The decline is unfolding as Canada’s new policy settings – a cap on international enrolments and other measures – continue to impact international students and the Canadian education system alike. The government’s reforms, which were intended to reduce the number of international students in Canada and improve programme integrity, have considerably overshot the mark.

A recent report from The Office of the Auditor General of Canada (OAG) found that the Canadian government significantly underestimated the effects of its enrolment cap and did too little to improve the integrity of the system. The Auditor General also observed: “The department did not know why [study permit] approval rates were lower than projected.”

The full-year data for 2025 from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) provides the answer: lower-than-expected permit grants were due to (1) the erosion of international student demand and (2) historically low approval rates for new study permit applications.

“Last year, IRCC processed 211,000 new post-secondary applications from prospective international students,” says a new analysis from . “Compared to 2024, demand was -55% lower year-over-year.” In other words, much fewer international students applied for a study permit last year than was the case in 2024, and this was on the heels of another substantial applications drop in 2023.

At the same time, approval rates have fallen sharply over the last five years. In 2021, 57.9% of new study permit applications were approved. That approval rate fell to 44.9% in 2024 and then took another significant step down to 35.7% – in 2025.

These two declining trends are closely linked. Simply put, students do not need to wait for official statistics to understand that many of their peers are having their applications rejected and that they should perhaps consider other options.

Can we talk about the overcorrection?

Another newly released study, this time from the , reinforces the point: “The [enrolment] cap and related reforms are reducing [international student enrolment] in excess of the provincial and territorial allocation targets, because they damage the brand and reputation of Canada’s International Student Program…After two years of caps, the 2024 policy changes seem to have reduced new study permit applications and enrolments much more than IRCC planned – and much more than provinces, territories and DLIs expected.”

The Committee’s study of the International Student Program was carried out from September to November 2025 and included testimony and written briefs from dozens of expert witnesses and organisations.

The Standing Committee finds that, “Although education and the regulation of learning institutions fall under provincial and territorial jurisdiction, the federal government was responsible for issuing an unsustainable number of study permits and allowing the system to be abused.” However, “While IRCC is attempting to reduce the number of international students in some provinces and territories, and to address overreliance on international students by colleges, its policies are impacting enrolment in regions and institutions across the country and in higher numbers than anticipated. Despite the government’s complex allocation formula, the policy is too broad and ignores regional institutional realities…While universities in some regions, such as Quebec, have not generally had problems with growing international student populations too quickly, nor with housing these students, the cap has decimated enrolment from coast to coast to coast.”

In his testimony during the Committee hearings in September 2025, Alex Usher, President of Higher Education Strategy Associates, said:

“What we ended up with was a federal government that barely understood what was going on, lashing out, acting alone, doing anything it could to bring the numbers down with only the barest understanding of the system it was regulating…We have almost no instinct anymore for co-operative federalism. This was a clear case where governments should have been talking to one another, and they weren’t. They should have been including institutions, as well. We have brutally siloed decision-making.”

Among the 10 recommendations put forward to the Government of Canada by the Standing Committee, perhaps the most compelling one is the related point that: “To give time for all actors in the international student system to adapt, and to give more certainty to current and prospective international students, the [committee recommends] that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada consult more extensively with the provinces and territories about long-term plans for the International Student Program.”

Needless to say, the stakes are high – both for the country and for prospective students seeking access to education – and there is an urgent need for more thoughtful and effective policy making. The issues at hand transcend international student statistics and extend to the larger questions of Canada’s long-term social and economic development, in particular its ability to attract talented students, scholars, and researchers and what that means to larger national goals of innovation and productivity.

As Larissa Bezo, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Bureau for International Education, said in her Committee testimony:

“We need to be clear that this isn’t solely an immigration issue. Talent development and attraction cuts across departments and needs whole-of-government coordination.”

For additional background, please see:

• “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: Study permit numbers are in steep decline in 2025“

The post New international student permit approvals for Canada fell below COVID levels in 2025 appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The report continues Shorelight’s commitment, which began in 2023 in partnership with the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, to acquiring and analysing F-1 visa denial data. It is based on annual data obtained via a public information request to the US Department of State.

Refusals higher than in the pandemic

More than a third of all F-1 visas (35%) were refused in 2025, up from 31% in 2024 and 23% in 2015

The extremes on either point of this average are sharp. For Europe, the refusal rate is 9%. For Africa and Asia, it is 64% and 41%, respectively. The chart below shows the persistently low rate of rejection over 10 years for European students compared with students from elsewhere in the world.

Surging rejection rates for African students

In 2015, more than half of African applicants had their F-1 visa application approved. In 2025, nearly two-thirds were rejected. Over 10 years, refusals for African applicants have risen by 33%.

Students from some African countries are especially likely to be denied, with at least 80% of applicants from Sierra Leone, Somalia, Benin, and Burkina Faso turned away last year.

A record-high refusal rate also applied to applications from Ghana: 81% in 2025 versus 72% in 2024. Ghana – one of the safest and most stable countries in West Africa – has been a very important emerging market for US institutions in recent years. In 2024/25, according to the IIE’s Open Doors data, there were 12,825 Ghanaian students in the US, a +36.5% rise over the previous year. This was an even higher rate of growth than that from Nigeria (+9.1%), which has been the top African sender of students to the US for several years.

In 2024/25, there were 21,850 Nigerian students in US higher education, but next year will tell a different story: Nigeria is on the Trump administration’s travel ban list. This means that Nigerian students currently cannot even apply to the US, let alone have a shot of being approved for a visa. In addition, Nigerian students in the US hoping to switch to Optional Practical Training (OPT) aren’t currently able to, as the immigration department has placed an indefinite hold on their applications. This means they cannot work after finishing their studies.

Keystone Education Group reports that “Nigerian student search interest in the USA has dropped more than -50% since the visa processing freeze announcement on 17 December 2025.” Keystone found that Nigerian interest is shifting mainly to France (+40%), Italy (+33%), Australia (+21), and China (+17%).

Refusals now common for South Asian students

Like African students, South Asian students are increasingly aware that simply being from their country means they are less likely to receive an F-1 visa than students from other regions. Indian students – who compose the largest segment of the international student body in the US – are no exception. The rejection rate for Indian students rose from 53% in 2024 to 61% in 2025.

As a source market, India has been growing over time – up +10% in 2024/25 after an expansion of +23% in 2023/24, but this trend is now reversing.

Similarly, visa denials for Nepali students rose from 59% in 2024 to 81% in 2025. Last year, Nepal was the sixth largest origin market for US institutions, growing by +48% in 2024/25 over 2023/24 – the most significant jump of any top 20 market for the US.

Students from Bangladesh and Pakistan are also much more likely to be refused than approved for an F-1 visa (73% and 71% rejection rate, respectively), and this trend has intensified over the past year.

European students fare much better

Over 9 in 10 European students were approved for an F-1 visa in 2025.

The problem is that European countries contain a relatively small recruitment pool. For example, though six European countries – the UK, Türkiye, Spain, Germany, France, and Italy – are top-20 source countries for US colleges, they collectively compose less than 6% of international enrolments. In addition, they are not high-growth markets (see chart below); they will not offset declining enrolments from Africa and Asia.

Lower Indian demand has profound implications for the US economy

Indians represent 30% of all foreign enrolments in the US, and they are mostly in graduate programmes. But last year, Indian graduate enrolments fell by -9.5% – a serious decline made even starker because it followed +18.5% growth the previous year.

If Indian demand declines further because of high visa refusal rates or restrictions on the OPT and H-1B work streams, there will be profound domino effects. Consider:

• Indian students contribute over 70% of enrolments in master’s and PhD-level STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) programmes.
• Nearly half of STEM-OPT participants are Indian.
• Close to 75% of all H-1B work visas are awarded to Indians, mainly for positions in the tech sector.
• Nearly a quarter (23%) of tech workers in Silicon Valley with a bachelor’s degree or higher are Indian-born (including the current CEOs of Google, Microsoft, and IBM).
• Indian-born doctors are the largest segment of immigrant doctors in the US.

The explains what could happen if Indian students choose to go elsewhere to study and work in STEM fields:

“The broader impact on the US could be severe: hospitals facing doctor shortages, universities struggling to attract STEM students, and start-ups without the lobbying muscle of Google or Amazon are likely to be hit hardest.”

The future impact of structural bias in F-1 visa processing

The Shorelight report concludes:

“With student visa refusals in India climbing up to 60%, we’re not just denying students, we’re cutting off a critical talent pipeline for US universities, employers, and the economy. Without expanding opportunities in other high-growth regions, we’re creating a self-inflicted talent shortage. In a global race for skilled workers, the US cannot afford to turn away the very students who fuel our research, workforce, and competitiveness.”

Asked by Inside Higher Ed to comment on Shorelight’s determination that visa approvals are more determined by applicants’ home countries than by merit, the US State Department said: “All visa applications are reviewed on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with US law, and adjudicated based on the facts and circumstances of the individual case.”

Shorelight’s recommendations

Within the Shorelight report are “evidence-based solutions to address this challenge [of structural bias in F-1 visa processing],” including a call for “greater transparency in denials, standardised financial guidance, specialised training for high-refusal consulates, dual-intent for F-1 visas, and codifying OPT.” The full report .

For additional background, please see:


• “US: Student visa issuances fell by -36% in summer 2025; OPT uncertainty among factors affecting international student demand”
• “Australia: Student visa refusal rates reach record high amid weakening demand from China”

The post Visa rejections climb in the US for international students from key markets including India appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

Some of these changes are in effect immediately; some are still pending.

What has already changed?

As of 1 April 2026, international students no longer need a separate co-op work permit that are part of their post-secondary programme in Canada. This change applies to work-integrated learning components within the student’s programme of study, including co-op placements, internships, practicums, and mentorships.

This is a significant departure from the previous practice where students pursing any such work-integrated learning placement were obliged to obtain a separate co-op work permit in addition to their study permit.

Commenting on the change on LinkedIn, Ankita Goyal, an adjunct professor of immigration law at Queen’s University, said, “Removing the need for a co-op work permit means students won’t be stuck waiting to start their placements—something that has historically caused delays, stress, and even lost opportunities.”

“This change simplifies the administrative process for students by requiring only one permit to complete a single study programme,” adds a statement from IRCC. “It does not increase the number of students who are authorised to work or affect temporary resident volumes; it simply removes an administrative step that is no longer necessary.”

In order to be eligible to carry out any such work-integrated learning with only a study permit, the work placement must be a requirement of the study programme. The updated IRCC guidance says that eligible students must meet all of the following conditions:

• “You have conditions printed on your initial study permit that say you’re allowed to work on campus.
• You have a letter from your DLI [Designated Learning Institution] that confirms the work placement is a requirement of your study program.
• You have a valid study permit or you applied to extend your study permit before it expired.
• You’re a full-time student at a DLI.
• Your study programme is at least 6 months long, at a post-secondary level and leads to a degree, diploma or certificate.
• The work placement of your study programme totals 50% or less of your study programme.”

Further easing ahead?

In addition to those immediate changes around co-op of other work placements, IRCC has also proposed to rules around post-graduation work permits (PGWP).

Most notable among these is a proposal, for which consultations will be ongoing for the next month or two, that would allow international students to work without a work permit in cases where:

• An international student is waiting for a decision on a study permit extension; and
• An international graduate is awaiting a decision on an application for a post-graduation work permit (PGWP).

“When international students finish their programme, they can apply for a PGWP. However, there’s a gap between graduating and receiving the PGWP,” says a related report on . “Currently, gaps between permit expiry and approval of a new permit can leave students and graduates in limbo, and unsure about their ability to work, even though current regulations do allow graduates to begin work before receiving their work permit.”

The process and timeline for implementation of any new rules around PGWPs is not yet clear, but the current proposals reflect the government’s stated intention to streamline and Canada’s immigration system, and so seem likely to proceed in some form.

For additional background, please see:

• “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: A case study of immigration policy impacts on postsecondary institutions and the wider economy“

The post Canadian immigration officials move to ease rules around student work permits appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

A new resource from immigration law firm Fragomen called “” offers helpful guidance on what international students should consider when applying to a US institution, changing visa status, or leaving the US while on a visa or during a visa transition period (e.g., from an F-1 to OPT, or OPT to H-1B).

In brief, Fragomen emphasises that this is a very risky time for international students to leave the US because of a real chance that they might not be permitted re-entry.

In today’s article, we feature ��������dz����’s advice, and we also provide an update on the broader immigration landscape in terms of its implications for international students, higher education institutions, and employers. In particular, we look at why proposed changes to Optional Practical Training (OPT) and study duration limits – as well as new H-1B rules – pose challenges for US colleges’ international recruitment.

The golden pathway

The majority of international students in the US (57%) are in STEM fields: science, technology, engineering, and math. Many of them choose their academic focus to become eligible for the programme called STEM OPT (STEM Optional Practical Training), which:

• Allows international students to work in the US for up to three years (rather than the one-year term permitted for regular OPT participants).


  
• Gives them three chances to be selected through the H-1B work visa lottery system (a significant feature because of the extremely high demand for the limited number of H-1Bs granted each year). The H-1B visa, where applicants are sponsored by US employers, is valid for three years with a possible three-year extension.

In many cases, the pathway envisioned by many international prospects applying to a US university is this: Enrol in a STEM academic programme on an F-1 visa > participate in STEM OPT > apply up to three times for an H-1B visa that allows up to six years of work in the US > potentially progress to permanent residency from there.

The opportunity to pursue this pathway is central to the decision-making of most prospects considering study in the US. A 2025 survey conducted by NAFSA and the found that 54% of current international students would not have chosen the US if there was no OPT option. Another survey, the , found that 92% of US higher institutions believe that international students would choose another destination if OPT were eliminated.

Those survey findings underscore the impact of the OPT programme on an international student’s overall return on investment (ROI) for study in the US. Simply put, participating in OPT helps students to offset the high cost of a US degree, which might otherwise be prohibitive.

The pathway is under pressure

The importance of OPT to US colleges’ international enrolments highlights the massive impact that several recent proposals or rule changes by the Department of Homeland Security may have on institutions’ ability to recruit overseas. These include:

• A proposal to restrict or end the OPT programme. This proposal is currently under review. 

  
• A presidential proclamation requiring an employer to pay a US$100,000 fee for an H‑1B application filed from outside the US after 21 September 2025. This fee is now in place despite multiple legal challenges, some of which are still proceeding through the courts.


  
• A proposal to impose a fixed period limiting international students’ study visa to no more than four years. This would replace the current Duration of Stay (D/S) system that allows students to remain in the US as long as they are progressing in their academic programmes. A fixed admission period would require students to apply for extensions that they wouldn’t automatically receive. If an extension were denied, a student would be required to leave the US immediately, with no chance at OPT. This proposal is under review. Almost half (49%) of current students responding to the 2025 NAFSA/ Institute for Progress survey said they would not have enrolled in the first place had Duration of Status been replaced with a fixed period of admission.

Heightened scrutiny for international students

At the core of the current US immigration strategy is the administration’s belief that international students and workers could be a threat and even to national security.

As a result, the administration has shown that it is willing to use various policy levers to make it more difficult for international students to come to the US, and/or to stay after graduation. 

For the many international students who want to safeguard their ability to study, work, and potentially immigrate to the US, deciding to leave the country for travel can be risky. Re-entering means dealing with US immigration officers again at a time when the State Department is increasing refusals of visas for . It can be very difficult for students to challenge refusals from abroad – and for institutions to help them.

Several universities – with the help of legal experts – are counselling their international students to stay in the US for this reason. ��������dz����’s resource delves deeply into the risks for particular kinds of students based on their visa status or intended visa progression:

“International students are facing significantly heightened scrutiny, which could affect their status, ability to change status, and ability to re-enter the United States after international travel…F-1 students who have applied for, or are working on, post-completion optional practical training (OPT) or may be the beneficiary of an H-1B cap petition and a request to change status should be aware of the requirements and risks of travelling internationally.”

Fragomen adds: “This is true whether you are in an ongoing course of study, your 60-day grace period, a period of OPT (including a STEM extension), or in the ‘cap gap’ – the period between the end of your course of study or OPT and either the date a timely-filed H-1B change of status on your behalf will take effect, or April 1 (whichever is earlier).”

��������dz����’s guidance goes into to describe best practices for specific types of international students in different visa classes or circumstances.

The destabilising effect

Naavya Shetty, an Indian student finishing up her degree at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, spoke with in October 2025:

“What we [international students] felt would happen was that all these companies would develop a sense of uncertainty about hiring international students. Because who knows when a new law is going to pass that makes them have to pay a lot more for us than we might actually be ‘worth.’”

Ms Shetty explained: “In order to come here, I had to take a student loan, with a particularly high rate of interest. My parents had to mortgage our house in order for me to be able to take that loan. If I do not manage to get a job, there is quite a lot of burden on me and my family financially. The average graduate student salary [in the US] for my field is estimated to be about 100K, whereas in India, the estimated cost is around 15 to 20 lakhs – equivalent to roughly $17,000 a year.”

Keep the facts in focus

The confusing narrative around the US$100,000 H-1B application fee is daunting for employers who may not understand which applicants are affected and which are not. In fact, the fee (as of this writing) applies only to new H-1B applicants outside the US. F-1 students are exempted if they secure a job right after finishing school, which means there is no added cost for US employers wanting to hire them.

What’s more, the new rules could actually benefit F-1 international students. Employers who know about the exemption could pivot to hiring an international student graduate instead of a skilled worker outside of the US, since this would allow them to avoid the US$100,000 fee.

Law firm notes:

“[The new rules] create a sharp strategic divide. US‑based international graduates become far more attractive candidates, while employers may be reluctant to sponsor workers abroad due to the substantial additional cost …

The H-1B program is evolving into a higher cost, higher skill pathway. Employers prepared to invest in top tier talent will remain active participants, while others may pivot to alternative visa strategies or focus on international graduates already in the United States.”

The need for legal advice

��������dz����’s offers exactly the kind of counsel that can seem very elusive for students and institutions alike at this time.

For additional background, please see:

• “US suspends immigration processing for nationals from 39 travel ban countries – but F, J, and M visa processing will continue”
• “US: Student visa issuances fell by -36% in summer 2025; OPT uncertainty among factors affecting international student demand”&�Բ�����;

The post What international students need to know about study and work visas in the United States appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

As of this year, however, that pathway enrolment has now dwindled to the “low single digits” according to industry experts. This dramatic shift is the result of new immigration settings that essentially upended that national network of joint programmes.

Not enough PALs

The challenge to the pathway model first appeared in the form of Canada’s cap on foreign enrolment in January 2024. That cap is in part administered through an inventory of Provincial Attestation Letters (PALs) that are allocated by the federal government to each Canadian province or territory. Each provincial or territorial government in turn distributes its PAL inventory among its respective Designated Learning Institutions (DLIs). The pattern that has emerged over the first years of the cap system is that (1) PAL allocations tend to be heavily weighted to public institutions and (2) the allocations for language schools are often very modest.

In 2026, for example, Ontario, the province that is home to the country’s largest share of international students, allocated 96% of its PALs to public colleges and universities in the province. Only 4% were reserved for language schools, private universities, and other institutions.

The change of status problem

Subsequent to the introduction of the enrolment cap, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) also introduced that sets out that an international student, “Must be enrolled in the designated learning institution (DLI) named on [their] study permit. This means [they] can no longer change DLIs by letting us know through [their] online account. To change DLIs, [they] need to get a new study permit by applying to extend [their] current one.”

This directly impacted the traditional pathway model in Canada in that students would now need to apply for a new study permit as they moved from one pathway partner (one DLI, that is) to the next.

In short, that combination of a limited inventory of PALs for language schools and the additional uncertainty introduced around the new change of status provisions meant that the conventional pathway model in Canada was no longer viable.

Creating a new pathway model for language study

On the heels of those earlier policy changes from 2024, IRCC introduced a further revision to its rules for “joint programmes resulting in a single credential” in July 2025.

Languages Canada, the peak body for language training in the country, sought clarification from IRCC as to how that new rule might apply to pathway programmes. “The idea we began with,” says Languages Canada Executive Director Gonzalo Peralta, “is that language itself could be the joint programme.”

In November 2025, the association received confirmation from IRCC that the new rule around joint programmes could indeed be applied to a language study pathway.

This determination led Languages Canada to create a new model for pathways – the (JPP) – and to operationalise that new model via a limited pilot beginning in February 2026.

Languages Canada explains that in the JPP, “Lower-level language education is delivered by the private partner, followed by upper-level language education at the public partner. Students remain within a single joint programme under one study permit. The public institution issues a [letter of acceptance, LOA] and PAL naming both DLIs and specifying the joint programme. The public institution conducts LOA verification and compliance reporting, and issues a conditional LOA for the academic programme [outside of the JPP].”

That model is based on IRCC’s current for joint programmes which set out that:

“Students pursuing a joint programme that results in a single credential may be issued

• one provincial/territorial attestation letter from the province or territory of the DLI issuing the credential and
• one study permit for the DLI issuing the credential for the entire duration of their studies (or for the duration of their passport validity, whichever comes first).

The DLI issuing the credential must

• issue the LOA with no academic conditions required to advance to the next DLI in the joint programme
• complete the LOA verification activity
• complete the international student compliance regime report, which includes reporting on the student when they are studying at any other DLI that is part of the administration of the joint program”

With that operational guidance in place, the benefits for each partner in the JPP are clear. As Languages Canada explains, “For private language schools, the JPP creates a compliant pathway for study permit students and helps navigate PAL scarcity. For public institutions, it offers a way to increase intake by partnering with trusted private partners and leveraging established recruitment pipelines in diverse markets.”

Going nationwide

Based on the findings from the early pilot and on the considerable demand from prospective pathway partners, Languages Canada announced at its annual conference in March 2026 that the JPP pilot will now be rolled out nationally. “The Joint Pathway Program aims to bring language pathway programmes back to Canada’s education ecosystem, in a structured and responsible way that protects students, institutions, and Canada,” says Mr Peralta. “By aligning language education with post-secondary pathways in a clear and coordinated way, we are restoring confidence in Canada as a destination of choice for international students.”

Along with ILSC and Oxford International, ILAC is a participant in the pilot. “As an established leader in Canadian pathway programmes, ILAC is committed to using the JPP to continue delivering an exceptional student journey, offering a smooth, supported transition from our language programmes to post-secondary institutional partners,” adds Senior Vice President Partnership Development and Career Colleges Magdalena Link. “The IRCC-approved JPP further amplifies these opportunities, opening new doors for students pursuing higher education in Canada. The benefits for students are clear: the JPP removes the risk associated with change of status or applying for a new study permit. It offers more certainty as students can transfer from the private language school partner to the public post-secondary partner under a single study permit.”

“Our objective is to bring pathways back to Canada,” says Languages Canada’s Peralta. “Within three to five years, we want to have at least 10% of language students in pathways.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Canada’s foreign enrolment has fallen by nearly 300,000 students over the last two years“
• “Canada: A case study of immigration policy impacts on postsecondary institutions and the wider economy“
• “Canada announces international student cap numbers for 2026 and updated programme guidance“
• “Nearly 30 Canadian language programmes closed in Q1, marking the ‘sharpest decline in the sector’s history’“
• “Canada’s language sector buffeted by policy changes in 2024“

The post Canada’s language training sector reinvents pathway programme model in response to policy settings appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The report, , concerns Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s (IRCC) imposition of an ongoing cap on new study permits as a way of controlling the growth of international students in Canada.

The OAG found that:

• The reduction in new study permits disproportionately affected smaller provinces.
• The department introduced a tool to strengthen application processing but did not effectively respond to other weaknesses in integrity controls.

The Auditor General also documents the continued trend of new study permit grants coming in much lower than government expectations, culminating in 2025, when the forecast was 255,360 new permits. Instead, the number came in at 50,000. The chart below illustrates the contrast between predictions and actual approvals.

The OAG also found that “The department did not know why approval rates were lower than projected.” In addition, it determined that there were “weaknesses in how the department responded to suspected cases of study permit non compliance and immigration fraud.”

In essence, the Canadian government underestimated the effects of the cap, and the OAG found that IRCC did too little to achieve one of its main goals: improving the integrity of the system.

Insufficient tracking and adjustments

The distribution of study permits across Canada resulted in deep losses of international enrolments in Canada’s smaller provinces. The projection for 2024 was that study permit approvals for Manitoba, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick would decrease by roughly -10% or less. They did decrease – but by at least -59% across those provinces.

What’s more, the intention was for study permit increases in Newfoundland and Labrador and Saskatchewan. What happened were significant decreases, as shown in the chart below.

In 2025, the downward trend continued, with between -15% and -49% fewer approvals than projected.

The smaller provinces were disadvantaged in large part because of the cap’s design. IRCC allocated study permits based on each province’s population, but it did not factor in that smaller provinces experience lower approval rates than others. The report concludes:

“The department’s approach resulted in smaller provinces experiencing two compounding challenges: limited allocation spaces and lower study permit approval rates. This was made worse by decreasing application volumes.”

The OAG found that overcorrection was not monitored or addressed. The report states:

“This finding matters because the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act mandates Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada not only to manage immigration, but also to ensure its benefits are shared across Canada. The department also has a statutory obligation to consult provinces on immigration planning and consider regional economic priorities.”

OAG looked into IRCC’s response to the situation and found it profoundly lacking. It also asked provincial representatives for their insights on any constructive consultation that has happened: “Provinces reported to us that they were not informed of their allocations in a timely manner in either 2024 or 2025, which impacted their ability to plan for the changes and implement processes to meet the department’s requirements.”

Finally, the report found that IRCC did not follow up on several cases when fraudulent documentation was detected after study permits were issued.

Effects on institutions, provinces, and towns

Canada’s national public broadcaster, CBC, post-secondary representatives in British Columbia, the second-largest host of international students in Canada after Ontario, to hear how the study permit cap has affected them. Representatives spoke about programme cuts, staff layoffs, and negative impacts on smaller towns and workforces.

Dale McCartney, a professor at University of the Fraser Valley who has researched years of international student policy in Canada, said:

“It’s very clear how few people in Ottawa are actually thinking about this from the lens of what serves international students, what serves Canadian communities, what serves, you know, universities or colleges.”

Further, Prof McCartney spoke of the broader implications for Canada, noting that “in a few years, there could be a generation of post-secondary students who have very few international colleagues … leading to a lack of global perspectives. I would say it’s a very poorly conceived policy that was created haphazardly. And the effects of it are very clear.”

At the University of the Fraser Valley, 45 faculty and staff were recently laid off as a result of a CA$20 million deficit in the 2026/27 fiscal year.

Also interviewed was Jen Wrye, president of the North Island College Faculty Association, who said :

“We are the thick of closing down programmes that have either high demand and or important economic outcomes for this region and for this country.”

These examples are far from unusual. Dozens of institutions and smaller towns are reeling from the effect of Canada’s cap on new study permits for international students.

For additional background, please see:

• “Canada’s foreign enrolment has fallen by nearly 300,000 students over the last two years”
• “Canada: A case study of immigration policy impacts on postsecondary institutions and the wider economy“

The post Canada: Government audit finds impact of international student cap far greater than expected appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

A new whitepaper from outlines characteristics of the Mexican market and best practices for engaging with students and parents.

Political and economic context

Mexico’s economy is forecast to grow by just under 2% in 2026, which, while modest, would be a better rate than in 2025. However, like the vast majority of countries, Mexico is vulnerable to the current US government’s tariff measures, so the forecast may change more than it normally would over the course of the year.

A couple of trade developments will serve as stabilising elements amid this volatility. These include:

• The “nearshoring” phenomenon, which describes foreign and multinational companies – often from Asia – setting up shop in Mexico to be closer to North American markets. Nearshoring has created more employment in northern regions closer to the US, and it has also revealed pronounced skills gaps in niche occupations.

• A strengthening relationship with Canada, as both Mexico and Canada seek to reduce their reliance on the US market. A high-level Mexico-Canada “action plan” is expected in late 2026, and Mexico’s Economy Minister Marcelo Ebrard says it will focus on “joint initiatives related to minerals, investment in ports, infrastructure and supply chain security.”

Both of these trends have accentuated skills gaps that Mexico needs to address for economic expansion. A two-million-position shortfall of engineers and technicians is limiting growth in sectors such as AI, manufacturing, and technology.

Nearshoring activity is mostly concentrated in northern regions such as Nuevo León, Jalisco, Coahuila, Chihuahua, Querétaro, Aguascalientes, and Baja California. While some of these areas pose security risks because of cartel activity, they are also home to many students who will be particularly interested in niche fields of study related to the skills needed by the industries around them.

High demand for study abroad

While there is higher education capacity in Mexico, very few Mexican universities place in the top tiers of the QS World University Rankings, and there isn’t a great range of niche programmes that serve new labour force opportunities. These opportunities can be found in a growing list of sectors, including:

• Automotive
• Aerospace
• Electronics and medical devices
• Food and beverage sector
• Renewable energy
• Oil and gas
• Tourism

The SME sector (Small and Medium-sized Enterprises) generates about 70% of jobs in the country, so business-related fields of study are also popular.

A busier recruitment environment

Marcela Tintinago, Account Manager at EdCo LATAM Consulting, says that she is seeing more and more top-ranked universities from the UK, Ireland, Canada, the US, Europe, and Australia prioritising Mexico as a student market: “It’s become a very competitive market, particularly as more Mexican students look to study in destinations beyond the US.”

Several destinations have posted growth from Mexico lately:

• Spain: There are almost 10,000 Mexican students in Spain, and this number is on the rise.

• United Kingdom: Almost 1,800 Mexican students were enrolled at UK universities in 2024/25, up +8% over 2023/24, a much stronger pace of growth than in 2023/24 (+1%).

• Ireland: In 2024/25, the small Mexican representation in Irish universities (360) was up +27% y-o-y in 2024/25, reflecting demand in Mexico for degree-level studies abroad and the growing popularity of Ireland for higher education. Mexico is among the top 10 fastest growing source markets for Irish universities. Ms Tintinago adds: “Mexican students are particularly interested in Ireland because it is more affordable than other major study destinations, has many companies promising good job prospects, and offers a unique cultural experience.”

By contrast:

• United States: Mexican higher education enrolments grew by only +1% 2024/25 according to IIE Open Doors data, compared to the +6.5% increase the previous year.

• Canada: There were about 11,400 study permit-holding Mexicans in Canada in 2024/25, down -26% over the previous year.

• Australia: About 3,900 Mexicans studied at all levels in 2025, stable from 2024. Only 900 Mexicans are enrolled in Australian universities, compared to about 2,400 in vocational education (VET) and 1,300 in English-language studies (ELICOS). The EdCo LATAM report notes that it is interesting that the number of Brazilian and Colombian students in Australia is significantly higher than that of Mexicans (26,000 and 20,000, respectively). The report suggests: “The presence of established Latin American student cohorts in Australia would be a major drawing card for prospective Mexican students and should be leveraged in marketing campaigns to this market, alongside other attractions such as Australia’s high-quality institutions.”

However, there is a high degree of price-sensitivity in Mexico regarding study abroad. VET and ELICOS enrolments are trending down given recent policy developments in Australia that make it far more expensive to apply to study there.

Study abroad decision factors

Affordability: EdCo LATAM’s Latin America Account Manager Scarlet Ramirez says that Mexicans try to steer clear of debt and are on the lookout for scholarship opportunities:

“Taking out a loan in Mexico is very rare, we tend to save up or obtain funding for our studies. Studying abroad is a huge investment for Mexican students, and they want to ensure they are getting the best value for money possible.”

Return on investment: There is also a wealthier market segment and the higher a family’s socio-economic status, the more they will look at a foreign university’s ranking.

Teachers: EdCo LATAM observes that Mexican high-school students are used to close relationships with their teachers:

“In Mexico, your teacher often becomes more than an educator, they become our mentors and someone we can rely on beyond the classroom. Mexicans are very warm people and always looking to create strong relationships, so when we go abroad, we really value it when lecturers are approachable and supportive.”

Family: The families of students want to be closely involved in discussions with institutional representatives, whether these are central staff, in-country representatives, or agents. Parents’ opinions are highly valued, and parents ideally want to see their children study at a highly ranked university, “especially when they are contributing financially.” Post-graduate work opportunities are similarly important.

Safety and community: Safety is naturally prioritised by parents. Knowing there are other Latin American students on campus goes a long way – and this should be communicated across all marketing channels. Examples of Latin American graduates achieving success after their studies are highly effective as well, especially using audio-visual.

All these motivating factors for study abroad from Mexico have implications for recruiters:

• Social media is important for awareness. The report says, “Instagram and TikTok are the go-to platforms for marketing undergraduate courses to Mexican prospects, while Facebook and LinkedIn are best suited for promoting postgraduate opportunities.”

• However, a committed in-person effort is required, including one-to-one meetings with parents and students. Account Manager Julián Nivia says: “This approach is much more effective than trying to market your institution in a crowded room with hundreds of other institutions.” Tailored recruitment facilitates “the effective representation of your university’s value proposition in the region.”

• Communication is everything – from quality and personalisation to speed. Universities should endeavour to make students feel special, and timely follow-ups are essential (no more than 2–3 days).

The report notes: “Pre-arrival communications should include how Mexican students will be supported on arrival, details about orientation week, available mentors, details about the international office and support systems and societies that may be of interest. Mexican students really appreciate it when universities have someone from the international office they can rely on.”

For additional background, please see:

• “International student recruitment in Mexico: Demand for language study still leading the way“

The post Mexico: A personalised, supportive approach is the key to success in this growing study abroad market appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

“DHS has indicated it intends to re-evaluate practical training regulatory requirements for foreign student visa holders through a rulemaking,” said the Secretary. “The rule would propose to amend existing practical training regulations to protect US workers from being displaced by foreign nationals, address fraud and national security concerns, and enhance the Student and Exchange Visitor Program’s capacity to oversee the program.”

The momentum for a rule change stems from a belief in some circles that the current OPT framework takes jobs from US workers, among other assertions. ()

Recent F-1 visa data suggests that OPT’s possible termination is already having an effect on international student demand for study in the US – especially in some of the most important overseas markets for US institutions.

A strategic pillar of US recruitment

The OPT programme is increasingly popular – especially because STEM students can receive a total of three years of work due to their specialisation (regular OPT allows for only one year). Participation in the compared with the previous year.

According Mirka Martel, the Institute of International Education’s (IIE) head of research, OPT is an “essential component of an international student’s academic experience” (which is why the organisation includes OPT numbers in its annual on international student numbers in the US). Keystone Education Group research suggests that OPT may be the The firm found that 86% of international prospects consider staying in the US and working after graduation.

Visas plummet -36%

Leading up to the 2025/26 intake for US institutions, a series of events disrupted international student recruitment. The Trump administration suspended visa interviews at US consulates in May 2025, which lasted for almost a month; revoked thousands of student visas; and it warned of upcoming policies to curb the duration of student visas and post-study rights for international students. In the key summer recruiting window, President Trump also revived the travel ban preventing nationals of some countries from entering the US (and then extended it in December 2025 to 39 countries).

Alongside those events, F-1 visas plunged by -36% between May and August of 2025, according to a analysis of data.

The top market for US institutions – India – decreased much more sharply than the average: about -60%, which equates to only 22,870 new F-1 visas awarded to Indian students in those summer months. In July and August alone, the drop was nearly -80%.

Why STEM OPT is so important to international students

Of all the disruptive factors spurring the visa declines, uncertainty around the OPT programme – especially STEM OPT – could have the most significant long-term impact on international student demand – particularly in price-sensitive student markets.

The importance of STEM OPT for the families of thousands of international students can be summed up in three letters: ROI (return on investment).

This is because:

• STEM OPT participants (this is not a rule for general OPT).
  
• This means that at least two of the three years of work that STEM OPT participants engage in are paid.
  
• The three-year term of STEM OPT gives participants three chances to enter the H-1B visa lottery (one per year) – versus one chance offered by a one-year OPT term.
  
• The H-1B visa, which allows US employers to temporarily hire foreign workers for specialty occupations (mostly in STEM), is valid for three years with a possible three-year extension. Those who receive an H-1B have a better chance to become permanent residents because they gain work experience that counts towards eligibility.

STEM OPT participants’ paid work in a specialised STEM field allows them to offset the cost of their degree. The potential ROI increases even further because STEM OPT students have a better chance of receiving an H-1B visa than other students given the multiple times they can enter the lottery.

As Keystone Education Group “The calculation is straightforward: three years of US work experience can be transformative for career trajectories and provides multiple opportunities to secure H-1B sponsorship.”

What is at stake

The following data – which shows the link between international students’ demand for STEM studies in the US and the availability of OPT – foreshadows how devastating a restriction or termination of this post-study work stream could be for US universities and colleges :

• Previous research has found that in the US use their OPT work benefit.

• In 2024/25, of all international students in the US were pursuing STEM degrees, rising to 64% at the graduate level. This means that more than half of all international students in the US are eligible for STEM OPT.

• Indian students, who compose 31% of all international students in US universities and colleges, are overrepresented in STEM fields. Indians also make up nearly half (48%) of all students in the OPT STEM stream. Chinese students, who make up the next largest share of international students in the US, are the second largest nationality in STEM OPT: 21%. Without STEM OPT, the idea of paying for a STEM degree in the US would hold less appeal for Indian and Chinese students, especially given cuts to major research programmes by the Trump administration.

• Vietnam, Nepal, and Nigeria are some of the fastest-growing international student groups in the US (growing +49%, +16%, and +9%, respectively, in 2024/25 compared with 2023/24). They are also the among . US institutions are increasingly reliant on these markets as a counter to over-reliance on China and India.

What is already happening

In our own analysis of , we found that India is but one of many student source markets for which F-1 visa issuances are tanking. In July and August of 2025, F-1 visa grants fell by -78% for India, -33% for China, -17% for Vietnam, -83% for Nepal, and -63% for Nigeria. As noted earlier, international students from these countries account for a large share of STEM OPT participants.

OPT = ROI

In July of 2025, the offered a succinct analysis of what the removal of OPT would mean for Indian students:

“Let’s be clear—it will hurt Indian students. OPT is their runway to repay loans, gain experience, and build global careers. Estimates suggest that the average Indian student spends $60,000–$100,000 on a US STEM degree. Without OPT, the ROI vanishes.”

The Times continued: “Without OPT, US universities become overpriced diplomas without job prospects. Why would anyone pay $100,000 for a degree that ends in deportation? NAFSA estimates international students (led by Indians) contribute $33 billion to the US economy. Kill OPT, and watch that cash vanish.”

Effects on domestic students, institutions, and workers

The bulk of international students in the US pay tuition fees that are two to three times higher than domestic fees – and those fees are essential for many institutions to keep STEM programmes running and research facilities competitive with those in Europe and Asia. Remembering that international students make up 54% of US master’s enrolments and 44% of doctoral enrolments in STEM fields, and that OPT is a major reason for those high proportions, the declines we would see if OPT were actually removed would be even more drastic than what happened in the summer of 2025. All students would feel the impact.

The end of STEM OPT would also severely disrupt the hiring ability of major tech companies and scientific organisations in the US, making it more difficult for them to maintain innovation levels. A recent featured Madeline Zavodny, an economics professor at the University of North Florida, who examined nearly a decade of data on Optional Practical Training. She concluded:

“The results indicate that the OPT program does not reduce job opportunities for American workers in STEM fields … a larger number of foreign students approved for OPT, relative to the number of U.S. workers, is associated with a lower unemployment rate among those U.S. workers.”

Longer-term impacts

an October 2025 working paper by researchers Michael Clemens, Jeremy Neufeld, and Amy Nice, analysed different scenarios that could play out according to specific levels of decline in the number of international STEM graduates in the US. According to the “plausible” scenario of a one-third reduction in US-trained foreign graduates:

“There would be 6 to 11 percent fewer high-skill STEM workers in the U.S. workforce overall (including both foreign-born and domestic STEM workers). The best available economic research implies that, within ten years, this one-third decline in foreign STEM graduates from U.S. universities would lead to long-run GDP losses of $240 to $481 billion each year.”

For additional background, please see:

• “US proposes new rules for student visas including term limits and other restrictions“
• “US: Study estimates that changes to international student policies could reduce GDP by up to US$481 billion per year“
• “There were more international students in the US than ever in 2024/25 but commencements are declining“
• “Canada and the US are losing international student enrolments to Europe and Asia” 

The post US: Student visa issuances fell by -36% in summer 2025; OPT uncertainty among factors affecting international student demand appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.