Those policies were introduced to limit the number of new international students coming into the country after years of double-digit growth. But they overshot their target: far fewer students have come to Canada since 2024 than the government predicted. The confusing rollout of each new rule reduced international students’ confidence in the benefits of applying to Canadian institutions.

However, a significant policy reversal in November 2025 appears to have (1) sparked new interest in Canada, and (2) improved Canadian institutions’ potential to recruit international students in the current immigration context.

Dramatic increase in search interest

Keystone Education Group says that in December 2025, there was a +55% year-over-year increase in international student searches for Canada on its platform – a major change after two years of decline.

The turning point for the rebound was the government’s 6 November 2025 announcement that master’s and doctoral-level students would be removed from the 2026 cap on new international enrolments.

Incoming postgraduate students no longer need a Provincial Attestation Letter (PAL) for a study permit, and they are now permitted to bring their families with them. Canadian immigration (IRCC) processes those students and families’ applications together, eliminating any uncertainty about whether partners/dependent children will have to wait longer than students for a visa decision.

Keystone’s data also shows an uptick in master’s-level interest. In October 2025, searches for this level were down by -6% compared with October 2024. Then in November, they grew by +28%. Following that, there were sustained, monthly increases:

• +55% in December 2025
• +50% in January 2026
• +21% in February 2026
• +45% in March 2026

Keystone says this pattern suggests “a structural shift in student interest, not a momentary spike.”
Mark Bennett, VP of Research and Insight at Keystone, says:

“Prospective students react clearly and often very consistently to policy changes, and our search data is a great way of tracking that. What’s important here is that it’s the relative calm and clarity that seems to be having a positive effect on Canadian interest. Audiences who may have been struggling to understand Canada’s position on international education are responding to a clearer signal here.”

More evidence of an upturn

Findings from IDP’s most recent Emerging Futures survey, EF9, also show that Canada is regaining popularity. As the following chart illustrates, Australia (+10%), Canada (+7%), and “other” destinations (+9%) gained significant traction this year as destinations students are considering. This is in contrast to lower interest for the UK (-3%) and especially the US (-9%). The comparison is the data from EF9 (conducted in March and April 2026) versus data from EF7 (February 2025).

Will Canada’s momentum continue?

International students’ growing interest in Canada this year comes amidst a more beneficial external and internal environment than in 2024 and 2025.

External factors include:

• Significantly lower interest in the US given the second Trump administration’s immigration policy direction;
  
• More cautious recruitment on the part of UK universities given strict new compliance thresholds (including a requirement that institutions maintain a visa refusal rate of less than 5% to avoid sanctions).

Internal factors include:

• The postgraduate exemption from the cap;
  
• The ability of postgraduates to bring their families;
  
• Greater policy stability, which leads to (1) more confidence among international prospects, and (2) improved ability of institutions and agents to advise students given less confusion and volatility;
  
• More clarity on which programmes are eligible for the Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP);
  
• Higher visa approval rates for university programmes: according to IRCC data, undergraduate approvals rose from a 22% share of all approvals in 2024 to 35% in 2025, and at the postgraduate level, the jump was from 18.5% in 2024 to 30% in 2025;
  
• Last but not least – more targeted recruitment strategies by Canadian institutions.

The question of whether or not Canada can regain its footing as a preferred leading destination depends especially on the internal factors above – including policy stability.

For additional background, please see:

• “New international student permit approvals for Canada fell below COVID levels in 2025“
• “Canada: Government audit finds impact of international student cap far greater than expected“
• “Canada’s foreign enrolment has fallen by nearly 300,000 students over the last two years“
• “Canada announces international student cap numbers for 2026 and updated programme guidance“

The post New data provides early signals that Canada’s popularity as a study destination is on the rise appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

Lowest volume of visa applications in the past five years

The Home Office received -33% fewer sponsored study visa applications from students (main applicants) in January–April 2026 than in the same period in 2025. This follows a -21% decline in applications in Q4 2025 versus Q4 2024.

The chart below was published by Nous Group director in mid-May.

As the chart depicts, this year’s January–April visa application volume is the lowest in the past five years. It is -11% below the recent-year low for the same period in 2024, and in April 2026 alone, only 8,900 applications were received. This is down nearly -40% compared with April 2025.

What is driving the decline?

Visa applications from key markets dropped dramatically when the government announced in the summer of 2023 that most international students would no longer be able to bring their families with them to the UK as of January 2024.

However, demand began to pick up in 2025 as the shock wore off: in May 2025 alone, submissions from main applicants (i.e., students rather than dependants) were up +19% compared with May 2024.

This suggests that it wasn’t the dependants ban that prompted the past seven months of applications declines. Rather, many industry analysts believe the drop was spurred by a government announcement in May 2025 that universities would soon need to meet higher standards of compliance in order to continue to host (aka sponsor) international students. The three updated Basic Compliance Assessment (BCA) standards demand that institutions maintain:

1. A visa refusal rate of less than 5%
2. An enrolment rate of at least 95%
3. A course completion rate of at least 90%

The government then elaborated in January 2026 that failure to meet even one of the three benchmarks above would land institutions in the “red” or “amber” bands of a “red, amber, green” (RAG) assessment structure. Falling into “red” (e.g., exceeding 5% in visa rejections) can lead to a range of sanctions – the most extreme of which is that an institution has its licence to sponsor international students revoked.

The updated BCA thresholds (and associated RAG system) represent a much more stringent test of compliance than what they replace. found that had the updated benchmarks been in place in 2024, more than 20 universities would have failed at least one threshold and about 49,000 students might have been affected.

The immediate impact on applications

Following on the heels of the May 2025 announcement of the tightened BCA thresholds, the average visa approval rate for international students dropped to 85% in Q4 2025, down from 91% in Q4 2024. Universities were fully aware that the 85% approval rate is a full 10 percentage points below the upcoming BCA threshold of 95%.

For many, the lower average approval rate was the trigger for adopting a more cautious recruitment approach to high-growth markets with higher-than-average refusal rates.

As early as December 2025, some institutions hit the brakes entirely on recruiting in important emerging markets such as Bangladesh and Pakistan, countries where visa rejection rates hover between 18% and 22%. Many also adopted more a more careful approach to markets such as Nigeria, India, and Nepal, including:

• Extending fewer offers
• Checking documents more rigorously
• Holding more credibility interviews

A recent British Universities International Liaison Association (BUILA) survey found that around a third of surveyed UK universities reported curtailing recruitment in certain markets to reduce compliance risk.

The shift towards lower-risk markets continues, and the 1 June official implementation of the stricter BCA metrics will do nothing to halt this momentum.

High-risk markets are high-volume markets

Over the past couple of years, demand from the UK’s top two sources of students, India and China – as well as from the key emerging market of Nigeria (#4) – has been falling. The chart below details commencements from 2005–2025, and it highlights just how sharp the declines have been from India and Nigeria.

Strong demand from Nepal and Pakistan has been essential to mitigating declines from other top markets.

If the BCA compliance benchmarks continue to dampen UK universities’ confidence in recruiting in some Indian states with as well as in Nigeria, Pakistan, Nepal, and Bangladesh, the downward pressure on overall international commencements and enrolments could be severe. Collectively, according to HESA data, those five countries accounted for 39% of international enrolments in the UK in 2024/25. Looking at the entire student population (domestic and international), roughly 1 in 10 students were from India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Nepal, or Bangladesh in that academic year.

The impact on revenue and operations

Should international commencements fall again in the 2026/27 September intake, it will be devastating for many UK universities. On 19 May, the recruitment firm published an analysis of revenue sources across the higher education sector and found that “22 universities now earn more than half of all their income from overseas tuition … eight years ago, none did.”

Forecasts for coming years

The Office for Students (OfS), which is the independent regulator of higher education in England, released its on 14 May. Key inputs for the analysis are the self-reports and projections of 279 participating UK universities.

Of those universities, more than a third (36%) reported an operating deficit for 2024/25. On average, providers expect a small worsening of the financial picture in 2025/26 and then a rebound in 2026/27.

The OfS is skeptical of this forecast:

“Our assessment is that this projected recovery remains based on overly optimistic assumptions, particularly in the context of continued volatility in student recruitment.”

It notes that among responding universities, “non-UK entrants fell by -7.7% [in 2024/25], which was -9% below [providers’] forecast.”

Despite this decline, responding universities reported to the OfS that their forecast is for international undergraduate numbers to increase by +24.6% and postgraduate enrolments by +26.8% between 2024/25 and 2028/29.

The OfS warns that it would be financially imprudent to operate according to such an expectation, noting that “recent published visa data from the Home Office suggests a possible renewed decline in non-UK student numbers, particularly from key markets such as India and China.” The chart below is pulled from the report, and you’ll see that beginning in the fall of 2025 – as the BCA thresholds began to affect recruitment – international visa applications began to soften.

The OfS presented three financial scenarios in the report that “could happen if recruitment changes and providers take no mitigating action.”

Scenario 1 assumes no growth in international and domestic enrolments, Scenario 2 anticipates a modest reduction, and Scenario 3 describes a larger reduction of enrolments. The OfS summarises:

“Under the ‘no growth’ scenario, which assumes flat student recruitment from 2025/26 onwards, cumulative net income losses relative to forecast could reach £2.7 billion by 2028/29. Under this scenario 163 providers, representing 58.4% of the sector, would report a deficit. In the most severe scenario modelled, cumulative income losses increase to £4.2 billion, with deficits reported by up to 196 providers (70.3% of the sector as a whole).”

The report concludes: “Variations in student recruitment in 2024/25 and 2025/26 are prominent in the financial challenges facing the sector. Further volatility in recruitment, in 2026/27 and beyond, could present further significant challenges.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Foreign enrolments in UK higher education dipped again in fall 2025”
• “Narrowing bands of compliance: How the UK’s new RAG system will impact international student recruitment”
• “UK’s stiffening compliance regime already having an impact on international student recruitment”

The post UK universities bracing for a further decline in international enrolments appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The order dictates that “no applications may be made to the National VET Regulator under section 9 of the Act until after the day 12 months after the day this instrument commences.” The order is in immediate effect and it means that the Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA) will not accept applications from new providers or for new courses for a 12-month period beginning 19 May 2026.

The order specifically prevents any new applications for registration in the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS). CRICOS is Australia’s official government register of education providers and courses that are approved to enrol international students. And The Education Services for Overseas Students (ESOS) Act 2000 requires that any Australian institution enrolling visa-holding foreign students must be registered on CRICOS.

The 18 May order applies to private vocational education and training (VET) providers as well as those in the English Language Intensive Courses for Overseas Students (ELICOS) sector. Public providers, including TAFEs and public universities, are exempt.

In other words, during the year-long freeze, no new private VET or ELICOS providers may be established, nor may existing private-sector providers establish any new courses.

A background brief accompanying the assistant minister’s order explains that there are two exceptions:

“The Suspension will not apply to applications made by any existing provider that relate to adding:

• a location for a course the provider is already registered on CRICOS to deliver
• a course identified as superseded (non-equivalent) on the National Register (www.training.gov.au), where the provider is already registered to deliver the superseded (non-equivalent) course.”

An accompanying statement from Mr Hill says that the freeze is necessary to “provide ASQA with additional time to address sector integrity issues while processing existing applications with a focus on rigour, scrutiny, and integrity.”

The assistant minister draws a direct line in his comments from the order to two substantive government reviews of Australia’s immigration system – the Rapid Review into the Exploitation of ���ܲ��ٰ���������’s Visa System (the Nixon Review) and the Migration Review in 2023 – which identified “significant integrity concerns within ���ܲ��ٰ���������’s international education system, particularly in the vocational education and training (VET) sector.”

“Suspending new registrations to teach international students VET or English language onshore is not a decision taken lightly and will allow the Government to address integrity concerns about new market entrants and oversaturation in the international VET and ELICOS sectors,” added the Assistant Minister. “Frankly, it raises suspicions when at the same time student numbers in these parts of the sector are moderating the regulator continues to see a rush of new market entrants.”

A blunt instrument

“The Albanese Government has quietly dropped one of the most consequential blows to ���ܲ��ٰ���������’s international education sector in years and it landed without warning,” says . “This is not simply a technical regulatory change. It is a deliberate attempt to reshape the international education market to favour public providers while freezing out the private sector…It freezes the entire pipeline of new entrants regardless of quality, innovation, or workforce relevance. It also blocks private providers from diversifying their offerings.”

Ian Pratt, Managing Director at Lexis English, also questioned the government’s approach, noting that, “We now appear to have reached the point where, instead of properly resourcing regulators to assess applications and enforce standards, the solution is simply to stop accepting applications altogether.”

“Instead of empowering the regulator to identify and remove poor operators, the government has chosen a blanket suspension targeting an entire segment of the sector,” he added on LinkedIn. “The genuinely frustrating part is that quality independent providers are not the problem here. Many of the most innovative, student-focused and internationally responsive organisations in Australian education sit within the private sector. These are the providers building niche programmes, responding quickly to employer demand, investing in student experience, and actively supporting regional economies.”

Part of a larger pattern?

The freeze on new CRICOS registrations arrives in the midst of an ongoing political debate around migration levels in Australia. Both the governing and opposition parties have offered policy positions based in part on reducing immigration levels, including with respect to international students.

A statement from Universities Australia Chief Executive Officer Luke Sheehy cautions in response that, “After two years of instability and policy swings, what the sector and students need now is stability, certainty and a clear long-term strategy.

“International students are not the low-hanging fruit both sides of politics are treating them as in the migration debate. Significant cuts to international student numbers would have real consequences for the economy and our universities at a time both are doing it tough.

“Australia cannot afford another race to the bottom driven by stop-start policy settings, political signalling or measures that damage our economy, our universities and our global reputation.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Australia: Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers“
• “Australia: Student visa refusal rates reach record high amid weakening demand from China“
• “New IDP research shows link between visa uncertainty and the perceived ROI of study abroad“

The post Australia orders a year-long pause on new VET and ELICOS provider registrations appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

On 12 May, Todd M. Lyons, ICE’s acting director, called to announce that ICE has found more than 10,000 cases of fraud in the system on the part of dodgy employers and students.

Mr Lyons said that OPT has “become a magnet for fraud.”

He continued:

“When OPT was created under the Bush administration and expanded under the Obama administration, DHS had anticipated only a few thousand foreign students would receive training approval before returning home. Instead, OPT ballooned into an uncontrolled guest worker pipeline with hundreds of thousands of foreign students working in the United States. As the programme size has exploded, so has the fraud.”

Mr Lyons, and acting executive associate director for Homeland Security Operations (HSI) John Con, detailed the results of multiple investigations across the country, which include cases of “empty buildings with locked doors at addresses where hundreds of foreign students are allegedly employed … residential addresses listed as work sites for hundreds of foreign students – yet no employees were present.” Mr Lyons said:

“We are discovering evidence of organised fraud that spans national and international borders. This is not accidental. It is deliberate, coordinated, and criminal.”

Closing out the press conference, Mr Lyons concluded: “We will not tolerate abuse of our programmes, and more actions are forthcoming.”

In 2024/25, close to 300,000 international graduates participated in either OPT (one year) or STEM OPT (one year plus a two-year extension for STEM programme graduates).

A step toward restricting the OPT programme?

Many international education analysts believe the press conference is laying the groundwork for much stricter government oversight – or even the elimination – of the OPT programme.

There is strong political support for this direction within the governing Republican party, and as we reported last week, the director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Joseph Edlow, has indicated that he wants a regulatory system that can “remove the ability for employment authorisations for F-1 students beyond the time that they are in school.”

It’s possible that a cumulative and coordinated administration strategy that gradually reduces the attractiveness of OPT – and more broadly, the opportunities for international students to work in the US after graduating – could be in play. Following are four measures whose inter-dynamics suggest this may already be the case.

1: Pause in visa processing. In January 2026, the government expanded its 39-country travel ban so it could impact not just students coming into the US, but also those already studying there. It announced that while current students from those countries could still apply for OPT, the processing of their applications would be paused. This “pause” remains active. OPT applicants cannot work in the US until their application is approved, leaving them in limbo and without any sense of when processing will resume.
Strategic negative impact on OPT? Yes. It becomes harder and less attractive for international students from travel ban countries to participate in OPT.

2: USCIS to decide how long international students can stay in the US. The Duration of Status (D/S) system, which allows many students to stay in the US past their programme end date if their Designated School Official decides they have a valid reason for needing more time, is expected to be terminated in September 2026. It will be replaced by a fixed-admission structure under which students will be allowed no more than four years of admission unless they get an extension. US Citizenship and Immigration Services officials will decide whether to approve the extension. Officials will be permitted to “use discretion,” which means they can make independent judgments and choices when reviewing requests from students. They will never have met those students, relying rather on a paper or electronic submission for their decision. Most F-1 students will need the extension to be eligible for OPT given that they would exhaust the four-year admission period just by completing their degree.
Strategic negative impact on OPT? Yes. To enter OPT, students will need permission from immigration officials to stay in the US for longer than four years.

3: The framing of the OPT system as a “magnet for fraud” this week. In this week’s press conference, ICE may have been creating a context in which limiting OPT access would be justified. Mr Lyons characterised the incidences of fraud as “not victimless … [but] a blatant attack on the goodwill of the American people who generously allow foreign national access to our education system.”
Strategic negative impact on OPT? Yes. OPT is being positioned as a backdoor immigration pathway.

4: New rules for US employers hiring H-1B workers. In the March 2026 registration cycle for the H-1B lottery, a December 2025 “” was applied for the first time. This rule makes it more difficult for US employers to hire entry-level, highly skilled foreign workers and students.

It does so because petitions to sponsor entry-level or lower-salaried foreign workers and students receive fewer chances to “win” the lottery. There are now four salary levels in the selection process for H-1B recipients: #4 (the highest salary) gives four chances; #3 gives three chances; #2 gives two; and #1, the lowest, provides just one chance. Young international students in OPT, who represent a popular pool of H-1B prospects for employers, will be disadvantaged given their lower likelihood of being offered senior-level positions.
Strategic negative impact on OPT? Yes, indirectly. Receiving an H-1B is the primary route for highly skilled foreigners to work in the US for a considerable amount of time (three years with extensions possible to six years or even longer). It is also a dual-intent visa that allows employers to sponsor permanent residency for their H-1B workers.

By limiting the chances of international students to get an H-1B, the government also makes it less likely for them to eventually get a Green Card. The degree > OPT > H-1B > permanent residency pathway – while certainly not guaranteed – is the dream of many international students who choose the US for study abroad. Disrupting the OPT > H-1B pathway will jeopardise American universities and employers’ chances to attract some of the world’s top students.

Is OPT really so nefarious?

Many prominent companies, universities, and firms figure among the top employers of OPT participants. The table below is based on from 2024.

Apple CEO Tim Cook held a staff meeting in February in which he voiced his strong opposition to the Trump administration’s immigration approach. Mr Cook told employees: “For as long as I can remember, we have been a smarter, wiser, more innovative company because we’ve attracted the best and brightest from all corners of the world. I am going to continue to lobby lawmakers on this issue.”

Speaking of innovation

In 2022, a report from the found that one quarter of US billion-dollar companies were founded by international graduates of US universities.

More broadly, the latest instalment of the ’s long-running “New American Fortune 500” research programme found that in 2025, nearly half (46%) of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or the children of immigrants. Further, the American Immigration Council found that “of the 14 companies that made the Fortune 500 list in 2025 for the first time, 10 were founded by immigrants or their children.”

A 2022 of American Community data found that “every additional 100 foreign-born workers with an advanced degree working in a STEM occupation creates roughly 86 jobs for U.S. workers.”

Nothing final yet

With the press conference this week, the Trump administration continues to signal that OPT is in its sights. Miriam Feldblum, president and CEO of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, told in April:

“This current administration has been signaling very clearly that they’re seeking to end postgraduate Optional Practical Training. The former secretary of homeland security, the current secretary of homeland security, Republican senators have all been kind of waving the specter that there will be a proposed rule to end OPT.”

For additional background, please see:

• “US to end ‘Duration of Status’ for F, J, and I visas and limit the time international students can study in the US”
• “What international students need to know about study and work visas in the United States”
• “US: Student visa issuances fell by -36% in summer 2025; OPT uncertainty among factors affecting international student demand”

The post US immigration officials allege OPT is being widely abused and say “more actions are forthcoming” appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The results of the ninth Emerging Futures survey suggest major implications for governments and institutions alike. They show a distinct shift in students’ approach to choosing where in the world to study.

IDP notes: “While employability, post-study work opportunities, and affordability remain core drivers, EF9 shows students are now screening options more proactively, often ruling out destinations sooner due to visa costs, policy uncertainty, or perceived barriers to entry.”

The survey was conducted between early-March and late-April of 2026 among over 5,800 prospective and current students in 118 countries.

Demand remains high for Big Four destinations

The survey found that Australia (21%), the UK (19%), and the US and Canada (14%) remain the preferred countries in which to study. A main reason for this is that students believe there will be a high return-on-investment (ROI) from studying in those countries, especially with regards to career prospects.

Visa barriers impact perceived ROI

Despite their appeal, Big Four destinations are currently associated with uncertain, unfair, or increasingly restrictive immigration policies. Students are aware that:

• The likelihood of obtaining a visa for the US and Canada is lower than in the past (especially for students from some regions).
• Work and immigration rights are narrowing for international graduates in the US.
• ���ܲ��ٰ���������’s non-refundable visa application fee and financial requirements are the most expensive across all destinations.
• The UK government will reduce its popular post-study work stream, the Graduate Route, to 18 months for undergraduate and master’s students in 2027, and there are for further tightening of work and immigration rights.

Developments such as these are jeopardising the perceived ROI of studying in a Big Four country. If a student is doubtful they can pay for or obtain a visa, and if they see evidence of post-study work rights shrinking, they are naturally more likely to think twice about their decisions. The survey results show that this uncertainty is manifesting in several ways:

• Earlier influence: Students are exploring visa settings before or alongside their research on traditional “pull” factors such as programme availability, costs of study/living, rankings, reputation, etc. More than 4 in 10 said that the financial requirements of a visa application, the cost of applying for a visa, and the post-study work opportunities attached to a visa exert a strong influence on their choice of study destination.

IDP says: “Visa concerns are occurring earlier as prospects weigh the true cost to arrive [and] the likelihood of visa approval and employment pathways, [which points] to a strong focus on the value of their investment of an overseas degree.”

• Dramatic effect: Visa issues are a major reason that some students decide to give up their goal of studying abroad. Of students who said they have decided not to study abroad, more than a quarter said it was because the cost of a student visa is too high (27%) or because securing a visa is too difficult (26%).

• A wider net: More than three-quarters of students (78%) are now weighing multiple countries before committing, up from 66% in October 2024.

Visa settings as deterrent

IDP notes: “[The survey findings] reflect the cumulative impact of increasingly restrictive visa policies, and act as a warning sign to all destinations that sustained policy tightening can rapidly shift student preferences.”

Simon Emmett, Chief Partner Officer of IDP Education, said:

“Students are behaving more like savvy consumers, comparing destinations based on the return on their investment. If students can’t quickly understand whether they’re likely to qualify, what they’ll need to show and what it will cost up front, they will eliminate destinations sooner or delay plans altogether ….

“International students are planning the biggest chapter of their lives while navigating major hurdles. Governments of countries that want to attract the highest quality students should help them understand visa decisions, not add uncertainty that drives good students elsewhere.”

Mr Emmett called for collaboration across the sector and emphasised the collective need to “lift confidence in international education through greater transparency and accountability, better data on outcomes and visa trends, and enhanced compliance and early warning signals that protect students and support sustainable growth.”

Implications for institutions

The IDP research underlines the importance of strong communications, website content, and social media posts clarifying visa information for international students. If partnering with agents, institutions will also need to make sure they are constantly equipping agents with the most current, accurate information about immigration rules. In an era where students’ confidence in traditional study abroad destinations is under pressure, there is no room for error in these communications.

What’s more, there is a chance to build stronger relationships with students by stepping in to provide trusted information when it may be difficult to find otherwise.

For additional background, please see:

• “A common challenge: Strengthening student confidence in the ROI of study abroad”
• “What students want: The top decision factors for study abroad”

The post New IDP research shows link between visa uncertainty and the perceived ROI of study abroad appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

These trends are highlighted in results from the most recent by NAFSA, Oxford Test of English, and Studyportals. The survey asked respondents from over 254 universities across 36 countries about new international enrolments in the January–March 2026 intake; perceived barriers to enrolling students; and recruitment strategies.

The research found that universities in the Big Four are struggling with policy-induced enrolment pressures, but it also revealed that they are adapting recruitment strategies for their current context. Edwin van Rest, CEO of Studyportals, commented: “Universities that are agile, proactive and supportive of students are much better positioned to absorb visa disruption and sustain enrolment.”

About the research findings

The survey sample was heavily weighted towards the US, with 149 universities from the US compared with 39 in Europe, 24 in the UK, 13 in Canada, 9 from Australia, and 9 from the Asia-Pacific region (excluding Australia). In all, about three-quarters of responding universities were in the Big Four. For this reason, the regional breakdowns in the survey report are especially valuable.

There was also a Global Enrolment Benchmark Survey wave in January to March 2025. While apples-to-apples comparisons between the early-2025 and early-2026 waves cannot be made because of the waves’ slightly different samples, broad trends are definitely apparent.

New undergraduate enrolments

As shown in Chart 1 below, 69% of Canadian institutions reported fewer undergraduate students in the January 2026 intake. Considered alongside the 82% that reported a drop in the Q1 2025 survey wave, this marks two years of severe contraction.

In Q1 2026, 62% of US universities welcomed fewer new undergraduate students, a greater proportion than the 48% reporting the same in Q1 2025. This suggests that recruitment challenges have intensified in the US over the past year.

The undergraduate enrolment situation in Australia and the UK appears less dire. Under half of Australian (44%) institutions reported a falloff, and just as many (44%) said they had welcomed more new international students. The picture was more balanced in the UK, with 42% saying commencements were down, 37% reporting stability, and 21% enrolling more new students.

Meanwhile, Asian and European institutions are faring very well. Fully 82% of Asian institutions saw more new undergraduate students in Q1 2026 than in Q1 2025, and none of them reported drops. In Europe, almost half (47%) of responding universities reported a year-over-year increase, which is nearly double the proportion reporting a decline (25%).

Graduate trends

As shown in Chart 2 (below), around two-thirds of Australian, British, and American universities reported lower international postgraduate commencements in January 2026. The 2026 trend is worse for British institutions than in 2025, when only half said commencements were down, but it is stable in the US.

Canadian institutions are grappling with further deterioration at the postgraduate level in 2026. Fully 8 in 10 (80%) institutions reported declines (up from 71% in Q1 2025), and none reported increases.

Meanwhile, over half of Asian universities (55%) reported postgraduate commencement gains, as did 43% of European institutions.

Significant differences in Q1 2025 and Q1 2026 survey results

Chart 3 (below) shows the difference in average reported commencements between Q1 2025 and Q1 2026. European and Asian institutions welcomed considerably more new students in Q1 2026, especially at the bachelor’s level. Masters’ commencements were down significantly in Australia. In Canada and the US, intakes at both levels worsened considerably. Canadian undergraduate programmes were particularly affected, while in the US, the most severe reduction was at the master’s level. While less pronounced than in North America, a downward trend is also evident in the UK at both levels.

The most pressing issues

An overwhelming majority of respondents in the Big Four cited restrictive policies as the biggest obstacle they face (Chart 4 below). The full Australian sample (100%) picked this option, as did 84% in both Canada and the US and 71% in the UK. Policies were also the top challenge in Europe, but only 59% chose this response option.

In Asia, the top three cited issues did not include policies at all. Instead, cost of study/living, English-proficiency requirements, and academic requirements were the main challenges for Asian institutions.

What lies ahead

More than 4 in 10 universities in Australia, Canada, and the UK are planning budget cuts in the next 12 months, with over a third saying the same in the US (Chart 5 below). Close to a quarter of institutions in Australia and Canada are also planning to cut staff.

The relatively supportive policy environments in which Asian and European institutions are recruiting are reflected in their plans. Fully 64% of Asian institutions have more aggressive enrolment goals, as do 31% in Europe. In Asia, more than half (55%) intend to use more AI in their operations, and 26% of European institutions do as well. The mindset is clearly one of growth, while Big Four universities have their hands full with managing tough policy contexts and associated budget and staff cuts.

Across the board, however, institutions see diversification as a necessity this year (the most cited sample-wide priority at 37%).

Sector resilience and top strategies

The top strategies being used by universities to boost international enrolments are highlighted in Chart 6, below. Introducing new programmes; diversifying/expanding geographically; executing strong branding/marketing; and offering financial incentives and scholarships were the most cited institution-led initiatives.

In addition, a notable proportion of universities reported that they had introduced January start dates to “manage visa unpredictability and to capture students who would otherwise defer or drop out of the cycle.” The report notes:

“One global recruitment calendar rarely works well for all markets. Understanding demand by origin country can help to prioritise marketing and recruitment activities. Certain countries show a notably stronger preference for the January to March intake than their peers elsewhere.”

Of the Q1 2026 findings, Dr Fanta Aw, Executive Director and CEO of NAFSA, commented: “Despite an increasingly uncertain policy environment, the survey shows that institutions willing to innovate and adapt can still create meaningful pathways for student success and access …. Institutions can and must exercise greater agency to counter serious external forces.”

The study report adds:

“The right response to a shifting landscape is not to wait it out. It is to understand it better and move faster. Student demand for international education remains strong. The institutions that will capture it are the ones that treat uncertainty not as a reason to pause, but as a reason to think differently.”

For additional background, please see:

• “From the Big Four to the Big Fourteen”
• “Canada and the US are losing international student enrolments to Europe and Asia”
• “The four key trends that will shape international student mobility for the next decade”

The post Universities urged to focus on “factors they can control” as policy settings depress international student enrolments in the Big Four appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The proposal also suggests that students in shorter programmes (e.g., two-year master’s) will need to leave at the end of their study programme unless they receive an extension, with language students allowed a 24-month maximum term of admission, including breaks and vacation time.

The government intends to abolish the “Duration of Status” (D/S) system, which allows students to stay beyond the end-date on their I-20 form if they can prove they have legitimate reasons for an extension. The D/S system has been in effect for decades.

As for when the D/S system will be formally replaced, Jill Allen Murray, Deputy Executive Director of Public Policy at NAFSA: Association of International Educators, told :

“We do anticipate that it will happen soon. We know that the administration’s desire is certainly to have [the fixed time limit rule] in place so that it would be effective for students arriving in the United States in the fall. They do have a proposed a 60-day implementation period that has to happen, so working back from that, the very latest we should see the final rule is between the end of May and end of June.”

The webinar was presented by NAFSA, the International Student Resource Center, and the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, and it was devoted to preparing institutions for the impact of the rule change.

What is being replaced?

The D/S system, which allows F and J students an extension on the admission end-date on their I-20 form if their school, college, or university determines they are progressing in their studies. The D/S system recognises that international students need flexibility when it comes to accomplishing their study goals. For example:

• A student begins their journey in an English-intensive programme (IEP) and then progresses to higher education once they have become more proficient in the language;
• A PhD student needs more than four years to finish their programme (which is very common – the average is five to eight years);
• A student completes their degree programme and then progresses to Optional Practical Training (one year) or STEM OPT (three years) to gain work experience.

These are only some of the common and legitimate study pathways offered to international students under D/S.

If a student needs to stay in the US for longer to complete their programme, they apply for an extension to the Designated School Official (DSO) at their institution, who is familiar with the student’s academic progression and performance. The DSO is authorised to make extension decisions by the Department of Homeland Security.

How will the extension process change?

According to the proposal, the DSO will no longer have power to approve the extension request. That will transfer to US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officials, and those officials will be permitted to “use discretion” in their decisions. The date students are required to leave the US (with a 30-day grace period) will be entered on their I-94 form, linked to their passport. Students will need to make their case for an extension directly to USCIS.

Other limitations

The proposal also seeks to prohibit international undergraduate students from changing programmes or schools in the first year of their studies and graduate students from doing so at any point. Extensions will not be granted to students wanting to pursue a second degree or qualification if immigration authorities deem that programme to be at the same or lower level than the initial one.

The threat to OPT

When the government takes over the role of education institutions in deciding if a student should have more time to complete their studies, the implications will be massive, especially for students aiming to participate in Optional Practical Training (OPT). The director of USCIS, Joseph Edlow, has indicated he is prepared to restrict access to OPT. In May of 2025 at his , he said:

“What I want to see would be essentially a regulatory and sub-regulatory program that would allow us to remove the ability for employment authorizations for F-1 students beyond the time that they are in school.”

The OPT and STEM OPT post-study work streams are vital to US institutions’ ability to compete for international students (especially those in STEM and at the graduate level). A 2025 survey conducted by NAFSA and  found that 54% of current international students would not have chosen the US if there was no OPT option.

If it becomes too cumbersome, expensive, and uncertain to request an extension for OPT, demand will be extremely affected in the US’s top source of students, India. This is because Indians represent about half of all participants in OPT and STEM OPT.

The implications for graduate programmes

Nearly half of all international students in the US are studying at the master’s or doctoral level. The proposal includes a four-year limit for graduate programmes. Doctoral-level programmes very frequently require more time than this to complete. International student demand for graduate programmes is already down, and it will almost certainly fall further due to the proposal.

Some graduate programmes in STEM could be devastated. According to IIE data, international students account for almost 70% of enrolments in math and computer science programmes and more than half in engineering programmes. In AI-related programmes, 7 in 10 enrolments are international.

Such statistics also illustrate the huge potential of international STEM graduates to contribute to research and innovation in the US economy.

Will current students be affected?

The finalised rule is expected to apply to new students coming into the US in September 2026. Current students wanting to extend their stay beyond their programme end-date will likely need to submit a request to immigration authorities. It is possible there will be a six-month grace period for OPT students after the ruling goes into effect, as long as they do not leave the country.

Why is D/S being replaced?

The government says that the D/S setup cannot adequately address cases of fraud and visa non-compliance by international students and exchange visitors. More broadly, the change is being framed as a way to better protect national security because it will provide more opportunities for DHS to monitor the activities of international students. Students’ end-dates and activities will be more closely integrated into the US visa infrastructure.

In its response to the proposal, NAFSA exposed many holes in the government’s argument – including the lack of data compromising many of its points – and explained how much of the monitoring the DHS wants to do could be accomplished by making tweaks to the SEVIS system upon which D/S relies.

NAFSA has mounted a comprehensive and sector-wide effort to have the government reconsider the end of D/S or at least to significantly reconsider the proposed changes. The association has stated:

“If [the proposal] becomes final, the damage done by this rule will be felt on our campuses and in our communities and will harm our country’s standing in the world.”

The “sea change” ahead

The need for students to file a request for an extension to USCIS will be anything but a procedural switch. As Joann Ng Hartmann, Strategic Initiatives Leader at NAFSA says, it will be a “sea change.”
It will introduce considerable uncertainty for students, for two main reasons:

• At present, USCIS’s processing of immigration requests has never been more backlogged. Adding international students’ requests for extensions to the backlog will only worsen the situation. Many students will face a long wait to see if their extension is approved. 


  
• The granting of extensions will be in the hands of immigration officials at a time when the US government is eager to reduce the flow of foreigners into the country.

In addition, it will cause chaos for schools and colleges, according to Robin Catmur-Smith, Director of Immigration Services in the Office of Global Engagement at the University of Georgia, who was a NAFSA webinar panelist. Institutions will need to change their recruitment messaging, websites, communications, and supports for incoming and current students.

The administration burden – and needed budget – will be extremely high as well for the new compliance and procedural changes ahead. International student departments will in many cases have to be reorganised to advise and track different student profiles (e.g., J students, graduate students, incoming students, OPT students). What’s more, because the final proposal has not yet been published, institutions are in some ways flying blind as they attempt to prepare themselves, recruitment agents, current students, and incoming students for the September 2026 intake.

Where does the government proposal stand now?

The DHS review of comments and objections submitted by tens of thousands of respondents – including universities and peak bodies – is complete and the document is now final. NAFSA announced today that:

“On May 5, 2026, DHS submitted the final rule that will eliminate F and J “Duration of Status” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. We expect OMB’s review to be expeditious and for the rule to be published in the Federal Register in the not-too-distant future. The final rule will go into effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. Although the text of the final rule will not be available to the public until at least 24 hours before the Federal Register publication date, we surmise that it will retain most if not all of the changes included in the proposed rule.”

Can the rule be challenged?

During the 28 April NAFSA webinar, Andrew Lyonsberg, a partner at McDermott Will & Schulte’s Supreme Court & Appellate Litigation and Government & Regulatory Litigation practice, presented as a panelist. He spoke to the question of whether the fixed time limit rule can be legally challenged.

Mr Lyonsberg, whose practice has successfully appealed past Trump administration immigration rules, says that when the final rule is published, DHS will need to present strong rationale that the need for the change outweighs the “harms” of it to students, institutions, and stakeholders. If not, this will likely clear a path to litigation.

If there is a challenge, it would likely be that the rule should be struck down because it is “arbitrary and capricious.” That legal terminology without a reasonable basis, ignoring relevant facts or logic and often appearing random, unfair, or unsupported by the evidence.

Mr Lyonsberg said that the international education community could prepare to support potential litigation by beginning to document concrete examples of harms the proposal would inflict on students, institutions, staff, and more.

The larger implications

NAFSA states:

“We are in a global competition for talent, as other countries around the world recognize the outsized economic and social benefits of international students and exchange visitors and have implemented policies to create a welcoming environment for these students to thrive.”

“If finalized, the rule will foster tremendous uncertainty for many international students and exchange visitors about whether they will be able to maintain their legal status in the United States through the completion of their studies or program, discouraging students and exchange visitors from coming here, and pushing them to look for opportunities in other countries instead.”

NAFSA also has related to the proposal and its implications, including:

• “Preparing for the final D/S rule. How has your office started to prepare?”
• “Spreadsheet for advising and staffing planning”
• “Presidents’ Alliance Survey: Share how international talent strengthens our communities”

For additional background, please see:

• “What international students need to know about study and work visas in the US”
• “US: Student visa issuances fell by -36% in summer 2025; OPT uncertainty among factors affecting international student demand”

The post US to end “Duration of Status” for F, J, and I visas and limit the time international students can study in the US appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

Of its research, the British Council notes:

“The findings from multiple metrics suggest that in an increasingly unstable, multipolar world, there is a growing preference among young people for predictability, security, and capability – qualities increasingly associated with non-Western governance models – over the perceived instability, paralysis and polarisation of many Western democracies.”

Of the study destinations becoming more attractive to youth, several are authoritarian, which dovetails with another major study that found that young people are to non-democratic governance. The Big Four remain in the lead, but they are losing ground, not least because of less welcoming immigration settings than in the past – particularly for students from the Global South.

About the research

The British Council’s 2025 Global Perceptions survey sample was over 20,000 youth aged 18–34 in G20 countries excluding Russia. A key aim was determining how the UK stacks up against other countries in terms of attractiveness, trust, perceptions of the economy and government, and as a study abroad destination.

The 2025 QS Global Student Flows report drew on responses from over 70,000 students across 191 countries. Otherwise, QS says it “maps and forecasts international student mobility using an open source framework, flow mapping technology, and scenario-based forecasting.”

Leaders and climbers

The British Council survey asked respondents about the overall attractiveness of countries based on a number of metrics. Chart 1 (below) shows Japan, Italy, and the UK are in the lead, but all have lost some ground. Japan is almost stable since 2016 (down 1 percentage point), but Italy and the UK have lost -5 and -6 percentage points, respectively. The UK leads in “trust in government,” but has fallen slightly (-1) while Japan is #2 and has gained +5 percentage points.

Meanwhile, of the five “climbers” (countries that gained the most in attractiveness since 2016), four are in Asia (South Korea, Türkiye, China, and Indonesia), with Saudi Arabia rounding out the top five.

Interestingly, of the five climbers, two are non-democratic (China and Saudi Arabia), and one is increasingly authoritarian (Türkiye). All three of those countries have “strongman” leaders who have been in power for some time. China’s President Xi Jinping has held the presidency since 2013; Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman has led since 2017, following his father, Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud; and Türkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has held power since 2014.

What’s more, even Russia makes the top 10 for attractiveness today (see Chart 2, below), bouncing back from its ranking of #18 when it invaded Ukraine to #10 in 2025. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has been in place since 1999 and rules with an iron fist.

The British Council notes:

“The top ten for overall attractiveness has long been dominated by rich, liberal, democratic capitalist states. The UK, Japan, and Italy have consistently held leading positions over the past decade. But that dominance is no longer assured: Australia, Canada, and the United States have all seen their rankings decline over time, with the risk that one or more may soon fall out of the top ten.”

QS also finds a gravitation to non-Western countries

There may be a connection between these changes in attractiveness and students’ rapidly growing interest in alternative destinations. In publishing its 2025 Global Student Flows report, QS interviewed Matthew Ramsey, Director of University Affairs at the University of British Columbia, who said:

“We now live in a more uncertain global environment. This uncertainty has an impact on the younger generation, and especially those who may consider studying outside of their home country.”

The Global Student Flows report projects that by 2030, Türkiye, the United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, and Japan will gain more share of international students, while the combined market share of the Big Four is projected to drop from 40% to 35%.

High visa rejection rates will ripple outside of international education

High visa rejection rates in Australia, Canada, and the US for African and South Asian students will have a huge impact on future global student mobility – and countries’ soft power. QS interviewed Hans de Wit, a Distinguished Fellow at the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College, who said:

“We see a reduction in South-North mobility and an increase in South-South mobility … Africa is the new battlefield, with students moving within the region and to Asia and the Middle East.”

The losses incurred by traditional leaders in attractiveness such as Canada and the US coincide with their extremely high visa rejection rates of students from Global South countries. For example:

• In 2025, nearly two-thirds (64%) of all F-1 visa applications from African students were rejected. Many Asian students were even more likely to be refused: India: 61%; Pakistan: 71%; Bangladesh: 73%; Nepal: 81%; and Afghanistan: 81%.

• The latest African-only study permit rejection rate data published by the Canadian government in 2023 found that over 60% of African students were refused in Canada. And in 2025, the refusal rate for Indian students was 74%.

With rejection rates like these, the ability of the US and Canada to build soft power and partnerships with the Global South is greatly diminished. The introduction to the British Council’s Global Perceptions report states:

“[Youth perceptions] influence personal choices – like where to study, where to build a business, or which partnerships to pursue. But they also shape the choices of governments, businesses, and international organisations. Whether negotiating trade deals, collaborating on climate action, or sharing intelligence, trust is the foundation of international cooperation.”

The UK has also lost ground

The British Council found that of the top 5 study destinations, the UK has lost considerable ground (see Chart 3 below), and it notes that this trend has wide implications:

“The UK has long benefitted from a strong soft power position. But … this advantage is slipping. While the UK remains attractive and trusted, its relative standing among G20 nations is under pressure. This poses a direct challenge to its international influence, long-term security, and economic prosperity. Crucially, soft power is no longer the preserve of a few traditional powers. Emerging players are actively vying to become the next “soft power superpower.” The competition is intensifying – and the field is levelling. In this new race, complacency is costly. If the UK is to maintain its edge, it must act decisively, strategically, and with purpose.”

One finding in particular confirms the strong linkages between economic competitiveness, soft power and study abroad: youth respondents saying they studied in the UK were four times more likely to say they intend to do business or trade with the UK in the future than those who had not.

Practical rather than philosophical

For students from the Global South aiming to improve their and their families’ lives, study abroad offers the chance of earning globally recognised degrees, sending money home, and accessing often better educational systems than exist in their own countries. If they can’t get into a Big Four destination, they have increasingly attractive alternatives.

Over time, the more international students who study outside the West, the more talent, trade, and soft power will be concentrated in those regions.

For additional background, please see:

• “From the Big Four to the Big Fourteen”
• “Visa rejections climb in the US for international students from key markets including India“
• “Australia: Student visa refusal rates reach record high amid weakening demand from China“
• “Narrowing bands of compliance: How the UK’s new RAG system will impact international student recruitment“

The post New research finds global youth increasingly drawn to non-Western governance models and study destinations appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.