Since the introduction of a supposed “ban” on essay mills in 2022, contract cheating companies remain alive and well – so whose fault is that? Nearly a year after new legislation took effect, essay-writing services such as ukessays.com are still thriving in the UK despite the crackdown. Instead of disappearing, these companies have continued to target students – particularly international students – on social media and other channels. This reality begs an uncomfortable question: if essay mills were outlawed, why do they persist? The answer lies not just with shady operators finding loopholes as the media would have you believe, but with the universities and policymakers who have failed to address the root causes that drive students into the arms of contract cheating services.
Lowering admission requirements to attract a lucrative market
Media reports and whistleblower accounts suggest that some UK universities have lowered academic entry requirements for international applicants in order to boost fee income. In early 2024, for example, the University of York (a Russell Group institution) instructed staff to take a “more flexible approach” by lowering its tariff (required grades) for overseas applicants across all departments, explicitly citing “financial challenges”. An email seen by reporters indicated York would accept some international undergraduates with A-level grades as low as BBC (instead of the usual AAA), and permit entry to postgraduate courses with a lower second-class degree (2:2) for overseas students. The university later claimed it was simply being flexible for those who narrowly miss their offers, to remain “competitive in a global market”. Nonetheless, this episode was viewed as the “latest sign” of severe recruitment and financial pressures driving admissions decisions. Other investigations around the same time uncovered that elite universities were using foundation programs and agents as ‘back door’ routes to admit lucrative foreign students with lower qualifications than advertised – allegations the universities have denied or contextualised.
There is evidence of a systemic trend behind these incidents. A 2025 BBC investigation, echoed by academic experts, found that universities were “overlooking sub-par language skills” of international postgraduates because of the high fees they pay. One professor told the BBC that 70% of his recent master’s students had inadequate English proficiency. Two anonymous Russell Group professors described a “quality crisis” in which many international students do not meet basic requirements (especially in English) needed to earn a degree – yet degrees are still being awarded. They attributed this directly to universities’ financial incentives: years of underfunding and frozen home tuition have pushed institutions to prioritise fee income “above all else,” rushing to recruit more international students even if academic preparedness suffers. In their experience, some master’s seminars now comprise overwhelmingly international cohorts (often 75%+ from a single country) where only a few students can fully participate in discussions due to language barriers. These claims highlight a lowering of effective academic standards in practice, driven by the need to attract and retain high fee-payers. Notably, university leaders dispute that any formal standards have been lowered – pointing out that foundation-year pathways and language support are meant to bridge gaps and that progression to a degree still requires meeting set criteria. However, the pattern of relaxed enforcement (e.g. leniency for missed grades or language deficiencies) has been widely observed and criticized as a threat to quality.
Academic and government data underscore the financial motivations behind this trend. International students pay tuition fees several times higher than domestic students, and with UK undergraduate fees capped at £9,250 since 2017, universities have grown heavily reliant on overseas fees to balance budgets. On average, about 20% of university income now comes from international students. At York, for instance, expanding the number of overseas students from roughly 4,750 to 6,145 in one year helped boost total tuition income by 10% in 2021–22. Sector-wide, many institutions cross-subsidise domestic education and research with international fees, a model analysts warn is unsustainable. Universities UK reports that due to inflation and funding shortfalls, teaching UK students now runs a deficit (losing £1bn/year across the sector), making international fees crucial to avert financial crisis. In fact, projections suggest that if international student growth even flatlined, up to 80% of universities could plunge into deficit. This financial dependence creates pressure to maximise overseas recruitment, which in turn can incentivise more lenient admissions decisions. In short, evidence from 2024–25 shows academic standards are being tested by market forces – with universities denying any “dumbing down,” yet cases like York’s grade flexibility and academics’ testimonies reveal a real tension between selectivity and solvency.
International student support and student experiences
Once enrolled, many international students report feeling undersupported in academic and pastoral domains. Despite paying premium fees, they often struggle to get the help they need with language, integration, and well-being. Surveys and testimonials highlight a gap between the revenue international students bring in and the support services provided to them. A joint report by Migrants’ Rights Network and Unis Resist Border Controls, which surveyed 124 Tier 4 (student visa) holders at 31 UK universities, found a “woeful lack of support structures” for international students in higher education. More than half of respondents said they were destitute or at risk of destitution during the COVID-19 lockdown, lacking money for basic necessities, and 56% received little or no help from their universities’ hardship funds or advice services. Because they have no recourse to public funds by law, these students depend entirely on universities for emergency support – yet many were either denied hardship grants or too afraid to seek help (fearing it might affect their visa status). One student in the study described her family going into debt to support her during quarantine, lamenting that “knowing the university could care less” about her situation was “absolutely unacceptable”. This underscores a sentiment echoed by others: international students often feel like “cash cows” who are left to fend for themselves once tuition is paid.
Even outside of crisis conditions, integration and pastoral support for international students can be lacking. Research has long indicated that many institutions do little to actively integrate foreign students into campus life or the job market. In a 2014 analysis of the international student experience (prior to recent growth), observers noted that UK universities often neglect the “holistic” student experience for internationals – leaving social and co-curricular activities underfunded and providing fewer opportunities like internships or work placements to them. This lack of support left many international students feeling they “pay more and are treated worse” than home students, as reflected in lower satisfaction scores on student surveys at the time. Unfortunately, several of these issues persist. A common complaint is insufficient academic support for students adjusting to a different educational system and language. For example, writing in 2024, two Russell Group professors observed that many of their international postgraduates were “not engaged at all in the learning process” due to language and cultural barriers, despite the lecturers’ efforts to adapt classes. They find themselves slowing down instruction, providing written transcripts for translation, and still facing silence in discussions – an indication that these students need far more language and learning support than is currently provided. Without such support, international students can struggle academically and socially, which in turn detracts from their overall university experience.
Recent student feedback and news reports reinforce that international students want more support. In 2023, stakeholders pointed out that while most overseas students do manage to overcome language hurdles, many lack confidence in seminars or interacting with native speakers, and would benefit from additional help (e.g. academic English workshops and mentoring). International alumni have also compared the UK unfavorably with other countries in career support: one Chinese UK graduate noted that universities in China organise extensive job fairs for final-year students, whereas in the UK, career guidance for international students can be minimal. The result is that some students feel “like a tool for revenue generation” rather than a valued member of the academic community. There have even been instances of international student groups organising petitions and protests – for example, during the pandemic, thousands of international students in London demanded tuition fee refunds, saying they felt “treated like cash cows” and received little support as teaching moved online. In summary, evidence from student surveys, advocacy groups, and faculty indicates a support shortfall: many international students experience isolation, inadequate academic guidance, and poor mental health support, even as universities depend on their success. This gap has been widely acknowledged, and some universities (as well as the Office for Students) have started initiatives to improve personal tutoring, English language assistance, and community-building for international cohorts. Nonetheless, the perception of being under-supported remains a common theme in international students’ experiences in the UK.
Recent trends in international recruitment (2022–2024)
International student numbers in the UK have surged in recent years, reaching all-time highs and significantly shifting in composition. According to government data, there were about 758,855 overseas students at UK universities in 2022/23, accounting for roughly 26% of the total student population (the tenth consecutive record high). This represents rapid growth: annual new enrolments from abroad nearly doubled in five years – from ~254,000 new overseas students in 2017/18 to ~459,200 in 2022/23. The mix of source countries has also changed dramatically since 2020. India is now the single largest source of international students in the UK, overtaking China. In 2022/23, about 126,600 Indian students entered UK higher education, more than ten times the number in 2017/18. Meanwhile, students from China – historically the biggest group – peaked and leveled off: new Chinese entrants fell during the pandemic and rose only modestly to ~102,800 in 2022/23 other countries have risen sharply in the rankings: for instance, Nigeria became the third-largest sender, with ~53,800 new Nigerian students in 2022/23 (after a six-fold increase since 2017). In contrast, EU student numbers have plummeted. After Brexit changes (which ended EU students’ home-fee status and access to loans), the number of EU entrants dropped by 53% in 2021/22 and fell further in 2022/23). EU students now make up a much smaller share (only 95,500 out of 758k overseas students in 22/23) as compared to non-EU students (all stats from researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk).
Policy developments since 2022 have both fueled and tempered these trends. On one hand, the UK government’s International Education Strategy (launched in 2019) set ambitious targets to grow foreign enrollment – aiming for 600,000 international students by 2030, a goal the sector reached a decade early in 2020/21. The reintroduction of the two-year post-study work visa (Graduate Route) in summer 2021 made the UK more attractive to applicants, particularly from India and Nigeria, who value the ability to work after graduating. This contributed to the 2021–2022 spike in numbers. On the other hand, by 2022–2023 political rhetoric shifted to concerns about immigration levels. The Home Office under then-Home Secretary Suella Braverman floated measures to curb international student inflows – for example, reducing the Graduate Route from 2 years to 6 months (a proposal ultimately dropped amid industry pushback). In 2023, the government did move to restrict student migration in a specific way: it banned most taught-master’s students from bringing dependants with them, effective 1 January 2024. (Previously, tens of thousands of dependants had accompanied students from countries like Nigeria and India.) This rule change, along with increased visa and health surcharges, was intended to cut net migration numbers. The immediate impact has been a softening of demand from some markets – UK study visa issuance fell by ~5% in 2023 compared to the record 2022, and early indicators for 2024 intakes (like visa applications in late 2024) were down by double digits. Universities are bracing for a possible downturn after the boom: internal forecasts predict the January 2024 intake of overseas postgraduates could be one-third lower than the previous year, reflecting the combined effect of visa policy tightening and economic factors (all stats are from researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk).
Importantly, the financial calculus for universities has become a balancing act. The sector’s reliance on international fee revenue (cross-subsidising teaching and research) now clashes with government efforts to limit immigration. This has led to intense discussions about sustainability. University leaders have called for a “stable and sustainable” international recruitment strategy that isn’t solely about chasing tuition income. Observers note that the current model – using high international fees to offset frozen home fees – is vulnerable: if overseas student numbers dip, many institutions could face financial strain. Indeed, in late 2023 and 2024, some universities in the UK began reporting budget shortfalls as growth from China slowed and recruitment from certain countries became harder. The coming years may see more targeted recruitment (focusing on quality and diversity of students) and pressure on the government to increase domestic funding. In the meantime, however, the trend of the past decade has been ever-growing international enrolments, with students from a wider array of countries – a trend that has only recently shown signs of leveling off. The UK remains one of the top two global destinations for international students (trading places with the US and Australia), and as of 2022 it had reclaimed the #2 spot worldwide (researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk). In summary, since 2022 the UK has hit record highs in overseas student numbers, diversified its international student body (with huge growth from South Asia and Africa), and now faces new policy constraints aiming to recalibrate that growth. Universities are adapting to this new landscape, even as they deal with the quality and support challenges discussed earlier.
Scapegoating and a superficial ban won’t solve the issue
It’s easy to scapegoat “rogue” essay companies, but the truth is that universities have helped create the very market essay mills exploit. Year after year, universities have eagerly recruited fee-paying international students without providing sufficient academic support. Many of these students arrive underprepared for the rigors of English academic writing – often through no fault of their own – and find themselves overwhelmed. Research shows that even those who meet language entry requirements can struggle; one study found international students with IELTS English scores of 6.5–7.5 had roughly half the vocabulary size of home students and processed information at half the speed. According to academic integrity expert Tracey Bretag, “we set them up for failure, knowing that they will need more support and a lot more training… [but] they don’t have time to access any non-mandatory support that is on offer”. In other words, universities enroll them without adequate language and study-skills support, then act surprised when these students struggle. As Bretag bluntly notes, “on top of that, we have unscrupulous, marketing-savvy essay mills that target those vulnerable students” Faced with intense pressure to succeed and little help, many international students see cheating as their only way to survive academically – a desperate attempt not to fail or disappoint their families.
The UK government’s much-trumpeted “ban” on essay mills turns out to be a narrow and superficial fix. Contrary to headlines, the law is not an outright ban on all essay-writing services. It criminalises the provision and advertising of “contract cheating” services only when targeting students at higher education providers in England. In practice, this means it is now illegal to offer or advertise paid essay-writing to students enrolled at English universities. That’s a welcome step for academic integrity, but it’s also a very limited one. Essay companies operating from overseas or catering to clients outside of English institutions can simply sidestep the law. Even within England, enforcement is daunting when so many essay mills base their operations abroad or online. As one expert noted, “we’re still seeing essay mills operating as so many of them are based outside England, so it would be very difficult to enforce the current law”. Crucially, the law does nothing to stem the demand for these services. It’s akin to squeezing one end of a balloon: the problem just bulges out elsewhere. In fact, observers have likened the ban to “sticking a thumb in a flood” – a token gesture against a much larger tide. The legislation, which applies only in England (with no immediate equivalent in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland), amounts to a sticking-plaster solution: it covers up a visible symptom of the crisis while ignoring the illness beneath.
What is that deeper illness? A higher education business model that prioritises tuition revenue over student preparedness. British universities have become “fiercely competitive for a share of the international student market”, as Dr. Louise Kaktiņš of Macquarie University puts it. “It is not surprising that entry requirements for international students are becoming less stringent and increasingly flimsy… especially as regards students’ academic suitability,” Kaktiņš says. Universities bank the tuition cheques, but too often fail to invest in the extra support and training these students need to thrive. One academic surveyed by Times Higher Education lamented that universities reassure incoming international students their English is “sufficient to get by” when often it isn’t – that is our fault, not theirs”. He noted that institutions have been using “the purchasing power of international students… in lieu of appropriate and sustainable government funding. We should hardly be surprised if that purchasing power is used in ways we can’t control” – in other words, we shouldn’t be surprised if those students, left struggling, spend their money on cheating services.
Universities have effectively created a perfect storm: they admit underprepared students, provide inadequate academic support, and thereby drive those students straight into the waiting arms of essay mills.
The government, for its part, has addressed this complex problem with a simplistic legal bandaid. Banning commercial cheating services (or rather, certain forms of them) addresses the supply side only, and superficially at that. It does nothing about the academic desperation and pressure that fuel demand for cheating. Students who feel unable to write a competent essay in English or navigate an unfamiliar academic culture will still seek help – if not from blatant essay mills, maybe from tutor-for-hire sites, freelance ghostwriters, or other underground avenues. The new law may push contract cheating further into the shadows, but it won’t stop it from happening so long as the incentive to cheat remains high.
Ultimately, the persistence of essay mills post-“ban” is a wake-up call about where the real accountability lies. The finger must point at institutions and policymakers just as much as at the cheating services. Universities that knowingly enroll students without ensuring they can succeed are complicit in this crisis of academic integrity. These institutions have reaped the financial rewards of international enrollment; now they must reckon with the consequences by dramatically improving academic support, language training, and honest admissions standards. Meanwhile, the government’s focus on outlawing essay providers – without forcing a hard look at why students resort to them – is simply tinkering at the margins. It’s easy to pass a law and declare the problem solved; it’s much harder to confront the uncomfortable truth that contract cheating is a symptom of systemic failures in higher education support. Until universities stop creating the conditions for contract cheating to flourish, and until student support (especially for international students) becomes a priority rather than an afterthought, essay mills will continue to find customers. In short, you can’t truly fix the essay mill problem with legal stick alone – you have to cure the academic culture that makes these services attractive in the first place.
