PALATINATE | Thursday 28th October 2021
17
Politics
Student
Division in plain sight: rising international student fees
Emerson Shams Discussion of tuition fees arises every year, typically focused on the £9,250 fees that home students (and, until this year, EU students) pay being unfair. These arguments typically come with students feeling that they are not receiving a proper education for this large cost. However, the discussion typically leaves out the largest group which educational institutions make money from: international students. Anyone who has spoken to an international student knows that, at Durham University, their tuition fees are at least double those of home fees. Mark Steed wrote in Britain in Hong Kong that education is
“Britain’s most valuable export”. While that is debatable, it definitely is one of the country’s main exports, whether that is through the use of GSCEs and A-levels in international schools around the world or through the high number of spaces for international students to attend university in the UK every year. In fact, in 2019, the Department of Education showed £19.9 billion earned through educational exports as a whole. Regarding how this works at a university level, international students are enticed by Britain’s fame for higher education institutions, which in comparison to America are available for a steal. But, as the Government subsidises local students, it uses the fees from international
Teaching Year
Law
Humanities
STEM
Social Sciences
2018/2019
£18,300
£18,300
£23,100
£18,300
2019/2020
£19,250
£19,250
£24,300
£19,250
2020/2021
£20,500
£20,500
£25,800
£20,500
2021/2022
£21,730
£21,730
£27,350
£21,500
2022/2023
£23,000
£22,900
£28,500
£23,100
Durham University international student tuition fees
students to fund other university needs, which is how they explain the drastic increase in price. One of the biggest issues at the moment though is how much the price increases every year for international students. While the tuition fees for home students have consistently been £9,250 per annum, international fees have gone up around £5,000 over a five year period. An evaluation of tuition fees at Durham since 2018 in the table below shows just how much they have changed. These fees are quickly becoming unmanageable. The stereotype that all international students are extremely rich is incorrect, with most being from similar backgrounds to a majority of Durham students. Often, what happens is that a student’s family will save up for them to study Business abroad in the hope that it will help their future £18,300 career paths, but their families £20,250 have to work overtime or take £21,500 out loans to pay for the tuition. £22,900 And most when getting here £24,500 either get part time work or live
meagrely to get by and finish their education. Thus, this increase will further cause these situations to happen, in addition to getting to the point that only the most elite can study abroad. However, this inhibits universities’ ability to grow positively from the interactions with an international community. One thing is clear though: international students are a commodity. They are told that the increase of fees is to cover what the British government subsidises for home students, but this argument falls apart once one compares the options available for home and international students. Firstly, access to university disability support is limited to home students because they get monetary support from the government for this. The disabilities department in Durham does not have the financial means to provide resources for international students. This is an ableist problem as it stops disabled international students from receiving the same support as their peers. And though fees are meant to cover what is provided for home students, this important factor is left out. Furthermore, with the Covid-19 situation, the gap in support for
international and home students widened. In addition to the traditional arguments as to why online education was not worth the standard tuition fees any student pays, many international students ended up being stuck in their home countries over the last academic year which led to paying exorbitant tuition fees for many resources that they had absolutely zero access to. For example, the library became a shipping service for books to allow students to access literature over lockdown. However this service did not extend overseas, leaving international students without the full extent of the library. In conclusion, international students have been treated as little more than a commodity to exploit through rising tuition fees on the basis that universities need the extra money. However, the fairness of these fees has hardly been discussed, mainly due to a negative stereotype that all international students come from extremely wealthy backgrounds. It is important to involve international students in the conversations about how tuition fees impact us all: they need to be treated in the same manner as home students.
Critical Race Theory: an educational battleground Lorna Petty Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a term denoting the controversial movement of US civil rights scholars and activists who advocate a theory-focussed teaching of race and inequality at the centre of the US curriculum. A prominent doctrine of CRT is that disparities in racial outcomes are the response of a complex system of racism and institutional dynamics, rather than deliberate individual prejudices. CRT scholars view white supremacy as an intersectional construct that promotes the interests of whiteness and white people at the expense of non-white persons. In the aftermath of the Black Lives Matter movement, education on these concepts has advanced – whilst not sufficiently – significantly. Many are familiar with the idea of systemic racism and micro-aggressions that contribute to an unequal society in which we see people of colour being continually disadvantaged. But CRT produces a debate between academic critics, some of whom argue that it relies on social constructionism, promotes
storytelling above evidence, rejects truth, and opposes liberalism. This debate has seen conservative US lawmakers restrict CRT instruction and other anti-racism programs under the argument that they teach ‘unAmerican’ values of division and racism. The campaign against CRT was taken up confidently by Donald Trump in the run-up to and aftermath of the 2020 US presidential election. But it is not just America that agonises over this issue; in October 2020 the Conservative MP and Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch made the following comments on the teaching of CRT in UK schools: “We do not want to see teachers teaching their pupils about white privilege and inherited racial guilt ... any school which teaches these elements of critical race theory, or which promotes partisan political views such as defunding the police without offering a balanced treatment of opposing views, is breaking the law.” After these comments and subsequent accusations by Badenoch that certain writers of popular, black-authored books “wanted a segregated society”, the MP was denounced by the
Black Writers Guild in an open letter that indicated Badenoch’s comments had been “not only false but dangerous” and asked that “the government ensure that ministers […] uphold democratic values such as freedom of speech and act with a duty of care.” But as Badenoch is a black-British woman herself, it is clear this debate is not simply racial, but political and ethical beyond colour.
For too long the history of white supremacy has been omitted by education authorities For supporters, CRT is a crucial framework for understanding the way that systemic inequalities and institutional racism can propagate discrimination and disadvantage. But for opponents, it is a seditious plan to indoctrinate young white people to reject their history, whilst encouraging young people of colour to view themselves as helpless victims unable to overcome the racism of an unfair society. Christopher Rufo, an antiCRT activist in the US has warned against the “elites” who “seek
to reengineer the foundation of human psychology and social institutions through the new politics of race”. Rufo’s comments on Tucker in September 2020 saw Trump take his advice and issue an executive order directing agencies of the US federal government to withdraw funding for programs that mention ‘white privilege’ or ‘critical race theory’. Whilst comments on the divisiveness of CRT are understandable, perhaps they simply reflect the discomfort of acknowledging the scale of white privilege and systemic racism in 2021. At least 30 schools across the US have recommended that students should read ‘Not my Idea’, a children’s book by author Anastasia Higginbotham, who has labelled her theories as CRT and argues that “any place where there are white people has violent white supremacy embedded into it”. Comments like these are certainly hard to hear, but also of great importance and interest. Listening to the voices of those who are marginalised by white privilege and bringing depth to debates on racial inequality is the first step in tackling systemic racism. If paired with a projection of
hope and possibility for a better future if change is enacted, then the teachings of CRT could help turn the tide on racism in the US and UK today. Teaching young white children about their inherent participation in a racist system is complex and should be done with care to ensure that doom and impotence do not overtake the desire for action. But for too long the history of white supremacy has been omitted by the education authorities, and it is important for both people of colour and for white children to understand the atrocities that formed the systemic racism and white privilege of the modern world. CRT, whilst controversial, is one method through which we can reach an understanding of these forces; and the censoring of discussion around it is at best ignorant, at worst an attempt to silence discussions that would begin anti-racist action toward bettering the system for persons of colour in both the UK and the USA. IDEA FOR AN ARTICLE?
Send your thoughts to politics@palatinate.org.uk
