Plans? What plans?
The academic year is ending with uncertainty for international students, with an unpredictable policy environment upending summer plans.
In the wake of the mass cancellation of thousands of students’ legal status and warnings of stricter screening at the U.S. border, some are rethinking plans to travel abroad or return home over the break. Although the Trump administration restored student records in a federal database, the government last week introduced a new policy in court filings that would give immigration officials greater leeway in status terminations.
The outsized impact of government actions is reflected in a new survey that found seven in 10 American colleges consider government policies for foreign students or problems in getting a visa a “significant issue” when it comes to international enrollments.
A number of colleges, including Duke University and the University of California at Berkeley, are warning international students about traveling overseas this summer. “We are advising current international students to travel cautiously this summer,” said Bonike Odegbami, director of international student services at Hamilton College, in New York State. “Students should only travel if absolutely necessary and after consulting with our office about the potential risks.”
One student said she was pulling out of a study-abroad trip to Africa next month despite semester-long preparation. Another told The Chronicle that she had canceled her flight home to China and would spend the summer with her American roommate. “I have too much anxiety” about international travel, the student said, even though she had not participated in campus protests and had no legal infractions, the two reasons cited by the administration for status terminations. (The students asked not to be identified because of fears about the impact of speaking out on their visa status.)
But another student said he felt he had no choice but to return to India, where he has an internship lined up. It’s too late to find summer housing and if he stayed in the United States, he wouldn’t be allowed to work, he said. “Yes, it’s a calculated risk.”
Fueling concern is a document introduced as evidence in one of dozens of lawsuits filed in response to the earlier status revocations. Titled “policy regarding termination of records,” the document says that immigration officials have the “inherent authority” to cancel student records and adds two new reasons for government action — “failure to comply” with visa requirements or a visa revocation by the U.S. Department of State.
But the guidance, which is labeled for internal use by the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security agency that oversees student visas, has not been published for public comment. Because of the absence of an official regulatory process, “we’re not treating it as a formal policy,” said Fanta Aw, executive director of NAFSA: Association of International Educators.
Still, Aw said, “there has been great cost” to international students and American colleges. NAFSA, along with the Oxford Test of English and Studyportals, a search platform for international students, fielded a global survey that found growing uneasiness among colleges about the fallout of government policy on international enrollments.
Apprehension about the intrusion of government is not uniquely American, however. Universities in other major destination countries, like Australia and Canada, have similar worries, the survey found. Worldwide, 62 percent of respondents said government restrictions were a significant barrier for international students, overtaking cost concerns as the most pressing issue.
In other policy news, a budget plan released by the Trump administration would “essentially eliminate” State Department exchange programs. The proposal would cut funding for the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, which runs prominent programs like Fulbright and Gilman, by $691 million, or 93 percent.
While the proposal is just the starting point for the appropriations process, Mark Overmann, executive director of the Alliance for International Exchange, called the potential cuts “deeply disappointing.”
“The proposal demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of exchange programs and would do the exact opposite of making America safer, stronger, and more prosperous,” Overmann wrote on LinkedIn.