After four years of rigorous research, Lakshmi Priya Balakrishnan’s DPhil (PhD equivalent) candidacy at the University of Oxford was downgraded to a Master of Letters (M.Litt.), with assessors citing a lack of “scope” in her work. Despite her college’s support and endorsements from prominent Shakespeare scholars lauding her research as rigorous and groundbreaking, this decision abruptly derailed her academic aspirations. A BBC article written on her case ignited vitriolic trolling, much of which focused on her statement: “I paid £100,000 to get my PhD, not another master’s degree.” Critics dismissed her plight with remarks like, “You can’t buy your degree.”
This response, however, misses the crux of her critique: Lakshmi’s remark was not an entitlement to a degree in exchange for money but an indictment of systemic failures in academia that disproportionately affect international students. Her case underscores a troubling reality in British and global higher education—international students are simultaneously positioned as critical financial assets and yet mistreated by not providing adequate support for their academic, career-related, and unique socio-economic and cultural issues.
College life is challenging for any student, but for international students, the journey is filled with additional, often unseen, unique challenges. International students face intense competition for a limited amount of on-campus, non-work-study positions. The visa and employment restrictions drive down wages and incentivize unsustainable working conditions. “Dealing with all of the issues related to visas and funding restrictions is almost like a second job, and it is a constant source of anxiety”, says a former international student.
In addition to practical issues such as visa restrictions, students from abroad may also encounter cultural misunderstandings or even bias. Samar Harfi, a doctoral student from Saudi Arabia at the Illinois School of Professional Psychology, dresses in a headscarf and modest clothing, which occasionally elicits offensive comments from her peers. "Part of me feels activated and wants to explain myself, but I also just want to be a student," says Harfi. These challenges are compounded by a lack of institutional support and mistreatment.
As a recent article reports, international students in the United Kingdom (UK) are caught in a crossfire of profit-driven policies and anti-immigrant political rhetoric. These students face skyrocketing tuition fees, overburdened academic staff, and inadequate policy changes to address their challenges. When no longer profitable—for example when Nigerian students struggled to pay tuition due to their currency collapse—universities withdrew them from courses, curtailing visas and locked them out of critical resources like mental health and disability services.
Scholars like Duna Sabri argue that UK education policies commodify the diverse “student experience,” homogenizing it and erasing structural barriers like socio-economic and cultural inequities. The systemic disregard of Lakshmi’s emotional and financial investments is yet another reflection of this dynamic. Speaking about Lakshmi’s experience, Sanaz Raji, a UK-based activist, argued that the rage against Balakrishnan is motivated by her daring to reveal that migrant students are being poorly treated not just in “lesser” institutions but even at the likes of Oxford. Recent reports also suggest that British universities have been reprimanded over unfair treatment of students accused of academic misconduct in a report by the higher education ombudsman for England and Wales. More specific recent cases include Nigerian PhD student Sue Agazie’s partial victory against Newcastle University—where she received a refund and compensation after mishandling by the university—and Egyptian postgraduate Riham Sheble’s compensation from the University of Warwick after being denied extensions during cancer treatment. This indicates that the inequities that Lakshmi is appealing against are not unique. Appeals procedures, often opaque and exclusionary, leave international students without equitable recourse, rendering their concerns invisible. Raji points out that students see universities deliberately drawing out prolonged processes in order to imperil their visa statuses.
However, this dynamic of systemic disregard for international students’ issues and universities’ reliance on exhausting student visas through prolonged appeals procedures is only a surface upshot of a deeper, more fundamental issue within British academia. Market-driven logics reduce international students to revenue sources rather than equal stakeholders in the academic community. This has reduced international students to mere “cash cows,” contributing £14.1 billion to the United Kingdom’s economy in 2008-09, a figure that has only grown in the years since. Yet, one look at recent reports of complaints from non-EU students to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) surging to record high and cases like Lakshmi exposes how international students are disproportionately burdened with financial, academic, and emotional challenges.
It is this issue that Lakshmi tried to articulate in her frustration against her broken Oxford dream. Lakshmi’s family sold all their assets for the Oxford dream which lay broken with a hollow and inadequate explanation of “lack of scope” coupled with vehement online trolling. However, this diabolical mistreatment and further dismissal of international students issues is not limited to the United Kingdom.
In the United States of America (US,) Trump's previous term saw restrictive immigration policies affecting student visas and work opportunities, particularly the H-1B visa. In fact, the denial rate for H-1B visas reached its peak during Trump's presidency — 24%, compared to 2% in 2022. Many international students in the US report exploitation in student work authorization delays and post-graduation employment, where they are often overworked while navigating restrictive visa conditions. Universities in the US heavily market themselves to international students with promises of quality education and career opportunities and yet leave them astray with systemic inequities, precarious employment, and xenophobic political rhetoric once they arrive.
In the recently erupted H1B visa debate, Trump siding with Musk who had pledged to go to war to protect the import of “competent” talent for the tech industry reflects the economic narratives played on students. International talent in the United States is increasingly treated as resources whose worth is tied to their profitability rather than as people with rights and needs. This expects international students and workers to justify their presence in the United States by performing profitably while being mistreated and deprived of necessary support.
Under the guise of highly valued prestige, universities, and educational policies globally are turning a blind eye to international students' challenges. The time has come for universities and government authorities alike to ensure that international students are not merely contributors to their financial coffers but valued and respected stakeholders in the community. The intersection of education as a business and academia as a safe space for international student education remains a critical issue that Lakshmi’s story brings to light. It is a strong call to action for elite universities to balance their reputation with their responsibility to deliver fairness and adequate support for international students. Without it, the unfair price of prestige will continue to be borne by students whose concerns are scornfully dismissed and challenges, conveniently ignored.
(Edited by Madiha Tariq and Srijana Siri)
Comments