This dream is one that is often referenced by universities promoting their programmes abroad, and it tends to be presented as universally possible. But the truth is that only some students are able to progress along that pathway.

The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) has produced a report called “” The analysis shows that institutions in major destinations may be:

• Overpromising a route that is attainable only by a segment of their foreign graduates;
• Not providing the level of language and career supports needed by many graduates to have a good chance of working in-country after their studies and/or gaining permanent residency.

The report also reveals that government policies – and policy volatility – can present unforeseen challenges for international graduates hoping to find jobs that match their hard-won skills.

The OECD observes: “There appear to be tensions between recruitment messaging, which suggests future employment and possible residence, and the realities of post‑graduation opportunities.”

This can lead to false confidence among international students, who, “not always having all relevant information, have at times, an unrealistic expectation of the ease with which they can find a job, secure visa/permit and obtain permanent residency or even citizenship.”

Retention is an issue

Across the six countries analysed, the highest five-year retention rates were in Canada and Germany (52% each). This dipped significantly to about a third in Australia and France (34% and 33%, respectively) and to 19% in the Netherlands. In the UK, only 7% of international graduates were still in the country on a work permit or other immigration permission after five years.

These low retention rates contrast with international students’ high hopes to remain in the country to work after completing their studies: over 70% in Canada, 73% in the Netherlands, 64% in Germany, and 83% in France want to stay on to work.

What barriers are international graduates facing?

The reality that many international graduates face is that employers in their host country find it too cumbersome or expensive to hire them. This leaves many students at a pronounced disadvantage compared with domestic peers.

For example, in Australia, found that for about 20% of international graduates who reported taking a job which they were overqualified, the main reason was that they did not have permanent residency. Many Australian employers see temporary visas as unstable (in the sense that these visas have an expiry date) and administratively burdensome. It is not worth it for them to invest time and money in hiring a foreigner if they can find a domestic graduate with the right skills for the position.

As a result, many graduates go into “visa limbo” where they accept poorly paid jobs unrelated to their skill-set and education. They often apply for another work visa to remain in the country, but they end up becoming “permanently temporary” rather than permanent residents.

The report referenced surveys showing that in three of the six countries analysed, most international students say they feel inadequately prepared to secure a job after graduation and/or to find a job after their studies. For example:

• In the Netherlands, 59% faced difficulty in finding a job after graduation;
• In Germany, only 35% felt “rather” or “well” supported by their institution in planning their career;
• In the UK, 53% thought career support and placements at their institution , followed by internships and experiential learning.

The OECD notes:

“There seems to be a shared nervousness about the transition to employment among both international and domestic students. However, in the case of international graduates, the transition to employment is also tied with the possibility to remain in the country.”

The list of barriers can also include low language proficiency in destinations where English is not the dominant language:

“During their studies, international students are surrounded by English, in their institution and [because] they tend to socialise with other internationals. However, job opportunities for English speakers … tend to be very limited and concentrated in a few specific industries. Most companies in France, Germany, or the Netherlands will still expect at least working-level proficiency of the local language.”

This is particularly relevant given the high number of English-taught programmes (ETPs) in France, Germany, and the Netherlands – many of which do not require competency in these countries’ official languages. These are major attractions for non-EU students especially, and non-EU students are also the segment most interested in remaining in their host country after completing their studies. The issue here is that many of those ETP-enrolled students will not have gained sufficient proficiency in the official language (French, German, or Dutch) to compete successfully for jobs.

Recommendations

The OECD recommends that institutions adopt “a more realistic approach that clearly communicates that available opportunities, jobs and permanent residency permits, might be scarce. That stay after graduation is not guaranteed, and that there is a significant uncertainty about whether a particular international student will be able to settle in the country long term.”

Specific recommendations for policy makers and institutions include:

• Helping international students to understand the labour market, before and during their studies, to guide them in what topics to focus on and on choices regarding their education.



• Integrating labour-market literacy into programmes, supported by career centres. 



• Allowing students to engage with employers and  gain work experience during their studies. For example, “both professional networks and relevant work experience have been identified as among the most highly rated factors in finding employment by international graduates in the Netherlands.” This recommendation means “higher education institutions must establish and maintain strong relations with relevant employers.”



• Informing international students to start looking for possible employment early, to better inform them about various employment opportunities: “International students tend to be aware of the big and well-known companies but are not always aware of small- and medium-sized businesses and other employers.”

• Developing alumni networks that allow international graduates to turn to former students for career support and guidance.

For additional background, please see:

• “Germany’s foreign enrolment continued to grow in the 2025/25 academic year”
• “Many foreign students want to stay in Germany but need more help with the transition to life after study”
• “Netherlands reports first-ever decrease in foreign enrolment for 2025/26”
• “Canada struggling to attract and retain global talent”
• “UK to implement reduced Graduate Route from January 2027”

The post OECD: International students may be underinformed about job prospects in top destinations appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

These destinations are informally called the “Big Fourteen” in industry circles – representing the longer list of countries now enrolling tens or hundreds of thousands of international students.

Japan is on that expanded list. Last year, it surpassed its target to reach 400,000 international enrolments by 2033, and it did so eight years early. The achievement was bolstered by the government’s drive to attract and retain top foreign students to offset the economic effects of an ageing population and shrinking labour force.

Past Japanese governments considered the creation of English-taught programmes (ETPs) in the country’s universities to be a promising tool for building Japan’s global reputation and its international student population. But those programmes are no longer the focus. They exist, and many are successful, but new initiatives are behind the country’s strengthening position as a major study destination in Asia.

Japan’s departure from ETPs as a primary recruitment mechanism is due to several reasons we explore in this article, all of which highlight:

• The challenges of ETPs in non-anglophone countries where domestic English proficiency is low;
• A growing realisation that public acceptance of foreigners depends on how well immigrants can integrate into national culture and language;
• The importance of offering strong language supports to international students who are not proficient in a host country’s language.

ETPs: From recruitment lynchpin to programme option

In 2009, the Japanese government invested heavily in a project aimed at enrolling 300,000 international students by 2020. Part of that project was the launch of “Global 30,” which funded the development of ETPs in seven national and six private Japanese universities. These universities were chosen among hundreds because they were thought to have the best potential to position Japan as a premier regional education hub.

English-medium instruction in those thirteen universities prompted wider take-up of ETPs across the system – but not in a dramatic way. This was because:

• Funding for ETPs was limited to such a small number of universities;
• There is limited enthusiasm among faculty and Japanese students for English-taught programmes.

The general consensus is that the Global 30 project helped to raise the visibility and cachet of Japan as a study abroad destination – not least because of the marketing campaigns enabled by the funding – but did not drive system-wide adoption of ETPs.

The Global 30 project gave way to other initiatives, including the current J-MIRAI strategy, aka “Japan Mobility and Internationalisation: Re engaging and Accelerating Initiative for future generations,” as shown in the following chart.

Japan’s university internationalization arc: G30 → TGU → J MIRAI

The current landscape for English-taught programmes in Japan

The most recent definitive data shows that between 2018 and 2022, the number of undergraduate ETPs in Japanese universities edged up minimally from 42 to 45, and the number of postgraduate ETPs increased slightly from 107 to 114. Some premier universities are planning new English-taught courses, or even full departments, but these examples are few and far between.

Dr Hiroshi Ota, Director of the Global Education Program at Hitotsubashi University, said in an email exchange with ���Ϲ��� Monitor, “I don’t think the number of ETPs in Japan will increase significantly in the near future. I think that Japanese universities have reached their capacity limits for establishing new ETPs.”

Dr Ota believes that in order to increase the number of ETPs at Japanese universities in the future, major reforms are needed, such as switching the language of instruction to English in existing degree programmes taught in Japanese. This is because of the major obstacle preventing an expansion of ETPs in Japan: “The English proficiency of both Japanese students and Japanese faculty is significantly lower than in other countries.”

The language conundrum

In 2017, of 1,000 Japanese adults who had never lived overseas or studied abroad found that:

• 2.5% said they could “speak English fluently”
• 2.2% felt their English was sufficient for work
• 43.5% said they could “hardly speak English,” and 40% said they could speak only “elementary” English
• 22% felt able to answer a tourist’s question for directions

Though the survey was conducted in 2017, its findings are not dated. The 2025 EF English Proficiency ranked Japan 96th among 123 non-English speaking countries, moving Japan into the “very low proficiency” band (95–123). By contrast, China was ranked #86 (“low”) and South Korea #46 (“moderate”). Japan also sits behind Laos, Bhutan, Turkmenistan, and Vietnam.

Why is English-language proficiency so low?

There has historically been little need for English-language skills within Japanese society, with some exceptions. Most of the population can live and work entirely in Japanese. Retail outlets, media, government, and most workplaces operate fully in Japanese. The exceptions are Japanese who work in tourism, at multinational firms, or as academics involved in international research.

This is changing. For example, ETS, a company specialising in lifelong learning, commissioned the Harris Group in 2025 to conduct . Japanese respondents were more likely than their global peers to say English proficiency matters more today than it did five years ago (96%). On the policy side, the Japanese government has set a target for attracting more foreign direct investment (FDI) and multinationals.

However, Japan’s education system is not primed for the English-dominant global economy. Writing in , Yuko Tamura said: “One of the biggest problems in English education in the Japanese public system is the gap between the government’s expectations and the reality in schools.”

Ms Tamura writes:

“The focus on test-driven English education has eclipsed the true value of learning a foreign language, creating a sense of aversion among many of those studying it.”

It isn’t only students who may dread their English lessons; it is the instructors teaching these lessons. Ms Tamura writes:

“As a former English tutor, I taught Eiken Grade Pre-1 (the second-highest tier) to high school students who needed this level to aim for top universities. To my surprise, teachers were among those I tutored because this was the preferred proficiency level for their profession. Yet in 2023, only 45% and 81% of Japanese teachers in junior high and high schools respectively had achieved it.”

The low drive to learn English also dovetails with public concern about the rising number of foreigners in Japan and the impact on national identity. For example, political scientist Axel Klein commissioned in February 2026. One survey question asked if “foreigners should place the highest priority on following Japanese rules, etiquette, and customs.” Nearly two-thirds of respondents (63%) agreed, and only 7% disagreed.

Of the findings, Mr Klein, said:

“They reflect a tension that Japanese policymakers and the public have struggled to resolve: the economic case for accepting more foreign workers is clear, yet it sits uneasily alongside deep-rooted ideas of cultural cohesion and ethnic homogeneity.”

Learning Japanese a key step to employment

Mr Klein’s comment helps in understanding a new governmental policy announced in January 2026: foreigners will need to learn Japanese and be able to integrate into Japanese society in order to be eligible for permanent residency.

Learning Japanese will also help international graduates wanting to stay in Japan to find jobs.

Dr Ota adds:

“Unless they have a high level of Japanese proficiency, international students find it difficult to secure employment in Japan. This is especially true in the humanities and social sciences. When Japanese companies hire international students, they place the highest priority on Japanese language proficiency. In other words, Japanese companies screen applicants without distinguishing between Japanese and international students. Therefore, international students who do not have a high level of Japanese proficiency are at a disadvantage when job hunting.”

To smooth the settlement process, the government is working on a system to ensure both before and after they move to Japan, foreigners can learn basic Japanese and adapt to social norms.

Writing in , Menshu Toshihiro lauded the new policies, saying that they will “help to prevent conflicts with neighbors caused by unfamiliarity with the local language, rules, and customs.” He continued: “Japan’s path forward depends on its ability to integrate foreign nationals and build mutually beneficial relationships.”

Coincidentally or not, foreign enrolment in Japanese language schools is at record-high levels. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) data show 294,200 international students learning Japanese within Japan as of November 2024 – 30,000 more than in 2023.

While there are no system-wide, standardised pathways from Japanese language schools to Japanese universities, individual institutions do establish that pipeline. Some language schools even offer scholarships to encourage progression to certain institutions – you can see .

It is likely this pipeline will strengthen as the Japanese government turns ever more from a volume-based conception of international recruitment to a more selective one related not only to economic goals, but also to social ones.

For additional background, please see:

• “Japan market report: A dual focus on attracting international students and sending more Japanese students abroad”
• “From the Big Four to the Big Fourteen”
• “Japan surpassed its foreign enrolment target of 400,000 in 2025”

The post Japan: Japanese proficiency essential for foreign graduates staying on to work appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

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

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

He continued:

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

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

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

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

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

A step toward restricting the OPT programme?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is OPT really so nefarious?

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

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

Speaking of innovation

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

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

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

Nothing final yet

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

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

For additional background, please see:

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

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

The most recent edition of the ISB gathered responses from 93,843 international students from 135 universities during a September–December 2025 survey window.

Here are five important takeaways from this year’s top-level findings.

Students are mostly satisfied with their study abroad experience

When asked in the 2025 ISB cycle, “Overall, how satisfied are you with all aspects of your experience at this institution?”, 90% of respondents said they were “satisfied” or “very satisfied.”

A related question asked respondents how likely they are to recommend their institution to a family member or friend. Etio uses the responses to generate a Net Promoter Score (NPS). Using a response scale of 0–10, students who provide a score of 6 or below are classified as “Detractors,” whereas those who give a 7 or 8 are classified as “Passives,” and those who give a 9 or 10 are “Promoters.” The Net Promoter Score is arrived at by subtracting the percentage of Detractors from the percentage of Promoters.

The ISB shows that, globally, the Net Promoter Score has been on the rise since 2019, where the aggregated NPS value across the survey was 15, to 2025 with its NPS of 22. As with overall satisfaction ratings, there are big differences within institutions (by faculty or student nationality, for example), and by destination.

Students feel they are getting good value for their investment in study abroad

When asked, “To what extent do you feel that your current course is good value for money?”, 85% of students either agreed or strongly agreed that they were getting good value.

As we see in the chart, ratings for value for money have been climbing steadily since 2019. “That 85% as we are now is a pretty good result for the sector,” says Etio’s Head of Surveys Robin Hallows. “It suggests that [institutions] are by and large delivering on their promise.”

“I do wonder if there is a link between the improvements we have seen over time around graduate outcomes, employability, and career readiness – if there is a link to student perceptions of value for money.”

“Institutions are also managing expectations around cost,” adds Guy Perring, Etio’s Regional Director for APAC and the Middle East. “Singapore, for example, does very well in this regard. It’s not a cheap option; in fact, Singapore is one of the most expensive cities in the world. But they manage the expectations of the students so that students know how much the cost of living will be [in advance].”

Career impact remains the key driver

This year’s ISB results underscore that decision making for study abroad is heavily influenced by future career considerations, and by a return on investment calculation that weighs the costs of study and living abroad against anticipated future earnings.

Those priorities come through loud and clear when the ISB asked students, “How important were the following factors when deciding where to study?”

“The impact the [foreign qualification] has on their future careers is the most important decision factor,” says Mr Hallows. “And it’s always been the most important decision factor since 2019.”

“It is important for institutions to understand what drives decision making,” Nannette Ripmeester, Etio’s Regional Director for Europe, Africa, and North America. “This generation of students is completely different. [Study abroad] has to provide return on investment for them.”

Online information sources are having a greater impact on student decisions

When asked, “Which of the following helped your decision to choose this institution?”, students noted institutional websites and education agents as the most important influences on their study abroad decision, followed by friends and family.

It is interesting that the influences that have seen the greatest change over time are all digital, including the institutional website, online advertising, and social media channels.

There is a satisfaction gap in career services

The ISB asked a number of questions around career services, including “How satisfied are you with the following types of employment / careers support from this institution?”

“There is a bit of a variance [in satisfaction] within career support,” adds Mr Hallows. “Satisfaction with ‘information’ is quite a bit higher at 78% than employment – i.e., getting a job – at 59%. What I see when I see this is the potential for further improvement; for growth.”

For additional background, please see:

• “What students want: The top decision factors for study abroad“
• “How post-study work rights can make or break the return on investment for study abroad“

The post Five things we learned from this year’s International Student Barometer appeared first on ���Ϲ��� Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

Prospective students are considering the high cost of studying and living abroad in those leading destinations and then they are:

• Looking at rules restricting foreign students’ entry, work rights, and ability to bring their families;
• Comparing what institutions promise about employment outcomes to what current students and alumni say about what is actually happening for them.

When considering each destination individually, they notice that:

• The non-refundable fee for a student visa in Australia keeps ramping up (it is currently AU$2,000), alongside historically high visa rejection rates.
• The UK’s Graduate Route post-study work term is being cut from 24 months to 18 months in 2027.
• Post-study work streams in the US are under review by policy makers.
• Canada’s international student cap remains in place, alongside more restrictive policies for post-graduation work eligibility, and declining visa approval rates.

At the same time, labour markets in the Big Four are being disrupted by geo-political factors and the impact of new technologies. The youth unemployment rate is currently higher in Canada than it was just after the pandemic, and it is the highest it has been in a decade in the UK – trends that contribute to a more uncertain employment outlook for domestic and foreign graduates alike.

“Post-study work is obviously a key driver for a significant part of the prospective student audience,” says Dr Mark Bennett, Vice President of Research and Insight at Keystone Education Group. “But that doesn’t mean it’s their ‘default’ option post-graduation. Rather, it’s one of many opportunities that enhances the value and attractiveness of an international degree. Trusting that the door is there in advance matters whether or not someone chooses to walk through it later.”

Measuring student sentiment

Recent survey research and social media listening studies confirm that international prospects are more skeptical about the ROI of study abroad in a Big Four destination.

Looking just at the UK, for example:

• New research found that 34% of international students are less interested in UK study as a result of the imminent shortening of the Graduate Route (and half of the sample didn’t know about the policy change, indicating that demand might fall still further).

• Student visa applications to the UK in the first three months of 2026 were down -31% compared with the same period in 2025.

• A newly released study by , an AI-powered social media listening platform purpose-built for international education, found that across various social channels there is vigorous conversation about the pros and cons of studying in the UK among current and prospective international students. Anxiety and disappointment are common themes in those online conversations across tens of thousands of student comments throughout 2025. So too is a sense of being valued primarily for paying higher tuition fees than domestic students.

Here are just a couple of quotes featured in the Voyage study:

“The government introduces policies every year, which further deters international students, such as the graduate visa restrictions, not allowing dependents, etc. The new visa restrictions pretty much killed any chance of working in the UK. If you’re looking for a degree from well-regarded institutions, that’s great. If you’re looking to get a job afterwards, just know that your options are extremely, extremely limited and recent law changes have pretty much made it impossible.”

“The immigration policies are made to be as prohibitive as possible. After milking you with insane tuition fees and living expenses while providing you with no jobs, the UK wants you to spend around 3,000 pounds on a graduate visa. This will allow you to stay for 2 years. Will you find jobs on a graduate visa? You have a better chance than the impossible student visa, but it is still hard.”

Overall, the conversations picked up by Voyage include a notable level of concern about UK government policies that limit work rights while tuition fees remain much higher for international students.

A new urgency around career services

In the face of restrictive government policies, it is crucial for institutions to demonstrate their continued value to international students.

This means proving – not just promising – that they are committed to international students’ post-study success. An excellent way of achieving this is (1) customising career services for the unique needs of international students and (2) effectively communicating the value of this function to them.

Recent research shows that this isn’t happening enough as yet. A 2024 QS and Universities UK International study, which surveyed 10,000 international graduates from nearly 40 universities, found that only 3% of employed graduates had found their job with the help of career services. About a fifth had used career services for other reasons, but not for job-finding.

The research highlights a gap between the availability of career services and the relevance of this function in the eyes of international students.

Recognising that international students have more barriers to securing a job than domestic students do can help to close this gap. For those students, career services must go beyond resume coaching, interview prep, etc. They need to cover other critical areas, including:

• Working through complicated visa and immigration processes.
• Being aware of programmes linked to skills gaps (that are thus prioritised by governments and employers).
• Knowing which programmes are eligible for post-study work streams.
• Avoiding being penalised simply because of not being aware of a deadline or requirement.
• Building professional networks both in their host destination and elsewhere, because:
  • There is not a guarantee they will be able to work in the host country after studies due to policies or other factors.
  • They may not want to stay in the host country and be perfectly content to find a good job at home or in another country.
• Identifying employers who are open to hiring/sponsoring international students.

Embedding career and immigration supports

Sanam Arora is the chair of the National Indian Students and Alumni Union (NISAU) in the UK. At the 2025 ���Ϲ��� Monitor Global Summit in London, she explained:

“Seventy percent of Indians choose a destination of study on the basis of overall employability, and they have historically seen the UK or US in particular as a launchpad for global careers. In that sense, the definition of what it means to be educated has fundamentally changed. Universities that realise they’re not just here to educate, they’re here to be that global talent launchpad, will really ace this going forward.”

Ms Arora shared her own perspective on what she would find helpful:

“Before I graduate, I want the university to help me prepare for a successful life. That is what I think of when I think of career services, because success in a career is not that different than success in life. Sometimes career services is seen as something that is off to the side or in a corner, but really it needs to be embedded end-to-end throughout the entire student life cycle.”

Embedding career services means considering the whole student journey – from pre-admission to post-graduation. It means offering help to students not only in choosing the right programme, but also in understanding immigration rules and post-study pathways. Supporting students through those immigration processes is in fact an integral part of career services today, especially in the wake of heightened government oversight and compliance requirements.

Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, has department whose name fits the bill for what is needed in our current context: the . That office combines employment research with immigration guidance, and it is open to all international students.

A wider lens for networking

Another important angle today is to recognise that fewer international students will be able to stay on to work because of new immigration policies – and some will naturally prefer to pursue careers in their home country or in a third country in any case. This puts the onus on institutions to connect students to global networking platforms and to career fairs with international employers.

Collecting data on students from the very beginning of their enrolment about their post-study plans enables the customisation of career services not just on the basis of international versus domestic, but also international “planning to stay” and international “planning to return home or work elsewhere.”

Integral to brand reputation

There is a growing urgency to backing up the promise of employability with real outcomes for students. Helping international students to achieve the ROI they expect is ever-more integral to brand integrity and equity, to student satisfaction, and to the ability to recruit successfully in overseas markets.

For additional background, please see:

• “Survey highlights a growing ‘engagement gap’ between international student expectations and institutional response”
• “Is a university degree still the same passport to success?”
• “What students want: The top decision factors for study abroad”

The post A common challenge: Strengthening student confidence in the ROI of study abroad 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.

The link between higher education enrolment and jobs

The number of students enrolled in India’s higher education system has more than tripled in the past 15 years to a Gross Enrolment Rate (GER) of 28%, and the government’s target is a GER of 50% by 2035. But the pace of enrolment growth is slowing, and it is doing so in tandem with a slowing of income gains for graduates since 2017.

The APU report offers some sobering statistics:

• Under 7% of graduates in India secure permanent salaried jobs within one year of graduation.
• Of those who do, less than 4% land white-collar positions.
• 40% of graduates aged 15–25 and 20% of those aged 25–29 are unemployed.
• Of the roughly 5 million graduates India produces each year, barely 2.8 million find jobs, with even fewer securing salaried work.
• While on average, graduates still make double the amount of money over the course of their lifetime than those without higher education, the pace of wage growth for them has slowed since 2017.
• The proportion of young men in school is declining – from 38% in 2017 to 34% in 2024.

Tenuous pathways from education to good jobs for women

Among poorer Indian families, the motivation to save precious income for university studies has always been to escape informal and/or poorly paid occupations in agriculture and construction. Between 2007 and 2017, the share of students from India’s poorest households enrolled in higher education rose from 8% to 17%, and while this happened, a growing number of new jobs were created outside of agriculture.

Still, nearly half of all work remains in the agricultural sector, and almost two-thirds of all Indian women working are employed in that sector. Many of them are the first in their family to hold a degree – and they invested in that degree precisely to get out of agricultural work.

A March 2026 article by the sums up the differing outcomes of segments of female graduates:

“At one end, a small but growing cohort of educated and skilled women is entering salaried roles in IT, automobile manufacturing, and business services. At the other, far larger end, most of the increase is in self-employment and unpaid or home-based work, often within households or family enterprises. This signals necessity rather than opportunity. The result is a statistical rise in participation that masks a qualitative divide: opportunity at the top, compulsion at the bottom.”

In March 2025, interviewed 27-year-old Geetanjali Devi, 27, who holds a bachelor’s degree in history. Now, Geetanjali works on her family’s rural farm in the state of Bihar near the border with Nepal. Her husband is not with her: “Like the majority of men in the village, he spends most of the year working construction in the southern state of Kerala, earning $8 a day more than 1,000 miles away.”

Men are also losing hope

Disappointing job prospects are dampening Indian men’s demand for higher education. APU’s study notes that in 2017, 58% of young men cited economic pressure as the reason for not continuing their studies. Only five years later in 2023, this proportion rose significantly to 72%.

Without a degree, more Indian men are turning to informal jobs to meet urgent household needs for cash. They cannot wait to see if the economic returns of higher education will pay off over the long term.

More industry linkages are needed

As reported in a January 2026 article, new survey results from India’s TeamLease EdTech, a provider of employability solutions and educational technology for higher education, show that “75% of higher education institutions in India are not adequately prepared to meet industry expectations.” Only 7% of the 1,000 representatives from wide swath of institutions surveyed said they were achieving placement rates above 75%.

According to the report, ‘”industry relevance is often treated as an add-on rather than a fundamental design principle,” resulting in graduates who emerge with “theoretical knowledge that lacks direct applicability in a modern workplace shaped by technology, automation, and evolving business models.”

There are, of course, high-quality institutions that do prioritise industry linkages, but wealthier students have a much better chance of (1) affording these and the higher-ROI courses such as engineering they offer, and (2) obtaining good jobs as a result of this and their social connections to those in power.

The national urgency

The APU report notes:

“India’s youth population, defined as those between the ages of 15 to 29, is the largest in the world. The 367 million people in this age group account for a third of the country’s working age population. The extent to which this large, increasingly educated and aspirational cohort is productively absorbed into the labour market will determine whether this massive, and continuing demographic dividend translates into an economic dividend.”

Much will depend on whether India can provide more linkages from education to good jobs for segments other than the wealthiest students. If not, the number of degree-holding women left on farms to manage subsistence agriculture will increase, and the number of men who trust higher education to increase their income prospects quickly, rather than over a lifetime, will decrease.

The urgency is real. The Washington Post reports: “Indians are now poorer than Hondurans on a per capita basis. More than half of those of working age are unable to find a place in the formal economy.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Is a university degree still the same passport to success?”
• “Canada and India deepen educational ties; India repositions as an equal player in international education”
• “The number of Indian students abroad fell in 2025”

The post Study highlights poor outcomes for graduates of Indian higher education 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.