Responses to an earlier blog showing that, post-Brexit, a number of UK universities would continue to offer all European Union students preferential tuition fee status over international students suggested it was worth digging deeper. It’s also worth considering what the consequences might be if a group of international students or the National Union of Students decided to test whether a university’s blanket discount for EU students was discriminatory. The recruitment implications for pathway operations if some university partners provide preferential fees for EU students is another dimension for consideration.
Research on university websites suggests that universities planning to give EU students the same tuition fee as UK students in the 2021 academic year include:
| Bedfordshire | Buckinghamshire |
| Solent | Leicester |
| West London | Royal Holloway |
| De Montfort | Portsmouth |
| Oxford Brookes | Nottingham Trent |
In most cases the intention is clearly stated but there are more subtle versions of preferential pricing such as the University of Gloucestershire where details are buried in the 2021/22 Fee and Bursary Policy (on page 14 of 19). It notes that “The International Grant Award is a tuition fee waiver of £3,000 deducted from your first year’s tuition fee” while the “EU Grant Award is a tuition fee waiver of £3,000 deducted from each year”. So, an EU undergraduate student on a three-year degree course gets the benefit of an additional £6,000 of grant “automatically awarded at the point of offer”.
Some of the university websites are so Delphic or poorly organized that it is difficult to confirm their position one way or another so the list may not be comprehensive. At least 13 universities reviewed do not seem to be in a position to show fees for 2021/22 or say they are awaiting further information from the Government. These include some surprisingly big players:
| Coventry | Northumbria |
| Cambridge | Liverpool |
| University of the Arts, London | Brunel* |
| Queen Mary | Loughborough |
| Greenwich | SOAS |
| Brighton | Hertfordshire |
| London South Bank |
*A source has indicated that Brunel are offering the same rate to EU as Home students in 2021 but I am unable to verify this on the website.
The legal consequences seem ill-defined and it remains possible that last minute Government action might change the situation. Scotland has already decided that post-Brexit it could not legally continue to offer EU students the same, free tuition as Scottish students. Edinburgh University is publishing 2021/22 fees that have three rates – those for Scottish students, Home/Rest of UK, and International/EU. This would suggest that the university sees little room for manoeuvre in maintaining even the Home/Rest of UK for European Union students.
Legal analysis is very thin on the ground with the Time Higher Education article by Elizabeth Jones of Farrer and Co being an exception and the piece does not run to exploring remedies that might arise if the differential fees are illegal. The university would, presumably, be obliged to honour its contract with the EU students to charge them at home rates so could not change that arrangement. If that is the case then it is possible they might be required to reduce fees for all other international students to the same level.
As an example, the difference for De Montfort would be around £5,000 a year per student. HESA data for 2018/19 indicates that the University had 1,020 EU and 2,025 other first degree, full time international students so, if one took a third of the latter number that could suggest around 675 first year international undergraduate students and, therefore, a potential cost of £3.375m a year in lost fees if they had to be charged at the lower rate. There are many ‘ifs’ involved in the calculation and I am happy to make any corrections needed if an authoritative source is able to say how much is at stake.
There’s also the interesting matter of what international students who are attending a course with a commercial pathway provider have been advised about their fees. Just as an example, De Montfort is aligned with Oxford International Education Group (OIEG) which offers an integrated degree – the student can either study an International Year Zero (IYZ) and then go on to do three years with the university or an International First Year (IFY) and go on to do two years with the university.
The point is that the OIEG website shows the “International or Tier 4 Visa students” fee for IYZ at £14,995 for 2020/21 and 2021/22 and for the IFY at £14,995 in 2020/21 rising to £15,995 in 2021/22. EU students on the same courses are being charged £9,250 in 2020/21 and the 2021/22 fees are not yet announced. Commercial providers in a similar situation may soon have to choose whether to continue to offer wholescale preferential rates on the basis of nationality.
Some pathway operations have grown large numbers of EU students into their operation with the lure of being charged the same as Home students when they go on to the university to complete their degree an important sales points. For example, the 2018 QAA Report on the Navitas pathway operation with Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) noted, “The significant growth in student numbers at the Cambridge College, based on recruitment of home and EU students, is a trend that the Provider is looking at in relation to other colleges.” Individual course pages suggest that ARU is currently planning that in 2021/22 EU students will be considered international but that could be tested if other universities and their partners appear to be successful in their recruitment efforts with preferential fees.
It would be good to see the UK Government confirm its position so that UKCISA and universities have to provide certainty to students about the fees they will pay. This is also a moment where the NUS could step up to ensure that international students are being treated equitably. The current situation was wholly foreseeable and organizations that are meant to have student interests at heart are only noticeable by their absence.
If universities offering lower EU fees are successful in their recruitment efforts it does not take a great leap of imagination to see how this could become widespread across the sector. It would mean universities choosing (rather than being obliged by Government) to embed preferential treatment based solely on nationality into their recruitment processes. That seems an unfortunate consequence which should be challenged at the earliest opportunity.