government estimated that, from 2011 to 2012, international students contributed £3.9 billion in tuition fees after scholarships and £6.3 billion in living expenses (Gil, 2014). As of 2012, London Metropolitan University (LMU) is recorded as having 2,600 international students (Grove, 2012). From 2010 to 2011, foreign student fees provided around 15% of LMU’s £157.8 million income, or approximately £24 million (Grove, 2012). London Metropolitan University’s Loss of Highly Trusted Sponsor (HTS) Status London Metropolitan University has an international student sponsorship status, called the Highly Trusted Sponsor (HTS). However, in August 2012, the UK Border Agency (UKBA) revoked LMU’s HTS status (also called the ban) because it found out that the latter was not meeting particular assessment criteria (Grove, 2012). The UKBA stated that the University failed three tests. First, 26 out of 101 sampled overseas students could not show any valid visa for their temporary stay in the UK (Casciani, 2012). Second, the UKBA discovered that 142 out of 250 international students had attendance problems, which suggested that these students were working instead of studying (Casciani, 2012). Third, 20 out of 50 sampled students showed poor English competency (Casciani, 2012). The UKBA charged LMU for not properly monitoring and achieving essential HTS conditions and standards. As a result, it revoked the University’s international student sponsorship status. In effect, LMU was banned from teaching 2,600 students that came outside the EU (Grove, 2012). In line with the ban, these international students received “notification that they have 60 days to find another sponsor or face having to leave the country and being unable to complete their degrees” (National Union of Students, 2012). The ban affected international students and university professors and administrators in different parts of the UK (Grove, 2012). Because of the unfairness of these conditions to overseas students who are diligently studying and have sufficient English competency, diverse student union and higher education organisations expressed indignation over the UKBA’s decision (BBC News, 2012). Malcolm Gillies, vice-chancellor of LMU, stressed that the UKBA did not only hurt LMU’s image to international students, but also the entire reputation of UK universities (Grove, 2012). Professor Gillies stated: “The impact on the sector would be profound. It would be a mad thing to do” (Grove, 2012). He voiced a concern of a professor and an educator administrator, which underlies the sentiments of those working for the UK higher education sector. Literature Review The Government’s Side of the Ban The loss of LMU’s HTS status can be better understood within the context of UK’s strict visa rules due to immigration curbs (Garner, 2012a). The UKBA conforms to these rules to ensure that illegal immigrants are not entering and staying in the UK through its educational system (Fazackerley, 2013). In effect, the government is treating international students as immigrants already, since immigration curbs are affecting them (Grove, 2012). The UKBA implemented visa system changes, which included reporting any students “who have missed 10 consecutive expected contacts” (Tapia, 2013). Different universities adapted to this directive in diverse ways. The University of East London de-registers students who missed three compulsory elements of a module, while the University of the Arts London and the University of Glamorgan require overseas students to sign in once a week (Tapia, 2013). The government justifies that the ban was needed to guarantee that the lawful criteria for sponsorship was being met across all universities and colleges in the UK. Damian Green, the immigration minister, explained that the ban on LMU was implemented because of the “serious, systematic failure where a university does not have the capacity to be a proper sponsor” (Grove, 2012). He stressed that “[a]llowing LMU to continue to sponsor and teach international students was not an option” because it was “very seriously deficient as a sponsor” (Clark, 2012). He underlined that their investigation revealed that it “appears that the university doesn’t have the capacity to be a proper sponsor and to have confidence that the students coming have the right to be here” (Clark, 2012). Mr. Green is saying that LMU would not have had its sponsorship cancelled, if it did its role of monitoring the attendance and academic outcomes of its students. The government prepared to respond to the negative effects of the ban on international students. David Willetts, the universities and science minister, informed the public of the development of a taskforce that would assist affected international students (Grove, 2012). The Higher Education Funding Council for England and UUK (Universities UK) led the task force (Grove, 2012). Willetts noted: “It is important that genuine students who are affected through no fault of their own are offered prompt advice and help, including, if necessary, with finding other institutions at which to finish their studies” (Grove, 2012). He shows that the government does not want eligible international students to suffer with others who are not meeting the criteria for sponsored overseas students. The government, however, does not address the potential effects of the ban to UK higher education and the economy as a whole. Reaction from Higher Education Officials and Members London Metropolitan University’s Actions against the Ban Even before the ban, LMU learned through The Sunday Times that the UKBA was considering revoking its HTS status. The University showed disappointment at how the UKBA used the press, and not more formal communication channels, in expressing an impending HTS revocation. On 26 August 2012, the University stated: “We condemn the actions that have led to London Metropolitan University learning from The Sunday Times that it might have its Highly Trusted Sponsor (HTS) status revoked” (London Metropolitan University News, 2012). In particular, it was concerned of how the news itself can affect international students: “To learn that we might have our HTS status revoked via a newspaper, with the panic that this can cause for thousands of students, is outrageous” (London Metropolitan University News, 2012). Furthermore, LMU assured its international students that the administration was doing everything they could to prevent an HTS revocation: “For the last six weeks we have repeatedly tried to liaise with the UKBA to understand further their concerns, which seem to be focused on processes related to the legacy of previous management” (London Metropolitan University News, 2012). The University sent the message that it was not neglecting the UKBA’s concerns about its students, and that it provided concrete responses to the latter’s allegations. Despite the University’s efforts, the UKBA revoked its HTS status on 29 August 2012, which prompted LMU to undertake various legal and non-legal actions to help its overseas students and to challenge the ban. On 29 August 2012, the University informed its international students of the ban: “The University regrets to announce that as at 8pm on Wednesday 29th August 2012, the UK Border Agency (UKBA) has revoked its Highly Trusted Status for sponsoring international students” (London Metropolitan University News, 2012). Furthermore, the University asserted that the ban would have widespread negative effects, and that it worked with different organisations to provide further support to affected international students: “The implications of the revocation are hugely significant and far-reaching, and the University has already started to deal with these. It will be working very closely with the UKBA, HEFCE, the National Union of Students and its own Students Union” (London Metropolitan University News, 2012). The University stressed that it would not dismiss its students’ concerns at all: “Our ABSOLUTE PRIORITY is to our students, both current and prospective, and the University will meet all its obligations to them. The University has set up a Help Centre to support and advise students” (original text in caps lock in London Metropolitan University News, 2012). LMU emphasised that it would provide necessary support and accommodations for the transfer of affected foreign students. Moreover, the University pursued legal action against the UKBA’s decision. On 3 September 2012, the University released a press report on its legal actions: “London Metropolitan University has instructed its lawyers to commence legal action to challenge the revocation of its Highly Trusted status for sponsoring international students” (London Metropolitan University News, 2012). Specifically, the University challenged the findings of the UKBA regarding the former’s systemic failures as a sponsor. In opposition to the UKBA, LMU provided its own side with findings that rejects the UKBA’s report. The University’s findings are below: 1) there is no evidence of systemic failings, as claimed... 2) the University has been conducting checks on its international students, specifically in relation to English language and educational ability, that not only meet UKBAs published requirements, but exceed those requirements in a number of key areas... 3) the Universitys staff has been diligently performing stringent checks to try and ensure that all individuals who are studying at the University are legally entitled to do so. UKBA has not provided any constructive advice to the sector on this matter, despite being asked to on numerous occasions. 4) the University has practices in place that allow it to monitor its international students in a manner which we believe complies with UKBAs guidance. Again, the sector has consistently asked UKBA for more clarity in relation to applying the monitoring requirements. 5) UKBA officers ignored information that was made available to them when they conducted their audit. Despite our concerns, we cooperated and assisted them fully and tried to persuade them on a number of occasions to review evidence that we felt was relevant. 6) UKBAs requirements have changed substantially at least 14 times in the last three years. We believe the Universitys approach to complying with this multitude of changes is of a standard that not only equates with practices adopted by the majority of other universities in the sector but in a number of key areas exceeds sector-wide practice. (London Metropolitan University News, 2012). The University denied UKBA’s assertion that it neglected to perform its duty as a sponsor of overseas students. It asserted that the UKBA was the one at fault by changing requirements repetitively without further clarification for monitoring requirements and standards (London Metropolitan University News, 2012). Throughout September 2012, LMU attended hearings to challenge the ban. The court allowed for the case to be judicially reviewed on 21 September 2012 (London Metropolitan University News, 2012). Reactions from Other Higher Education Organisations Numerous higher education organisations and members criticised the UKBA’s decision. Eric Thomas, vice-chancellor of the University of Bristol and president of UUK believes that this should have been the last resort, not the first step to penalising LMU: “We believe that there were alternative ways of addressing UKBAs concerns and that revocation of a universitys licence should only be a decision of last resort” (Grove, 2012). Others asserted that the ban was ill-thought, considering its various harmful effects on the UK educational sector and the economy. Sir Christopher Snowden, vice-president of Universities UK, underscored that the ban would have negative effects on the UK economy too: The London Met situation is very serious, not only for that university, but for the whole UK sector. UK universities contribute over £8billion to the UK economy through their education of international students and this type of incident certainly threatens that important contribution to the economy. (Clark, 2012). He noted that international students would develop negative perceptions of the UK: “This situation could be interpreted very adversely by international students, their sponsoring organisations and potential students considering study in the UK” (Clark, 2012). They would view the UK as not an ideal environment for completing higher education. Student unions also voiced their indignation. The National Union of Students (NUS) (2012) expressed disgust at the ban because it completely disregarded the contribution of international students to the economy and the cultural diversity and development of the UK. Liam Burns, NUS President, stated: It is disgusting that international students continue to be used as a political football by politicians who seem either incapable of understanding, or are simply uncaring about the impact of their decisions on individuals, universities and the UK economy. (NUS, 2012). Burns further stressed that the last thing that the government wants to do is to upset a mass of well-paying, well-meaning international students. In addition, he believed that the license revocation can have social and psychological impacts on international students: This decision will create panic and potential heartbreak for students not just at London Met but also all around the country. The needs of students must be at the heart of any process to find new places of study and NUS will be working with UUK and HEFCE to support affected students and ensure as far as possible that they can continue studying in the UK. (NUS, 2012). He is concerned of how overseas students will perceive the UK, especially if they do not get any helpful assistance or support after the ban. Reaction from Affected International Students in LMU and Other Institutions Students expressed anger over the crackdown on international students. International student Zohan Tapia talked about what she thought about the ban and restrictive visa rules. She said: The home secretary, Theresa May, may feel that talking tough on immigration, and imposing humiliating clampdowns, will give her party a boost in the polls. But she should realise that this gain will only be short term – because if this trend continues, ultimately, Britain will be the loser. (Tapia, 2013). Tapia (2013) connected the visa rules with higher political popularity due to upcoming elections. She found the crackdown degrading to both international students and Britain. NUS President Burns censured the suspicion of the government against international students: Politicians need to realise that a continued attitude of suspicion towards international students could endanger the continuation of higher education as a successful export industry. This heavy-handed decision makes no sense for students, no sense for institutions and no sense for the country. This situation and the botched process by which the decision was arrived at could be avoided if international students were not included in statistics of permanent migrants. (NUS, 2012). He does not think that international students should be targeted. He emphasises that international students should not be treated as permanent immigrants since they are in the UK as students. International students were upset over the ban and complained of discrimination and feeling unwelcomed. Immediately after the ban, the NUS (2012) reported increases in correspondence from international students of feelings of not feeling welcomed anymore in the UK. Students also felt the effects of strict visa rules. Mostafa Rajaai has started the third year of his BA in London. He asserted that it is “racist and degrading” to attend classes through signing in regularly. He said: “If I knew that was the situation, I wouldnt have come in the first place, and would tell others back home to think twice” (Tapia, 2013). Zoha Tapia felt the same resentment. She talked about the pros and cons of signing in and other strict visa rules imposed on international students: Though signing in may not seem like a big deal, the office isnt necessarily open at the hours we are at university. While I do not have an issue with monitoring attendance during class, sign-ins are not only inconvenient but also make us feel under permanent suspicion, unwanted even. And why should we be the only ones targeted: dont British and EU students also have the duty to attend classes? It feels like discrimination. (Tapia, 2013). On the one hand, she understood the role of attendance monitoring to student performance. On the other hand, she did not like how constant sign-ins made her feel. These rules, which are ever-changing, make her feel unwanted and discriminated upon. Tapia (2013) noted that British and EU students also have the same duty to attend classes, but they do not face the same attendance controls. These students are underscoring the effect of strict visa rules and the ban on their sense of well-being as international students who already have existing stressors (e.g. language and cultural differences, as McMahon, 2011 and Wang et al., 2015 showed in their studies). Other students faced deportation too because of strict visa rules, even those who did not study in LMU. Jin Yang is a Chinese masters student at Sheffield University. She also faced possible deportation, even after paying for “more than £27,000 for her two-year landscape architecture course” (Fazackerley, 2013). Before Christmas, the court gave her an unhappy gift. She “received a curt notification that as she had finished earlier than expected, she must leave the country by 1 January, although her original student visa expires in May” (Fazackerley, 2013). She also noted the impacts of tough immigration and visa rules on other international students of these visa changes: “The majority of my classmates have given up the right of attending their graduation ceremony this week. Most had bought plane tickets for their parents, but they have gone already” (Fazackerley, 2013). The university offered to help her with the costs through a visitor’s visa. Jin Yang insisted on staying: “I paid a very expensive international tuition fee and I feel I have the right to attend my graduation. This is all so unfair” (Fazackerley, 2013). Apparently, the visa and immigration changes are affecting international students as a whole, not only immigrants. Of all these affected students, the foreign students of LMU expressed significant frustration and confusion. Donna Marie Winstanley, from Hong Kong, is in the third year of an international relations course at the university, and she said: “Im just sat here in shock. Ive already paid £16,000 in fees and was preparing to pay £8,000 for this years fees. I dont want to leave” (Garner, 2012b). She could not believe that she paid a significant amount of money, as well as time and effort, for nothing. Other foreign students conducted a peaceful demonstration to oppose the ban. International students from Londons Metropolitan University protested at Downing Street after learning of the University’s revoked HTS (Clark, 2012). See Figure 1 for the photo of demonstrators. The students had their mouths taped to signify their loss of right to study legally in Britain (Clark, 2012). The University has not conducted interviews and surveys, however, of how international students felt because of the ban. Figure 1: International Students’ Protest against UKBA’s Decision Source: Clark (2012) from The Daily Mail online After the Lifting of the Ban LMU’s Tarnished Image and Lost Revenues On 9 April 2013, the ban on LMU’s sponsorship was lifted; however, it suffered the brunt of the financial effects of the UKBA’s decision. The Home Office stated that university had attained essential improvements to its monitoring of students turnout and immigration status (Richardson, 2013). The agency stressed, nevertheless, that LMU stays on the probation list and it has limited the latter’s foreign student recruitment (Richardson, 2013). LMU complained that the ban created a “£30m hole in its budget,” apart from the damage on its image on international students (Shepherd, 2013). The loss of its sponsorship license only worsened the effects of the “70% cut in the number of its courses since 2009” (Shepherd, 2013). The University and College Union said they were happy with the return of HTS status, but they asserted that the government has yet to respond to the “unnecessary disruption and costs during the last six months” (Richardson, 2013). The government did not show any concrete action regarding mitigating the effects of the ban and visa restrictions on the experiences and perceptions of international students, which are important to their decision to stay and to choose the UK as their choice for higher education (Lillyman and Bennett, 2014). Wider Effects on UK Universities Other British universities suffered the same loss of revenues too, which shows that the UKBA ruling affected the UK higher education sector as a whole. Surrey University has reported a 65% drop in Indian students from 2010 to 2012, with masters recruitment showing a large decline (Fazackerley, 2013). Prof Christopher Snowden, vice-chancellor of Surrey University noted: “And that was a market that was growing very healthily” (Fazackerley, 2013). International students may not be very vocal with their sentiments about the ban, but figures do not lie. They are finding other countries as better options for international education. Dr Tim Westlake, director for the student experience at Manchester University, confirmed that they are also experiencing revenue losses: Since 2004, the university has had significant growth in Indian students, but over the past two years there has been a 32% drop in Indian masters enrolments. Masters applications from India are down again by 33% this year. (Fazackerley, 2013). International students are flocking away than towards UK universities, both in undergraduate and graduate programs. International Students’ Lower Applications for UK Universities To expand on this further, international students are rejecting application for UKs most prestigious universities due to UK’s immigration curbs (Garner, 2012a). The top 24 UK institutions, which include Oxford and Cambridge, saw a decline of 30% in application from Indian students (Garner, 2012a). The government’s crackdown on international students, including the ban on LMU, has visible effects across the UK higher education sector. Dr Wendy Piatt, director general of the Russell Group, noted: “As ministers crack down on abuse of the system, they must be careful about the messages they send to the worlds best and brightest students” (Garner, 2012a). The Russell Group underscores that overseas-student numbers must be preserved because the education of non-EU citizens is “a major UK export industry” that contributes to £2.5 billion a year in fees (Garner, 2012a). Craig Calhoun, the new director of the London School of Economics, stressed his “concern” about overseas recruitment (Garner, 2012a). He observed a “modest drop” in the reception of places from international students because “people are worried about the possibility the Government might suddenly and without notice revoke visas” (Garner, 2012a). The ban has created a sense of insecurity and doubt on the government’s ability to protect the educational rights of international students. New visa regulations also impact work and application arrangements with international students that are turning them away too. Visa application has become more difficult with tough questions on destinations and English competency (Garner, 2012a). Calhoun noted: “If you are a bright student and you have offers from the LSE and Cambridge and Harvard and you havent got a visa for the UK, what are you going to do? Every year we have students turned down for visas for reasons we cant fathom” (Garner, 2012a). In addition, several universities concur that Indian students have been chiefly turned off by the strict new rules on post-study work visas (Fazackerley, 2013). Many Indian students study in the UK and even take loans because of the opportunity to work in the UK and gain some experience before going back to their home countries (Fazackerley, 2013). At the University of East Anglia, vice-chancellor Professor Edward Acton talked about the “negative vibes” towards international students and academics that decreased international student applications (Garner, 2012a). He said that their university had previously one “near genius” mathematician who lost a post because of visa restrictions (Garner, 2012a). He added: “The regulations said we couldnt appoint him if anybody within the EU could do the job. There was – but they didnt take into account a stellar Russian who could get you a Nobel Prize” (Garner, 2012a). He also emphasised that that LMU’s ban affair generated “untold reputational damage to the UK higher education system” (Garner, 2012a). These restrictions create an image that the UK does not want or welcome international students as temporary or possibly long-term workers too. Long-Term Negative Effects of Strict Visa Rules and the Ban Though LMU’s HTS revocation has been lifted, higher education professors and personnel warned of how UK government’s crackdown on students affected them all. Professor Acton stated that the “repercussions could still be felt as his colleagues received the message it was impossible to get a visa to work in England” (Garner, 2012a). Sally Hunt, general secretary of the academics University and College Union, said institutions are not yet completely feeling the UKBAs decision on Britains standing to foreign students and their families and sponsors overseas: Hundreds of students faced a worrying period of insecurity and unnecessary costs as they tried to find somewhere else to study...We are pleased the university has got its licence back, but feel the UKBA should have taken a less draconian approach and avoided the mess that so many students, the university and our international reputation got caught up in. (Shepherd, 2013). The ban may have lasted for six months, but its effects on international students and the economy have yet to be determined. Conclusion The review of literature shows that the ban affected international students’ education and stay in the UK. Some of them experienced distress over being deported, as if they were illegal immigrants. They also sensed confusion over their discriminated status, when they were willing to pay large fees and complete academic requirements. The review, however, indicates a gap because there has been no study that has systematically asked about how the students felt and thought about the ban and new visa rules. Future studies should examine how tough visa rules affected LMU’s students per se and other international students, specifically, their thoughts and experiences as students and how they perceive the UK as a higher education and employment destination. References BBC News (2012) ‘London Metropolitan University students fear deportation,’ BBC News, 30 August. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/education-19419395 (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Brooks, R., Waters, J. and Pimlott-Wilson, H. (2012) ‘International education and the employability of UK students,’ British Educational Research Journal, 38(2), pp.281-298. Casciani, D. (2012) ‘Analysis: London Mets foreign students,’ BBC News, 30 August. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-19425955 (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Clark, L. (2012) ‘2,600 face the threat of deportation after damning government probe: University told to stop letting in students from overseas,’ Daily Mail, 30 August. Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2195566/London-Metropolitan-Universitys-visa-licence-revoked-students-fear-deportation.html#ixzz3aYkfzJfu (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Fazackerley, A. (2013) ‘Visa changes mean foreign students turn their back on unfriendly Britain,’ The Guardian, 7 January. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jan/07/visa-rules-deter-international-students (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Garner, R. (2012a) ‘Foreign students spurn UK universities after immigration curbs,’ The Independent, 11 October. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/foreign-students-spurn-uk-universities-after-immigration-curbs-8206130.html (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Garner, R. (2012b) ‘2,500 foreign students at London Metropolitan University in desperate bid to avoid deportation,’ The Independent, 30 August. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/2500-foreign-students-at-london-metropolitan-university-in-desperate-bid-to-avoid-deportation-8096212.html (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Gil, N. (2014) ‘International students in the UK: who are they really?’ The Guardian, 13 October. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/oct/13/-sp-international-students-in-the-uk-who-are-they (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Grove, J. (2012) ‘London Met banned from enrolling overseas students,’ Times Higher Education, 30 August. Available at: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/london-met-banned-from-enrolling-overseas-students/420993.article (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Lillyman, S. and Bennett, C. (2014) ‘Providing a positive learning experience for international students studying at UK universities: a literature review,’ Journal of Research in International Education, 13(1), pp. 63–75. DOI: 10.1177/1475240914529859. London Metropolitan University. (2012) ‘Press release: Revocation of Highly Trusted Status for sponsoring international students,’ News from the London Metropolitan University. Available at: http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/news/press-releases/press-releases-2012/revocation-of-highly-trusted-status-for-sponsoring/ (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Olivas, M. and Li, C. (2006) ‘Understanding stressors of international students in higher education: what college counselors and personnel need to know,’ Journal of Instructional Psychology, 33(3), pp. 217-22. McMahon, P. (2011) ‘Chinese voices: Chinese learners and their experiences of living and studying in the United Kingdom,’ Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 33(4), pp.401-414. DOI: 10.1080/1360080X.2011.585739. National Union of Students (2012) ‘NUS responds to Government decision to revoke London Metropolitan Universitys license to sponsor visas,’ National Union of Students, 30 August. Available at: http://www.nus.org.uk/en/news/nus-responds-to-government-decision-to-revoke-london-metropolitan-universitys-license-to-sponsor-visas/ (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Richardson, H. (2013) ‘London Met wins back foreign student licence,’ BBC News, 9 April. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/education-22080301 (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Saubert, S.B. (2014) A phenomenological exploration of the experiences of international students, PhD thesis, The University of Leeds, Available at: http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/8614/1/Saubert_Thesis.pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Shepherd, J. (2013) ‘Ban on London Met University enrolling foreign students lifted,’ The Guardian, 9 April. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/apr/09/ban-university-foreign-students-lifted (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Tapia, Z. (2013) ‘Picking on international students will only damage Britain,’ The Guardian, 30 September. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/30/international-students-damage-britain-immigration (Accessed: 12 May 2015). Wang, K.T., Heppner, P.P., Wang, L. and Zhu, F. (2015) ‘Cultural intelligence trajectories in new international students: implications for the development of cross-cultural competence,’ International Perspectives in Psychology: Research, Practice, Consultation, 4(1), pp. 51-65. Read More