Foreign Students Must Leave the US If Their Universities Transition To Online-Only Learning (reuters.com) 169
ugen shares a report from Reuters: Foreign students must leave the United States if their school's classes this fall will be taught completely online or transfer to another school with in-person instruction, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency announced on Monday. It was not immediately clear how many student visa holders would be affected by the move, but foreign students are a key source of revenue for many U.S. universities as they often pay full tuition. ICE said it would not allow holders of student visas to remain in the country if their school was fully online for the fall. Those students must transfer or leave the country, or they potentially face deportation proceedings, according to the announcement.
The ICE guidance applies to holders of F-1 and M-1 visas, which are for academic and vocational students. The State Department issued 388,839 F visas and 9,518 M visas in fiscal 2019, according to the agency's data. The guidance does not affect students taking classes in person. It also does not affect F-1 students taking a partial online course-load, as long as their university certifies the student's instruction is not completely digital. M-1 vocational program students and F-1 English language training program students will not be allowed to take any classes online.
The ICE guidance applies to holders of F-1 and M-1 visas, which are for academic and vocational students. The State Department issued 388,839 F visas and 9,518 M visas in fiscal 2019, according to the agency's data. The guidance does not affect students taking classes in person. It also does not affect F-1 students taking a partial online course-load, as long as their university certifies the student's instruction is not completely digital. M-1 vocational program students and F-1 English language training program students will not be allowed to take any classes online.
Very sneaky... (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems an underhanded way to force universities to have in-person classes to retain students, regardless of the actual situation at the school. Maybe the schools will have in-person classes just for students in danger of losing their visas (as opposed to those students in danger of losing their health/life).
They'll just make them attend one. (Score:3)
Maybe the schools will have in-person classes just for students in danger of losing their visas (as opposed to those students in danger of losing their health/life).
This one's easy to work around. The school just needs to make the F-1 or M-1 student attend ONE in-person class each semester.
Which means they have to run such classes. Kinda kills the point of doing remote education in a pandemic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sneaky? Hardly. They're being overt about that being their intent. Within hours of ICE announcing their new policy, Trump tweeted [twitter.com] (caps and all):
SCHOOLS MUST OPEN IN THE FALL!!!
On the one hand, I can't disagree with the logic that if your school isn't offering in-person classes, you have no reason to remain in the country (nor, frankly, would I think that they'd want to stay here, given the current situation). On the other hand, my time in grad school was made so much better thanks to all of the international students we had in my researc
From which countries? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: From which countries? (Score:3)
Everywhere.
Re: From which countries? (Score:2)
The Norwegian students are not in class. They are either out skiing, or out taking advantage of the low alcohol prices in the US. Or both. They are a lot of fun.
Re:From which countries? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Norwegians will be collateral damage.
Reciprocal (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Many other countries have let Americans stranded because of the virus stay without penalty.
Re: (Score:2)
At the college I work for there are 2 tuition levels - in-state resident, or non-in-state resident. No differentiation on "how far out of state". And yes, for the fall we'll be remote (but not asynchronous) for classes that don't have special requirements like clinicals (we have nursing, dental assistant, radiology tech, nuke med tech, resp. therapist, cvt) or things that require specialized/expensive equipment to do the labs (our Cisco classes).
What I'm wondering about is the schools that have "first yea
This puts Chinese students at a disadvantage? (Score:2)
The Great Firewall is not built to allow uncensored information from outside. It will take the Chinese bureaucracy too much time to pass judgement on all those documents and lesson plans for various courses from the USA.
Those hardest hit, will be the princelings and ambitious students who value a degree from a good US university. This also sinks all the private, fake universities that are immigration scams, used by Indians and Chinese to get students who really become indentured servants in return for a so
Next step : H1B visas (Score:2)
The logical step is the Trump administration going after all those H1B visas because one could work as easily from another country from your own home.
Most H1B visas are just for programming jobs that don't require any attendance in the office.
This would really suck (Score:5, Informative)
I was once an F1 student, and had spent a lot of effort to actually be up to date with all the paperwork (one does not appreciate how much bureaucracy there is until they run into it). Fortunately I graduated, and was able to find a full time job. However those years were stressful, one one side there is your research, on the other side TA/RA remittance is barely enough to keep you from starvation.
It would be really bad for those folks who are into later years of their education, and need to scramble to find a transfer. If you are a masters or PhD student that means changing your professor, lab, and most likely your entire research area. It would be several years going down the drain. It is also bad for the research labs that lose those students, since most of the research activity is actually done by students and/or post-docs.
It would we much more prudent to implement a temporary rule to keep those students in place.
Authority to arbitrarily revoke visas? (Score:2)
The DHS/ICE/CPB is "guidance" not "rule" nor "law" and is subject to interpretation and -- hopefully -- court fight. It's another stupid Trump initiative to remove people legitimately in the US from staying.
Do they have the mandate and the right and authority to take a visa and revoke it because the school is teaching online. My opinion is no. Hopefully some immigration lawyers will step up and fight this.
Whether your school offers online classes, or makes you go to a physical class, or whatever, the vis
Almost certainly yes they can (Score:2)
Do they have the mandate and the right and authority to take a visa and revoke it because the school is teaching online. My opinion is no.
When I was getting a green card the immigration lawyer warned me that the US government could arbitrarily revoke or restrict the green card of any given foreign nationality. So if they can do that to a green card holder they can almost certainly do it to a mere visa holder.
Of course, this was 20 years ago so things may have changed but, if they have, they will certainly not have changed for the better.
so much know-nothing (Score:4, Insightful)
if it wasn't so damaging to so many people, I'd say to let this happen. When tuition goes up by 20- 50%, a few of the smarter ones will realize that the foreign students were paying WAY, WAY, WAY more and subsidizing the locals. It takes about a million dollars to train up an engineering student to the Ph.D. level. This administration is making their lives as miserable as possible. Whenever one of them gives up and goes back home, A MILLION DOLLAR INVESTMENT GETS TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER COUNTRY. They take all that training and knowledge with them. If they start a business, it benefits some other country.
At the end of the cold war, Russia lost almost all it's scientists and engineers. The government simply stopped paying then and left them to fend for themselves. A few of them found jobs as taxi drivers. Most held on for a few years, then gave up and emigrated to other countries...... the US.... Europe..... about 100,000 engineers and doctors went to Israel. The expertise they brought to those countries was an enormous benefit. If we're not careful, we will repeat this history.
These points will be entirely lost on the people setting the policies though. All they know is that the voters who put them in office think "FURINER BAD".
Re: (Score:3)
Tuition will continue going up by leaps and bounds regardless. It will be difficult to pinpoint what percentage of that is the result of kicking foreign students out and what's the continuing result of unmitigated greed. I would be willing to bet that most of it will remain a consequence of the latter.
I'd like to return to school, but I'm waiting for the crash. When universities start collapsing maybe tuition will fall with them.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that foreign students don't go to the local community college, they go to private universities or flagship public universities, which actually have added value over their native countries. Given the demographics at these universities, nearly all the people affected by the 20%-50% higher tuitions would have opposed Trump and opposed this policy from the beginning.
Which makes this just another case of Trump's "handouts for my supporters, screw everyone else, and forget equality or ethics" polic
Re: (Score:2)
On the plus side if they can take online classes from the other side of the world then so can you. Get a cheap degree from Europe or maybe even India.
Re: (Score:3)
America has the capability of getting almost all of the highly trained people in a particular area of specialty. This can be a huge economic advantage, as it prevents other countries from competing against you.
If you send all of those highly trained people back home, then they can go back home and compete against you. This happened with the H1B program. Limitations and cutbacks led to the development of outsourcing companies. Once the outsourcing companies existed, then entire departments of companies
Got screwed by this back in 2009 (Score:5, Interesting)
Correction (Score:3)
foreign students are a key source of revenue for many U.S. universities as they often pay full tuition
Actually... they ALL pay full tuition, not often.
Immigrant contributions (Score:2)
Blocking off immigration isn't the brightest idea when you consider the contributions of immigrants in the recent past. The 1950s to 1970s space program and the atomic bomb back in WWII was entirely designed by immigrant or refugee German scientists and engineers. We wouldn't have put anything on the moon without a bunch of German immigrants like Wernher von Braun, Arthur Rudolph (who we deported), Hans von Ohain (jet engine pioneer), Adolph Buseman (supersonic aerodynamics), Hermann Oberth, etc. --too many
Re: Immigrant contributions (Score:2)
Also forgot to add modern supertall skyscrapers wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Fazlur Khan an immigrant from Bangladesh who pioneered an important structural design concept.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Immigration is the issue that most separates Trump supporters from his opponents. These crackdowns mean that Trump's campaign sees this as a "turnout" election. They believe they have more to gain by energizing their base rather than reaching out to the center. They may be correct.
If Biden wins in November, immigration will likely be liberalized. Immigrants tend to vote Democratic. But it is also economic insanity to be deporting educated and productive young people.
Re: (Score:3)
...If Biden wins in November, immigration will likely be liberalized. Immigrants tend to vote Democratic.
Immigrants tend to come to this country and vote for those who support them. Even the dumbest citizens see that neither party supports the People anymore.
...But it is also economic insanity to be deporting educated and productive young people.
Shit keeps going south in the US (as compared to the rest of the world), and we won't have to worry about deporting educated and productive young people. Ignorance and Pride will stand there and wave that "problem" goodbye.
Re: (Score:2)
Even the dumbest citizens see that neither party supports the People anymore.
Trump's whole gimmick is that he's on your side. America First, jobs for everyone. You are under attack by "far left fascists" whatever those are.
Maybe they don't believe it and vote for him for some other reason but many of them sound quite convinced that he is trying to help them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
usa is peculiar in that they don't actually know who is a citizen or not by design though.
I mean they do, but pretend that they don't know because you can't make a list of all the people who are citizens and mark them as eligible to vote for some crazy reason.
Re: (Score:2)
The ironic part of it is that many of these immigrants are actually quite conservative. They only vote that way because the republicans hate immigrants.
Re: (Score:2)
Naturalized citizens don't appear to favor one party over the other. And the other immigrants can't vote.
Research suggests that foreign-born citizens do not register as Democrats and Republicans or turn out to vote at comparable rates to native-born citizens. But with the current president villifying them I bet they won't vote for him if they vote at all.
Re:I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:5, Informative)
I fully support DACA, but I don't think refugee status of applicant or parent matters:
You may request DACA if you:
Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;
Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;
Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making your request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS;
Had no lawful status on June 15, 2012;
Are currently in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and
Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor,or three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.
https://www.uscis.gov/archive/... [uscis.gov]
Re: I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:4, Informative)
When have the Democrats given amnesty to anyone except children fleeing violence? DACA kids were actually child refugees, now this is the only place they call home.
One has to only look into the activities by the late Ted Kennedy, who when I last checked was a Democrat. He was the driving force behind immigration reform legislation. Though blame lies at the feet of both parties, as Republican cooperation was required - like in the 1986 Amnesty program.
1965 - revoked the quota system, and allowed chain migration - especially from Latin America.
1986 - Amnesty. Granted Amnesty to 1.3 million people living in the U.S. illegally. Nearly 3 million applied. Kennedy was quoted saying: "We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.” Despite passing this, the population of undocumented immigrants increased after Amnesty. The border was never secured.
2007 - He gave Amnesty another try, this time for 12 million people. This one failed.
Re:I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:4, Insightful)
It doesn't matter. Immigrants as a whole *create* jobs.
They aren't robots. They need to eat food. They need houses. They need Clothes. They need transport. All of these things create jobs.
In fact its pretty non-controversial in economics is that one way to decrease unemployment is to increase immigration as immigrants usually create more than one job as the first few years of immigration tend to be labour intensive. It might not be intuitive that this is the case, but its well understood.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:4, Interesting)
to set conditions in which the labor pool is reduced in supply.
You are espousing the Lump of Labor Fallacy [wikipedia.org].
As sg_oneill said, labor creates its own demand when workers spend their paychecks to buy additional goods and services. Young people do this particularly well, since their years of childhood dependency are behind them and their years of retiree dependency are far in the future.
Deporting these people means fewer net jobs remaining in the American economy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And, as we all know, Homo economicus is a real thing--a being created by the gods of Econ 101 which bears neither blemish nor opportunity costs.
Meanwhile, in our poor representation of economic utopia here on Earth 616, there are costs to ramping up the supply of labor. There are costs to importing foreigners who may be here for mercenary reasons. And there are costs to privileging the economy over society.
It doesn't matter if every immigrant added more to the GDP than they subtract from it, if the result i
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your very same argument applies to the unemployed - why worry about the unemployed? They'll spend their benefits and keep the economy going - it wasn't that long ago that Democrats argued that every dollar in unemployment benefits returns $2-3 of economic activity!
Re: (Score:2)
Your very same argument applies to the unemployed - why worry about the unemployed?
It also applies, but in a different way. Spending money on unemployed people _reduces_ unemployment.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but this is an example of the broken window fallacy.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There's no unused resource here. Someone earned that money, but it was taken away from him in the form of taxes, and gifted to someone who doesn't produce any value. Granted, that's not destruction, but it's pretty close to it in economic terms. Whether we spend 50% of GDP on broken windows or the unemployed, in both cases the economy will greatly suffer.
In other words: you say "Spending money on unemployed people _reduces_ unemployment". I say it most likely would've been used to purchase something anyway
Re: (Score:3)
There's no unused resource here.
Yes, there are. Unemployed people.
The fundamental principle of economics is "your spending is my income". If too many people don't have money to spend, then many other people don't get their income. And this becomes self-reinforcing.
I say it most likely would've been used to purchase something anyway (and thus reduce unemployment)
Or they could just sat in a bank account as a deadweight, earning nothing. Which is what actually happens.
had the money not been taxed away from its original owner, with the difference that it could've been used for a more permanent value (e.g. home improvement) instead of just feeding someone.
In certain conditions money can actually be created out of thin air, without affecting inflation.
Re: (Score:3)
In the medium-term, we need to support the unemployed because when the economy recovers, we need their la
Re: (Score:2)
Your comment is based on the fallacy of rich people being taxed for the benefit of the poor.
I'm not American, I'm European, so my point of view may be different, but there are very few rich people here. Most tax money collected here comes from the middle class. There's literally a tax (1.2%) appearing on my payroll precisely for the "state employment policy". Other incomes (such as capital gains, where the rich earn the most) are _not_ subject to this tax.
If you let the unemployed starve to death during the bad times, there's nobody to hire during expansion and labor rates would go through the roof killing the economic growth.
I definitely didn't suggest that we do let them star
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, unemployed people are an unused resource. But the only use of them is to make them employed (=produce value). Giving them money for free is not that.
Or they could just sat in a bank account as a deadweight, earning nothing. Which is what actually happens.
Most likely no. People would just buy newer cars, improve houses, invest in their hobbies etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, unemployed people are an unused resource. But the only use of them is to make them employed (=produce value). Giving them money for free is not that.
Yes, it's "that" sometimes. Giving free money to unemployed people would get them to spend them, resulting in more people hired (=less unemployment). This creates a virtuous cycle, eventually eradicating elevated unemployment.
This doesn't work when economy is or near the full employment or if there is an external resource crunch that causes elevated unemployment.
Most likely no. People would just buy newer cars, improve houses, invest in their hobbies etc.
No. This is EXACTLY what happens in recessions. People who have money are not spending them. This is an empirical fact, not a conjecture.
Re: (Score:2)
I would argue that having the state invest money during recessions (and thereby create employment) is a much better strategy than handing them out for free.
Re: (Score:3)
Those are mostly shit jobs (Score:2)
Again, the trouble is that the wealth these immigrants generate is going to the top. Creating a handful of shitty service sector jobs when they go out to eat doesn't make up for the massive drop to wages that flooding the labor market without counterbalancing with social programs caused.
Not to say I'm opposed to immigration,
Re: (Score:3)
Any average increase in productivity will decrease unemployment. As immigrants (i.e. people who are willing to take drastic action to try to improve their lives) tend to generate more productivity than the
Re: (Score:2)
They are not robots but you know what the robots are still there and what jobs will the robots do, why the jobs the immigrants used to do. So why keep bringing in more immigrants if you are going to use robots, what work will those immigrants do, when you have already lost current citizens jobs to robots and are paying a universal basic wage. You want to import more people, to pay the universal basic wage and the work done by robots, for what sane reason why, why the fuckity why?!?
Oursourcing and breaking t
Re: I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:2)
I agree with you that overall, immigration is good. However, your argument could be interpreted as a version of the broken window fallacy [wikipedia.org], or some kind of race to the bottom.
Responsible immigration policies spend money and resources to integrate appropriate immigrants so they can end up paying their own way.
It seems we've not been as good at such policies as we'd like to think.
Re: I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:2)
Re: I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:2)
Re:Too much immigration (Score:5, Informative)
Because immigration exceeding a certain threshold stops dissolving — they stop becoming Americans.
Wow, that would be terrible if it were true. I'm amazed at how many Americans are sure that immigration should have been stopped the day after their ancestors arrived! Yet somehow, everyone melds together. By the third generation you have trouble telling immigrants from native born, and that has always been the case.
This is not some new problem Trump created, we've had an entire artillery battalion desert [wikipedia.org] — and join the adversary, because they felt closer to them on account of being fellow Catholics...
The deserters were immigrants who were treated like shit by Americans (oh, and escaped slaves who were treated like shit by Americans). So, Trump's solution is to treat immigrants like shit. Brilliant!
Re: (Score:2)
The ironic thing is that mi is a bloody immigrant himself, yet he behaves as if he is more american than americans.The zeal of the convert and so on.
Re: (Score:2)
So, when are you planning to return to Ukraine?
If none of the wealth they generate (Score:2)
I'll grant that in order to have a functioning economy we need immigrants (US birth rate is below sustainability) but, well, 60-70% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck (depending on whether you consider $1000 in the bank as "not paycheck to paycheck", that's not even a decent sized car repair though). We're 24 days away from a massive eviction and foreclosure
Re: (Score:2)
I'll grant that in order to have a functioning economy we need immigrants (US birth rate is below sustainability)
Why does the population necessarily need to increase to have a functioning economy? The economy is based on resource extraction and usage, productivity and consumption, not population
Re: (Score:2)
It's also insanity because most foreign students are paying students. That means, that they are a net benefit to the economy RIGHT NOW - they are spending loads of money. If they are forced out, they might spend that money elsewhere, losing local university jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
If you were even remotely competent at crisis management then you'd realise coronavirus is a temporary oddity and the economy does not benefit from eliminating people who contribute to GDP.
I got criticised by someone as well.
Idiot: "You came to my country and thus took a potential local's job!"
Me: "No I had a job and brought it to your country and as a result I pay your farmers, supermarkets and landlords my wage, and your government my taxes. I can take my money elsewhere and not a single extra person will
Re: (Score:2)
Not just that, the reason we're paying people to stay home was to flatten the curve is to prevent the spread of the virus(?) (Actually, who knows - one day it's flatten the curve, another day it's find a cure, another day it's stopping the spread, blah blah blah). Many of them had jobs before the pandemic, and have only lost it due to sheltering in place.
As for the F1 and M1 visa students, if they can do their courses remotely, they can do it from their countries back home. Essentially, it scuttles the
Re: (Score:3)
The limit on education is money, not the number of chairs in the classroom.
By paying full tuition, these foreign students are making education more affordable to Americans.
Re: (Score:2)
They generally don't pay full tuition.
I know plenty of foreign (ex-)students and they all paid full tuition. They are also ineligible for many government assistance programs. Many of them had to get student loans to pay for education.
American students have it WAY easier.
Re: (Score:2)
They generally don't pay full tuition. They're also eligible for subsidized housing, grants, and employment as teaching assistants or research assistants, especially for "needs blind" colleges. American students take on quite large loans to compete with them:
No, they normally pay higher tuition fees.
Many of them have their degrees in STEM fields funded by their federal governments.
I don't think you can blame the students for have far-thinking governments.
Re: (Score:2)
This is simply a case of bringing some sanity to the situation - a student with a 100% virtual course load can just as easily log in from around the world as they can from right here in the US.
Part of the desire to attend a US university is to have the experience of living in the USA, possibly with a view to living and working in the USA afterwards. If you remove that element one effect is that the talented ones may well not remain afterwards and contribute to the economy. Another is that they may consider that it is not worth attending a US university at all..
If this change in policy just ends up covering this year and those that are still studying can then move to the USA it would offset some o
Re: (Score:2)
Define a 'lot' in terms of percentage.
And I'm not sure I understand the argument that the universities need foreign students because they pay full tuition. So do most US students eventually, sure they get funding through various forms like scholarships, Pell grants and loans but that just reduced the student's exposure. The school still gets paid, either by the foundation supporting the scholarhip or the federal government.
But yeah, sure whatever the foreigners are taking up all the slots, well 5.5% of
school like them as they pay FULL vs discount rate (Score:2)
school like them as they pay FULL vs discount rate as in some cases they get it over an US student do to that.
Re: (Score:2)
Those dicounts are subsidized by state funds, donations, and student loans.
Foreign students don't qualify for in-state discounts or federal loans or grants, and they pay their full ride, just like an out-of-state student does (at a state school). When an out of state student gets a "discount" it is either a gift from the school or a federal grant, which covers the discount - the school loses nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
I know for a fact a lot of these "students" are actually here working full time and that the "classes" they're taking are in subjects they've already passed in their home countries. e.g. they're just here to get around H1-B Visa limits.
Translation: we're getting too many Asians!
Re: I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:2)
Oh, do you know that for a fact? Care to share some sources?
Re: (Score:2)
I know for a fact a lot of these "students" are actually here working full time and that the "classes" they're taking are in subjects they've already passed in their home countries. e.g. they're just here to get around H1-B Visa limits.
I love reading such vague certainty.
Re: I'm not sure if this is good or bad (Score:3)
It was said so matter-of-fact that people didn't realize how absolutely stupid of a statement that was. If foreign students can fly over here that far from their families & communities, pay out of state tuition, and STILL find an employee to illegally hire them to earn enough to not only pay the tuition but also turn a higher profit than back home...
The locals should just quit high school, go study abroad, and come back as foreigners. Student debt would be a thing of the past and they would be so much
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A country so terrible yet people die trying to sneak in.
Re: (Score:2)
A country so terrible yet people die trying to sneak in.
Well you are better than Guatemala, so there is that.
Re: (Score:2)
If you let people in, some of them are going to be criminals. If that scares you so much that you don't want to let anyone in that is your right. Must suck to be so fearful though.
As far as facts go, immigrants are actually more law abiding than native citizens, both here and in your country.
https://www.cato.org/publicati... [cato.org]
Re: Makes sense... (Score:2)
What country are you from? I'd love to have a chance to pull various statistics for your country. And if you have a history of colonialism or Naziism then it's gunna be a really poor comparison for your country vs mind.
What country are you from?
Re: (Score:2)
You people are droning on and on how bad a country Russia is, yet they have millions of illegal immigrants. It is actually quite simple, countries being terrible is not binary, there is a gradient and these people flee from countries that are even worse.
Re: (Score:2)
I know plenty of countries have better broadband than here, but you simply can't count on a good Internet experience if the entirety of International students are lighting up the undersea pipes with video classrooms and such. The latency is already relatively terrible. On top of that, you have censorship laws to work around.
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, are foreign students going to want to Zoom in to US campuses at 2 am, local time?
Re: (Score:3)
The University of Washington - like many larger schools - is currently planning on a hybrid approach where smaller classes (fewer than 50 students) are taught in person while the larger classes are held online.
Since the classes will almost certainly still be required to follow social distancing rules, I'll be curious to find out if UW actually has enough class space to pull this off.
And that's not looking at how they're planning to deal with the residence and dining halls at all...
Re: (Score:2)
Remotely? Yes, of course — and by the same students. They'll just be attending from back home, in their native countries.
If call-centers and and other services can operate over the Internet, so can remote learning.
Re: (Score:2)
They'll just be attending from back home, in their native countries.
More likely they will find other countries who value their drive and ambition and the fact they are paying for their own education. We'll take your DREAMers too.
Your loss.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure! If your colleges are open for in-person studies, by all means, try to attract these folks, who, for some inexplicable reason, have earlier chosen this stinking racist cesspool of ours, instead of your enlightened piece of heaven.
Re: Makes sense... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If your colleges are open for in-person studies, by all means, try to attract these folks, who, for some inexplicable reason, have earlier chosen this stinking racist cesspool of ours, instead of your enlightened piece of heaven.
They chose it because you try to attract them. Since that is no longer the case the world will re-arrange itself appropriately. Lot of other countries will continue to welcome people who are smart and driven.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't live in your xenophobic and largely imaginary country.
Thankfully.
Re: Makes sense... (Score:2)
Every single country that is not run by you, which is every single country.
Re: Makes sense... (Score:2)
Lol, hypocritical racist colonizers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Citations needed.