Foreign Students and Scholars: Do Not Pass Go

It is a cliché, especially among academics, to note that foreign students and scholars benefit this country in a huge variety of ways. Enhanced international understanding, manifold contributions to research and development-especially in science, engineering, and technology-and billions of dollars contributed to our national economy are all benefits that America derives from being the destination of choice for the world's best students and scholars.

And the number of foreign students and scholars has grown steadily. In 1970, the Institute of International Education reported that 135,000 visas were granted to foreign students, a number that climbed to 286,000 in 1980, 386,000 in 1990, and 586,000 in 2002. Over the last 50 years, nearly 13 million foreign students have studied in the United States.

During these years of growth, other nations also recognized the value of international students, and many countries launched ambitious efforts to attract these talented, hard-working individuals. To some extent, their strategy worked-of the total number of international students, the percentage coming to the United States began to decline in the early 1990s. Nonetheless, the world's best system of higher education, advanced technology, and the personal and intellectual freedoms enjoyed at our campuses remained a powerful, almost irresistible magnet, and the actual number of foreign students in the United States continued to swell.

But September 11, 2001, changed everything. Initial reports claimed that many of the hijackers had entered this country on student visas. The reports were later proven false; indeed, only one student had entered the United States on a student visa and two of the terrorists had sought student visas after they arrived. In the wake of the tragedy, federal policy makers rushed to approve proposals to limit access for all international visitors, especially students and scholars.

They succeeded. In the last three years, the federal government has put in place more than 25 new laws, rules, and regulations designed to make it harder for foreign visitors to receive visas. The new Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) is perhaps the best known of the new security measures, but it is not the only one. Section 416 of the Patriot Act pertains to higher education institutions. Additionally, a dozen or more rules and regulations issued by the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security tighten restrictions on monitoring non-immigrants from certain countries, renewing visas for aliens returning home after short visits, and, in some states, requiring additional documents when foreign visitors apply for a driver's license.

Making the nation safer is essential, especially for colleges and universities. After all, once admitted to the country, foreign students and scholars, like their American-born counterparts, are given free access to all that universities have to offer. Those who would do this nation harm have no place in our classrooms, libraries, or residence halls. All segments of American society have felt the cost and inconvenience of enhanced security. Higher education has not sought, nor does it merit, special treatment.

But these new restrictions have made it more difficult for foreign students to secure visas to come here. These new steps are largely procedural. For example, all students must be personally interviewed at the consulate office before they can receive a student visa. Foreign students and researchers who hope to study or work in fields identified on the State Department's "Technology Alert List" have been subject to a higher level of scrutiny and a far longer review process. And students who are admitted to the United States find themselves fingerprinted and photographed as soon as they arrive. In several highly publicized cases, students who have run afoul of U.S. visa rules and regulations (or who are thought to have violated them) have been summarily deported.

Declining Enrollments

College and university officials have long worried that these steps would take a toll and that the United States might become a less desirable destination, not because the quality of our institutions has fallen or the state of our technology has declined, but rather because we, as a country, are less welcoming.

It appears that these fears were well founded. According to the most recent Open Doors publication, while the total number of foreign students increased slightly, enrollments of students from 13 of the 20 countries that traditionally have sent the most students fell.

This coming year does not look any better. In February, the American Council on Education and several other higher education associations surveyed hundreds of graduate schools to assess trends in applications from potential international graduate students for the next fall term. A comparison of applications from prospective students for fall 2004 with applications for fall 2003 reveals:

* Of the 250 institutions that responded, 47 percent indicated a decline in the number of applications they had received. Applications were unchanged at 38 percent of the institutions, while just 14 percent reported an increase.

* Fifty-nine percent of the doctoral institutions indicated a decline in applications, 28 percent reported no change, and 11 percent revealed an increase.

* Of the institutions that responded, 19 ranked among the 25 largest research universities and all had large international enrollments. All of these institutions reported a decline-at nine of them, the decrease was more than 30 percent.

Things are no different for undergraduate students:

* Among the 382 institutions that responded to a survey, 36 percent noted a decline, 35 percent held steady, and 29 percent reported an increase.

* Among the 1.9 largest research universities, 12 had seen a decline in applications, 6 indicated an increase, and one institution reported holding steady.

In March, the Council of Graduate Schools conducted its own survey of 113 institutions, including 60 percent of the top 50 universities in terms of international graduate student enrollment. That survey yielded similar results.

These data are preliminary and may very well change. We will, of course, not have an accurate picture until this fall, when colleges report their actual enrollments. Still, in light of the increased scrutiny now given to potential international students, most institutions encouraged students to apply earlier than previously. Would-be students who had not applied by February are likely to face difficulty clearing all the visa hurdles before classes begin this fall, even if they are admitted.

It's possible that things could get even worse. As this is written, the Department of Homeland Security is seeking final approval to issue regulations to govern the collection of the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) fee. If, as we expect, the regulations will require prospective students to receive a paper receipt confirming that the fee has been paid before they can apply for a visa, it will add another delay to a process that has gotten considerably longer in the last three years.

Even without the SEVIS fee, it seems clear that the additional requirements and delays have made coming to this country a more difficult and slower process for foreign students. Moreover, in the increasingly global world of science and technology, the best students are easily identified, they have plenty of options, and other countries are eager to attract them. In this environment, institutions such as McGill, Toronto, Cape Town, Cambridge, Oxford, and the Sorbonne gainat America's expense.

Stopping the Hemorrhage

As with many public policy problems, the diagnosis is easy but the cure is difficult. Responsibility for international students and visas is spread among a number of agencies. While the Departments of State and Homeland Security are the most important of these, literally dozens of agencies can be involved. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, under the leadership of John Marburger, former president of the State University of New York at Stony Brook, has played an important coordinating role, but it is an information-rich and power-poor agency that lacks the authority to impose its views on recalcitrant agencies.

Individual agencies, like the blind men touching the elephant, all see something different when they look at the issue. Not surprisingly, we do not have a policy on international students and national security that works smoothly. Rather, we have a hodgepodge of complex and clunky policies that undermine our basic interest in remaining the "most favored destination" for the world's best students.

One step toward solving this issue would be to form a high-level panel of administration officials and college and university leaders who could review the existing process, identify problems, and recommend solutions. In other words, we need a blue ribbon panel to look at the big picture and find ways to ensure that we remain the most popular destination for international students, while taking all necessary steps to protect national security.

However, it is not clear whether either the Bush administration, which has made attracting international students a high priority, or a possible Kerry administration would take such a step. There are plenty of urgent problems that need attention, and it will be years before the full impact of this problem is felt.

TERRY HARTLE is senior vice president at the American Council on Education.

Copyright American Council on Education Spring 2004
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved