In recent days, the concentrated expulsion of irregular foreign students by several renowned universities in China has sparked widespread attention. This move is interpreted as a sign of the increasing strictness in the management of higher education in China, possibly marking the end of the era of “privileged treatment” for foreign students. However, experts analyze that this is closely related to multiple factors such as the downward trend of the Chinese economy, tightened finances, and changes in the domestic political atmosphere.
According to reports from NetEase, universities like Wuhan University, Sichuan University, Shandong University, Nankai University, and Huazhong University of Science and Technology in China have recently issued announcements to expel irregular foreign students. Reasons for expulsion include failure to meet academic standards, violating school rules, extended leaves of absence without resuming studies, and prolonged unavailability.
For example, the School of Public Health at Shandong University expelled 3 master’s and doctoral students who did not register on time; Wuhan University and Sichuan University each expelled 6 and 19 “misbehaving” foreign students respectively; Nankai University expelled 16 international graduate students for completing their leave of absence without returning to studies and being untraceable; the School of Management at Huazhong University of Science and Technology expelled 5 students who failed to graduate on time, and addressed some issues related to the abuse of scholarships.
The Beijing News also reported that Tsinghua University handled the withdrawal of a long-term absent American student, He Mourui, last year. These events are interpreted as signals of stricter management of foreign students by universities.
The reason why this expulsion action has sparked debate is closely related to the “privileged treatment” that some foreign students have enjoyed for a long time in China.
For a long time, the controversial “privileged treatment” enjoyed by some foreign students in Chinese universities has sparked debates. Some believe that some foreign students are not primarily driven by academic pursuits but are attracted by the scholarships and living subsidies provided by Chinese universities.
Cases circulating online show that some students behave poorly during their time in school, such as sleeping in class, playing games in the laboratory, or engaging in misconduct like harassment or physical altercations, severely affecting campus order and wasting educational resources.
Furthermore, what has caused even more controversy is the generous treatment provided by some universities to foreign students. Jinan University was exposed for providing foreign students with up to 29,000 to 30,000 yuan in “provincial government living allowances,” far exceeding the subsidy standards for ordinary Chinese students.
In addition, some universities have arranged “study buddy” programs for foreign students and even forced Chinese female students to participate in exchange activities. These measures have been criticized for lacking fairness and harming the rights of Chinese students.
According to data previously released by the Chinese Ministry of Education, in 2017, nearly 490,000 foreign students were enrolled in Chinese universities, with a budget of over 3.3 billion yuan allocated for international student education in 2018.
Observer website once quoted comments from Hu Biliang, a professor at Beijing Normal University, mentioning that the scholarships provided by the authorities for African students are a “long-term emotional investment,” hoping for their influence upon returning to their countries, such as a Beijing University student who became the President of Ethiopia after returning home.
Regarding the phenomenon of Chinese universities concentrating on cleaning up irregular foreign students, Li Yuanhua, former associate professor of Capital Normal University, expressed in an interview with Dajiyuan that the system of foreign students in China has to some extent transcended the scope of education and carries a certain political color.
“During the period of rapid economic development in China, the Communist Party invested a large amount of money, taking in foreign students as a special means of united front worldwide to curry favor with political figures of some countries,” Li Yuanhua explained. “Schools comply with this policy because the increase in the number of international students helps enhance the international ranking of universities. Therefore, many schools are not truly concerned about whether students are here to study; they just need to receive government subsidies, have the names of foreign students on the registration list, and the school’s ranking will naturally rise.”
Li Yuanhua also revealed that as of 2025, the investment of the Chinese authorities in students from abroad has decreased by nearly 60% compared to 2024. “In this financial environment, many universities have started to strictly require students, getting rid of those who were just in name, receiving subsidies, and could not graduate for many years.”
Lai Rongwei, Executive Director of Taiwan Inspirational Association, believes that the recent expulsion action by Chinese universities is closely related to the current political and economic environment in China.
“This completely fits the prevailing theme politically in China. In recent years, Xi Jinping’s government’s ‘wolf warrior diplomacy’ has become the main political tone. Today, patriotism is prevalent in China,” Lai Rongwei pointed out. “Institutions of higher learning, in order to advance their own promotion, will inevitably evaluate higher directives, following the political trend.”
On the economic front, Lai Rongwei analyzed, “With the significant downturn of the Chinese economy, various universities have aligned with this patriotic theme and no longer need to give special privileges to foreign students. Schools can use the saved funds to subsidize local students, which to some extent can alleviate the relative sense of deprivation among young people in China towards foreign students enjoying special treatment.”
Regarding some universities claiming to use the saved funds to support Western rural education projects, Lai Rongwei expressed doubt. “This proposal sounds wonderful, but can these funds actually effectively promote balanced development of urban and rural education? If achieving urban-rural education balance is so easy, why didn’t the government solve this problem during the period of rapid economic development in China?”
The large-scale cleaning up of “idling” foreign students by Chinese universities this time is undoubtedly an important signal of adjustment in China’s higher education policy, reflecting changes in economics, politics, and educational concepts, and is worthy of continued attention.