Stephanie Suarez: Foreign students' big economic impact on New England

Source: NEBHE analysis of data from Open Doors: Report in International Educational Exchange, published annually by IIE and the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. www.iie.org/opendoors

From The New England Journal of Higher Education (NEJHE), a service of The New England Board of Higher Education (nebhe.org)

New England faces a concerning dip in its higher education enrollment, due in significant part to declines in the region’s birth and high school graduation rates that are both projected to continue through 2029. Despite these trends, New England’s postsecondary institutions continue to attract a large number of international students to the region, according to the 2018 Open Doors report released by the nonprofit Institute of International Education (IIE) and the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA). The report shows:

• The number of international students in New England has increased every year since 2012 and the region’s growth on this measure now outpaces the nation. In the 2017-18 academic year (AY), the region enrolled 6.3% more international students than the previous academic year. This figure compares to a national increase of only 1.5% during the same period. Both public and private nonprofit institutions in New England saw a 61% rise in the number of foreign students over a five-year period from AY 2012-13 to AY 2017-18, which is comparable to the national growth in the international student population over the same period.

• In 2018, by far the largest share (31%) of international students matriculating at New England colleges and universities originated from China. Nationally, two-thirds of all foreign students come from Asia, and one-third of the total population of international students are from China alone. The other countries rounding out the students’ top five places of origin in the region include India (14.6%), Canada (5.9%), South Korea (4.4%), and Saudi Arabia (3.4%).

• International students represent a big economic injection for New England. In AY 2017-18, international students contributed $39.4 billion to the overall U.S. economy, with $4.2 billion added to the New England economy alone. Between 2012 and 2018, international students contributed a total of $21.3 billion to the New England economy.

• International students have helped forestall a nationwide enrollment crisis. The total higher education population in the U.S. topped out in 2010 at about 21 million students and has been slowly declining since then. The decline in New England is especially acute. This has been countered to some extent by growth of the foreign student population, coupled with a rise in online enrollment, which together comprise almost a quarter of the nation’s students.

• International students help make college more accessible to Americans. Because international students generally pay significantly higher international tuition and fee rates, the recent influx of foreign students has provided a much-needed boost to many college campuses’ bottom lines. The additional revenue generated by the higher fees paid by foreign students helps subsidize the tuition and fees of low-income domestic students who could otherwise not afford to attend college. As the Washington Post recently reported, “contrary to perceptions that foreign students take spots that belong to Americans, at many schools they’re enabling more American students to get a degree.”

What can we expect in 2019?

Despite the economic and cultural value foreign students add to our college campuses and our workforce, New England’s strong international enrollment figures may be in jeopardy in 2019. In particular, over the next year, the region’s colleges and universities may need to prepare for a potential decline in the number of students originating from China. The fragile dependence on Chinese students may soon crack for a number of reasons.

• China’s deepening economic downturn has begun to raise serious concerns in academic admissions offices, as this slowdown threatens to decelerate the influx of Chinese students who have flocked to American campuses to study and bolstered institutions’ bottom lines for the past decade.

• The federal government has begun targeting and encouraging the closure of Confucius Institutes, Chinese government-funded centers for Chinese language and cultural education hosted by over 500 college campuses worldwide, with more than 100 of them in the U.S. These programs have recently come under intense scrutiny by counterintelligence experts, political figures from both sides of the aisle, and those within academe, who argue that the Institutes constitute a broader effort by the Chinese government to conduct espionage, influence American academics, silence free speech and stifle critical analysis of China. Following the passage of a national defense spending law in late 2018 that prohibits the use of appropriated funds for Chinese language instruction at colleges that house a Confucius Institute, several campuses have terminated the program, including the University of Rhode Island (URI), which in December 2018 became the sixth U.S. institution to announce the end of its partnership with the Confucius Institute. A URI representative linked the decision to terminate the program specifically to the potential loss of federal funding.

• In December 2017, the White House released a National Security Strategy plan that stated the U.S. government would consider “restrictions on foreign STEM students from designated countries” as a measure to protect intellectual property. The new screening instructions, which went into effect June 11, 2018, affect the visas of Chinese students pursuing a graduate degree in robotics, aviation or advanced manufacturing, reducing the periods of validity from five years to one year.

Economic impact by state

Connecticut. There were 15,278 international students enrolled at Connecticut institutions in AY 2017-18, which represents an increase of 4% over the previous year and a 63% increase since 2012. In AY 2017-18, Connecticut ranked second in New England and 24th in the U.S. in terms of international student enrollment. Between AY 2012-13 and AY 2017-18, Yale University and the University of Connecticut took the top spots as the universities with the largest share of international students in Connecticut. Foreign students contributed an estimated $584 million to Connecticut’s economy in the past year.

Maine. There were 1,343 international students enrolled in Maine colleges and universities in AY 2017-18, a 0.2% increase from the previous year, and a 7% increase since 2012. Maine has the lowest number of international students in New England, and it ranks 49th in the nation. Between 2012 and 2017, the University of Maine held the top spot for enrolling the greatest share of international students. International students at Maine’s four-year colleges and universities generated a total of $49 million in economic activity for the state in 2017-18.

Massachusetts. There were 68,192 foreign students enrolled in Massachusetts colleges and universities in AY 2017-18, which represents an 8.4% jump over the previous year and a 65% increase over the past five years. In AY 2017-18, Massachusetts ranked first in New England and fourth in the U.S. in terms of international student enrollment. Northeastern University has consistently enrolled the largest share of international students in the Bay State over the past five years. Foreign students contributed an estimated $3 billion to the Massachusetts economy in the past year.

New Hampshire. There were 4,391 international students enrolled in New Hampshire colleges and universities in AY 2017-18, a 6% decrease from the previous year, and a 33% increase over the past five years. New Hampshire ranks 39th in the U.S. in enrolling international students. Every year between 2012 and 2018, Dartmouth College enrolled the largest share of international students in the state. In 2017-18, international students contributed a total of $155 million in activity for the state.

Rhode Island. A total of 5,748 international students enrolled in Rhode Island colleges and universities in AY 2017-18, which represents an increase in enrollment of 2% over the last year, and an increase of 8% since 2012. Rhode Island ranks 33rd in the U.S. in terms of international student enrollment. Between 2013 and 2015, Johnson & Wales University enrolled the largest share of international students in Rhode Island, and in 2012, 2016, and 2017, Brown University took the top spot. Rhode Island’s economy has received a total impact of $256 million from these students in AY 2017-18.

Vermont. A total of 1,870 international students enrolled in Vermont colleges and universities in AY 2017-18, which represents a 6% increase from the previous year, and a 40% increase over the past five years. Vermont has the second lowest enrollment of international students in New England and is fourth from the bottom nationally. Between 2012 and 2017, the University of Vermont enrolled the greatest number of international students. Vermont’s economy received a total of $88 million from this international enrollment in 2017-18.

Stephanie Suarez is a master’s candidate at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and NEBHE policy intern.

Jay A. Halfond: The future of U.S. college internationalization

Boston University's East Campus along Commonwealth Avenue.

Via The New England Journal of Higher Education, a service of The New England Board of Higher Education (nebhe.org)

America’s university population peaked in 2010 at about 21 million students. We would be mired in a nationwide enrollment crisis if not for two major decade-long trends that cushioned a fall: students enrolling exclusively online and those relocating here from abroad to study. These, combined, now comprise almost a quarter of the nation’s students. Because these two mitigating factors do not benefit all institutions equally, a major redistribution of enrollments is underway. Those institutions with sizeable distance-learning programs and foreign populations are thriving, as others decline and some risk demise. Even Greater Boston—the world’s mecca of higher learning—has not been immune to this zero-sum enrollment shift.

America has long had abundant capacity in its colleges and universities, which have increasingly welcomed those from countries where quality higher education is a scarce resource. This coincided nicely with America’s pivotal role in the growing globalization of the world’s economy. An American degree has become a valuable rite of passage for an aspiring elite in business, government and science and technology. Part of the appeal is the opportunity to stay and work for a year or two beyond the degree (Optional Practical Training)—as about half do—and then to pursue their version of the American Dream long-term.

This dramatic increase in international students—by favoring some institutions, some fields of study and some institutions and regions—has yet to spread across the American academic landscape. Its impact is both sporadic and tenuous. It is tempting to target the Trump administration for imperiling our growing dependence on international students. The responsibility for sustaining our global presence, however, rests just as much on America’s universities.

Debunking claims of internationalization

Whenever I query my students on what percentage of students nationally they think come from other countries, they are often amazed that barely 5% are foreign. This may be their Boston bias showing. About one million international students enroll in U.S. colleges and universities—roughly triple the number over the past two decades. Half do so in only five states: California, New York, Texas, Massachusetts and Illinois. The top academic destinations are three cities (New York, Los Angeles and Boston) that reap tremendous economic rewards from these affluent visitors and their families. One-fifth of all international students attend just 20 large research universities. By expanding and professionalizing their international infrastructure, these and other universities have raised the barriers to entry for schools that have been late—or too small—to expand their international reach.

Since international students often enroll in business and STEM programs—and as often at the graduate as undergraduate level—liberal arts colleges without business majors, universities without engineering schools, and colleges without post-baccalaureate programs rarely see students from abroad.

Even though the U.S. is the desired destination for three-quarters of the world’s migrating students, their impact has been barely felt across the spectrum of schools and programs. The vast majority of America’s professors rarely, if ever, teach any of these students. Likewise, most of America’s domestic students hardly ever encounter someone from another country and, when they do, have only superficial opportunities to benefit from that interaction. We still have a long way to go before international students pervasively and profoundly impact the nation’s campuses.

For the past 30 years, “international” has largely meant Asian. Japan dominated foreign demand in the 1990s, followed by India, and now China. Two-thirds of all current international students are Asian, one-third from China—and growing. The fragility of this dependency on one country and one continent is frightening. Imagine the devastating consequences were the president to declare that Chinese students are a serious national security risk, or if China were to retaliate in a tariff war by taxing (or restricting) those who want to study in the U.S. Nor can this dependency on one region justify claims of a truly international student body.

The purposes for their presence

Nationwide tallies show that new international students began to decline in number even before the Trump Inauguration. Foreign students have shifted toward other institutions in other countries less because of an unwelcoming national administration than because an increasing number of European programs are now taught in English. Canada has become more inviting and affordable, and other nations’ universities are supplanting American schools in global rankings. Trump might exacerbate our declining competitive advantage, but we should not be overconfident that the innate appeal of America’s universities would otherwise persist. Enrollments from China, India and Vietnam are still growing, while other countries cultivate alternative places for their citizens to study. If international numbers remain flat while reliance on several countries intensifies, America’s schools will be even more vulnerable to the vicissitudes of a few nations.

This raises serious questions about whether representation from just these few countries constitutes genuine internationalization. Why have some major research universities been so welcoming? Public institutions, whose mission dictates a local focus, have been especially aggressive in growing their international numbers. If the main reasons are financial, then more full-tuition-paying students becomes an end in itself. If the reasons are academic, then this is a meritocratic means of elevating institutional reputation. In either case, the source of students matters less than their academic pedigree and willingness to pay the full sticker price of a higher education.

But if the motives are more idealistic and humanistic—if the goals are to diversify the student body and enrich the on-campus global experience—then current results of international student recruiting are far more suspect. And where they come from and what they bring to campus life becomes paramount. Simply attracting offspring of affluence from a few countries, doing little to educate them about American life, showing minimal concern for their well-being as strangers in a strange land, and failing to leverage their campus presence to benefit the global savvy of domestic students are not only missed opportunities, but irresponsible and exploitive.

With power comes responsibility

International students are not solely means to greater ends. International students have emerged as the largest, perhaps most overlooked, minority on many college campuses. Those institutions that tout their diversity need to appreciate that this is as much a moral mandate as a statistical achievement. Otherwise, through neglect, student self-segregation persists.

The internationalization of American higher education still has a long way to go, even with likely flatlining of foreign numbers in the near term. Opportunism is only a first step toward achieving a global campus. More institutions need to attract more students from abroad, from a broader range of countries and social classes, across a wider array of disciplines, with greater sensitivity to the challenges of adjusting to the American classroom and culture, and toward greater inclusivity on campus. This will require investing in student recruiting, financial aid, and academic and social programs. Doing so will strengthen the ongoing appeal for those from other countries and cultivate global awareness for the benefit of all.

Jay A. Halfond is a Professor of the Practice at Boston University, where he teaches a course on Global Higher Education, among others. He is the former dean of BU’s Metropolitan College.