I’ve gotten to thinking a lot recently about the current situation in France. Being an exchange student here, I look at the university blockages much differently than French students do. That’s not to say that there’s not a considerable movement of French students protesting the blockages, many for the same reasons that foreign students are against them: who’s going to pay for a lost semester (apartment, tuition, etc.)? When will this all be made up? etc.
If my school – which is blocked right now (though it has been for a much shorter time than other schools) – isn’t reopened in time to finish courses and have exams before I leave, I’m basically screwed, and not only will I not encourage people to study in France as a result, I will actively advise them against it.
This I think, along with all of the other exchange students (some of whom haven’t even been able to attend a SINGLE class), could have a significant effect on France. A country that was, until recently, known for its scholarship ( two recentstudies seem to suggest that’s changing) and relies on tourism (much of which I would presume is from students and visiting families, though not a majority, I’m sure), is this as significant as it seems to me?
France, though, is just an example. I’m wondering, in general, how important economically it is for a country intice students? This doesn’t just involve people coming and spending money, but I’m sure it has to do with R&D as well as reputation.
USUAL FRENCH DISCLAIMER: Though I have problems with France, I have nothing against French people. In fact, I like French people as much as like all other people (and I’m not a misanthrope, so that’s a good thing). That goes double for French Dopers…
There are many foreign students in Australian tertiary institutions, some in exchange programs, but more as full-fee paying students from predominantly Asian countries.
Most of the fee-paying students are here on temporary visas, and must return to their country of origin after graduation. Therefore, they do not get a chance to really contribute economically to Australia post-grad.
However, many of our Universities depend upon foreign students because they pay up-front and an inflated amount for their degree courses. In fact, because of the need of Unis to ‘pay their way’ in the market, some Unis are allocating more and more places to foreign students rather than our own HECS paying locals, leading to an overemphasis on quantity rather than quality.
The United States pulls in a lot more foreign students than any other country, and they are important. The percentage of foreigners in graduate programs runs as high as 25% in valuable fields like math, chemistry and biomedical engineering. Further, many students who arrive from foreign countries in their early 20’s do decide to stay for their entire lives, and contribute their talents to our economy rather than returning to their home countries. That phenomenon has certainly been one factor that has helped keep America on top economically for so long.
They’re a big financial boon, sure. It’s not just the tuition dollars they pay, but their presence also helps institutions land grant money and corporate support. However, I think many countries feel that aside from the money, their unique perspectives and brain power are a truly valuable addition to academe.
When they stay, they add to the economic production of the country, and can also provide a cultural boost (at least to those countries that value additional cultural diversity). Those foreign students that return home may carry some of the values of the host country back with them, and faciliate future understanding and cooperation between the countries.
For chemistry, make that over 90%. I was one of them.
For Spain, foreign non-immigrant students are seen as an anecdote; same as our kids who go to the US for 12th grade to raise their GPA. Nice to have a exchange student at home or in your class, nice to be one, but the sky would not fall upon our heads if the exchange programs dissapeared.
I realized there’s some points I didn’t mention but which will be totally alien to some of our US Dopers.
“Immigrant students” are immigrants first and students second. Someone is considered a “foreign student” if he is there just for his coursework. If he’s an immigrant who happens to be in school (at whatever age, from kindergarten to PhD) he’s a student, period.
If your parents were born in Vietnam and you were born in Spain you’re a “Spaniard of Vietnamese parents”, people may say “he’s from right here, his parents came from Vietnam”; if you were born in Vietnam and have Spanish nationality (birth or acquired) you’re “a Spaniard born in Vietnam”. No such thing as a Vietnamese-Spaniard.
They’re important in the same measure any immigration is important. It’s important for immigrant children to go to school because it’s important for children to go to school; it’s important for immigrants to be college-educated because a higher college education is Good For You and we don’t care if they got it in Madrid, Bogotá or Cracovia so long as they’ve got the paperwork right (foreign college/professional high school diplomas have to be evaluated by the Ministry of Education, they give you a certificate indicating what’s the Spanish equivalent of your degree).
This is linked to the whole “doing the Americas” mentality: our own emigrants often go wherever with full intent to come back home ASAP, either because they’ve gotten rich, because they’ve retired or because the political climate has softened. A poll taken last year showed that a lot of our immigrants have this idea; for many Americans it’s pretty unvelievable (and don’t tell me it’s not, I’ve heard the speeches until my ears hurt - I said “many” and I know “many” is not “all”); for us it’s perfectly logical. Where would you like to be, if you could? Why, HOME! Why aren’t you there? Trying to stay alive and out of jail / looking for a better life for me and my kids.
Foreign students from poorer countries are seen as a Good Thing because if they do go back they’ll help make their home country richer/healthier/more stable. Sort of a “what goes around comes around”; if every country was “good enough”, then nobody would be forced to migrate - people would migrate only voluntarily. We had a lot of involuntary migrants (both im- and e-) during the 40s, 50s and 60s - we don’t wish that on anybody.
I don’t think that’s too different from the US. When we say Mexican-American, it simply means an American with Mexican origines. Whether we say “Mexican-American” or “American of Mexican parents” is of little importance.
Foreign affairs are interested in this sort of thing, especially for some categories of schools (business, political sciences…) and when the student appears promising, or might have family connections, etc… But though they might keep an eye on some people, they don’t run the education system, so, it’s generally an indirect benefit that is not given much weight in practice despite being often mentionned in theory.
And simply having a college degree does not qualify as a special skill, although what special skills the governmetn recognizes you as having may be rigidly defined by your college degree:
Despite all the talk the government does about making Japan “international,” when it comes to actually making real changes they just stare at their feet and wait for someone else to make the first move.
Our school has a lot of foreign students, and also takes in a lot of students mid-year because it is kind of desperate for students. In fact, all the universities in our state except UWA are low on students and doing even worse than us in their quota-filling. I dunno why they can’t just reduce the number of places but whatever. I would say foreign students are pretty important for that reason because most universities here are run by the state and if there weren’t students coming in from South-East Asia the schools would shrivel up and die due to lack of money.
International students are vital to the running of Australian universities and the system would collapse without them. In some courses, the proportion of international students runs as high as 50% and the overall average for some universities is around 20%. This does not count the large number of immigrants who have been partially or fully naturalised. Based on conversations with international students, it seems roughly about 50% are planning to stay here for employment after they graduate and 50% plan to leave for somewhere else. I’ve not heard anyone express worries about switching from a student to a working visa so I always assume this was fairly routine.
Then maybe the state and federal governments here should look into better funding for tertiary education. Education is not meant to make money, nor even break-even financially. It is an investment program that promises economic losses in the short-term, but great rewards in the future.
I’m an old-fashioned person who believes that access to higher education should be based on academic merit and not the financial status of the parents…from my understanding, most international students have the financial backing of their parents, not just for tuition costs but for living expenses here as well. I believe that having such a high proportion of international students on Australian academic campuses has a deleterious effect upon the availabilty of further education for Australian students, and thus jeopordises the economic future of this country…perhaps not in the short term, but most certainly in the long-term.