Why do our most prestigious and wealthiest Unis accept so many international students ?

and as a result entrance criteria for those subjects has altered across all sites including Oxford Uni. Meaning those who would historically not have got into OXU now can (in certain subjects).

I'd be curious to see any evidence of Oxford uni offers being decreased (doesn't accord with anything I've seen) and for some Cambridge courses while they typically cite the lowest offer on their website (for the one the OPs DS applied to its two A stars and an A, specifically in physics, further maths and maths ... so quite unusual for anyone to actually get that rather than all a stars) , in practice for candidates applying with four a levels the offer will be on all four and they've been asking for more stars over the last few years not fewer.

All Oxbridge courses have more applicants than places, they filter out some before interview on the basis of entrance tests etc and then more by the interview. The idea they've become easier to get into is simply untrue.

But that's not because of international students taking a larger share of the available places.

Money, and the fees are going up aren't they?

No student would be tossing up whether to apply to OXU or OXB.

OBU, like many ex-poly’s, are likely to have a few specialist courses that are high ranking. These normally reflect the previous role of polytechnics in teaching vocational courses that meet the technical needs of local employers. These courses are subjects very rarely taught at older universities which focus on academia and research like OXU.

It’s money money money

Kings College law faculty this past year is c90% international students - they pay the bills

I am sure you know best.

The Times Higher Education Young University Rankings to which you linked lists the world's best universities that are "50 years old or younger" dated 2022. The most up-to-date list seems to show it as 15th overall in this listing in the UK.
This is not quite the same as being 4th in the UK out of all universities, as it includes only 58 newer UK institutions. It actually comes 46th when all 130 UK institutions are included.
Obviously there will always be people for whom it is the best choice for various reasons, but it does not bear comparison with the University of Oxford.

That universities make a profit from international students, regardless of if they choose to use that profit to subsidise UK students.

@Littoralzone but what point are you making? That the tuition fee income isn't necessary because it's less than the income from publishers?

They only care about the money coming in.

Businesses don’t just look at their final figures though, they break it down be sector/department/product/area. If international students didn’t make a profit they would stop having them or would charge them more. UK students are subsidised more by Oxford University Press than they are by international students.

Surely the very definition of profit is that it is the difference between revenue and costs...

They DO make profit from overseas students, as they may do from other activities such as business spin-offs, consultancy, building lets, summer conferences…. That they have to use these profits to cover other loss making areas does not mean these sources of income are not profit-making even if overall the university is loss making.

I just looked up Oxford University income for last year. It seems publishing is one of their biggest sources of income, way above international student fees.

Sorry yes of course the fees make a difference. I meant to write in terms of places offered as these are controlled - they cannot change the number of places offered to international students for medicine to increase fee income.

690 students got all grade 9s in all subjects taken in ten or more subjects last year (though there was a significant drop in top grade from 2+ years ago when Covid marking was still influencing results)

4135 students took three A levels and achieved all A* (stats not present for four A levels)

I posted a link earlier which has OBU as 4th. Its still an attractive option to people albeit not Mag or CC.

My point is there are less people who want to take certain subjects at ALL Uni sites. The numbers for Music and Maths are down everywhere. OBU and Cardiff have closed departments (see bbc news) and as a result entrance criteria for those subjects has altered across all sites including Oxford Uni. Meaning those who would historically not have got into OXU now can (in certain subjects).

They're not making a profit though - they're subsidising home student fees. They're covering overheads!

Its far better now than it used to be. International students pay market rate and (as people have said) subsidise UK students. Essentially, they arent competiting for the same places as UK students, they are a completely separate population.

It used to be a complete shitshow before Brexit though. Back then, EU students were allowed to take all the places from UK students, despite not paying market rate fees (they paid the same loss-making fees that UK students did). And EU students were eligible for student loans, etc. It created a ridiculous situatoin where many of the top universities were 50%+ Europeans on most courses, and British students were completely frozen out.

This has now been fixed, thankfully. EU students now have to pay market rate fees (which is why not many come any more), and international students make a profit for the university.

International Students can get a degree in UK far cheaper than USA or China. Compare costs of a 3 year degree at Cambridge/oxford/UCLImperial with cost of Harvard or Stamford, it’s waaaay cheaper to study in the UK.

When the cap on International students came off Universities really pushed Internationalism, over seas recruitment agents/events, overseas Campuses etc. it’s not a bad thing, Universities still need to deliver world class education to compete globally.

I'm an admissions tutor at Oxford.

It's true that some of the poorer colleges are admitting more international students than in the past for fee income. But it's not as if Oxbridge colleges are trying to turn a quick profit on undergraduate education. Quite the opposite. Our core business is teaching undergraduates but we lose money on home students hand over first. Richer colleges subsidise home students from their endowments; poorer colleges have to find other means.

In reality, the admissions process is by design and in execution meritocratic. I don't think it's hard to imagine that some overseas students might massively outperform most UK applicants on a standardised test. After all, overseas is a big place.

No admitting tutor is thinking about how much the eight or so students they admit a year will or won't contribute to the UK economy. For a tutor in maths, the dream admit would be someone who is going to win a Fields Medal. At that point, the applicant could have a conviction for drink-driving, a 4 in English GCSE and an irritating personality: it would all be overlooked.

The bold parts are meant to be stars!

10 x grade 9 and 4 A* is actually exceptional, even for Oxbridge

DD found that a lot of her Cambridge contemporaries achieved less than that. Loads of kids had grade 8s and very few had done four A levels, let alone got 4 A . Many of them only just got the AAA entry requirement.

I can see why the OP is feeling butt sore (but don't think it's the internationals' fault). A lot of the UK kids from private schools have been intensively coached to satisfy the tutorial requirement aspect of the interview.

But lots of young people can get these grades. That’s why Oxford and Cambridge do those long interviews where they ask strange questions and really test your critical/original thinking. It’s really the interview that’s going to decide if someone gets in. They recognise that A-levels can be about regurgitating information but at degree level they want the original thinkers.

Some courses at some universities were set up primarily to attract international students and thereby fill the coffers of the university. International students often prefer subjects that are less prestigious in the UK (eg Business Management, International Relations) than in other countries. That said, there are some courses eg Economics at LSE where many UK students apply yet fail to gain places despite stellar results where displacement by international students, who pay higher fees, feels very real to UK 18 year olds.

Nope.
It's a myth that international students are taking the places of UK students. Even if they weren't considered as separate groups, at the moment there is room for everyone!

At my university an international applicant had to meet very strict criteria before their application even gets in front of an admissions tutor to be considered.