[The Montana Professor 15.2, Spring 2005 <http://mtprof.msun.edu>]
George M. Dennison
History
UM-Missoula
President, The University of Montana
In profound ways, 9-11 altered the world we Americans assumed we knew. The events on that tragic day undoubtedly had a similar if less immediate impact on people in other countries. I will focus my discussion on some of the changes affecting American higher education, specifically the complicated developments that threaten to erode the attractiveness to students from other countries and cultures. For years, the United States has gained in many ways from the eagerness of potential students around the world to study in American colleges and universities, and the students have benefited as well. The participating students have had access to an education of high quality and responsiveness, usually with sensitivity to cultural concerns, and they have typically returned after graduation to their home countries prepared for productive and engaged lives. The receiving colleges or universities have enjoyed more diverse student populations and more stable revenues, and the United States has had a more favorable balance of trade in addition to the opportunity to inform people from other countries about American culture and values. The mutuality of benefits from the relationship helps to explain the thrust and orientation of much of American policy during the period after World War II. In those years, public diplomacy, as it came to be called, emerged as a fundamental part of American foreign policy.
Public diplomacy refers to a planned and long-term effort to influence world opinion by bringing people from different cultures into close contact with Americans, either by facilitating travel to allow Americans to live, work, and study in other countries, or by attracting people from other countries to live, work, and study in the United States. Regarded as "the cornerstone of United States public diplomacy" since its adoption, the United States Mutual Education & Cultural Exchange Act of 1961--most often referred to simply as the Fulbright-Hayes Act--promotes reciprocal exchanges of students and scholars. Thousands of Americans and people from other countries around the world can attest to the power of Senator J. William Fulbright's insight explaining his support for this namesake piece of world-influential legislation.
Educational exchange can turn nations into people, contributing as no other form of communication can to the humanizing of international relations. I do not think educational exchange is certain to produce affection between peoples, nor indeed do I think this is one of its necessary purposes; it is quite enough if it contributes to the feeling of common humanity, to an emotional awareness that other countries are populated not by doctrines that we fear but by people with the same capacity for pleasure and pain, for cruelty and kindness, as people we were brought up with in our own countries./1/
Experience and research have buttressed Fulbright's insight by demonstrating the direct and causal nexus between language study, study abroad, and international travel, on the one hand, and interest in and understanding of international relations and affairs, on the other./2/ Clearly, the humanizing effect of international exchange has the power to transform relationships.
However, in the aftermath of 9-11, the United States government instituted a new and very rigorous process for issuing visas, and this change has had the effect of encouraging potential students and other visitors to go elsewhere./3/ Since at least one of the 9-11 terrorists entered the United States on a student visa, and two others sought student visas after arrival, the incident provoked a new concern for tighter visa controls that, while understandable, have threatened other vital interests of the United States. In addition, many critics had waited in the wings for the appropriate moment to attack the earlier "open doors" approach./4/ The author of one recent article labeled the student visa business a "scam" imposed on the American public by the higher education community for its own benefit./5/ According to George Borjas, many, if not the majority of the recipients of student visas, never return to their home countries, and the sale of student visas has supported a substantial black market./6/ Moreover, as he said, the colleges and universities have blatantly relied on the foreign students as cheap labor on campuses. Attitudes similar to these merged with valid concern about security to support the new procedures, the Biometric Visa Program, and the automated Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) with its controversial fees and payment processes./7/ SEVIS, combined with the Biometric Visa Program and the 1998 Visas Mantis process requiring special security checks for people seeking visas to study or work in sensitive science or engineering fields, has radically interrupted the flow of students and visiting scholars to the United States./8/ In the years from 2001 to 2004, according to one report, "the federal government has put in place more than 25 new laws, rules, and regulations to make it harder for foreign visitors to receive visas."/9/ The effects of these massive changes have become apparent.
In terms of sheer numbers, the relatively free flow of students and scholars to the U.S. during the years after 1961 rose from a total of 48,486 in 1959-1960 to over 135,000 by 1971, and dramatically to 586,322 in 2002-2003, the high point./10/ In 2002, some 2 million students studied in countries other than their home countries, with more than one-quarter of them in the United States. The United Kingdom, the closest competitor, attracted roughly half the number coming to the United States./11/ In 2002-2003, the students and scholars coming to the United States accounted for $12.8 billion of economic activity, after deducting the financial assistance provided to them by the colleges and universities and including the expenditures the students made on behalf of their dependents./12/ American higher education leaders understand very well the economic as well as the educational value of these visitors, and they worry about the increasing competitiveness of colleges and universities around the world./13/ By 2003, the impacts of the new visa requirements became clear, as the annual increase of entering international students slowed to less than one percent, compared to an annual average increase of five percent for the prior five years./14/
Early projections of international enrollments in American colleges and universities for Fall Semester 2004 revealed a continuing downward trend and underscored the seriousness of the challenge. Some informed observers had argued during 2002-2003 that a variety of economic and other factors had produced merely a temporary dip in the number of students studying abroad./15/ However, reports from Australia and other countries quickly undermined such speculation. As international student enrollments dropped in the United States in 2003, the corresponding number enrolled in Australian universities increased by nearly 17 percent to around 167,000./16/ Recent reports push the Australian total to 300,000 or more. Moreover, the 2004 estimates for the United States confirmed a continuation and deepening of the downward trend. The Council of Graduate Schools announced in August 2004 that applications to U.S. universities had declined by 32 percent since 2003./17/ Shortly thereafter, Terry Hartle, Senior Vice President of the American Council on Education, confirmed the decline, with details about the largest impacts./18/ As Hartle reported, enrollments declined sharply in Fall 2003 from 13 of the 20 countries that previously supplied the largest numbers of students, and the declines have broadened in impact since 2003. These proliferating dismal reports have intensified the concern within the American higher education community, shared to a great extent in other countries.
The foregoing discussion suggests that public diplomacy involves a great deal more than the very important humanizing effect on international relations articulated by Senator Fulbright in 1983. The leaders of virtually every American higher education association specifically identified what they view as equally critical functions in a joint statement they submitted in May 2004 to the United States Departments of State and Homeland Security. According to this statement, signed by the various presidents and directors, "The United States cannot hope to maintain its present scientific and economic leadership position if it becomes isolated from the rest of the world."/19/ While conceding the heightened concern for security in the wake of 9-11, these leaders noted that continued interruption of the flow of students and scholars will have a clear and direct effect on the American economy and an incalculable but clearly negative impact on American security and the development of new knowledge worldwide. As they concluded: "The damage to our nation's higher education and scientific enterprise, economy, and national security would be irreparable."/20/
These leaders argued, as well, that the implementation of prudent measures to protect lives and property does not require such an outcome. "It is not a question of balancing science and security, as some have suggested. These priorities are not mutually exclusive; to the contrary, they complement each other, and each is vital to the other."/21/ The collaborations among scientists and scholars around the world have helped and will continue to help immensely in the struggle against international terrorism. As these leaders concluded, "In the long run, a robust network of global interactions is essential to winning this war [on terrorism]."/22/ The United States, as all nations, must have a security system "that does not hinder such international exchange and cooperation." Former Secretary of Education Richard Riley stated the conclusion eloquently: "While our nation properly continues the fight against terrorism, we must also develop a policy of educational diplomacy."/23/ Interestingly, public diplomacy rather easily morphs into educational diplomacy, given these valid and pressing concerns.
SEVIS and the Biometric Visa Program seek to link a visa applicant or traveler to a "single, traceable identity."/24/ In addition, every person seeking a visa must travel to the appropriate consular office for an interview. In and of itself, the required interview appears reasonable. However, most American embassies and consulates have insufficient personnel to keep up, thus resulting in long delays and often very rushed, cursory interviews ending with denials (officials wishing to avoid liability for a costly error). Moreover, the travel to the embassies and consulates often imposes tremendous burdens on the applicants. Finally, each person seeking a visa must pay the required $100 fee before receiving the visa, thus creating additional difficulties for some, not only because of the cost but also the challenges in the international transfer of funds.
These and other major changes affected those persons applying for student or visiting scholar visas to study or work in the United States. Not only must these applicants follow the procedures that apply to all other applicants for visas, including participation in the implementation of the Biometric Visa Program designed to assemble digital fingerprints and photographs, but they must also have their names entered into the SEVIS monitoring and tracking system prior to arrival in the United States, submit to rather extensive intrusions upon their privacy, and report all changes of status and location immediately on pain of deportation./25/ The receiving colleges and universities incur the obligation to assure timely reporting on the status and location of international students. Beginning in 1998, any students and scholars seeking to study and work in security sensitive scientific or engineering fields have also had to undergo much more extensive background investigations, taking in some cases literally months to complete--the so-called Visas Mantis process. If these people leave the United States for any reason after having received clearances, they must undergo new investigations before they can return.
No doubt, abuses of individual rights occurred during the period immediately following the terrorist attacks, evidencing fear of a larger and more systematic campaign. The newspapers and television stations around the country carried almost daily reports of investigations of suspected terrorists or those who allegedly aided and abetted terrorists./26/ No doubt, also, as Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge conceded later, some racial profiling affected the implementation of the new procedures./27/ A significant number of international students found themselves under investigation and threat of deportation for relatively minor violations of the tracking and reporting requirements that colleges and universities had enforced rather loosely before 9-11. Some higher education officials openly accused overzealous or overworked consular officials of reversing admission decisions and security clearances already made by colleges and universities and the responsible security agencies. As one administrator observed, "The eminent scientist who comes to visit every year should not be treated as a stranger."/28/ However, as people became familiar with the new procedures and requirements, the incidence of abuses diminished, although the delays and denials continued. Yet, the Department of Homeland Security has recently announced that SEVIS works. The report noted that 8,737 colleges and exchange visitor programs, representing more than 9,500 campuses, have participated with over 770,000 students and exchange visitors listed on the DHS database, including information on 100,000 dependents as well. By the date of the report, 1,881 filed investigations have resulted in 187 arrests, including some for selling fraudulent visa forms and transcripts./29/
Nonetheless, Nils Hesselmo, President of the American Association of Universities, arguably the most prestigious of the higher education associations in the United States, expressed anew the rising alarm about the impact of continued, more onerous restrictions on entry to the United States by legitimate students and scholars: "We do appear to be losing our allure as the destination of foreign students...and the academic community is very concerned." As he urged, "In its own national interest, as well as the interest of the global community, the U.S. needs to make every effort to facilitate collaboration and exchange."/30/
Attesting to this rising concern, in May 2004 the Presidents and Directors of all the American higher education associations submitted a joint statement identifying the visa problems and recommending solutions to them./31/ The comprehensive listing covered the range of problems that have plagued the visa process for three years with devastating effects, and proposed direct responses:
Extend the terms of student and scholar visas and Visas Mantis from one year to the duration of the course of study, current project, or appointment.
Eliminate repetitive security checks for known scholars and scientists, and allow visa renewals prior to departing the United States when the holders find it necessary to leave for collaborative work, conference attendance, or personal business.
Assure visa renewals for those scholars who have received favorable Security Advisory Opinions for Visas Mantis, thus avoiding unnecessary redundancy.
Assure visa applicants and their sponsors full transparency in the process and establish priority processing after 30 days of waiting.
Provide updated training for consular staff.
Establish visa reciprocity with sending countries willing to verify security checks, especially those countries with the highest volume and proven track records.
Implement a simple fee collection process for SEVIS allowing payment after the individual arrives in the United States, with the receiving institution guaranteeing payment.
Guarantee funding and staffing to operate the visa process effectively and efficiently.
Charges of recalcitrance to the contrary notwithstanding, the federal agencies responsible for security clearance and visa issuance have echoed the concerns expressed by the educators. They concur that the implementation of security policies could "jeopardize the status of the United States as the preferred destination of foreign students." In addition, representatives of those agencies apparently agree that the United States has vital security interests at risk when the flow of talent becomes obstructed./32/ Moreover, those representatives spoke favorably about several of the educators' recommendations, which look and sound very reasonable. But the rather consistent pattern of conciliatory language with little actual change has persisted, albeit with some amelioration.
Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge has conceded that some of the early security measures involved racial profiling, and that "too many students [were] left on the doorstep." As he said, the United States must have a system that protects the liberty and freedom of all. He concluded that "to suggest there is a trade-off between security and individual freedom--that we must discard one protection for the other--is a false choice. You do not defend liberty to forsake it."/33/ Secretary of State Colin Powell has concurred, and in a June 2004 speech said "the United States must ensure that it remains 'a beacon for students.... If we lose legitimate foreign scholars, if we lose them to procedural frustrations because it's too hard to get a visa, because they don't want to be bothered, we risk losing their goodwill, and that is a priceless thing to lose.'"/34/ The kinds of barriers mentioned by the two Secretaries continue to plague the visa and security system. Moreover, the only immediate response to all the concerns and requests for action prior to the beginning of Fall Semester 2004 came in the Department of Homeland Security's pledge of 24-hour assistance to all international students seeking visas for Fall 2004, and the extension of hours and increased staff beginning on 2 August 2004 to fulfill the pledge./35/ In addition, the Department announced acceptance of SEVIS fee payment by credit card online or mail. These relatively minor actions ameliorated but did not resolve the problems.
No hearings have occurred as yet in response to the letter of 17 August 2004 from David Ward, President of the American Council on Education--on behalf of the other higher education associations--to Representative Henry Hyde, Chairman of the House Committee on International Relations. Ward noted that:
While progress has been made, the process could still be improved. We remain concerned that current visa procedures and policies, combined with other factors, continue to impede our nation's ability to remain the destination of choice for foreign students, scholars, and scientists without any demonstrable increase in security. We believe that a hearing to address these factors could be useful./36/
Ward's words provide insight into the complicated and sensitive situation of those requesting changes, particularly in the context of heightened national security alerts resulting from the party conventions and the presidential election:
We again emphasize that we do not wish to do anything that would endanger the nation's security. However, we believe that the complexities of the current system, the inconsistencies inherent in it, and the extraordinary delays that affect some foreign students and scholars have had the unintended effect of making the nation seem less welcoming than it truly is. Many colleges and universities have reported a serious drop in the number of international students and scholars planning to come to the United States. We fear that the United States is, by virtue of such a complex and difficult process, sending potential students and scholars a strong signal that America no longer welcomes them. Clearly, that is not the intent of the new policies, but we fear it will be the effect./37/
In late August 2004, the American Council on Education reported that the Department of Homeland Security "is considering making Visas Mantis security clearances for foreign students and scholars valid for the duration of their time in the United States," but with no confirmation as yet./38/ After the beginning of Fall Semester, the House Government Reform Committee held a hearing on 9 September 2004 to review the collaborative efforts of the Departments of Homeland Security and State to develop an effective and efficient visa policy./39/ Chairman Tom Davis (Virginia) noted that visa issues ranked second only to concerns about Social Security in terms of case work in the congressional districts. Spokespersons from the Departments stressed the progress made in recent months, especially in expediting Visas Mantis problem cases with the result that less than two percent have delays of more than thirty days. Nonetheless, the scarcity of trained personnel and continuing challenges in implementing the Biometric Visa Program and installing needed equipment remained significant issues. Jacqueline L. Williams-Bridger and Randolph Hite, both of the U.S. Government Accountability Office, reported the successful installation of the equipment needed for the Biometric Visa Program in 201 of 207 designated posts overseas, but found issues of data definition, procedures, and quality of data still problematic. Moreover, they described the visa revocation process as flawed and incomplete, technologically as well as logically. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on 6 October 2004 and heard once again the concerns of the higher education community, but nothing of significance has changed as yet./40/
In conversations I had with visa applicants during a visit to the People's Republic of China in September 2004, the most common theme focused on the delay in making use of the information technology for which the United States has become justly famous to solve the problem./41/ Most who commented indicated they had given up on the effort to secure a visa and decided to go elsewhere. On the other hand, according to recent reports in the Chinese press, "The United States and China have agreed to a reciprocal visa arrangement with both sides offering 12-month multiple-entry business and tourist visas."/42/ Important for apparent reasons, the agreement applies only to "frequent travelers," not necessarily to students and scientists, and each side has "reserved the right to limit the issuance and validity of the visas on a case by case basis." Moreover, this bilateral agreement does not extend to other countries.
Interestingly enough, however, very little discussion of the possible use of new technology has appeared, underscoring the unwillingness of those with the responsibility for security to expose themselves to possible punishment for assuming any risk. In fact, the new legislation attaches legal liability to those who review and approve the issuance of the visas allowing people to enter the United States./43/ In 2004, at the urging of Russell Neuman of the White House Office of Science and Technology, Michael Geruso conducted a study of the use of iris technology as the "biometric technology best suited to the travel document application because of the stability and uniqueness of the human iris."/44/ However, cost, the absence of linked databases to compare criminal watch listings, and technological limitations--particularly the lack of a mobile acquisition device for use at land border crossings--will undoubtedly continue to block the use of iris technology./45/
The publication of the annual Open Doors report for Fall 2004 by the Institute for International Education confirmed the anticipated effect of the new restrictions./46/ The number of international students declined by 2.5 percent to 572,509 from the 2003 total, with much larger declines at the undergraduate and especially the associate degree levels, the first absolute decline since 1971-1972. More importantly, as the commentators noted, "American campuses are losing the best and brightest of these students to Britain, Canada, and Australia." One report with an erroneous headline correctly concluded that "International enrollments at universities in the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada are up by healthy margins."/47/ Actually, graduate enrollments increased by roughly 2.4 percent because of increased yield on fewer applications, but the situation differed radically from the flow of students in prior years.
It strikes me that the challenge of restoring a relatively free flow of students and scholars will prove quite difficult and lengthy not only because of the limitations of current technology and cost, but also because the restoration involves more than security concerns. In a sense, the security concerns reflect, refract, or encapsulate other agendas, tensions, and uncertainties generated and fueled by advancing globalization and globalism. The very terms "globalization" and "globalism" conjure sharply differing images depending on the perspective of the observer. Many people view the processes involved and their social and cultural impacts in very negative terms./48/ The young and not so young people who participate in demonstrations calculated to obstruct the meetings of the World Trade Organization and other such conferences tend to define "globalization" as the ever-expanding reach and tightening control of multi-national corporations unmoved by concerns for national boundaries and cultures, environments, or human conditions in their pursuit of profits and shareholder value. Other people view "globalism" as an insidious blight germinated in the Western and developed world that infests, corrupts, and obliterates indigenous cultures. Still others understand "globalization" and "globalism" as the deliberate reach for empire by the United States as the remaining world super power of the 21st century. Finally, in the United States, the nascent and seemingly omnipresent xenophobia and its consequent urge toward isolationism manifests itself in various ways to tighten the strictures and prevent further foreign intrusions into "fortress America."
American higher education leaders and others have proposed a "blue ribbon commission" appointed and charged by the President, Congress, or both, to develop recommendations for immediate action on the visa issues. However, I doubt that the proposal will attract many takers in the aftermath of the rescent presidential campaign, especially in view of the rising attention to "lax security" stimulated by the release of the 9-11 Commission's preliminary report, efforts to reform the intelligence structure of the U. S. government, and the ongoing debate about the war on terror./49/ Meanwhile, the damage to the image of the United States in the world will continue, perhaps becoming irreparable in the near term, because of the perception that Americans no longer welcome foreigners. If so, American science and learning in general will sooner rather than later feel the effects of forced isolation from the world community.
Over the longer term, we in higher education around the world must intensify our efforts to educate the public and the policy makers about the need for more not less public diplomacy. In my own view, we will succeed only by clarifying the myths about the meanings of "globalization" and "globalism." One recent study focuses on "globalization" as a process from which nations cannot abstain, involving "the flow of technology, economy, knowledge, people, values, [and] ideas across borders," and affecting "each country in a different way due to...[differing] history, traditions, culture, and priorities."/50/ Some experts have urged the use of this formulation as the foundation for a "globalism" initiative defined as "an intentional...[educational] response" through "a broad range of intellectual and experiential activities [both on and off campuses] designed to help individuals understand the global environment in which they live, communicate across borders, and acquire an understanding of the cultural, social, and political systems of other nations and the interactions among nations." In a very real sense, this recommendation urges us to do all that we can to revitalize public diplomacy as the means to assure a better world for all. I concur, since we need at this critical juncture a truly global and multi-national effort in our own collective best interest./51/
Notes
Speech before the Council on the International Exchange of Scholars, Washington, D.C., 1983.[Back]
Fred M. Hayward and Laura M. Siaya, Public Experience, Attitudes, and Knowledge (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 2001), esp. 36.[Back]
Adrian Arroyo, "The USA Patriot Act and the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act: Negatively Impacting Academic Institutions by Deterring Foreign Students from Studying in the United States," Transnational Lawyer (Spring 2003): 411-37, http://www.iienetwork.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-10000/1710/folder/10528/LawReview.doc.[Back]
George J. Borjas, "Rethinking Foreign Students: A Question of the National Interest," National Review, 17 June 2002, http://www.nationalreview.com/issue/borjas061702.asp.[Back]
Arroya, "USA Patriot Act," 423-24, on fraud and student visas, at http://www.iienetwork.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-10000/1710/folder/10528/LawReview.doc.[Back]
Ibid, 419-26; and House Government Reform Committee Hearing, "Creating Secure Borders and Open Doors: A Review of DHS-State Collaboration on U.S. Visa Policy," 9 September 2004, http://reform.house.gov/GovReform/Hearings/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=1305.[Back]
Terry Hartle, "Foreign Students and Scholars: Do Not Pass Go," The Presidency 7.2 (Spring 2004): 14-6; and "Bill Addressing Visas Mantis System Introduced in House," 19 May 2004, http://www.acenet.edu/hena/readArticle.cfm?articleID=748.[Back]
Ibid.[Back]
Institute for International Education, "Open Doors," http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/file-depot/0-10000000/0-10000/3390/folder/28491/Economic+Impact+Data+USA.pdf; and "Foreign Student and Total U.S. Enrollment," http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=25182; and Hartle, "Foreign Students," 14-6.[Back]
Todd M. Davis, Atlas of Student Mobility (New York: Institute of International Education, 2003), passim, noted at http://www.opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=36567.[Back]
Institute for International Education, "Open Doors," http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/file-depot/0-10000000/0-10000/3390/folder/28491/Economic+Impact+Data+USA.pdf; and http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=25182.[Back]
"Foreign Enrollments Grow in the U.S., but So Does Competition From Other Nations," The Chronicle of Higher Education, 16 Nov. 2001, A45-A48; and "Foreign-Student Enrollment Stagnates," The Chronicle of Higher Education, 7 Nov. 2003, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=36997.[Back]
Geoff Brumfiel, "US Loses Allure in Foreign Students' Eyes," Nature (6 Nov. 2003), http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=37067; and Arroya, "USA Patriot Act," passim, http://www.iienetwork.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-10000/1710/folder/10528/LawReview.doc.[Back]
Polly Curtis, "Fall in U.S. Overseas Student Market," Education Guardian (4 Nov. 2003), http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=37080; and Michael Dobbs, "Foreign Enrollment Levels Off at U.S. Schools," Washington Post, 3 Nov. 2003, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=36988.[Back]
Burton Bollag, "Australia Sees Strong Gains in Enrollment of Foreign Students," Chronicle of Higher Education, 9 March 2004, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=43551.[Back]
Jessica E. Vascellaro, "US Security Said to Hurt Foreign Students: Educators Seek Easing of 9/11 Crackdown," Boston Globe, 3 Aug. 2004, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=47547.[Back]
Hartle, "Foreign Scholars," 14-6.[Back]
"Statement and Recommendations on Visa Problems Harming America's Scientific, Economic, and Security Interests," To the Departments of State and Homeland Security, Washington, D.C., May 2004, http://www.acenet.edu/washington/international/Visa_state_05_2004.pdf.[Back]
Ibid.[Back]
Ibid.[Back]
Ibid.[Back]
USA Today, 13 Nov. 2001, 14A.[Back]
"Washington Window: Looking Visa Holders in the Eye," Michael Geruso, Mechanical Engineering 129.9 (Sept. 2004): 26, and further discussion infra.[Back]
Arroya, "USA Patriot Act," passim, http://www.iienetwork.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-10000/1710/folder/10528/LawReview.doc.[Back]
Fazia Akhtar, "Foreign Students Are Feeling Less Welcomed," The New York Times, 7 Apr. 2002, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=29500.[Back]
Mark Baker, "Crackdown Overrode Liberty: Security Chief," The Age (10 March 2004), Singapore dateline, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=43552; and "Editorial: Keeping Foreign Scholars at Bay," San Francisco Chronicle, 4 July 2004, http://opendoors.iienetwrok.org/?p=47293.[Back]
Jessica E. Vascellaro, "US Security Said to Hurt Foreign Students: Educators Seek Easing of 9/11 Crackdown," Boston Globe, 3 Aug. 2004, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=47547.[Back]
Dibya Sarkar, "DHS Beams Over SEVIS," Federal Computer Week, 27 August 2004, http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2004/0823/web-sevis-08-27-04.asp.[Back]
Jessica E. Vascellaro, "US Security Said to Hurt Foreign Students: Educators Seek Easing of 9/11 Crackdown," Boston Globe, 3 Aug. 2004, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=47547.[Back]
"Statement and Recommendations on Visa Problems Harming America's Scientific, Economic, and Security Interests," Addressed to the Departments of State and Homeland Security, Washington, D.C., May 2004, http://www.acenet.edu/washington/international/Visa_state_05_2004.pdf.[Back]
Jessica E. Vascellaro, "US Security Said to Hurt Foreign Students: Educators Seek Easing of 9/11 Crackdown," Boston Globe, 3 Aug. 2004, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=47547.[Back]
Mark Baker, "Crackdown Overrode Liberty: Security Chief," The Age (10 March 2004), Singapore dateline, http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=43552.[Back]
"Editorial: Keeping Foreign Scholars at Bay," San Francisco Chronicle, 4 July 2004, http://opendoors.iienetwrok.org/?p=47293.[Back]
"SEVIS Officials Beef Up Support for International Students and Scholars This Summer," Higher Education & National Affairs, 28 July 2004, http://www.acenet.edu/hena/readArticle.cfm?articleID=913.[Back]
David Ward, letter to Representative Henry Hyde, 17 August 2004, http://www.acenet.edu/hena/readArticle.cfm?ArticleID=1021.[Back]
Ibid.[Back]
"MONDAY BUZZ: Chronicle Story Reveals Possible Security Clearance Extension for Certain International Students and Scholars," Higher Education & National Affairs, 30 August 2004, http://www.acenet.edu/hena/readArticle.cfm?articleID=1032; "DHS relaxes visa policy on foreign students and scientists," Issues in Science and Technology 21.1 (Fall 2004): 19-20.[Back]
"Creating Secure Borders and Open Doors: A Review of DHS-State Collaboration on U.S. Visa Policy," House Government Reform Committee, 9 September 2004, http://reform.house.gov/GovReform/Hearings/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=1305.[Back]
"Addressing the New Reality of Current Visa Policy on International Students and Researchers," Hearing before the Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, 6 Oct. 2004, http://foreign.senate.gov/hearings/2004/hrg041006a.html.[Back]
For massive amounts of information on this aspect of the problem, see http://www.investigationresources.com/22/homeland-security-technology.html.[Back]
Beijing (AFP), 7 January 2005, 3:49 a.m. ET.[Back]
Donald Kennedy, "Scientific Exchange: Storm Rising," Science 301.5632 (July 2003): 1p, 1c; and Adrienne Froelich, "US Visa Delays: Keeping Scientists from Where They Want to Be?" Bioscience 54.4 (Apr. 2004): 296.[Back]
Geruso, "Washington Window," 26.[Back]
Ibid.[Back]
"Open Doors 2004: International Students in the U.S.," http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=50137; and "WEDNESDAY BUZZ: Decline in International Student Enrollment Raises Concern at Campuses Throughout the Country ," Higher Education & National Affairs, 10 November 2004, http://www.acenet.edu/hena/readArticle.cfm?articleID=1135.[Back]
"Visa Problems Diminish While International Graduate Student Enrollment Declines, New Survey Says," Higher Education & National Affairs, 10 November 2004, http://www.acenet.edu/hena/read/Article.cfm?articleID=1134.[Back]
Samuel P. Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations?" http://www.coloradocollege.edu/dept/PS/Finley/PS5425/reading/Huntington1.html; and Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996), passim.[Back]
Jane Knight and Hans De Wit, Internationalization of Higher Education in Asia Pacific Countries (Amsterdam: European Association for International Education, 1997), esp. 6, and passim.[Back]
The author extends appreciation to Sebastian Derry, Fine Arts Librarian/Media Resources Coordinator, Maureen and Mike Mansfield Library, The University of Montana, for specialized search assistance on the use of new technology in response to the visa challenge.[Back]
[The Montana Professor 15.2, Spring 2005 <http://mtprof.msun.edu>]