Enrolments were especially down of students from “high-risk” markets (i.e., markets where a high level of fraudulent applications or non-compliance with visa rules are expected). More than 8 in 10 universities reported declines from Pakistan, with an average reduction of 75%. Enrolments were also down significantly from India and Bangladesh.

What’s behind the decline?

As we are seeing across the other Big Four countries (Australia, Canada, and the US), visa rejections by the government – as well as anticipated visa rejections on the part of universities – are disproportionately affecting students from the Global South.

In June, the government will introduce a compliance regime in which universities that do not maintain a visa refusal rate of under 4% will be marked “amber” (as opposed to green) and prevented from increasing their international enrolments. This is fuelling many universities to adjust their recruiting in emerging markets. About a third said they had stopped recruiting in some markets and the same proportion said they now ask for higher deposits or conduct more rigorous financial checks.

At the same time, 6 in 10 universities reported that they experienced more visa rejections in January 2026 than in January 2025, and many were concerned about the reasons for this:

• 41% cited unexplained delays or interview scheduling problems;
• Over a third cited less convincing reasons for refusals that were inconsistent with applicant quality.

It is fair to say that genuine students in high-risk markets face discrimination based on their nationality.

It is also fair to say that universities are caught between a rock and a hard place because they are naturally interested in remaining compliant with government rules. When they see the government refusing high numbers of students from some markets, it is a signal that recruiting from those markets may tip them into the upcoming “amber” zone.

BUILA says:

“[We are] urging the Government to use ‘amber’ ratings as an internal warning measure rather than the point at which recruitment sanctions are applied. And [we are] calling for the traffic light system to better distinguish between factors within an institution’s control and those driven by external or systemic issues, such as visa processing delays.”

Chair Andrew Bird adds:

“This survey shows universities narrowing recruitment simply to manage risk, at a time when they are also facing higher refusal rates from UK Visas and Immigration, delays and inconsistent decision-making outside their control.

The UK already operates one of the toughest student visa compliance regimes in the world, and our members fully support protecting its integrity. But the Government keeps shifting the goalposts. The proposed traffic-light system is being implemented far more harshly than originally intended.

If introduced as currently proposed, the new system risks significant reputational damage to our world leading higher education sector. It could deter genuine students from applying and signal a problem to global markets where none exists, at a time when competition for international students is intensifying.”

No choice but to turn to alternative destinations

Consider these statistics about the chances of certain South Asian student being approved for a study visa in a Big Four destination (and note also that in the UK in 2025, the average visa rejection rate was only 12%).

• In 2025, Indian students faced a 61% and 74% rejection rate in and the US, respectively.
  
• Bangladeshi students encounter rejection rates of 51% in Australia so far in 2026, and almost three-quarters (73%) were refused by the US in 2025. In 2025, 36% were rejected by the (up 15 points over 2024).
  
• In February 2026, more than half (53%) of Pakistani students applying to Australia were rejected, as were 71% by the US. In 2025, more than a quarter (26%) were denied a visa by the (up 8 points).
  
• More than 8 in 10 Nepali students were refused in the US in 2025, as were 4 in 10 applying to Australia in February 2026. In 2025, 16% of applications from Nepal were refused in the compared with 2% in 2024.

As we have reported recently, these trends – as well as similar ones for African students – can only prompt a fundamental reshaping of global student mobility away from the Big Four.

For additional background, please see:

• “Narrowing bands of compliance: How the UK’s new RAG system will impact international student recruitment”
• “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” 

The post UK: 7 in 10 universities report declining international postgraduate enrolments; visa rejections are part of the story appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The context here is the past three years of new policy settings and greater government intervention to manage student inflows, as well as two successive student visa application fee hikes. As of this writing, the non-refundable fee of AU$2,000 is the highest in the world. The cost of a student visa – and the very real possibility for students from many markets that their application will be refused – is dampening demand, especially for students coming for relatively shorter programmes, such as English-language courses.

Unravelling the data

Presenting the analysis to IEAA members in April 2026, English Australia CEO Ian Aird showcased the importance of clarifying the source, time frame, and implications of often misunderstood data indicators for Australia’s international education sector. For example:

• Enrolments vs. student numbers: In Australia, course enrolments tend to be the main data point presented in international education summaries and covered by media. They are sometimes confused with international student numbers – which are something quite different. Enrolments are always far higher than student numbers because international students often enrol in multiple courses in a given year (e.g., two back-to-back English-language courses of four months each would be counted as two enrolments for a single student).

• Commencements vs. NTAs: General commencement numbers comprise both students coming for the first time to study in Australia and students already in Australia who progress from a completed course to a new course. But “New-to-Australia” (NTA) commencements describe only offshore students enrolling for the first time ever in Australia.

Each of those four indicators – course enrolments, student numbers, commencements, and NTA commencements – tell very different stories. Of the four, enrolments are the least indicative of the current and future state of affairs. Mr Aird explains:

“Both enrolment and commencement figures must be recognised as ‘lag indicators’ in terms of sector health. That is, the enrolments are students who may have started their courses months and sometimes years ago. Even commencements are students who booked, paid for, and were granted visas months before they commence. If a commencement is part of a pathway, it too could have been booked years before it is indicated in the official data.

This means that the majority of 2025 enrolments and many 2025 commencements are students who were not impacted by any of the 2024 changes to the student visa system and government policy.”

Why NTAs are more predictive of future trends

New-to-Australia commencement data offers a stronger indication of international student demand under the current settings – and relatedly, factors either easing or challenging students’ ability to come to Australia. This is because NTA counts represent new students coming into Australia within the recent past (as opposed to enrolments, for example, where data could represent demand from years prior, before the new policy settings came into force). Therefore, the latest NTA data reflects students who have relatively recently:

• Wanted to apply to an institution in Australia
• Decided to pay the fee for a visa application (currently AU$2,000)
• Had their visa approved

When NTAs fall, it suggests that fewer students now consider it worthwhile to apply for a visa and/or more students who are having their visa rejected. A recent decline suggests that the trend will continue unless current circumstances change. Right now, that context is Australia’s extraordinarily expensive visa application fee and high rate of visa refusals.

Recent increases or decreases in the volume of visa applications and in the visa approval rate provide an even better sense of the future trendline for the sector. These can also be divided into applications made in Australia (hence, re-enrolling students) and applications made outside Australia (generally, New-to-Australia students).

Have NTAs fallen?

New-to-Australia commencements have indeed fallen (see Chart 1 below), and this decline coincides with both a lower application volume (Chart 2) and a higher visa refusal rate for students from key markets.

Below, Chart 1 shows that whole-sector NTAs have dropped significantly over the past two years and are significantly lower than before the COVID-19 pandemic. Chart 2 reveals that the number of students submitting visa applications fell by 32% from the post-COVID rebound peak in 2023 to 2025.

The damage to ELICOS and VET providers is the most severe

The picture for the ELICOS and VET sectors is considerably bleaker than the all-sector aggregate: a -40% y-o-y New-to-Australia commencement decline in 2025 for ELICOS and a -49% fall for VET. Chart 3 (below) shows the pattern for ELICOS.

As English Australia notes, there is a clear connection between the timing of visa application fee hikes and plummeting applications (and NTAs) for ELICOS:

“The student visa application charge went from AU$710 to AU$1,600 from 1 July 2024. This saw the monthly average student visa applications for ELICOS study fall by 34% versus pre-COVID (2018–2019) application levels or 46% versus post-COVID (2023) application levels. The increase of the student visa application charge to AU$2,000 from 1 July 2025 saw applications for ELICOS fall a further 27%.”

What about higher education?

The higher education sector has so far fared better than other kinds of providers because (1) many of the universities have the advantage of streamlined visa processing, which means their applicants aren’t scrutinised to nearly the extent as for other sectors, and (2) students are more willing to pay the visa application fee because it is a smaller proportion of the cost of a degree. For example, from 2024 to 2025:

• Higher education course enrolments rose by +9.7%;
• Commencements also increased slightly (+0.7%);
• New-to-Australia commencements were down by only -0.5%.

However, the sector’s resilience is now being tested in multiple ways. Major challenges include a decline in demand from China and high visa refusal rates for other key markets.

Chart 4 shows the proportion of applications from the top 10 source countries for higher education. The top 10 countries are traditionally responsible for 85% of all HE applications from offshore (that is, new students in the system). In Q4 2025, Chinese applications accounted for over 4 in 10 (43%) of these offshore applications. This fell to a third (34%) in January 2026 and to less than a quarter (23%) in February 2026.

By contrast, demand from India, Nepal, and Bangladesh has risen to the point where 65% of offshore applications from the top 10 are from these three countries. But much of this demand is being stopped at the border. In February 2026, 40% of Indians applying for a visa for study at an Australian university were rejected, as were 51% of Bangladeshis and 65% of Nepalis.

Lower interest from China – coupled with high visa rejection rates for students from other top markets –will almost certainly lead to a decline in Australian university commencements and enrolments in the coming intakes.

Are Australian government policies working?

To manage immigration, the Australian government is working to better link migrant profiles to labour force skills gaps. It wants to reduce net migration to pre-pandemic levels though policies aimed at increasing barriers for low-skilled temporary visa holders to work and immigrate.

Mr Aird presented a slide (shown below) showing that of eight temporary visa categories, only one is being affected by this mission: international students. He commented:

“Where government is talking about the number of temporary visa holders, and they’re taking all sorts of actions to control and manage that, they’re actually managing only one group – student visa holders. The other groups are all increasing significantly.”

The English Australia report reminds readers: “It’s vital to remember these numbers relate to real people. Falling student numbers means lost jobs in Australia, lost livelihoods.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Australia: Student visa refusal rates reach record high amid weakening demand from China”
• “Australia: Latest enrolment data challenges the government’s assertion of stability for international education this year“
• “Australia: Full-year data for 2025 reveals impact of AUD$2,000 study visa application fee on ELICOS sector“
• “Australia passes integrity legislation; sharpens definition of agents and agent commissions“

The post Australia: Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

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 existing structure for student visas in the UK provides an important backdrop for these changes. In brief, to sponsor a student visa, a UK university or school must be a registered student sponsor. This entitles the institution to issue a Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) which is in turn required for the student’s visa application.

The updated published on 7 April 2026 (“Document 2: Sponsorship Duties”) includes a new section that outlines the responsibilities of sponsor-institutions pertaining to education agents.

The updated rules carry two main implications for sponsor-institutions in their work with agents.

First, agency details must now be included on the Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS): “Sponsors must record agent details on the CAS where the sponsor has used an agent in the recruitment of the sponsored student.”

Second, sponsors must not only commit to the Agent Quality Framework (AQF), but be able to demonstrate that compliance: “All student sponsors using recruitment agents must retain evidence of how they are managing agents in line with the AQF and The National Code of Ethical Practice for UK Education Agents, as applicable to the school, further education, pathway and higher education sectors.”

Agency details on the CAS

Related guidance from outlines the agency details that must now be included in the CAS.

This amounts to:

• Agent company name (the formal legal name as used in the agency contract)
• Agent contact name (indicating the primary agent contract contact)
• Agent address (which refers to the specific office or branch from which the student was recruited)

The Home Office indicates otherwise that this provision applies to all cases in which the sponsoring institution was engaged with an agent on the student file, “even if this is a one-off recruitment and/or the recruitment was done without a formal ongoing contract with the agent or third party.”

In the event that a sub agent was involved with the file, the CAS must provide details of the primary agent (as opposed to the sub agent).

If an agent or advisor was engaged directly by the student for application support or other advisory, and where “that third party was not used by the sponsor as part of the recruitment process,” the agency details need not be included in the CAS.

Moving beyond voluntary compliance

The 7 April guidance effectively enshrines the Agent Quality Framework (AQF) for sponsor-institutions in the UK, a distinct progression from what has essentially been a voluntary compliance regime to this point.

The Home Office sets out that, “All student sponsors using recruitment agents must have committed to adhering to the key principles of the (AQF).”

Further, sponsors are now required to document how they are managing agents in line with the provisions of the AQF and .

What this will mean in practice is not yet clear, but it does set up a requirement for more structured and systemic reporting as to how a sponsor is in compliance with the AQF and The National Code. In broad terms, the provisions of The National Code extend additional reporting and documentation requirements to agents, along with specific training requirements, including completion of the .

Commenting on the updated guidance on , Avinav Sharma, Executive Director, Global Partnerships at MSM Unify, said:

“For agents and counsellors, the message is equally direct. If you have not completed your UK knowledge training and signed the national code of ethical practice, you are operating without the credentials this framework now demands. Your digital badge and certificate are no longer nice-to-haves. They are proof points that your sponsor partners will need to show UKVI…This is the UK government signalling that the recruitment channel will be held to the same compliance standard as the institutions themselves…Is your agency ready for this level of scrutiny?”

For additional background, please see:

• “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“
• “How the UK’s Agent Quality Framework will shape the future of agent training“
• “Who decides about quality? Education agents and the question of increased regulation“

The post UK Home Office publishes updated visa sponsor guidance for “agents and third parties” 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.

Fully three-quarters of Chinese students in Australia are in higher education. Department of Home Affairs data shows compared with February 2025. This is on the heels of previous decreases over the past couple of years.

As Chinese demand softens for study in Australia, interest from several South Asian markets has been increasing or stable over the past five years. This does not offset declining Chinese demand, however, largely because in contrast to very high visa approval rates for Chinese university students, students from emerging markets such as Bhutan, Sri Lanka, India, and Nepal face a much greater chance of having their visa refused.

Therefore, higher demand from some South Asian markets is not making up for lower Chinese enrolments. Rather, it is being stopped at the border.

More visa rejections in February 2026 than in any year of tracking data

In February 2026, one out of every three students applying to an Australian university . This monthly refusal average (32.5%) was the most significant in 21 years of tracking, and it was spiked by incredibly high rejections of students from Nepal (65%), Bangladesh (51%), India (40%), Sri Lanka (38%), and Bhutan (36%). This compares to a refusal rate of about 3.5% for Chinese students applying to an Australian university.

A depressor on diversification

Australian universities have long known that they need to rely less on China for enrolments. But a number of factors are making this very hard to do, including:

• Many of their top 10 markets – including India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan – are experiencing visa rejection rates of 30% or more.
• Many of these markets are price-sensitive, and thus especially affected by record-high and non-refundable visa application fees and financial requirements.

The pathway to higher education is being squeezed

In addition, several important emerging markets in Southeast Asia, such as Thailand, are characterised by very low English proficiency. Many Thai students (28%) begin in ELICOS to improve their English and then progress to higher education. Yet in February 2026, 43.5% of Thai visa applications for ELICOS study were rejected, narrowing the pipeline of Thai students into higher education.

Other implications of high visa refusal rates

As part of an ongoing mission to (1) weed out non-genuine students from entering the country and (2) disadvantage institutions considered to be at high risk of recruiting those students, the Australian government has a system that assigns institutions into one of three categories of risk. Those determinations are mostly based on student visa outcomes – especially visa refusal rates due to fraud (40%) or other reasons (10%).

The record-high spike in visa refusals in February 2026 will bump some universities into a Level 2 or 3 risk category. This will require them to secure more documentation from students (e.g., English-language test scores, financial means) to prove those students are genuine, and it means that new prospective students’ visa applications will be processed more slowly. All this means that on top of lower-than-expected enrolments and potentially weaker standing in key origin markets, those institutions will:

(1) Need more administrative staff time to try to help prospects submit more comprehensive documentation.
(2) See a higher volume of students who choose another option (i.e., another institution or destination) due to frustration with long visa processing wait times.
(3) Be more challenged to execute effective recruitment strategies in key markets due to overloaded resources and finances.
(4) Be less able to reduce reliance on their top market, China.

To make matters worse, when a visa submitted offshore is refused, the student must reapply if they want another chance. This would mean that on top of paying the first non-refundable visa application fee – currently AU$2,000 – they would have to lay out that amount of money again, with no guarantee of their second application being approved. This alone severely hampers Australia institutions’ ability to persuade an applicant to try again with better documentation.

Peak bodies react

The International Education Association of Australia (IEAA) is calling for a freeze on changes to immigration risk ratings at the next scheduled evidence level review in September 2026 because of the surge in visa rejections. Because refusals compose 50% of the criteria on which institutions are categorised, a volume of refusals can force an otherwise high-performing institution into a higher risk category.

In addition, reports that:

“Universities Australia is urging the government to publish weekly refusal dashboards so providers can intervene early with extra document checks and GTE coaching [Genuine Temporary Entrant] rather than lose applicants outright. In the short term, institutions recruiting heavily from India, Nepal and Bangladesh will need emergency marketing in lower-risk regions such as Southeast Asia and Latin America to keep 2027 pipelines alive.”

ELICOS and VET representatives have so far been unable to persuade the government of the growing existential threat to their operations as a result of current policy directions. It remains to be seen if the more recent pressure on higher education can create a different urgency around the serious challenges the sector is facing today.

Key facts

• In 2024/25, education exports amounted to AU$53.6 billion (US$37.8 billion), according to the , divided between tuition income and students’ spending in the Australian economy. This means that multiple business sectors outside of education reap the benefits of international student spending in the country.

• Almost three-quarters (72%) of the total economic value is from higher education enrolments.

• More than half (58%) of the total came from Australia’s top five markets: China, India, Nepal, Vietnam, and Colombia.

• Visa applications from Indian students fell -33% between 2023/24 and 2024/25, and the number fell by -10% from Nepal.

• Visa refusals for India and Nepal were 40% and 65% in February 2026.

• Nearly one-fifth of international students begin in ELICOS or VET

For additional background, please see:

• “Australia: Latest enrolment data challenges the government’s assertion of stability for international education this year”

The post Australia: Student visa refusal rates reach record high amid weakening demand from China 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.