Foreign students in US down 28%

[kheegster]

Of course, after 9/11 it's ABSOLUTELY necessary to make sure that them darn red commie chinks can't get in and cause more terrur'rism.

And it's a 28% fall in applications for grad schools as well. When you consider that 49% of American PhDs are awarded to foreign students, it does make you wonder.

Tough US visa rules deterring students

NEW YORK: American universities are losing their monopoly of the world’s best students as other countries exploit the difficulties experienced by foreigners in getting a US visa after the Sept 11, 2001 attacks.

Foreign students contribute US$13bil (RM49.4bil) a year to the economy and US universities have dominated the higher-education market for 50 years.

But despite the allure of names such as Harvard, Stanford and Princeton, foreign applications to American graduate schools fell by 28% this year and enrolments decreased for the first time in 30 years.

The countries that export most students are China, South Korea and India.

Applications to US universities from these countries have fallen by more than half in the past year.

Chinese students say they are particularly hard done by US visa checks. Many want to study the science subjects that are covered by a US screening system, Visa Mantis, which is designed to prevent the transfer of sensitive technology.

Tim O’Brien, international development director at Nottingham Trent University said: “International students say it’s not worth queuing up for two days outside the US consulate in whatever country they are in to get a visa when they can go to the UK so much more easily.” –The Daily Telegraph

[Illuminatus Primus]

Yup, moving ahead. Not only are we allowing our education system to circle the drain, but we're now cutting off our own brain drain. The Bush Plan for Tomorrow!

[Stormbringer]

Of course, after 9/11 it's ABSOLUTELY necessary to make sure that them darn red commie chinks can't get in and cause more terrur'rism.

It's part of stricter security. If you don't like that fact then petition to let in everyone and their lunatic followers. Until then people might want to realize that it is going to have an affect on visas.

Sorry, but security has it's price and I get sick of every moron whining when they discover that stunning little fact.

[Axis Kast]

I concur with Stormbringer.

While it's a sobering fact that we can never implement the kind of security we should have because people don't want to pay the opportunity costs of exhaustive screening procedures in either time or money, making visas harder for foreigners to obtain is one step in the right direction. As I recall, there were several men among the 9/11 hijackers who had obtained visas without filling out much of the background information on the request forms - including their intended places-of-residence and sponsors/contacts already in the country.

[kheegster]

Of course, after 9/11 it's ABSOLUTELY necessary to make sure that them darn red commie chinks can't get in and cause more terrur'rism.

It's part of stricter security. If you don't like that fact then petition to let in everyone and their lunatic followers. Until then people might want to realize that it is going to have an affect on visas.

Sorry, but security has it's price and I get sick of every moron whining when they discover that stunning little fact.

I'm not an American so it's none of my business. However, as someone who has the intention to do my graduate studies in the US, it does look like it's going to be extremely difficult for me to get a visa, and it's probably going to be YOUR loss when I and thousands of other students bring our brains and talents to other countries instead of the US.

Also note the main point of the article, that the US immigration authorities are using security as an excuse to make it extremely difficult for even people with perfectly legitimate reasons and credentials to get in (e.g. Chinese grad students). This is more about 'preventing transfer of sensitive technology' then preventing terrorism (if you'd actually read the article), or to be more precise, another display of jingoism and arrogance by the current administration.

I want to do my grad studies in nuclear fusion (hopefully in Princeton), and when the INS sees the word 'nuclear' in the description, they're going to flip out and think I'm some chink commie bastard out to steal nukes (even though nuclear fusion has precisely ZERO military applications, and even though I'm not even a PRC national, but the fact that I'm ethnic Chinese is probably enough). I can see this happening with virtually every other high-technology sector, so you can imagine the effect this is going to have in American grad schools.

[Axis Kast]

I'm not an American so it's none of my business. However, as someone who has the intention to do my graduate studies in the US, it does look like it's going to be extremely difficult for me to get a visa, and it's probably going to be YOUR loss when I and thousands of other students bring our brains and talents to other countries instead of the US.

Yes, it is our loss. Nobody’s denying that the United States loses out on the benefit of reaping the benefit of its own attraction for foreign minds by imposing stricter security measures. Yet on the flip side of the coin, the fewer people we let through our borders, the fewer we have to worry about tracking in some capacity or another.

Also note the main point of the article, that the US immigration authorities are using security as an excuse to make it extremely difficult for even people with perfectly legitimate reasons and credentials to get in (e.g. Chinese grad students). This is more about 'preventing transfer of sensitive technology' then preventing terrorism (if you'd actually read the article), or to be more precise, another display of jingoism and arrogance by the current administration.

Guarding technological advantages is a form of ensuring security. It’s data protection. Information is an asset, and during wartime, teams of educated individuals are often considered the equivalent of combat-ready legions. Remember that obtaining a higher education during the Vietnam War initially exempted one from the draft.

Remember that many of the Arab students the United States once furnished with a scientific education during the ‘70s and ‘80s later went home and began working on atomic energy programs Washington strenuously opposed. Much of the basis of the Iranian program today is, for example, the work of men who were themselves protégés of scientists trained in the United States, Western Europe, or Russia. While it is true that those denied an education in the United States can go elsewhere for the same kinds of training, they will probably have less access to high-quality materials and stimulating environments. Now, in my opinion, the time to consider this a major or significant benefit of making visas harder to obtain has passed, but it’s still worthy of mention as a potential motivating factor. The real benefit comes from the fact that stricter restrictions mean better management of the groups already in the country.

[Thanas]

You know, my brother is an exchange student right now.
The consulate demanded very thorough background information on my parents (their religion, their income, their work place etc), several biometric mug shots of him, a letter from the police certifying that he didn't do anything wrong (Not sure about that one, but I'm fairly certain it was in there) and several other things. For example, he had to write an essay why he wanted to go to the USA. Like a 16 year old blond german citizen is going to hijack a plane and run it into the capitol.

Sorry, but this definitely eliminated any plans of going to the USA for university (I already spent one year as an exchange student).

[Chmee]

They'll be replacing the Statue of Liberty's torch wiith a handheld metal-detector next year.

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be frisked!"

[Big Phil]

As an American citizen, I will stand up for my rights all day long - I think the Patriot Act is a travesty and all of the people willing to give up their rights for increased security deserve neither.

That being said, foreign citizens in the United States have no rights other than those granted by the people of this nation (or through their proxy, the government). A foreign national has no right to enter this nation, or to study in our schools, or to work here. Those rights are reserved for American citizens.

Requiring foreign nationals who wish to come to this country to go through a screening process hardly seems like such a travesty to me. If you want to come the USA so badly, jump through the hoops. If you don't, there are plenty of others who would jump at the opportunity. Boo hoo hoo.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Obviously not as many line up to take their place, we're losing over a quarter of our incoming brains, and if you've seen some of the figures about our scientists' and engineers' places of origin, this is very disturbing.

[Stormbringer]

I'm not an American so it's none of my business. However, as someone who has the intention to do my graduate studies in the US, it does look like it's going to be extremely difficult for me to get a visa, and it's probably going to be YOUR loss when I and thousands of other students bring our brains and talents to other countries instead of the US.

I never said it wasn't a loss to have students studying here; it is a loss to us But the fact is that terrorists can and have exploited that student visas. Which tells us that security needs to be made tighter. Sorry but if that's the price to pay for preventing future attacks then: too fucking bad. Security does come with a cost.

Also note the main point of the article, that the US immigration authorities are using security as an excuse to make it extremely difficult for even people with perfectly legitimate reasons and credentials to get in (e.g. Chinese grad students).

Proof that it's unfair or unreasonable? Because just because as the article says it's being made harder doesn't mean it's unfair or unreasonable. If they're applying for sensitive fields then they ought to be screened rigorously. That's only common sense.

For that matter so is the practice of screening countries who's nationals are associated with terrorism. That doesn't make it unfair or unreasonable, it's a statistical corrolation.

This is more about 'preventing transfer of sensitive technology' then preventing terrorism (if you'd actually read the article), or to be more precise, another display of jingoism and arrogance by the current administration.

You're damn right it's about protecting US technology. Student visas have been abused by terrorists and spies. There is no reason at all that either should be allowed to steal that technology.

[kheegster]

I'm not an American so it's none of my business. However, as someone who has the intention to do my graduate studies in the US, it does look like it's going to be extremely difficult for me to get a visa, and it's probably going to be YOUR loss when I and thousands of other students bring our brains and talents to other countries instead of the US.

I never said it wasn't a loss to have students studying here; it is a loss to us But the fact is that terrorists can and have exploited that student visas. Which tells us that security needs to be made tighter. Sorry but if that's the price to pay for preventing future attacks then: too fucking bad. Security does come with a cost.

Yes, but it looks like the cost might involve endangering American superiority in science and tech. When 49% of PhDs in America are for foreign students, and applications for such students are down 28%, it's a very significant difference.

And we are talking about grad students here. The level of commitment required to win entry into grad school is much larger than Ismail al-Terrorist is willing to go through to sneak into the country, when there are much easier ways to get in.

Also note the main point of the article, that the US immigration authorities are using security as an excuse to make it extremely difficult for even people with perfectly legitimate reasons and credentials to get in (e.g. Chinese grad students).

Proof that it's unfair or unreasonable? Because just because as the article says it's being made harder doesn't mean it's unfair or unreasonable. If they're applying for sensitive fields then they ought to be screened rigorously. That's only common sense.

For that matter so is the practice of screening countries who's nationals are associated with terrorism. That doesn't make it unfair or unreasonable, it's a statistical corrolation.

Sorry for making assumptions beyond the scope of the article. My point was based on an issue of the Nature science journal which I saw a year or two ago. The entire issue was dedicated to the fact that American science was feeling the reduced flow of brains into the country.

I can't quote from the journal at the moment because I need to access it through my university account, and I won't finish winter break till next week.

You mention the practise of screening of individuals from countries associated with terrorism. There are only four countries officially recognised as such by the US at the moment (Iran, NK, and two others I can't recall at the moment), but I've seen the lines outside the American Embassy in London of Brits applying for tourist visas, let alone student visas.

From what Thanas says, if a 16-year old German has to jump through so many hoops just to go on exchange in an American uni, this is overkill at the very least. Sort of like strip-searching 70-year old grandmothers for bombs at airport check-in gates.

This is more about 'preventing transfer of sensitive technology' then preventing terrorism (if you'd actually read the article), or to be more precise, another display of jingoism and arrogance by the current administration.

You're damn right it's about protecting US technology. Student visas have been abused by terrorists and spies. There is no reason at all that either should be allowed to steal that technology.

Sensitive technology makes up a very small fraction of American science as a whole. It's one thing to keep a PRC student from doing his grad studies in the neutron absorption effects of neutron bomb detonations, but lots of students wanting to study gene therapy and organic chemistry are being kept out as well (remember, 28%).

In any case, the safeguards against foreign nationals working in national security projects were already pretty airtight (polygraph tests, multiple background checks) before decades ago, so much so that it's almost impossible for anyone who isn't a natural-born US citizen to participate in classified research.

So, no, it isn't really about protecting transfer of sensitive technology.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Obviously not as many line up to take their place, we're losing over a quarter of our incoming brains, and if you've seen some of the figures about our scientists' and engineers' places of origin, this is very disturbing.

Not everyone who goes to school here stays here, however, and it could be argued that the people who aren't deterred by the new security are the ones who are more likely to stay in the first place, so that the 28% loss in total students will not significantly impact the number of those students who become US Citizens or resident nationals.

[Thanas]

You could argue that. Still, I ask you:

If you want to take a trip to another country, how would you like the fact that you're being treated like a second class human?

[Darth Wong]

You can almost set your clock by Stormbringer rushing to defend yet another asinine Bush Administration "terrorism"-related act.

I do like the implication that student visas enable terrorism, as if any jackass can't just visit the US as a tourist and then simply disappear into the population. Have any of you people ever tried visiting the US as a foreign tourist? It's not very hard, and it's not as if INS agents follow you around once you get off the plane, for fuck's sake.

[Chmee]

You can almost set your clock by Stormbringer rushing to defend yet another asinine Bush Administration "terrorism"-related act.

I do like the implication that student visas enable terrorism, as if any jackass can't just visit the US as a tourist and then simply disappear into the population. Have any of you people ever tried visiting the US as a tourist? It's not very hard, and it's not as if INS agents follow you around once you get off the plane, for fuck's sake.

Unless you're a Chinese bachelor apparently .... our company has three new sales engineers based in China and we tried to get them over here for a training seminar we were running for all our global SE's, and they couldn't get visas. Apparently INS or State is too worried about them coming over and getting married and staying.

All of our other SE's from Europe and Asia got a good laugh out of that.

[Stormbringer]

Yes, but it looks like the cost might involve endangering American superiority in science and tech. When 49% of PhDs in America are for foreign students, and applications for such students are down 28%, it's a very significant difference.

It is going to have negative effects, I am not claiming otherwise. If nothing else it's going to reduce the tution dollars spent by students that just come here and go. It might well negatively affect US tech advantages.

And we are talking about grad students here. The level of commitment required to win entry into grad school is much larger than Ismail al-Terrorist is willing to go through to sneak into the country, when there are much easier ways to get in.

No, we're not talking about grad students, at least not exclusively. This is talking about students in general, undergrad and grad.

Not to mention simply making blind assumptions about the reliablilty of grad students is just plain foolish. There's no guarentees there are at all and the idea behind border security is that we don't just assume.

Sorry for making assumptions beyond the scope of the article. My point was based on an issue of the Nature science journal which I saw a year or two ago. The entire issue was dedicated to the fact that American science was feeling the reduced flow of brains into the country.

As I've said, we probably are.

I can't quote from the journal at the moment because I need to access it through my university account, and I won't finish winter break till next week.

Well, when and if you find the article then feel free.

You mention the practise of screening of individuals from countries associated with terrorism. There are only four countries officially recognised as such by the US at the moment (Iran, NK, and two others I can't recall at the moment), but I've seen the lines outside the American Embassy in London of Brits applying for tourist visas, let alone student visas.

I'm sorry if security actually doing it's job makes it incovinient. Boo fucking hoo. The fact is that it's a lot harder reflects the fact we're taking things seriously and not half assing it. Yes, that will make it more difficult. Unless you have proof that they're unfair, illegal, or unreasonable then your complaints seem more about about laziness and frankly unreasonable belief that the US is obligated to let people with all the security of a dance club.

From what Thanas says, if a 16-year old German has to jump through so many hoops just to go on exchange in an American uni, this is overkill at the very least. Sort of like strip-searching 70-year old grandmothers for bombs at airport check-in gates.

Oooh, completely undefined anecdotal evidence. In concede, I concede. Oh wait, no.

Sensitive technology makes up a very small fraction of American science as a whole. It's one thing to keep a PRC student from doing his grad studies in the neutron absorption effects of neutron bomb detonations, but lots of students wanting to study gene therapy and organic chemistry are being kept out as well (remember, 28%).

Proof that qualified and eligible students are being turned away from non-sensitive fields? Pure laziness is not keeping people out, it's them being to lazy. And of course not providing all the information is a pefectly legitimite reason to keep people out.

In any case, the safeguards against foreign nationals working in national security projects were already pretty airtight (polygraph tests, multiple background checks) before decades ago, so much so that it's almost impossible for anyone who isn't a natural-born US citizen to participate in classified research.

So, no, it isn't really about protecting transfer of sensitive technology.

Then what is it about and what's your proof?

[kheegster]

Obviously not as many line up to take their place, we're losing over a quarter of our incoming brains, and if you've seen some of the figures about our scientists' and engineers' places of origin, this is very disturbing.

Not everyone who goes to school here stays here, however, and it could be argued that the people who aren't deterred by the new security are the ones who are more likely to stay in the first place, so that the 28% loss in total students will not significantly impact the number of those students who become US Citizens or resident nationals.

Yes and no. It's true that staying back in the US is no longer the automatic choice for a foreign student, but most scientists who are from developing countries would still want to remain in a developed country after graduation in order to pursue their research interests. A Chinese student in, say, engineering would consider returning to China to work, but his fellow countryman specialising in high-energy particle physics isn't going to find much opportunities there. Fifty years ago, the US would have been the only realistic choice for this, but no longer. Western Europe is emerging as an alternative in terms of lifestyle, security, research opportunities, funding and facilities.

The second point is that it's not just students who are being deterred by the policies, but applications are actively being rejected or made extremely difficult by INS (or State or whoever is in charge of this), especially students from developing countries. A student from Australia is more likely to get approved than one from Nigeria, but then the former isn't as likely to stay in the US for the long term. This is probably a hasty generalisation, but students from developing countries tend to be hungrier than their Western counterparts.

Another thing is that the top students are likely to have applied for, and received offers from top institutions in other Western countries as well. When it comes to applying for visas, they'll see the shit that they'll have to go through to get into the US, compared with an effective wave-through from the other countries, what would they pick? Note of course I'm talking about roughly equivalent institutions in the US and elsewhere giving the offers, not Harvard vs Krakow State Polytechnical Institute.

I'll need to get back to university to find the issue of Nature that I was referring to. IIRC half of the issue was devoted to this issue, and academics from Ivy League universities were bitching about it.

[Antares]

In case i am really doing my PhD after my current studies i've already decided to do it anywhere but not in the US.

[Thanas]

From what Thanas says, if a 16-year old German has to jump through so many hoops just to go on exchange in an American uni, this is overkill at the very least. Sort of like strip-searching 70-year old grandmothers for bombs at airport check-in gates.

Oooh, completely undefined anecdotal evidence. In concede, I concede. Oh wait, no.

Are you accusing me of being a liar?

My brother went through all that. And if you want to know, I can provide you with the name of the school he's now staying with, the name of his host - parents and even a phone number, so you can call him yourself. Hell, I'll even provide you with their football team rooster.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Hell, I'll even provide you with their football team rooster.

Um, are you actually intending to send him the team's fowl mascot, or was that just a typo for 'roster'?

-Damien

[Thanas]

Whatever he desires.

but yeah, it was a typo