I know this will be very unpleasant and will entail a lot of hardship for a lot of people but I can't help but wonder if in the long term this will help to start reversing the "brain drain" problem that many developing nations are struggling with. They'll still have access to their classes and be able to acquire the requisite skills, but now they'll be building something in their home country not stuck in a middle tier position within the US.
Of course not saying that means the policies made are good or bad, I am just curious to the second order effect this will have.
The effect would be these students would not opt for these courses. For majority of these students the main attraction is employment in USA, for a small subset experiencing American culture. In absence of both of these there is no reason for students to take online courses from American Universities.
> The effect would be these students would not opt for these courses. For majority of these students the main attraction is employment in USA, for a small subset experiencing American culture. In absence of both of these there is no reason for students to take online courses from American Universities.
Keep in mind that this is expected for 1 of at least 4 years of undergraduate, or 1 of 2-5 years of graduate, education. Someone's still going to have plenty of time living in the US and interacting with potential future US colleagues.
(I'm accepting at face value your assertion that signalling provided by a degree from a US institution has ~no value. I don't think that's the case, but my comment above makes that question close to moot.)
I find this a common sentiment here. As someone who left his country to study abroad, I find it very odd.
An individual looks at his or her options, decides that pursuing education in a foreign country will result in a better future for them and their family.
And somehow restricting their opportunity and their freedom to do so is a good thing? Certainly not for the individual in question.
Personally, I think the way to prevent brain drain is not to impose restrictions on individual liberty but to compete better on the education/career market.
> I think the way to prevent brain drain is not to impose restrictions on individual liberty but to compete better on the education/career market.
Countries that are at the source of brain drains would typically like to do that but can't, just like they have problems solving other problems. $arbitrary country does not have the major tech companies to support tech-company level salaries and there is a chicken-and-egg problem there.
So an artificial restriction like that would indeed tilt things in their favor, which may help them solve this very problem in the long term.
If this anti-immigration trend is held over a sufficiently long time I think rich countries will start realizing what a magnificent deal they had.
>If this anti-immigration trend is held over a sufficiently long time I think rich countries will start realizing what a magnificent deal they had.
I suspect as soon as the sentiment changes that people will rush to come here again. The US has for better or worse a fairly unique culture and those who like that will still want to immigrate in 5 or 10 years.
I know several developers from developing nations that have strong ties to their countries of origin, and engage heavily in various "good works" there. They have massively more resources to do so due to their salaries in the US than they would if they were stuck in their countries of origin.
OTOH, if a critical mass of great developers went back to their countries of origin (assuming they want to live there), they would be able to earn US-level salaries there (probably less than what they earn in the US but comparable after subtracting cost of living and taxes). Also taxes would go to their countries as well instead of IRS (not sure if it's good or bad though, depends on the country).
Do you have any actual examples or research? Remittance and charity didn't exactly help East Germany prosper after the mass exodus of its young, professionals, and farmers...
People aren't coming here for learning (not the first priority), rather a college education is the gateway to a high paying job in the US and it's lifestyle.
Many would argue that the main benefit of studying in the US for an average foreign student is the possibility to live in the US, get some good connection in the US that could help him later and an opportunity to get a job in the US.
If the study is 100% remote, none of these benefits applies anymore, and since the quality of studies itself is comparable to many European or Asian universities, it is hard to justify the cost of US university scholarship.
Maybe, but I think the main problem is that a middle tier position in the US pays a lot more and provides a higher standard of living than what some can expect in their own home countries.
No, they're going to transfer to a school that's still holding in-person classes. Many international students do not have the money/internet access/stable home situation to go home and continue taking classes.
Here's one major problem off the top of my head: what if you're from China or Iran and your school uses G Suite for Education? Accessing classes from home would be literally illegal.
The US is not the only option if you're willing to immigrate. This policy pushes talented students away to other developed Anglophone countries. Some would rather not go abroad if they can't go to the US. Much of the benefit of an F1 visa is the ability to get stay and work in the US.
Of course not saying that means the policies made are good or bad, I am just curious to the second order effect this will have.