Fit For Purpose?
I’ve had a few arguments with friends over the last few weeks about the situation faced by London Metropolitan University whose licence to sponsor overseas student visas has been revoked. My poor husband has been woken up many mornings by me shouting obscenities at Radio 4, and my friends have backed off, surprised by my (I hope) uncharacteristic anger presumably assuming I’m suffering from some sort of PMT that manifests itself in overly vociferous defence of the UK Higher Education system.
The problem is, of course, as with so many things, that people venture an opinion based on half a story. The comments on the Guardian and BBC websites (I didn’t dare look at the Daily Mail) made me seethe, so quick were they to smugly condemn London Metropolitan University: “The law is the law, and sadly it seems London Met failed to abide by it” declared one, happy to cast one of many stones at the convicted institution of which he presumably knew little. “At last, somebody is implementing the law on immigrants, at last, at last! The number of frauds was very large. deception, fraud and intent to deceive just to get to stay here. Just because you are a foreigner, doesn't mean you can ignore the law! Righteous imperial guilt time is over. get the frauds out!,” announced another, failing to cite how any of this was relevant to London Met.
So what did London Met supposedly do wrong? According to the BBC, they got three things wrong. Firstly, in a sample of 101 students, 26 didn’t have a valid visa; secondly, 20 out of 50 sampled students didn’t have valid English language certificates; and finally, many had what has vaguely been called “attendance problems” in news reports. Well, I hear you cry, enough said! Out with their licence! The institution is clearly hopeless.
But you don’t work with these rules and requirements on a daily basis. I do. I am not surprised that many didn’t have a “valid” visa, because it’s so difficult to get one these days. I don’t mean that the rules are strict, I mean that they are silly, obtuse and time-consuming. Applying for a student visa is like being trapped in a Kafka novel. Anyone – student, worker, whatever – whose visa is running out should either leave the country or make a new application. Simple, yes? Not really. The student visa form was over 40 pages long. If you send it in time but the application is deemed “invalid” then it is returned to you, and the application deemed never to have been made. If your visa has expired in the meantime, you’re screwed. I know of students who have sent their visa applications well in time who become unwittingly illegal because:
- They forgot to tick the box on the form that asks “Have you ever lived in Northern Ireland”? They haven’t ever lived in Northern Ireland, but the lack of a single tick is enough to put them on the wrong side of the law.
- They missed the (well hidden) box that asked if they were receiving public funds. Overseas nationals on student visas are not allowed to receive public funds, so frankly good luck to them if they are. But regardless, the form is returned, and they become illegal.
- Their photo is deemed invalid because (all true) they have an afro so their head is too big, they are wearing the same top they wore in a previous photo so are mistakenly thought to be using the same photo which is thus too old or (my favourite) “the applicant is almost smiling.” Woe betide anyone who looks a bit coy in a UKBA photo.
Furthermore, UKBA’s delays in processing applications is well documented. I know of students who have sent their application several weeks before their visa is due to expire, only to receive an unceremoniously returned “invalid” envelope two months later.
And then we get to the English requirements. It seems a bit daft to me that government departments are telling universities what level of English is required of students to study in the UK. I would not profess to tell a government department how to run its affairs, yet apparently the UKBA are experts when it comes to IELTS, TOEFL and the like. In fact, dictats on English language are all rather arbitrary. I have seen students who have passed their respective exams with flying colours with whom I am unable to have an even partly intelligible conversation. I have seen others whose English on paper is less good, but this won’t necessarily hinder their performance in higher education, depending on what they’re studying. I used to work at an art college, and would contend that the minimum level of English required to study jewellery design is very different to that needed for a History degree. Furthermore, UKBA told universities they are free to determine themselves whether or not a student possesses a high enough level of English. Apparently not.
And as for attendance, I would be interested to see how many UK students remained on their courses if they were thrown out for lack of attendance. I didn’t go to all my lectures. I wasn’t required to. That wasn’t how my degree worked. And I got a First – I wasn’t spending the time when I wasn’t in lectures working cash in hand in a Chinese restaurant, which is what UKBA seems to think is the default for foreign students. I was busy writing essays, being irritatingly earnest in Students' Union meetings and, um, trying and failing to save the world.
I’m not denying that London Met did things wrong. But I don’t think the UKBA is in any position to be passing judgement on universities – whose main role is to carry out teaching and research – when the UKBA, whose job is to police our borders, has failed miserably to get its own house in order. This is, after all, an organisation which:
- Has apparently lost around 150000 people who shouldn’t be here
- Has no exit controls, so actually has no idea if all the people who come in go home again.
- Takes around 6 months to issue straightforward visas and residence certificates trapping people in the UK so they can’t physically leave even if they want to, as UKBA is holding their passport hostage.
- Was heavily criticised for queues at immigration at Heathrow in excess of 3 hours, which potentially compromised security checks but which they explained were just due to "organisational change"
- Admits that it makes so many errors when issuing visas abroad that it has to have a whole department called the Entry Clearance Correction Scheme whose role is amend these mistakes (incidentally this is the best department in the whole of the Home Office, with wonderfully friendly staff who should receive the highest praise and a substantial bonus, though I suspect they get neither.)
- Require universities to act as campus immigration police and dob on their students for them if they breach the extensive rules in any way, presumably because, as I’ve demonstrated above, they don’t have the means to do it themselves. A good example: universities are supposed to report students who do not enrol. The UKBA then limits their visa to 60 days to give them time to leave the UK or change their visa, if they’re going to study somewhere else instead. My own institution diligently reported our no-shows in September, and the UKBA duly limited their leave to 60 days... in May.
- Has tweaked the rules that relate to students no less than 14 times in 3 years.
- Has unreliable computer systems that are constantly failing, meaning they actually turned away thousands of people who had diligently turned up to try to comply with the law and renew their visa.
- And as if to illustrate all of the above, yesterday the UKBA released yet another new version of its Tier 4 visa form which includes at least 10 spelling, grammatical and layout errors, including “fiancial” and "sponsorred", ten boxes to tick where there are only 6 options to which these should correspond, and the confusing sentence “If you are currently or have ever been known by any other name, please provided details in the box below.” Bafflingly, the next questions asks you to tick a box to confirm you’ve enclosed evidence of...your other name? No. Of “your additional nationalities.” Right. It makes you wonder if the UKBA checked the English Language level of whoever put the form together.
I could go on. I could – and my friends will sadly attest to this – talk for hours about it and still have things left to say, and countless implausible yet true examples to illustrate my frustrations. But I am infuriated by so many aspects of this situation – by bureaucracy and systems so multifarious, illogical and impenetrable that even the Discworld’s Drumknott would consider them excessive; by millions of students being treated and/or at least made to feel like criminals and eventually taking their talents and (let’s face it) their money elsewhere; by colleagues who previously loved an interesting job that involved helping people from around the world wanting out or going off sick because the constant fear that they may be fired for failing to notice a student didn’t tick the “Have you ever lived in Northern Ireland?” box is starting to take its toll. In short, it is my personal opinion that UKBA ought to get its own house in order before inviting itself into other people's and shitting on the coffee table.
The problem is, of course, as with so many things, that people venture an opinion based on half a story. The comments on the Guardian and BBC websites (I didn’t dare look at the Daily Mail) made me seethe, so quick were they to smugly condemn London Metropolitan University: “The law is the law, and sadly it seems London Met failed to abide by it” declared one, happy to cast one of many stones at the convicted institution of which he presumably knew little. “At last, somebody is implementing the law on immigrants, at last, at last! The number of frauds was very large. deception, fraud and intent to deceive just to get to stay here. Just because you are a foreigner, doesn't mean you can ignore the law! Righteous imperial guilt time is over. get the frauds out!,” announced another, failing to cite how any of this was relevant to London Met.
So what did London Met supposedly do wrong? According to the BBC, they got three things wrong. Firstly, in a sample of 101 students, 26 didn’t have a valid visa; secondly, 20 out of 50 sampled students didn’t have valid English language certificates; and finally, many had what has vaguely been called “attendance problems” in news reports. Well, I hear you cry, enough said! Out with their licence! The institution is clearly hopeless.
But you don’t work with these rules and requirements on a daily basis. I do. I am not surprised that many didn’t have a “valid” visa, because it’s so difficult to get one these days. I don’t mean that the rules are strict, I mean that they are silly, obtuse and time-consuming. Applying for a student visa is like being trapped in a Kafka novel. Anyone – student, worker, whatever – whose visa is running out should either leave the country or make a new application. Simple, yes? Not really. The student visa form was over 40 pages long. If you send it in time but the application is deemed “invalid” then it is returned to you, and the application deemed never to have been made. If your visa has expired in the meantime, you’re screwed. I know of students who have sent their visa applications well in time who become unwittingly illegal because:
- They forgot to tick the box on the form that asks “Have you ever lived in Northern Ireland”? They haven’t ever lived in Northern Ireland, but the lack of a single tick is enough to put them on the wrong side of the law.
- They missed the (well hidden) box that asked if they were receiving public funds. Overseas nationals on student visas are not allowed to receive public funds, so frankly good luck to them if they are. But regardless, the form is returned, and they become illegal.
- Their photo is deemed invalid because (all true) they have an afro so their head is too big, they are wearing the same top they wore in a previous photo so are mistakenly thought to be using the same photo which is thus too old or (my favourite) “the applicant is almost smiling.” Woe betide anyone who looks a bit coy in a UKBA photo.
Furthermore, UKBA’s delays in processing applications is well documented. I know of students who have sent their application several weeks before their visa is due to expire, only to receive an unceremoniously returned “invalid” envelope two months later.
And then we get to the English requirements. It seems a bit daft to me that government departments are telling universities what level of English is required of students to study in the UK. I would not profess to tell a government department how to run its affairs, yet apparently the UKBA are experts when it comes to IELTS, TOEFL and the like. In fact, dictats on English language are all rather arbitrary. I have seen students who have passed their respective exams with flying colours with whom I am unable to have an even partly intelligible conversation. I have seen others whose English on paper is less good, but this won’t necessarily hinder their performance in higher education, depending on what they’re studying. I used to work at an art college, and would contend that the minimum level of English required to study jewellery design is very different to that needed for a History degree. Furthermore, UKBA told universities they are free to determine themselves whether or not a student possesses a high enough level of English. Apparently not.
And as for attendance, I would be interested to see how many UK students remained on their courses if they were thrown out for lack of attendance. I didn’t go to all my lectures. I wasn’t required to. That wasn’t how my degree worked. And I got a First – I wasn’t spending the time when I wasn’t in lectures working cash in hand in a Chinese restaurant, which is what UKBA seems to think is the default for foreign students. I was busy writing essays, being irritatingly earnest in Students' Union meetings and, um, trying and failing to save the world.
I’m not denying that London Met did things wrong. But I don’t think the UKBA is in any position to be passing judgement on universities – whose main role is to carry out teaching and research – when the UKBA, whose job is to police our borders, has failed miserably to get its own house in order. This is, after all, an organisation which:
- Has apparently lost around 150000 people who shouldn’t be here
- Has no exit controls, so actually has no idea if all the people who come in go home again.
- Takes around 6 months to issue straightforward visas and residence certificates trapping people in the UK so they can’t physically leave even if they want to, as UKBA is holding their passport hostage.
- Was heavily criticised for queues at immigration at Heathrow in excess of 3 hours, which potentially compromised security checks but which they explained were just due to "organisational change"
- Admits that it makes so many errors when issuing visas abroad that it has to have a whole department called the Entry Clearance Correction Scheme whose role is amend these mistakes (incidentally this is the best department in the whole of the Home Office, with wonderfully friendly staff who should receive the highest praise and a substantial bonus, though I suspect they get neither.)
- Require universities to act as campus immigration police and dob on their students for them if they breach the extensive rules in any way, presumably because, as I’ve demonstrated above, they don’t have the means to do it themselves. A good example: universities are supposed to report students who do not enrol. The UKBA then limits their visa to 60 days to give them time to leave the UK or change their visa, if they’re going to study somewhere else instead. My own institution diligently reported our no-shows in September, and the UKBA duly limited their leave to 60 days... in May.
- Has tweaked the rules that relate to students no less than 14 times in 3 years.
- Has unreliable computer systems that are constantly failing, meaning they actually turned away thousands of people who had diligently turned up to try to comply with the law and renew their visa.
- And as if to illustrate all of the above, yesterday the UKBA released yet another new version of its Tier 4 visa form which includes at least 10 spelling, grammatical and layout errors, including “fiancial” and "sponsorred", ten boxes to tick where there are only 6 options to which these should correspond, and the confusing sentence “If you are currently or have ever been known by any other name, please provided details in the box below.” Bafflingly, the next questions asks you to tick a box to confirm you’ve enclosed evidence of...your other name? No. Of “your additional nationalities.” Right. It makes you wonder if the UKBA checked the English Language level of whoever put the form together.
I could go on. I could – and my friends will sadly attest to this – talk for hours about it and still have things left to say, and countless implausible yet true examples to illustrate my frustrations. But I am infuriated by so many aspects of this situation – by bureaucracy and systems so multifarious, illogical and impenetrable that even the Discworld’s Drumknott would consider them excessive; by millions of students being treated and/or at least made to feel like criminals and eventually taking their talents and (let’s face it) their money elsewhere; by colleagues who previously loved an interesting job that involved helping people from around the world wanting out or going off sick because the constant fear that they may be fired for failing to notice a student didn’t tick the “Have you ever lived in Northern Ireland?” box is starting to take its toll. In short, it is my personal opinion that UKBA ought to get its own house in order before inviting itself into other people's and shitting on the coffee table.
Labels: UKBA
posted by RLS at 1:32 pm
8 comments
