Copyright 2001 Federal News Service, Inc. Federal News Service
October 31, 2001, Wednesday
SECTION: PREPARED TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 4164 words
HEADLINE:
PREPARED TESTIMONY OF DR. DAVID WARD PRESIDENT, AMERICAN COUNCIL ON EDUCATION
BEFORE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
SUBCOMMITTEE ON 21ST CENTURY COMPETITIVENESS AND SELECT EDUCATION
SUBJECT - TRACKING INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS IN HIGHER
EDUCATION, POLICY OPTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR STUDENTS
BODY: My name is David Ward and I am president of
the American Council on Education (ACE), an association representing 1,800
public and private colleges and universities. I am speaking today on behalf of
39 higher education organizations, more than 6,800 colleges, and the 15 million
students enrolled on our campuses.
The recent terrorist
attacks on the United States have prompted a complete review of a wide range of
government and institutional activities. This effort quite properly includes
questions about international students who come to this country on student visas to study at our colleges. At present, it appears
that one or two of the September 11th terrorists may have entered the United
States on a student visa. This only underscores the urgent
need for an extensive review of the policies and procedures affecting the
issuance and tracking of student visas.
I am pleased that this Committee is conducting this hearing. In
addition to its general oversight responsibilities for higher education, the
Education and the Workforce Committee has a role to play because Title VI of the
Higher Education Act authorizes ten programs involving international education.
For years, these programs have supplied the nation with experts and expertise
about other nations, their cultures, political and business systems, histories,
and their languages. We are pleased that the House passed Labor-HHS- Education
bill for FY 2002 includes a significant increase in funding for these programs.
That is an important step in addressing important national needs in this
field.
This Committee has shown strong support for
these programs in the past. I believe that recent developments only underscore
the importance of training specialists in foreign languages and cultures who can
provide help to the government, the private sector, and the media and who can
communicate across cultures on our behalf.
In my
testimony today, I hope to do three things. First, to provide some idea about
the number of international students who study at American colleges and to
describe the process by which they are granted a visa to come here. Second, I
will outline a number of changes to tighten the student visa
process in a way that will address specific problems without making it
impossible for foreign students to enroll at American institutions. And finally,
I will discuss some of the broader issues - such as the need to increase the
level and amount of international expertise and foreign language competence -
that our nation urgently needs to address.
I am
particularly interested in issues related to international education for both
personal and professional reasons. Before I assumed the presidency of the
American Council on Education last month, I was Chancellor of the University of
Wisconsin, Madison for eight years and a faculty member at that same institution
for 25 years before that. As one of the nation's leading research universities,
UW Madison always had a large number of international students, in recent years
often more than 4,000 in one academic year. Without exception, I found them to
be diligent and hard working individuals who contributed significantly to the
academic and social life of the campus. They also brought an important element
of diversity to our institution and helped expose American-born students to the
world that they would encounter after graduating from college.
In addition, I have a deeply personal interest in this issue. I first
came to the United States on a student visa in 1960 to earn a
Ph.D. in geography at Wisconsin. At the conclusion of my Ph.D. program, the
University informed the Immigration and Naturalization Service that I had
graduated and I received a letter from the INS giving me thirty days to leave
the United States in accordance with the terms of my visa. After living abroad
for three years (again, consistent with the terms of my visa), I returned as an
immigrant and became a citizen in 1976.
These
experiences have given me a unique vantage point to appreciate the benefits that
accrue to international students, American students, and the university
community when we invite them to study at our institutions.
It goes almost without saying the entire nation benefits from
international education. For example, the enormous advances in computational
sciences in the 1980s that helped fuel the American economic boom in the 1990s
would not have occurred without the student and faculty exchange programs that
brought so many talented people to this country. The current revolution in
biomedical research that has laid the groundwork for enormous advances in the
quality of life in the years ahead is also benefiting from an influx of
exceptionally able foreign students and scholars.
But
it is not just the discoveries and the sharing of scientific knowledge that is
significant. Equally important, I believe, is the formation of working
relationships. Science is increasingly a collaborative endeavor and the
establishment of personal and professional relationships that international
education fosters will pay dividends throughout the professional careers of all
who are involved in it.
More generally, the chance to
study at an American college is often a life-altering experience for those who
have the opportunity. Many individuals who do so - such as Mexican President
Vincente Fox, United Nations Secretary General (and Nobel Peace Prize winner)
Kofi Annan, former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, and Jordan's King Abdullah
- make an impact in their home countries and throughout the world. But even
those who do not assume such exalted positions leave with a deep appreciation
for the people of the United States and for the benefits of personal freedom,
market economics, and democracy.
The benefits of having
international students enrolled at American colleges accrue to native born
students as well. For many young people, the first opportunity to have a
sustained relationship with an individual who was born Outside the United States
occurs when they enroll in higher education. As the world becomes increasingly
interconnected, that contact with the broader world is an important factor in
the intellectual and social development of young adults.
The Number of International Students. Let me put the number of
international students in perspective. In 1999, 31.4 million individuals were
admitted to the US with some type of visa. Of that total, 570,000 were admitted
on student visas. 560,000 of the student
visas were for academic study (known as "F" visas), and roughly 10,000 were
for vocational training (or "M" visas). This means that international students
accounted for less than 2 percent of the total visitors with visas in that year.
In addition, 275,000 visas ("J" visas) were issued to scholars and researchers
who visited the United States to conduct research or to further their education.
Many - though by no means all - of the individuals who received a "J" visa are
based at colleges and universities.
These numbers
illustrate that while the number of international students is large, it is a
small proportion of the total number of visas that are issued. It is important
to see student visas as but one part of a much larger
picture.
Admission of International Students to the
United States. Let there be no doubt about our position: the federal government
has the right and responsibility to protect the safety and security of the
United States by deciding who should receive a visa - any type of visa - to
visit this country. For the reasons noted above, we favor having as many
international students enrolled at American colleges as possible. However, we do
not want to enroll any student that the federal government believes poses a
security risk.
Colleges that admit and enroll
international students have an obligation and a responsibility to work
cooperatively with the federal government in keeping track of those students. As
I will describe below, we have done this for decades and take that obligation
seriously.
The process for determining whether an
international student gets a visa is straightforward. An international student
who has been admitted to an American college receives an I-20 form from the
admitting institution. The student takes this form to an American embassy or
consulate overseas and applies for a visa. State Department officials review the
visa application, conduct background checks, and in many cases, interview
potential visa recipients before making a decision.
Without the I-20 form, no visa can be granted. However, having an I-20
does not guarantee that a student will receive a visa. State Department
officials in US embassies and consulates overseas have total and complete
discretion to award or deny student visas. The primary
consideration in the award of a student visa is generally
whether the responsible consular official believes that the student is likely to
return to the home country at the completion of the educational program.
Student visa denials can be commonplace.
This year, for example, even before the tragic events of September 11th, the
percentage of student visas denied by the US embassy in China
increased from 18 percent of the total in 2000 to 40 percent in 2001. In light
of recent events, I assume that the worldwide visa denial rate will increase in
the months ahead. While we are understandably disappointed when visas are
denied, the decision is totally in the hands of the consular officials and we
would not purport to suggest contrary judgments. In addition, the State
Department maintains a "Technology Watch List." Students who indicate that they
wish to study in a field that is on the Watch List - for example nuclear
engineering - are subject to particularly careful scrutiny before a visa is
granted.
In recent years the number of visa requests
has grown dramatically but the number of consular officials has not changed
significantly. This means that the amount of time that consular officials can
spend with each visa applicant has decreased. My personal experience may be
instructive. When I was interviewed at the US embassy in London in 1960, my
interview lasted 15 minutes. Today, overworked consular officials generally
devote less than two minutes to each interview.
This is
hardly sufficient time to make fail-safe decisions about the granting of a visa.
For this reason, we believe that the number and size of US consular offices
overseas should be increased sharply to permit more extensive background checks
and more extensive interviews. No visa decision - a denial or an approval -
should be made without adequate time for a thorough review.
Once an international student receives a visa and enrolls, colleges
must collect and maintain a significant amount of information about the student.
Upon request, we must provide this information to the INS. Sometimes the request
comes in writing and other times it is made verbally. In some cases we are asked
to provide information about a single student and in other cases we may be asked
to supply information on a broader group of students - for example, all those
who are studying chemistry. As part of their visa agreement, students agree to
provide information to the institution that may affect their visa status. The
information that they provide and that we maintain includes the following: name;
address; date and place of birth; application materials, including the completed
application form; date studies began; enrollment status (full- or part-time);
field of study and degree program; and expected termination date. In addition,
we maintain financial information about international students. Because we
collect and keep so much data, the federal government has more extensive
information available to it about international student and exchange visitors
than it does about any other class of visa recipient.
Colleges used to provide this information to the INS. However, since
the agency had no way to compile and store this information, it found itself
drowning in unused and unusable data. As a result, in 1988, INS told colleges to
keep collecting the information and to provide it upon request but dropped the
requirement that we share data with them on a regular basis. That arrangement
has continued until the present time.
After the first
attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, Congress instructed the INS to develop
an electronic database to facilitate the rapid sharing of information about
international students. In response, INS began to develop the Coordinated
Interagency Partnership Regulating International Students, commonly known as
CIPRIS. Under this system, colleges are to notify the INS of an event that may
change the status of an international student. (For example, if a student fails
to enroll or reenroll, changes majors, drops below full- time status, graduates,
or applies for a work permit, colleges would have 24 hours to notify the INS.)
With this information, INS could take appropriate action with respect to a
student's eligibility to remain in the United States. This tracking system is
now known as the Student and Exchange Visitor and Information System (SEVIS). It
is now being tested in several regions on the country.
ACE and most other higher education associations have never opposed the
idea behind SEVIS - an electronic exchange of information with the federal
government regarding international students - and some 20 campuses have
participated in a pilot test of the system. Indeed, we already collect and
maintain most of the required information. However, we have repeatedly expressed
our conviction that SEVIS should be designed in a way that it does not itself
become a barrier to the enrollment of international students in American
colleges. Regrettably, INS has never been sensitive to these concerns and we
have been forced to turn to Congress to get straightforward administrative
matters resolved. The result of this clumsy implementation is that SEVIS is
overbudget and behind schedule.
We believe that prompt
implementation of this database is the most important step the federal
government can take to improve the timeliness of the information that it has
about international students and exchange. Senators Feinstein, Kennedy,
Brownback and others have recommended that the federal government provide the
remainder of the funds needed to finish development and implementation of this
database. We strongly support this recommendation.
The
long-term funding of SEVIS - the annual operating costs after development also
needs to be addressed. Because the program is addressing a national priority
reduction of the risk of terrorism - we think that the annual operating
funds ought to be provided through an annual appropriation to the Immigration
and Naturalization Service (INS) rather than by imposing a fee on students as
the law currently envisions.
However, if the student
fee model is to be maintained, it is important to have an effective and
efficient means to collect the fee. Therefore, we suggest that any fee be
collected by the State Department at the same time that the student pays the fee
currently required to obtain a visa. The state Department is equipped to receive
money in foreign countries (unlike the INS and colleges) and visa recipients
already pay a fee before they receive their visa. We recommend that a higher fee
be set for visa recipients who will be included in the SEVIS database ("F, "J,"
and "M" visas) and that a single combined payment be made to the local embassy
or consulate. Students should be registered in SEVIS when the fee is paid. This
approach would be the simplest administratively and would get the student
registered in the database before they leave their home country. INS and the
colleges would know to expect the student and INS could double-check the
student's registration when the visitor arrives in the US. Colleges would be
alerted to expect the student and would promptly notify INS if the student did
not arrive on campus soon after entering the US.
In
addition to providing the funds necessary to complete the development and
implementation of this database, we recommend that the several additional steps
be taken. These include:
Requiring INS to develop a
timeline with interim deadlines for the implementation of the SEVIS system. This
will allow Congress, colleges and the public to monitor the progress that INS
makes in implementing this system. If delays occur, prompt corrective action can
be taken.
Moreover, publishing a timeline with interim
deadlines will enable all parties to determine if the assumptions being made by
INS about implementation activities outside the agency's control - such as the
amount of time being allowed to modify campus information systems - is
adequate.
-- Requiring INS to provide each college with
a list of student or exchange visitor visa holders who entered the country on
the relevant Department of State form (I-20 or IAP 66) issued by that
institution and requiring that each college promptly confirm that the students
and/or exchange visitors have arrived on campus.
--
Requiring designated school officials to comply with any revised
responsibilities imposed by INS or lose authority to issue I-20s.
-- Taking special precautions (more extensive background
checks, delayed issuance of visas, etc.) with respect to student and other visas
applicants from countries on the State Department's watch list of states
supporting terrorism.
As noted above, while some
legislative provisions dealing with student visas may be
desirable, it is important to see student visas as a
relatively small subset of all classes of visa. We believe that several changes
that would affect all visa holders are worth considering. For example, S. 1518,
introduced by Senator Bond, calls for the immediate establishment of the
Integrated Entry and Exit Data System Task Force as authorized by the
Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 2000.
We think that this entry-exit tracking system - which would be integrated with
state and federal law enforcement databases - would be valuable in helping
monitor all visa recipients.
In many ways, the most
important step to improve the issuance of visas is simply to increase funding
for consular affairs activities at US embassies abroad. These funds would be
used to hire additional staff, increase the number and frequency of background
checks on all visa applicants, and improve facilities. Currently, these offices
are overworked and under-funded and they clearly need more resources. Not only
is this step crucial, it is easily accomplished.
Reducing the possibility that a student could receive more than one I-
20. Like many American students, international students often apply to multiple
colleges. Since many schools issue an I-20 when they send a letter of admission
to the student, it is possible for one international student to receive multiple
I-20s at the same time. Of course, only one I-20 is needed to obtain a student visa. However, unused I-20s could easily be sold in the
black market or given to others and used in a fraudulent effort to gain entry to
the United States. To reduce this possibility, some observers have suggested
eliminating the possibility that an individual might receive multiple I-20s.
We believe that the best way to accomplish this goal is to
stop giving I-20s directly to students. Therefore, when a student is accepted,
we propose to send the I-20 to a US embassy or consulate identified by the
potential student. As under current practice, the student would go to the
appropriate embassy or consulate to apply for a visa and a visa would only be
issued if a valid I-20 were on hand. Multiple I-20s issued on behalf of the same
student would be destroyed by the embassy.
If a visa is
issued, the embassy or consulate would return a copy of the I-20 to the sending
institution to alert the college to expect the student. Such a step would
provide an excellent mechanism to help schools and the INS identify the small
number of students who receive a visa but who fail to enroll.
To facilitate this process, we recommend that each American embassy or
consulate be asked to identify a "Student and Exchange Visitor Coordinator." The
name and address information for this individual (including the APO/FPO address)
should be posted on the State Department Web page to permit schools with
questions about specific visas to contact the appropriate person directly.
Ensure that the national need for international experts
and expertise is readily addressed. In addition to tightening the system by
which visas are issued, we recommend that Congress ensure that our educational
system continues to train the international experts and has the knowledge base
necessary to meet our country's needs related to national security, foreign
policy, and economic competitiveness. At present, the quantity, level of
expertise, and availability of trained personnel do not meet national strategic
needs at home or abroad.erica has faced this challenge before. During the Cold
War, higher education responded to the nation's needs for foreign languages and
international expertise thanks to modest incentives in the National Defense
Education Act, the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act
(Fulbright-Hays), and the Higher Education Act. Federal support for these
efforts was crucial because state governments and the private sector were unable
to invest the resources necessary to meet the national needs.
Developing the international expertise the nation needs will require
multiple strategies. At the top of the list, however, is adequate support for
the existing foreign language, area and international studies, and international
business education programs authorized by the Higher Education Act. Just as the
federal government maintains military reserves to be called upon when needed, it
should ensure that it has the international expertise to call upon in times of
crisis. Expertise cannot be invented. Nor can it be produced quickly. It must be
cultivated and sustained.
To accomplish this, we
strongly urge this Committee to adopt four goals for the coming decade:
-- To significantly increase the number of experts with
high-level proficiency in foreign languages, international and area studies,
especially those relating to non-Western nations and cultures.
-- To expand the international knowledge of faculty and students in
professional and technical fields such as business, education, environment,
crime and terrorism, economics, health, and information technology.
-- To increase the diversity of students that major in
international fields and foreign languages and who pursue careers in
international service.
-- To expand the capacity of
colleges and universities to maintain and update our international knowledge in
a wide range of disciplines and fields that are vital to US national interests
and economic competitiveness on a continuous basis.
As
part of this effort, we encourage this Committee to instruct the Department of
Education to make international and foreign language education a higher priority
and to devote an appropriate level of administrative and program resources to
this task.
Over the last 50 years, efforts to enable
foreign students to study at our campuses and to ensure that our nation had the
necessary expertise to address national security and economic issues have paid
enormous dividends. It is apparent that we must now review our current
activities in order to identify those that need to be strengthened or
modified.
I do not mean to imply that the federal
government bears the full burden of this reassessment. Colleges and universities
share important responsibilities in this effort. We need to reconsider the
extent to which we adequately prepare students to understand and even anticipate
the international forces that play such a central role in our world.
International education, study abroad opportunities, and foreign language
instruction will have to be a higher priority in the years ahead. Partnerships
between higher education institutions in the US and the developing world should
be fostered. We must reach out more to local public schools. Colleges must
reassess the nature and volume of international research activity. And we must
reexamine the steps we take to monitor the activities of those who visit our
campuses on student and exchange visas. At the same time, colleges and
universities, states, and even philanthropic foundations cannot undertake these
activities successfully without federal leadership. The nation faces a national
challenge and, therefore, the federal government must play a central role in
articulating the specific needs and defining the goals that we will pursue.
The higher education community looks forward to working
with the members of this Committee in this effort in the years ahead.
Document 49 of 73. 