Category: Education

The Trump administration is intensifying its scrutiny of US higher education institutions and international students. As of April 14, reports NAFSA, “there have been almost 1,300 reports of international students and scholars either having their visa revoked and/or their record in SEVIS [the database where international student records are stored] terminated, thereby jeopardizing their legal status in the United States.”

Staff working in international departments of universities and colleges across the country report a sense of helplessness as they receive emails telling them to hand over student records or face dire consequences. They are trading stories on private forums and looking for advice on how to resist and protect students. Inside Higher Ed reported on the trend at the beginning of April:

“One student adviser wrote on the forum that they received a letter from the Department of Homeland Security demanding a number of international students’ records and threatening to revoke the college’s visa certification ‘without any chance of appeal’ if they did not provide the records within five business days. Another said they’d gotten the same letter, but their deadline was just three business days.”

When a SEVIS record is deleted, it means the student cannot work, transfer to another school, leave the US to visit their family, or pursue a post-study work opportunity. It can be setup for a student’s legal status being terminated as if a student whose record has been removed performs an action they had been permitted to do when they had a SEVIS record, they can be detained or deported. What’s more, there are many reported cases of students not even knowing their SEVIS record has been deleted. because the government official who deleted it did not tell the school or the student.

University officials speaking on condition of anonymity to Inside Higher Ed said that students’ SEVIS records were being terminated without their knowledge. Some officials found out only by checking the database routinely or by chance.  “We usually check SEVIS once a semester … we don’t usually have to check statuses because we’re the ones who would change them,” one official said. “Now we are making a point to check thoroughly, every day. It’s the only way to protect our students.”

A retired professor who now focuses on immigration law and student visas said the government’s apparent conclusion that it does not need to notify school officials about SEVIS terminations “makes it difficult for colleges to advise their international students.”

Many of our readers work or have worked in the international offices of universities and colleges and therefore know the devotion international counsellors have to the students they work with. The current situation is not only logistically challenging, but also extremely difficult psychologically for both students and staff.

So many questions

In the first four months of the Trump presidency, international students have been detained or deported on such grounds as:

• A past traffic violation;
• Participation in a pro-Palestine protest;
• Social media posts;
• A determination by the secretary of state that their continued presence “would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences”;
• “Other.”

The ominous “other,” says NAFSA, is accompanied by “a vague reference to a criminal records check ‘and/or’ a visa revocation.”

While the officials who spoke with Inside Higher Ed said that “affected students were almost all Middle Eastern—Turkish, Kuwaiti, Saudi, Iranian—or from majority-Muslim countries like Malaysia, Indonesia and Bangladesh,” NAFSA is reporting that no nationality is being spared: “There is no clear pattern or trend in the nationalities of the affected students … students from all regions of the world are being affected.”

Security undone

Writing in Al Jazeera on 11 April, former US international student and associate professor Somdeep Sen said, “every international student in America today must accept that they may be abducted, detained and deported at any moment for attending a protest, writing an article or expressing a view that upsets the White House or its allies.”

Almost every US college or university that enrols international students (and/or has continued DEI initiatives) is also at risk. So far, billions of dollars of federal funding have been stripped from institutions including Columbia, Princeton, Brown, Cornell, Northwestern, and Harvard – and that is just the start of the list. Their perceived wrongs include not releasing student records, not stopping DEI initiatives, not cutting programmes (e.g., Middle Eastern studies), not terminating positions, and more.

Last week, Harvard provided the strongest resistance to the Trump government’s demands. This week, the US Department of Homeland Security has stripped more funding from Harvard, is planning to revoke Harvard’s tax-free status, and warned that the university will lose its permission to enrol foreign students if it does not share information on some of its students.

The United Kingdom’s most recent international education strategy was released in 2019. It set a target of attracting 600,000 overseas students by 2030 – a threshold that was reached in 2020 – and of seeing the sector reach £35 billion in economic value by 2030. A new international education strategy is expected from government later this year.

Ahead of its release comes a new report from the International Higher Education Commission, an independent group of sector experts formed with the goal of establishing “a new ‘International Education Strategy 2.0’ in partnership with the Higher Education community.” The Commission’s latest contribution to that process arrived this week in the form of a comprehensive report, Towards a Future UK International Higher Education Strategy: Resilience, Purpose and Precision.

Developed under the chairmanship of Former Universities Minister Chris Skidmore, the report is meant to provide “a roadmap for government and the sector.”

“What might that future look like?” asks Mr Skidmore in his introduction to the report. “First and foremost, it will be forward-looking and purpose-driven. We need to ensure that international higher education isn’t just about achieving significant numbers, but also aligning with Britain’s broader economic, diplomatic, and educational objectives. A successful strategy will safeguard the critical importance of UK universities and secure Britain’s position as a global leader in higher education.”

Priorities for the next strategy

The Commission sets out a wide range of recommendations for policy makers and sector leaders, all of which are underpinned by a series of strategic priorities. They include the following.

A call for long-term planning. The Commission considers the 2019 strategy’s focus on headline growth numbers an error, and highlights the need for a “coherent, long-term plan
for international education.”

The need for policy certainty. The last two years have marked a period of tumult in policy making around international students in many destinations, including the UK. The Commission calls for greater clarity around policy intent – and around the Graduate Route post-study work rights policy in particular – in order to promote sustainable growth in foreign enrolment in the UK.

Promoting policy coherence and coordination within government. The Commission calls for “a joined-up approach to policy-making” via the formation of an international strategy group within government and with delegates from the Home Office, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and the Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology.

The drive for diversification. The report argues that diversification away from the current reliance on a small number of student markets is a key aspect of a more strategic approach to recruitment. It proposes coordinated and targeted campaigns to boost student numbers from a wider range of source countries.

Telling the story of international education. “We must much more clearly communicate the significant economic and social contributions of international students and that, in almost all cases, they leave after graduation, thereby differentiating them from broader migration narratives,” adds the report.

A call for data. There are some significant reporting lags and gaps across the UK in terms of international student data. In response, the Commission calls for a public-private sector data group to speed the collection and dissemination of student data and market insights.

The full report contains expanded recommendations and considerable background in each of these areas, and more.

For additional background, please see:

The International Education Sustainability Group (IESG) has released the first-ever public results from its Climate Action Barometer (CAB) benchmarking study, and the findings are important given the growing tendency of international students to research the sustainability profile of universities and colleges they are considering.

The 2024 study involved 22 institutions in 10 countries that collectively enrol over 190,000 international students. Overall, international students account for 35% of the total enrolment of the participating institutions.

Students are actively looking for sustainable universities

As you can see from the illustration below, related QS research has found that more than three-quarters of students would prefer a sustainable university over a top-ranked institution, a third would pay more to attend a university with strong sustainability outputs, and two-thirds factored in the sustainability performance of a university in their choice to enrol there. Not shown in the infographic is another impressive stat: almost half (48%) said they would choose a sustainable university over one in the Top 100.

The influence of UN Sustainable Development Goals

Of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that all 193 United Nations member states agreed to in 2015 – with a target of these goals being met by 2030 – several specifically reference education and research, which is understandable given schools and universities’ role in educating youth for contemporary challenges. SDGs are increasingly being woven into K-12 and higher education curricula in many countries, and a large proportion of students are therefore familiar with the importance of the SDGs while deciding:

• Which destination to study in
• Which institutions to apply to
• Which programmes to consider

From the institutional side, working towards sustainability is complex – even when grounded in the best intentions. As the CAB report notes, international education is not easy on the environment. Collectively, international education at the 22 institutions and pathway providers in the 2024 study generated nearly 700,000 tCO2-e (tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent) with the largest share of that carbon footprint – roughly 83% of the total – stemming from student travel abroad.

Institutions truly committed to SDGs often find other ways to contribute to sustainability efforts (e.g., through academic departments and programmes, through campus initiatives, and through careful consideration of in-person travel vs. digital alternatives).

In general, the CAB study found that most institutions in the sample are very committed to climate action, but that performance was weaker when it came to emissions reduction initiatives and staff involvement in sustainability efforts. Just under half of international staff are “somewhat” responsible for climate change action initiatives at their university, while a third are “moderately” responsible. Only 19% are “mostly responsible.”

As you can see from the chart below, barriers to staff action towards sustainability efforts include limited resources, lack of set targets, lack of clear metrics, and uncertainty regarding who is responsible.

Innovative ways of reducing staff travel

Given that in-person overseas marketing is one of the major ways in which international educators contribute to global warming, it is important for institutions to look for ways to reduce emissions in this area. The CAB survey reveals a trend of institutions merging overseas activities and representatives to reduce the amount of staff travel. More than half (59%) are leveraging faculty members’ visits to include marketing efforts, 45% are leveraging alumni in local markets, and 32% are using their own students who are studying abroad in recruitment efforts.

Effects of global warming widely anticipated across the sample

Nearly two-thirds of institutions expect that their operations will be significantly impacted by climate change by 2030. Even now, Australian universities are reporting serious weather-related implications for their home campuses especially, as shown in the chart below.

Leaders in sustainability efforts

Stepping for a moment outside of the CAB findings, other sources indicate that Europe, and some European institutions in particular, have developed a competitive advantage with respect to sustainability. According to the UN’s Sustainable Development Report, the top ten countries for progress made towards the 17 SDGs are:

1. Finland
2. Sweden
3. Denmark
4. Germany
5. France
6. Austria
7. Norway
8. Croatia
9. UK
10. Poland

At the institutional level, of the Top 100 universities in QS’s global sustainability rankings for 2025, nearly half are in Europe. This includes twenty-six in the UK, six in Germany, four in Sweden, three in France, two in Switzerland, in The Netherlands, two in Belgium, and one each in Ireland and Spain.

The full list of top-ranked universities for sustainability, according to QS, is here. For those universities, sustainability is a compelling advantage. IESG Chief Executive, Ailsa Lamont, says:

“Universities have a powerful opportunity to lead the education sector’s response to climate change. By embedding sustainability into strategy, operations and leadership, institutions can build resilience, align with student and stakeholder expectations and strengthen their global reputation.”

For additional information, please see:

The Irish government has announced increases in the minimum funds requirements for foreign students. The changes will come into effect on 30 June 2025, and they mean that international students who are not required to have a visa (mostly students from the EU) to study in Ireland will need to prove the same level of financial savings as those who require a visa (mostly students from non-EU countries).
 
The announcement was sudden. The government provided just over 90 days’ notice, which means that students with visa-free-status who are close to beginning studies in Ireland – e.g., they have paid required tuition fees, booked flights, etc. – will now need to access €2,000–€3,000 more than what they were told to have when they applied for their course.
 
For all international students applying to courses of more than eight months, the minimum level of financial support will be €10,000 for the first year, and proof of that amount plus course fees for every subsequent year.
 
For courses of less than eight months, the requirement is €833 per month or €6,665 (in total), which represents a 120% increase over the 2023 threshold, and which is up from the €4,680 required currently. Those shorter courses are often delivered by the English-language sector, which has signalled its alarm over the financial requirement increase.

Call for a review

English Education Ireland, the national body representing over 60 accredited English-language schools, is calling for an immediate review of the increased savings threshold. Lorcan O’Connor Lloyd, CEO of English Education Ireland, says:

“This change has come without consultation, justification, or notice. It is difficult to see how a 120% increase in two years [for courses of less than eight months] can be considered proportionate when the cost of living has risen just 2% annually. The affected students are legally permitted to work part-time while in Ireland, yet are now being required to show financial backing as if they were not. This policy undermines the very structure of Ireland’s work-study visa system.”

On behalf of its members, English Education Ireland is calling for:

• An immediate pause and review of the policy
• A transition period to protect students already booked
• Full consultation with the education sector moving forward

The association states: “If unchallenged, the policy will lead to mass cancellations, reputational damage to Ireland, and loss of key emerging markets that have helped rebuild the sector post-pandemic.”

The growing popularity of Ireland

In the past five years, international students have become increasingly drawn to Ireland for reasons including Brexit (which, among other things, ushered in full international fees for EU students in the UK), stiffer immigration regimes in Australia and Canada, and a volatile political climate in the most expensive destination, the US.
 
In 2023/24, the number of international students in Irish higher education exceeded 40,000 for the first time and was 15% higher than in 2022/23. Supercharged growth has come from Mexico (61%) in particular, a country whose students have visa-free status in Ireland. Mexico is a price-sensitive market, so the more significant financial requirement for visa-free students beginning on 30 June may influence demand.

In addition, Latin American countries are some of the most important growth markets for Ireland’s English-language learning sector. In 2023, the top markets in the non-EU/EEA segment where visa is not required were:

• Brazil (53% of all students in this segment)
• Mexico
• Japan
• Chile
• Argentina

For additional background, please see:

The Institute of International Education’s (IIE) Fall 2024 Snapshot recorded a 3% increase in foreign enrolments in US colleges and universities as of the start of the 2024/25 academic year, but a new analysis of Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) visa data shows that international enrolments in the US declined overall during the 2024/25 academic year.

The analysis was conducted by Chris Glass, a professor and higher education specialist at Boston College and an affiliated faculty member at the Center for International Higher Education (CIHE).

Mr Glass says that SEVIS data shows a year-over-year foreign enrolment decline of -11% between March 2024 and March 2025, which, he estimates, represents up a loss of up to US$4 billion in economic impact (accounting for reduced spending on tuition and living expenses).

For context, he notes, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted a 15% decline in foreign enrolments – so the 11% drop in 2024/25 is getting close in scale to the fall-off during that incredibly disruptive time.

This drop does not account for policies enacted by the Trump administration, but rather occurred during the era of the Biden administration. President Trump’s policies (including an expected upcoming travel restriction) will likely further pressure foreign enrolments. The impact of the current administration’s policies on international enrolments in the US will not show up in enrolment data for months yet.

The March 2024–March 2025 decline was felt at all levels (and especially at the master’s level) and for language programmes as well as degree programmes. It picked up speed during fall 2024.

What is fuelling the decline?

Mr Glass points out that the structural components of the drop include changing flows from key source markets as well as record-high visa refusal rates.

Notably, there was a -28% reduction from India, reversing a growth trend from that market. Indian students tend to be drawn to graduate STEM programmes, and the massive decline from India is associated with an overall -20.5% reduction in foreign enrolments in master’s programmes in the US. Meanwhile, foreign enrolment in bachelor programmes remained stable year-over-year.

The master’s trend should not only be viewed in terms of enrolments, says Mr Glass:

“More importantly, as I’ve argued, international graduate students aren’t supplemental income—they’re critical scientific infrastructure. They don’t merely augment American scientific leadership—in many critical domains, they constitute it.”

Current crackdown on student protesters will likely further depress enrolments

Mr Glass points to affordability issues, visa processing and refusal rates, and permanent residency opportunities in other destinations as likely factors behind the fall in Indian student numbers. We can imagine that demand from India is being further depressed by stories circulating in India about Indian students’ treatment in the US. For example, Fulbright scholar and Columbia University student Ranjani Srinivasan was – without any notice – told her study visa had been revoked in March 2025. Her dorm room was visited, then raided, by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Before ICE could detain her, Ms Srinivasan fled to Canada. She later learned her participation in pro-Palestinian protests was part of the reason she was singled out.

Here is Mr Glass’s table showing what happened in all major markets for US colleges and universities. According to IIE data, Brazil was a Top Ten market in 2023/24 and had grown by 5% that year, but as you can see, SEVIS data shows a -14% decline in March 2025 compared with March 2024. Similarly, IIE data indicates a -13.5% increase from Nigeria in 2023/24; the March 2025 SEVIS data now shows a -16% decline from this market.

Potential impact of a travel ban

The Trump administration is considering a 43-country travel ban that would come into effect in the next few months. In a draft version of the plan, the 43 countries have been categorised into tiers, with RED countries most restricted, ORANGE the next tier, and YELLOW the last. The following table represents Mr Glass’s forecasts of the potential loss of enrolments from countries in each tier if the travel ban does go into place.

Potential impact of funding cuts

Government funding for scientific graduate programmes has been massively slashed in the past three months. One programme, the National Science Foundation (NSF) saw its budget reduced from US$9 billion to US$3 billion. The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding organisation has also received a -78% reduction in available budget, with Columbia University, in particular, targeted for major cuts. On top of an initial freeze of US$400 million from the NIH, Columbia learned this week of an additional US$250 million freeze. The freeze is linked to a government conclusion that Columbia has not done enough to clamp down on pro-Palestinian protests.

Mr Glass explains the far-reaching consequences of the funding cuts:

“These cuts strike at the heart of graduate education funding, particularly for international students. Federal funding serves as the primary support for 5% of STEM master’s students and 26% of STEM doctoral students. Among federally supported students, 69% receive research assistantships funded by federal grants.”

He predicts that the cuts will drastically affect the number of international students in STEM-focused graduate programmes: “I currently estimate between 50,000 and 77,000 international STEM graduate students could be affected—approximately 10% of the total international STEM graduate population.”

Is the writing on the wall?

The Institute of International Education (IIE) releases its report on international student enrolments in November of every year. But Mr Glass says:

“We don’t need to wait for November to see the warning signs. The data on the dashboard are flashing red before our eyes.”

Mr Glass paints a challenging picture of the future of the US’s world-leading role in higher education and science if trends continue:

“The dramatic shift in international student enrolment has the potential to reshape American higher education in ways that would be difficult to reverse. I don’t think this is just another cyclical fluctuation—but rather a more fundamental restructuring that will have profound implications for university finances, research output, and America’s position in the global knowledge economy.”

For additional background, please see: