Transcript Document

Class #3
International Students,
Scholars, and Scientific
Visitors to the U.S
Policy Background and Post 9/11 Issues
C. M. Vest
1
Background (Pre 9/11)
• Legal basis of visitor Visa policies
• Categories of Visas
• SEVIS (Student and Exchange Visitor
Information System)
2
Legal Basis of Visitor Visa
Policies
• Sec. 214(b) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act of 1952
– Visitors must prove to the satisfaction of a
consular officer that they will not remain in
the United States (Nonimmigrant Status)
– This appears to be the most common
reason for denying visitor visas.
– It also is used as a “catch all” when officers
want to deny a visa.
3
Categories of Temporary
Nonimmigrant Visas
•
•
•
•
•
B Class (Business)
F Class (Student)
J Class (Exchange Visitor)
H Class (Specialty Worker)
Graduate students usually enter with F or J
visas.
• Postdoctoral scholars usually enter with J
visas, or much less frequently with H-1b
visas.
• Short-term visitors for meetings and brief
collaborations usually enter with B visas.
4
SEVIS
Student and Exchange Visitor Information System
• A computerized tracking system for foreign
students and visitors [F, J, and M (vocational
training) visas].
• Purpose: Verify that foreign students are
pursuing their intended course of study at
certified institutions.
• Most information required was required prior
to 9/11.
5
SEVIS Statistics
• Approved Campuses: 10,024
• Active Students: 599,617
• Approved Exchange Programs: 1,448
• Active Exchange Visitors: 140,424
Source: Immigration and Customs Enforcement Web Site Oct. 18, 2005
6
Alice in Wonderland
• On one hand: It is our legislation-based
policy not to let students and scholars (or
anyone else) into the country if we think they
might stay here.
• On the other hand: An increasingly prevalent
complaint is that students who come here to
study “return home” and contribute to other
economies rather than ours.
7
Do foreign students stay here?
8
The First Destination of
Engineering PhD Graduates in
2004
• Engineering PhDs
– 1,274 U.S. citizens earned Engineering PhDs
– 97% stayed in the U.S. 3% went to another country.
• Engineering PhDs
– 1,683 temporary residents earned Engineerng PhDs.
– 73% stayed in the U.S. 26% went to another country.
Source: NSF Survey of earned doctorates 2004
9
The First Destination of
Science PhD Graduates in
2004
• Science PhDs
– 8,904 U.S. citizens earned Science PhDs
– 96% stayed in the U.S. 3% went to another country.
• Science PhDs
– 3,785 temporary residents earned Science PhDs.
– 72% stayed in the U.S. 28% went to another country.
Source: NSF Survey of earned doctorates 2004
10
U.S. S&E PhD Workf orce
300000
250000
200000
U.S. Born
150000
Foreign Born
100000
50000
0
1990
2000
11
Some Post 9/11 Visa Issues
• Review Processes:
• Technology Alert List (TAL)
• Visa MANTIS
• CONDOR
• Statistics
– Changes in International applications and
enrollments
12
Technology Alert List (TAL)
• TAL: A list of S&T areas of study and
research, and devices
• Basis: Prevent evasion of laws
prohibiting export of goods, technology,
or sensitive information.
• Use: To flag visa applicants for special
security review (Visa MANTIS).
• (A visit with officials.)
13
Visa MANTIS
• A review of a visa applications
conducted in Washington when
proposed programs of study or work are
considered by a consular officer to
have national security implications
(usually guided by the TAL).
• The issue is to expedite these reviews.
14
Visa CONDOR
• A review for visa applicants whose
country of origin is considered by the
State Department to sponsor terrorism.
• Other applicant information that raises
concerns about terrorism can trigger
this review.
15
Students and “Deemed Exports”
• Regulations
• Implementation
• Inspectors General Reports and
Proposed Changes
16
Flow of Scholars to U.S. Post 9/11
• Increased Visa Processing Time,
Security Reviews, and Rejections
• The Technology Alert List
• Complexity and Hassle
• Risk Averse Decision Making
• Deterioration of Welcoming Image and
Reality
17
Very Real Effects of U.S. Visa
Policy and its Implementation
• 32% Drop in International Applicants to U.S.
Graduate Programs from 2003 to 2004.
[Interpretation is complicated.]
• 18% Drop in Admissions to these programs.
[Quality?]
• Meetings Moved to Other Countries
• Increased Competition for Students and Faculty
• “Horror Stories”
18
U.S. Visas Issued to High-Skill
Visitors
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
Student
Exchange Visitor
Other
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Source: Science and Engineering Indicators 2004, National Science Foundation, Washington, DC
19
The U.S. has serious perceptual
problems.
The Pew Research Center recently asked
17,000 people from 16 countries
“Suppose a young person who wanted to
leave this country asked you to
recommend where to go to lead a good
life -- what country would you
recommend?”
Here are the results …
20
% OF PEOPLE
FROM HERE
WHO RECOMMENDED THIS DESTINATION
“FOR A GOOD LIFE”
U.S.
CANADA
AUSTRL.
U.K.
GERMANY
38%
6
13
6
3
POLAND
19
9
8
21
10
CANADA
13
18
7
3
GERMANY
10
11
11
3
CHINA
10
12
10
4
4
RUSSIA
8
8
9
4
22
TURKEY
8
7
12
5
18
LEBANON
9
17
18
6
6
JORDON
8
9
8
6
6
SPAIN
7
2
9
14
6
U.K.
6
9
31
FRANCE
5
14
7
4
7
PAKISTAN
5
3
1
6
1
NETHERLANDS
3
16
16
3
3
INDONESIA
2
2
8
5
4 21
INDIA
2
Source: Pew Global Attitudes Survey, quoted in the New York Times, July 3, 2005
Discussion Questions
• What do you think our basic policies should
be regarding international students and
scientific visitors?
• To what extent are your views in this regard
affected by the reality of 9/11?
• What sorts of thing should be on the
Technology Alert List?
• How do you think about risk and benefit in
admitting international students and
scholars?
• What sorts of things should be considered to 22
be “deemed exports”?