Today the session starts somewhere else. The student still arrives with a list. But the first question now usually comes from the parent, and it is rarely about a university at all. Will this degree pay back the years and the money? Will it still be relevant when my child graduates? Will artificial intelligence make it obsolete before the loan is repaid?

I have heard versions of these three questions in counselling rooms in Chandigarh, Manila, Lagos, and Bogota. They are asked quietly, sometimes almost apologetically, but they are serious questions, and they shape family decisions worth billions of dollars every year. They have also quietly changed what good student advising looks like.

Why the counselling room matters

It is easy to underestimate how much of international education still runs through a single conversation between a family and an adviser. According to the American International Recruitment Council, 44% of international students rely on recruitment agents to help them decide what and where to study. And the reason they are in that room has changed too. Career development is now the number one motivator for studying abroad, cited by 67% of students in IDP’s Emerging Futures research. Students are not just buying an experience any more. They are buying a working future.

That places advisers at a point of real leverage. The counselling conversation is where family hopes meet market reality, often for the first time. When expectations shift, advisers feel it before institutions do, and long before policy makers do. Which is why what we are hearing in those rooms now deserves attention.

From prestige to proof

When we ran the fieldwork for the this year, covering 4,812 agents, students, institution leaders and employers across 25 countries, one pattern came through more strongly than any other: families have stopped asking for prestige and started asking for proof.

In South Asia, 89% of recruitment agents told us their top request from institutions is now skill-mapped programme documentation, not brochures. In North America, agents named post-study visa clarity and programme-level outcome data as the top two concerns students bring to them, at 78% and 71%. Across regions, parents increasingly ask employment questions before they ask admission questions.

The shift makes sense once you see the counselling room from the family’s side. A ranking describes an institution. But a family is not buying an institution. They are buying one specific degree, and they want to know what happens to the people who finish it. Institution-level averages do not answer that. Programme-level outcomes do, and families have worked this out faster than much of the sector has.

The safety net that isn’t there

For a long time, advising had a comfortable answer to the anxiety behind these questions: choose a good university, and if the job market changes, you can always reskill later. Our research suggests that answer no longer holds.

Across OECD countries, only 8% of adults take part in formal, accredited learning in a given year, and the open online courses that were supposed to close the gap complete at a median rate of 12.6%. Meanwhile, 53% of the technical skills a graduate learns in year one are judged obsolete within three years. Skills are going out of date roughly six times faster than the system replaces them. Reskilling after work exists, but as a safety net for an entire generation, it is thin. Families who press on curriculum quality before enrolment, rather than trusting the system to patch things later, are being rational.

What is more encouraging is what employers told us they actually hire on. In our survey, 73% of employers said they hire recent international graduates primarily for durable skills, things like communication, judgment, ethical behaviour, and the ability to work across cultures, rather than for a specific technical stack. Technical tools change. These capabilities compound. For an adviser, that is a genuinely useful message to carry into a conversation with an anxious parent: the degree that protects your child is not the one with the most fashionable specialisation, it is the one that builds the skills that survive the tools.

Will AI make it obsolete?

We put that exact fear under a microscope in this year’s Barometer. Comparing internationally-mobile graduates against domestically-educated peers in the same fields, employers placed 71% of the internationally-mobile group in AI-augmented roles, work where AI expands what one person can do rather than replacing them, against 54% for domestic graduates. Only 6% of the internationally-mobile group sat in roles at material AI-displacement risk. For domestic graduates in the same fields, that figure was 14%, over twice as high. PwC’s analysis of nearly a billion job postings found the same pattern at market scale: workers with AI skills now command a 56% wage premium globally, more than double what it was a year earlier.

None of this makes the advantage automatic. It is built on the durable skills, the cross-cultural fluency and the sequenced curriculum design that produced it in the first place. But it does mean an adviser can answer a parent’s hardest question with a number instead of a reassurance.

What good advising looks like now

None of this requires advisers to become labour economists. In our work with counselling teams, the practices that are working are simple ones.

The first is to ask institutions for programme-level employment data, in writing, rather than settling for institution-level claims. Institutions that have this data increasingly share it, and the act of asking signals what families now expect.

The second is to talk to parents about durable skills directly. Parents understand instinctively that communication, adaptability and integrity matter at work. Naming them as the core of a degree’s value, with evidence, answers the AI question far better than reassurance does.

The third is to screen recommended programmes for work-integrated learning and international cohorts. Internships, placements and genuinely mixed classrooms are where durable skills form, and they show up later in employment outcomes. Arizona State University’s National Work-Integrated Learning Accelerator now generates 1.8 million experiential-learning hours per student cohort. In the Netherlands, international graduates who complete structured cross-cultural programmes actually out-earn their domestic peers, 48% of them clear €55,000 a year against 44% of domestic graduates in the same bracket. Programmes built this way are not hard to find once an adviser starts asking for them by name.

The fourth is simply to keep the post-study visa picture current for every destination, because in several markets it has become the first question, not the last.

Advising as trust infrastructure

There is one more finding from our study worth sitting with. Among UK-bound students we surveyed, 64% said they would still choose the UK despite recent visa changes, provided programme-level employment data was transparent. Read that carefully: even in a market facing policy headwinds, transparency holds demand. Families are not asking for perfect conditions. They are asking to see the evidence and decide for themselves.

That, to me, is the real story of how counselling is changing. The adviser’s role is shifting from gatekeeper of options to interpreter of evidence. It is less glamorous than selling dreams, and considerably more valuable. Students get decisions they can defend at the kitchen table. Institutions that publish honest outcomes get rewarded for it. And the sector gets something it badly needs, which is trust built one family conversation at a time.

The questions parents ask in counselling rooms are harder than they were five years ago. That is not a problem to be managed. It is the clearest sign we have that families are taking the decision seriously, and the sector should answer them in kind.

– Dr Priya Ranganathan is research director at MSM Unify, where she leads the company’s global research programme, including the annual MSM Unify Global Skills Barometer, a study of agents, students, institution leaders and employers across 25 countries. MSM Unify is a global education platform supporting institutions, students, and channel partners across international education markets. MSM Unify helps institutions strengthen student recruitment, enrolment management, and education delivery through technology, services, and global market expertise.

For additional background, please see:

• Readers who want to explore contemporary counselling issues more closely should consider , newly released by 91ɬ��Academy in partnership with Successful Graduate
• “Global agent survey reveals international students’ top concerns are visa uncertainty and affordability“
• “What students want: The top decision factors for study abroad“

The post The questions families are actually asking: Inside the student advising conversation in 2026 appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

• Anxious, including about AI’s impact on their career;
• Considering a wider range of study abroad options, and carefully evaluating risk and reward.

The survey for the report was completed by 870 education agents across 64 countries in May 2026.

What are the issues?

The last time international students felt this stressed about their education was arguably during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study plans were disrupted; isolation was the norm; and worries about personal health and family members’ health was intense.

Students’ concerns are different today. Many of them stem from an uncertainty about how to make wise decisions about what to study and where to study.

Surveyed agents said that students are most concerned about (1) the risk of sudden changes to visa rules and (2) cost of living pressures. Agents have to advise students about whether a Big Four destination (i.e., Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US) has changed its immigration settings yet again.

The continued narrowing of visa and immigration rights – with new rules often announced without warning – provides ample evidence that there is more risk to choosing these destinations than in the past.

Significant proportions of agents also said that students are worried about safety and security, exchange rate volatility, risk of travel disruption, increased cost of air travel, breakdown in country-to-country relations, and rising fuel and energy costs.

Students need more support

More than half of agents said that compared with 12 months ago, students are more likely to face financial strain (54%), need more academic support (78%), and need more mental and social support (82%). All of these percentages increased markedly since the previous survey in 2025.

A growing body of US, UK, and global shows that large proportions of youth believe that AI is a threat to their job prospects. This is reinforced in the Navitas survey: 75% of agents said that students are concerned about the impact of AI on their careers.

Visa acceptance rates are deterring even the strongest students

In emerging markets, students are well aware that visa rejection rates are high in the Big Four. Agents said this awareness is reducing applications even from top students with a good chance of being approved (80%). Another 76% said that students with strong academic and financial profiles are more likely to choose alternative destinations with higher visa certainty.

Increased interest in alternative destinations, more questions about the value of study abroad

International students are reacting in a variety of ways to the more uncertain climate around study abroad and to affordability pressures:

• 82% of agents said applicants are applying to more destination countries than in the past;
• 85% said they are applying to more institutions within each destination country;
• 77% said they are increasingly applying to study in alternative destinations;
• 72% said they are more likely to have a back-up plan to study in their home country;
• And 68% said that they are more likely to give up on study abroad due to lack of affordability

Study at home is increasingly an option

Close to half of agents said that there is now a perception that universities or branch campuses in their country are providing an equal quality of education as institutions overseas. Among students who decide to stay home, affordability is by far the top reason (87%).

Destination trends

Perceptions of top anglophone destinations have stabilised for Australia, picked up for Canada, and are continuing to slide in the UK. New Zealand is by far outperforming the Big Four in terms of positive perceptions, while the US has the poorest image.

AI is not displacing agents

AI may be changing the nature of student–agent interactions, but it is not substituting for agents’ skills and human assistance. Students are consulting AI when researching study abroad and then going to agents to validate/interpret the information. Over 4 in 10 agents said that students are relying on them more despite AI, and 3 in 10 said there has been no change.

In the foreword to the survey report, Scott Jones, group CEO of Navitas, contextualised the findings and the importance of hearing from agents:

“Once again, the results offer compelling data that both confirms the behaviours we are seeing, and sheds light on how the international education landscape continues to evolve in the current economic and geopolitical environment.”

There is clearly a new competitive advantage for destinations and institutions that can access it: certainty. Communicating stable visa policies, strong student supports, programme strengths, and in-study and post-study work opportunities can go a long way toward emphasising this advantage.

For additional background, please see:

• “91ɬ��Podcast: Student flows are shifting. Are agencies following suit?”
• “Visa delays and policy uncertainty projected to reduce foreign enrolment in the US by more than 100,000 students this fall”

The post Global agent survey reveals international students’ top concerns are visa uncertainty and affordability appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The ranking includes 150 cities, all of which must have a 250K+ population and at least a couple of universities in the QS World University Rankings.

Seoul’s #1 position is the second consecutive year it has achieved this ranking. Tokyo is next, and its ranking was driven especially by “employer activity” – a key metric given students’ increasing concerns about finding a good job after completing their programmes. London rounds out the top 3 – and 15 other UK cities also make the list, the most of any country.

Asia-Pacific on the move

Several Asian cities improved their position at the top of the table this year: Singapore (#11 in 2027,+4 over 2026), Beijing (#12, +19), Taipei (#14), Kuala Lumpur (#15, +8), and Kyoto (+2). Two Australian cities also improved their positions: Melbourne (#4) and Sydney (joint #5 with Munich).

As the following chart shows, Asia-Pacific’s ascendence over the past couple of years is in contrast to slower or negative growth trends in many cities in the Americas and Europe.

There were notable declines in Canadian cities including Montreal (#20, -2), Vancouver (joint #33, -4), and Ottawa (joint #84, -4). For those cities, as well as several American cities (Boston, San Francisco, and Washington), affordability was a major drag on overall ranking.

Some Middle Eastern cities ascended dramatically: Riyadh (#76, +21) and Abu Dhabi (#72, +19). Dubai, Sharjah, and Doha also made the 2027 ranking. We can hope that Middle Eastern tensions abate soon for those cities to regain the momentum they have recently achieved.

For additional background, please see:

• “Supply and demand for international higher education increasingly aligned in Asia”

The post Annual student city ranking underlines continued ascent of Asian destinations appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

This dream is one that is often referenced by universities promoting their programmes abroad, and it tends to be presented as universally possible. But the truth is that only some students are able to progress along that pathway.

The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) has produced a report called “” The analysis shows that institutions in major destinations may be:

• Overpromising a route that is attainable only by a segment of their foreign graduates;
• Not providing the level of language and career supports needed by many graduates to have a good chance of working in-country after their studies and/or gaining permanent residency.

The report also reveals that government policies – and policy volatility – can present unforeseen challenges for international graduates hoping to find jobs that match their hard-won skills.

The OECD observes: “There appear to be tensions between recruitment messaging, which suggests future employment and possible residence, and the realities of post‑graduation opportunities.”

This can lead to false confidence among international students, who, “not always having all relevant information, have at times, an unrealistic expectation of the ease with which they can find a job, secure visa/permit and obtain permanent residency or even citizenship.”

Retention is an issue

Across the six countries analysed, the highest five-year retention rates were in Canada and Germany (52% each). This dipped significantly to about a third in Australia and France (34% and 33%, respectively) and to 19% in the Netherlands. In the UK, only 7% of international graduates were still in the country on a work permit or other immigration permission after five years.

These low retention rates contrast with international students’ high hopes to remain in the country to work after completing their studies: over 70% in Canada, 73% in the Netherlands, 64% in Germany, and 83% in France want to stay on to work.

What barriers are international graduates facing?

The reality that many international graduates face is that employers in their host country find it too cumbersome or expensive to hire them. This leaves many students at a pronounced disadvantage compared with domestic peers.

For example, in Australia, found that for about 20% of international graduates who reported taking a job which they were overqualified, the main reason was that they did not have permanent residency. Many Australian employers see temporary visas as unstable (in the sense that these visas have an expiry date) and administratively burdensome. It is not worth it for them to invest time and money in hiring a foreigner if they can find a domestic graduate with the right skills for the position.

As a result, many graduates go into “visa limbo” where they accept poorly paid jobs unrelated to their skill-set and education. They often apply for another work visa to remain in the country, but they end up becoming “permanently temporary” rather than permanent residents.

The report referenced surveys showing that in three of the six countries analysed, most international students say they feel inadequately prepared to secure a job after graduation and/or to find a job after their studies. For example:

• In the Netherlands, 59% faced difficulty in finding a job after graduation;
• In Germany, only 35% felt “rather” or “well” supported by their institution in planning their career;
• In the UK, 53% thought career support and placements at their institution , followed by internships and experiential learning.

The OECD notes:

“There seems to be a shared nervousness about the transition to employment among both international and domestic students. However, in the case of international graduates, the transition to employment is also tied with the possibility to remain in the country.”

The list of barriers can also include low language proficiency in destinations where English is not the dominant language:

“During their studies, international students are surrounded by English, in their institution and [because] they tend to socialise with other internationals. However, job opportunities for English speakers … tend to be very limited and concentrated in a few specific industries. Most companies in France, Germany, or the Netherlands will still expect at least working-level proficiency of the local language.”

This is particularly relevant given the high number of English-taught programmes (ETPs) in France, Germany, and the Netherlands – many of which do not require competency in these countries’ official languages. These are major attractions for non-EU students especially, and non-EU students are also the segment most interested in remaining in their host country after completing their studies. The issue here is that many of those ETP-enrolled students will not have gained sufficient proficiency in the official language (French, German, or Dutch) to compete successfully for jobs.

Recommendations

The OECD recommends that institutions adopt “a more realistic approach that clearly communicates that available opportunities, jobs and permanent residency permits, might be scarce. That stay after graduation is not guaranteed, and that there is a significant uncertainty about whether a particular international student will be able to settle in the country long term.”

Specific recommendations for policy makers and institutions include:

• Helping international students to understand the labour market, before and during their studies, to guide them in what topics to focus on and on choices regarding their education.



• Integrating labour-market literacy into programmes, supported by career centres. 



• Allowing students to engage with employers and  gain work experience during their studies. For example, “both professional networks and relevant work experience have been identified as among the most highly rated factors in finding employment by international graduates in the Netherlands.” This recommendation means “higher education institutions must establish and maintain strong relations with relevant employers.”



• Informing international students to start looking for possible employment early, to better inform them about various employment opportunities: “International students tend to be aware of the big and well-known companies but are not always aware of small- and medium-sized businesses and other employers.”

• Developing alumni networks that allow international graduates to turn to former students for career support and guidance.

For additional background, please see:

• “Germany’s foreign enrolment continued to grow in the 2025/25 academic year”
• “Many foreign students want to stay in Germany but need more help with the transition to life after study”
• “Netherlands reports first-ever decrease in foreign enrolment for 2025/26”
• “Canada struggling to attract and retain global talent”
• “UK to implement reduced Graduate Route from January 2027”

The post OECD: International students may be underinformed about job prospects in top destinations appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

It is no coincidence that the Key Five are all emerging countries in the Global South, where large proportions of students are open to emigrating, temporarily or permanently, because of limited local opportunities. This makes immigration officials tend to question whether study visa applicants are genuine students – i.e., interested in quality education, a high-skilled job, and remaining compliant with visa conditions – or individuals with little intent to study and great intent to migrate in any way they can. Unfortunately, many genuine students from the Global South are disadvantaged in their applications because of where they are from.

The impact of the visa rejection trend for students from emerging economies in Asia and Africa could be enormous across the global international education landscape – and beyond. Already, it is spurring fewer visa grants, reduced recruiting in high-risk markets, and more withdrawals from students eager to avoid a rejection on their student profile. Not surprisingly, commencements are trending down in leading study destinations, and this will pressure overall enrolments in the years ahead.

In this article, we will look at Key Five origin countries with regards to:

• Their importance to overall enrolments across the Big Four;
• Recent study visa rejection rates;
• Commencement trends (i.e., the volume of new students provided a study visa allowing them to enrol in a Big Four education institution).

Contribution to overall international student numbers

According to the most recent available enrolment data, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Nigeria, and Pakistan compose anywhere from 30% to 40%+ of the entire international student body in Big Four destinations.

Visa rejection rates for the Key Five

Having looked at the huge presence of Key Five students in the total international student populations of the Big Four, we’ll turn to recent visa refusal trends (where official data are available).

Bangladesh: Nearly three-quarters (73%) of Bangladeshi applicants for US F-1 visas were turned away in 2025. Bangladeshi students have in recent years been very likely to receive a visa for Australia (about a 5% rejection rate in 2024/25), but in February 2026, more than half (51%) of offshore applicants from Bangladesh were refused.

India: Indian students, who represent either the #1 or #2 source market across the Big Four, are now quite likely to be refused a study visa in those destinations. Rejection rates were 61% in the US (2025), 80% in Canada (Q2 2025), and 60% in Australia (February 2026). While only 7.5% were denied a sponsored study visa in the UK in Q4 2025–Q1 2026, this this was up from less than 4% in winter 2024/25.

Nepal: More than 8 in 10 (81%) Nepali applicants were rejected for a US F-1 visa in 2025, and in February 2026, the Australian study visa rejection rate for Nepal soared to 65%. Interestingly, Nepali students were more likely to be approved for a UK sponsored study visa in winter 2025/26 than in winter 2024/25, bucking the general trend for emerging markets (see chart below).

Nigeria: Since December 2025, Nigerians have been included in an expanded travel ban announced by the US administration, along with dozens of other countries (mostly in Africa and Asia). In the UK, sponsored study rejections for Nigerian students used to be rare (less than 5%), but in winter 2025/26, 20% of Nigerian applicants were turned away. In Canada, between 70–80% were refused a study permit in in 2025.

Pakistan: More than 70% of Pakistanis were refused an F-1 visa in the US in 2026, and more than 6 in 10 offshore applicants from Pakistan were denied an Australian study visa in February 2026. Like Nigerians, Pakistani students applying for a sponsored study visa in the UK saw their rejection rate spike massively in winter 2025/26: increasing from 5.6% to 41% year-over-year.

These rejection rates for Key Five countries represent an absolutely huge number of potential students turned away.

What is happening to commencements?

Key Five commencements (new student entrants) are falling across the Big Four, with less than a handful of exceptions.
 
A striking example is F-1 visa issuances in the US in July/August of 2024 compared with July/August 2025. The percentages in the table below are based on our analysis of data from the US Department of State. It bears mentioning that in September of 2025 (not shown in the table), F-1 commencements fell further for Bangladesh (-69%), Nepal (-96%), Nigeria (-33%), and Pakistan (-9%) compared with September 2024.

In the UK, the following chart from HESA shows the dramatic drop-off in Indian (turquoise) and Nigerian (navy blue) commencements between 2023/24 and 2024/25: -13% and -33%, respectively. Over the span of two years (2022/23 to 2024/25), the declines were even more serious: -33% for India (126,580 to 94,955) and -132% for Nigeria (53,790 to 23,160).

In Canada, new student arrivals (from all nationalities) fell from 208,750 in 2024 to 115,120 in 2025. In January to April 2026 compared with the same period in 2025, arrivals were down -73% to about 200,000. There is no publicly available government information for specific markets, but the Times of India reports that between January and August 2025, Canada issued just 9,955 new study permits to Indian students.

In Australia, overall commencements fell by about -15% between 2024 and 2025, but this decline was concentrated in sectors other than higher education (the number of new international students in Australian universities edged up slightly in that time period). There was more of a mixed bag of commencement trends for the Key Five than in Canada, the UK, and US. Between 2024 and 2025, Indian and Pakistani commencements fell by -3.5% and -33%, respectively, while Nepal was up +33.5% and Bangladesh +33%.

The implications will stretch beyond international education

Our Key Five markets – Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Nigeria, and Pakistan – can be viewed as roughly representative of what is happening to mobility influences and flows between the Global South and Big Four destinations. They serve to show how immigration policies (and/or policy effects) in the Big Four are affecting demand from top non-EU markets. These policies, especially if they stretch on in time, could lead to:

• An intensification of existing challenges for the operations of hundreds of universities, colleges, and schools across the Big Four. Those institutions are often highly reliant on international student tuition amid declining domestic enrolments and/or public funding. Chinese commencements (which, for decades, were an important source of overall growth) are falling, and emerging markets in Asia and Africa have helped to mitigate the impact.

• Alternative destinations gaining a greater share of the world’s internationally mobile students (this is already happening – see From the Big Four to the Big Fourteen for background).



• A decline in the economic contribution of international education in the Big Four.



• A weakening of innovation and productivity in Big Four economies. India, in particular, contributes a large volume of STEM students and workers to Western nations.



• An erosion of the soft power of the Big Four in the Global South.

Methodological note

Data analyses are based on statistics from:

• The Australian
• (IRCC)
• The UK’s (HESA)
• The in the US

For additional information, please see:

• “UK: International student numbers fall for second year, especially in postgraduate programmes“
• “UK: Sponsored study visa issuances down, rejection rates up, and more“
• “There are more international students in the US than ever in 2025, but commencements are declining“
• “Visa rejections climb in the US for international students from key markets including India“
• “New international student permit approvals for Canada fell below COVID levels in 2025“
• “Australia: Multiple data indicators signal further declines ahead for international student numbers“
• “Australia: Latest enrolment data challenges the government’s assertion of stability for international education this year“

The post What is happening to student mobility flows between the Global South and Global North?  appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The report is based on survey findings from just over 67,000 prospective international students from 150 countries. The survey data was collected between October 2025 and April 2026, and Keystone has combined it, where appropriate, with actual search data from its student-facing course search websites.

The first thing that jumps out from the data is the difference between student interest (the destinations students are most interested in) and student intent (the destination where they actually go on to enrol).

For example, Keystone explains, “While the USA was our most-searched destination (19%), fewer students in our survey are selecting it as their intended study destination, a trend that has persisted for the second year running.”

In other words, there is currently a significant gap between students’ initial interest in the Big Four study destinations and their actual enrolment. While students may want to enrol in a preferred destination, they then weigh practical considerations such as their chance of obtaining a study visa and also compare the relative safety and affordability of various options.

“Basically, the Big Four has a huge amount of interest and high appeal,” adds Dr Bennett. “But when we move on to actual intent, we move on to practical factors. That’s where the gap is.”

The Keystone data shows that student interest continues to fragment across a wider field of study destinations, especially those in Europe and Asia. What’s more, more students are now wanting to choose a destination before progressing to considering programmes or institutions.

Intended programme of study remains the most important factor (40%) for students making decisions about study abroad, but it has lost some ground since 2025. By contrast, country choice has risen from a sample-wide average of 20% in 2025 to 28% in 2026 – an average pulled up by certain regional trends. Keystone explains, “For South Asian respondents specifically, country (35%) now outranks programme (31%). This is the only regional audience where we see this happen, and the one most exposed to recent visa and policy changes. This suggests that students are ensuring their chosen destinations are accessible to them before they can consider institutions or courses.”

As for their biggest concerns, cost and eligibility were the top worries for students in this year’s survey, echoing responses from last year. But “political uncertainty” is the fastest-rising concern in 2026 (rated third by students after only cost and eligibility), which points to a significant level of anxiety attached to study abroad decision-making. Students are well-aware of visa barriers and rejection rates, and they are naturally worried that government policies affecting their study/work plans could change before or during their programme.

“Confidence is declining,” says Keystone. “Students worry less about their ability to succeed than their opportunity to do so.”

How do students rate destinations in that larger set?

“The Big 4 still compete on appeal, especially when considering academic reputation and subject offering,” says Keystone. “But they don’t have a commanding lead. And they’re falling behind on the practical considerations that make studying abroad possible for many.”

The chart below shows relative ratings given by students, for various decision factors, across the Big Four, selected destinations in Europe (Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, France), and a sample of Asian destinations (Japan, China, South Korea).

Dr Bennett points out that what this data is telling us is that “Prospective students don’t think the gap between destinations is as big as we perhaps do.”

Use versus trust

The survey findings also paint an interesting picture of the sources and channels that students use in their search for information about study abroad. As we see in the chart below, AI use, for example, is comparable to the percentage that say they look for information on university websites. But the trust students extend to those institutional websites considerably outstrips their confidence in the information they get via AIs.

Keystone offers this summary of the findings in this area: “The takeaway here is reassuring for institutions: even as AI and social media reshape how students search, they haven’t reshaped who students believe. University websites remain the anchor of credibility, the one channel audiences approach with conviction rather than uncertainty.”

“Generative and broad-search tools may dominate the discovery phase, but trust still flows to curated, human-crafted sources. The implication is clear: investing in owned channels and curated partnerships isn’t just defensible, it’s where decisions actually get made.”

For additional background, please see:

• “New IDP research shows link between visa uncertainty and the perceived ROI of study abroad“
• “UNESCO confirms growing trend of intra-regional student mobility“
• “UK: Sponsored study visa issuances down, rejection rates up, and more“
• “From the Big Four to the Big Fourteen“
• “What students want: The top decision factors for study abroad“

The post Survey of 67,000 prospective students highlights gaps between interest and enrolment for study abroad appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The report draws on the most recent data available from 146 countries, and it covers 10 interrelated themes. This article focuses on the international student mobility findings and analysis.

More mobile students than ever

As of 2024, there were 7.3 million students studying abroad, a more-than-tripling over the past two decades. This growth is expected to continue for the next several years at least.

While seven countries host almost half of the world’s international students (see chart below), emerging destinations are increasingly popular. UNESCO names several of these:

• Argentina
• China
• Egypt
• Japan
• Malaysia
• South Korea
• ��ü���쾱���
• The United Arab Emirates (UAE)

The report highlights ��ü���쾱��� and UAE in particular:

“In ��ü���쾱��� alone, the number of students surged within 10 years by more than six-fold, from 38,590 in 2012 to 244,027 in 2022 (the last year of data availability). In the United Arab Emirates, the figure grew five-fold to reach 237,034 in 2023, compared to 54,162 in 2012 (no data is available from 2013 to 2016).”

We can also point to recent Monitor data on some of these other emerging destinations:

• China
• Egypt
• Japan
• South Korea

Regional mobility has grown substantially

When we look at the increasingly popular emerging destinations highlighted by UNESCO, part of the story for their ascendence is the growing tendency of mobile students to stay within their own region for study. For example, UNESCO notes: “In East Asia, the number of international students travelling to study within the region is growing at a faster rate than those travelling outside the region.”

This is a major competitive issue for institutions in the West because of the sheer volume of mobile students from Asia. In 2023, nearly half of all outbound students came from Asia, with East Asia and the Pacific accounting for 26% and South Asia and West Asia responsible for another 21%. Those students used to gravitate mainly to the West, but this historical flow is weakening. Asian students are increasingly choosing destinations such as China, Japan, Malaysia, and South Korea.

UNESCO uses the example of China to underline the fact that several Asian destinations are now both major sources and hosts of international students:

“China plays a dual and dominant role in this [intraregional] trend. Not only is it the world’s primary source of outbound international students, but it also serves as the main host country within East Asia and the Pacific.”

In other parts of the world, too, the intra-regional movement is strong:

• Latin America and the Caribbean: “The proportion of students choosing to study in other countries within the region nearly doubled between 2000 and 2022, climbing from 24% to 43% [with Argentina the main recipient].”

• Middle East: “In most reporting countries, the majority of international students come from within the region. This is particularly pronounced in Jordan, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Mauritania, and Algeria [where at least half of all inbound students are from Arab States].”

South-South mobility

Another crucial part of the evolution of global student mobility is the “South-South” phenomenon, where students travel between Global South countries. The trend is often fuelled by ambition and investment on the part of Global South countries aiming to be education hubs. UNESCO elaborates:

“Emergent examples include Egypt, whose scholarship programmes and package of initiatives under the Study in Egypt programme make it a top choice for students from Africa and the Arab States, and Malaysia, where low costs and expanding degree options attract students from East Asia and the Pacific. In India, students from sub-Saharan Africa are the second largest population group behind those from South and West Asia, which may be explained by the English-language programmes offered and cultural initiatives on the part of the Indian government, such as the Study in India programme which seeks to motivate students primarily from the Global South to undertake higher education in the country.”

The South-South trend is especially important considering that of the 10 countries responsible for almost half (45%) of all outbound mobility (see chart below), more than half are in the Global South (seven are in Asia and one is in Africa).

Towards better access to higher education?

The rest of the UNESCO report explains that while participation in higher education has never been higher, there are still pronounced differences in access and mobility, with poor students from less developed nations at a disadvantage:

“Despite growth expectations, the proportion of higher education students benefiting from academic mobility remains low, just under 3%, underscoring the elitist nature of mobility as still only a privileged few individuals gain access to higher education opportunities abroad.”

To this point, perhaps the wider availability of compelling, more affordable options outside the West is an opportunity to expand academic mobility to more than just that 3%.

For additional background, please see:

• “From the Big Four to the Big Fourteen”
• “Which countries will contribute the most to global student mobility in 2030?”
• “Research shows link between study abroad and poverty alleviation”
• “Beyond the Big Four: How demand for study abroad is shifting to destinations in Asia and Europe”

The post UNESCO confirms growing trend of intra-regional student mobility appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The results of the ninth Emerging Futures survey suggest major implications for governments and institutions alike. They show a distinct shift in students’ approach to choosing where in the world to study.

IDP notes: “While employability, post-study work opportunities, and affordability remain core drivers, EF9 shows students are now screening options more proactively, often ruling out destinations sooner due to visa costs, policy uncertainty, or perceived barriers to entry.”

The survey was conducted between early-March and late-April of 2026 among over 5,800 prospective and current students in 118 countries.

Demand remains high for Big Four destinations

The survey found that Australia (21%), the UK (19%), and the US and Canada (14%) remain the preferred countries in which to study. A main reason for this is that students believe there will be a high return-on-investment (ROI) from studying in those countries, especially with regards to career prospects.

Visa barriers impact perceived ROI

Despite their appeal, Big Four destinations are currently associated with uncertain, unfair, or increasingly restrictive immigration policies. Students are aware that:

• The likelihood of obtaining a visa for the US and Canada is lower than in the past (especially for students from some regions).
• Work and immigration rights are narrowing for international graduates in the US.
• ���ܲ��ٰ���������’s non-refundable visa application fee and financial requirements are the most expensive across all destinations.
• The UK government will reduce its popular post-study work stream, the Graduate Route, to 18 months for undergraduate and master’s students in 2027, and there are for further tightening of work and immigration rights.

Developments such as these are jeopardising the perceived ROI of studying in a Big Four country. If a student is doubtful they can pay for or obtain a visa, and if they see evidence of post-study work rights shrinking, they are naturally more likely to think twice about their decisions. The survey results show that this uncertainty is manifesting in several ways:

• Earlier influence: Students are exploring visa settings before or alongside their research on traditional “pull” factors such as programme availability, costs of study/living, rankings, reputation, etc. More than 4 in 10 said that the financial requirements of a visa application, the cost of applying for a visa, and the post-study work opportunities attached to a visa exert a strong influence on their choice of study destination.

IDP says: “Visa concerns are occurring earlier as prospects weigh the true cost to arrive [and] the likelihood of visa approval and employment pathways, [which points] to a strong focus on the value of their investment of an overseas degree.”

• Dramatic effect: Visa issues are a major reason that some students decide to give up their goal of studying abroad. Of students who said they have decided not to study abroad, more than a quarter said it was because the cost of a student visa is too high (27%) or because securing a visa is too difficult (26%).

• A wider net: More than three-quarters of students (78%) are now weighing multiple countries before committing, up from 66% in October 2024.

Visa settings as deterrent

IDP notes: “[The survey findings] reflect the cumulative impact of increasingly restrictive visa policies, and act as a warning sign to all destinations that sustained policy tightening can rapidly shift student preferences.”

Simon Emmett, Chief Partner Officer of IDP Education, said:

“Students are behaving more like savvy consumers, comparing destinations based on the return on their investment. If students can’t quickly understand whether they’re likely to qualify, what they’ll need to show and what it will cost up front, they will eliminate destinations sooner or delay plans altogether ….

“International students are planning the biggest chapter of their lives while navigating major hurdles. Governments of countries that want to attract the highest quality students should help them understand visa decisions, not add uncertainty that drives good students elsewhere.”

Mr Emmett called for collaboration across the sector and emphasised the collective need to “lift confidence in international education through greater transparency and accountability, better data on outcomes and visa trends, and enhanced compliance and early warning signals that protect students and support sustainable growth.”

Implications for institutions

The IDP research underlines the importance of strong communications, website content, and social media posts clarifying visa information for international students. If partnering with agents, institutions will also need to make sure they are constantly equipping agents with the most current, accurate information about immigration rules. In an era where students’ confidence in traditional study abroad destinations is under pressure, there is no room for error in these communications.

What’s more, there is a chance to build stronger relationships with students by stepping in to provide trusted information when it may be difficult to find otherwise.

For additional background, please see:

• “A common challenge: Strengthening student confidence in the ROI of study abroad”
• “What students want: The top decision factors for study abroad”

The post New IDP research shows link between visa uncertainty and the perceived ROI of study abroad appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.