This is the most serious sanction that can be levelled against a licensed sponsor. Revocation of the sponsor licence means that Bloomsbury, formerly the London School of Business and Management, immediately loses the ability to sponsor international students under the UK’s Student Route.

This means that it can no longer issue Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS). Any CAS already issued also now becomes invalid, and any pending visa applications based on a Bloomsbury CAS will be refused. The Institute will also be removed from the Register of Student Sponsors.

The revocation of the Bloomsbury Institute’s sponsor licence on 5 August 2026 follows the suspension of its licence on 9 June 2026, from which point it was forced to also suspend recruitment of international students.

The Institute’s licence was in the balance this year because Bloomsbury had not maintained compliance with the Basic Compliance Assessment (BCA) requirements. As the Home Office explains: “The Basic Compliance Assessment is an annual check that all sponsors must pass, measuring visa refusal rates, course enrolment and completion.”

Those BCA thresholds tightened this year, but Bloomsbury was assessed against the earlier benchmarks, which required that all sponsors maintain a visa refusal rate of less than 10%, an enrolment rate of at least 90%, and a course completion rate of at least 85%.

“Student sponsors must meet the standards required to retain their licence,” said the Home Office. “Failure to meet these standards represents a serious breach of its duties as an international student sponsor, and as a result, [Bloomsbury’s] licence was revoked.”

Effective 1 June 2026, the BCA thresholds were further strengthened such that visa refusal rates must be maintained below 5%; the course enrolment rate must be at least 95%; and the course completion rate must be at least 85%. Perhaps unnecessarily, the Home Office notes as well that, “The Bloomsbury Institute would also have failed to meet the new, stricter standards.”

A largely international student body

For 2024/25, the most recent available reporting year, HESA data indicates that the Bloomsbury Institute enrolled a total of 1,035 students. More than 800 of those, or nearly 80%, were international students, with the lion’s share (93%) coming from Pakistan.

The revocation of the sponsor license necessarily places the study programmes of those students, and even the future of the institution, in question. The Home Office says that its priority now is to “minimise disruption for international students already enrolled” at Bloomsbury.

To that end, the Institute “will be permitted to continue teaching its current sponsored students for a short period,” the term of which is not specified. Students who cannot complete their studies within that window will be supported to transfer to another institution.

Needless to say, those provisions are an important feature of the Home Office announcement. The headline is that a UK institution has had its sponsor licence revoked. But of course, behind that headline, are the many affected staff and students who now must deal with the uncertainty that accompanies this sanction against their institution.

For additional background, please see:

• “Narrowing bands of compliance: How the UK’s new RAG system will impact international student recruitment“
• “UK universities bracing for a further decline in international enrolments“
• “England: Government ‘remains of the view’ that the International Student Levy should go ahead; implementation planned for August 2028“
• “UK: Sponsored study visa issuances down, rejection rates up, and more“

The post UK Home Office revokes Bloomsbury Institute’s student sponsor licence appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

• The 685,565 foreign students in UK higher education in 2024/25 accounted for nearly a quarter of the total system enrolment that year;
• The total net economic impact of the 2024/25 cohort alone was estimated at £40.4 billion across the duration of their studies;
• The net economic impact estimates equate to £100,000 per international student, or £1 million in net economic benefit for the UK economy for every ten students over the duration of their studies;
• Student commencements have declined by -12% from a peak in 2022/23, at a cost to the UK economy of £2.9 billion;
• The net economic impact from the 2024/25 cohort equates to an average of £580 per UK resident per year.

Those key findings come from a recently released report from London Economics. Published in July 2026, was commissioned by the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI), and Kaplan International Pathways.

This type of impact analysis is not new, but it is an important part of the evidence for international education’s impact on institutions and national economies. At a time when there is rising public concern around immigration levels in many key study destinations, this type of analysis is crucial to the discussion.

“Immigration is a top concern for voters in Britain, and it is important that the debate around immigration policy is informed by evidence,” says HEPI Director of Policy and Strategy Rose Stephenson. “This report shows that international students generate very substantial benefits for the UK economy and underpin the financial sustainability of many universities. If ministers decide to further reduce international student numbers, they should be clear that there will be economic costs as well as potential political benefits. At a time when the UK is seeking stronger economic growth, those trade-offs deserve an honest and open discussion.”

There is a growing awareness across the sector, however, that those national impact figures may not affect public opinion in a meaningful way. The benefits arising from international enrolments can be unevenly distributed from community to community, and the linkages between international students, the financial health of institutions, and broader issues of innovation and productivity in the economy are not often well understood.

Writing about a recent roundtable of higher education leaders, IDP Director of Partnerships Rachel MacSween and Woke Editor Debbie McVitty , “Attendees agreed that the abstract economic returns argument has hit a ceiling, and simply doesn’t resonate with the key groups of voters that regional policymakers need to keep onside. Others – particularly those from parties intrinsically hostile to immigration in general – may see the numbers but simply care more about other political pressures and perceived risks.”

Trying something different

This brings us to the most interesting aspect of the London Economics report this year. As the authors explain: “For the first time, the analysis uses newly available detailed data on students’ term-time addresses, providing a more accurate picture of the local economic contribution made by international students across the UK. The findings show that these benefits are spread across all nations and regions of the UK.”

The analysis moves beyond the national-level figures we summarised above to provide a more detailed view of how that impact is distributed throughout the UK, region by region and parliamentary constituency by constituency.

An accompanying allows users to examine the impacts for each parliamentary constituency in the UK, such as we see in the example below.

The report finds that the impact of foreign enrolments is distributed throughout the UK economy, with “constituencies from nine regions featuring in the top 20 in terms of total UK impact, and constituencies from all regions featuring in the top 40.”

Even as illustrated in the table of top ten constituencies above, the impact varies widely by community, with the net national average benefit, per resident, estimated at £580.

There is something powerful in this model, as it brings that national impact down to the level of the individual community and even individual resident. The report is transparent about how those benefits are distributed. But it also makes clear that there is an impact in every part of the economy arising from international students, and that that impact can be quantified for each household.

Stepping back from this particular example in the UK, there are important lessons in this for every study destination in terms of how that more granular analysis could be employed to demonstrate the concrete, local impacts of international students. The London Economics report feels like an important evolution in the evidence base we have, and one that could make a meaningful contribution to building the social license for international education at the community level and therefore meaningfully affecting policy-making as well.

For additional background, please see:

• “Australia poised to further restrict immigration in bid to drive down net migration figures“
• “The power of data and narrative in building public support for international students“
• “Under pressure: How global migration and economic trends are impacting international education“

The post New analysis measures the impact of international students for each UK community and resident appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The programme will draw €420 million from the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF), which support cohesion and equality across member states, and it will be administered by the Ministry of Education. Students will see their travel, living costs, food, and accommodation covered under the terms of the scholarship.

Minister for Education and Merit Giuseppe Valditara and Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni announced the initiative together at a conference called “.” Details about timing will be released in the coming months.

Most scholarship students will go for two-week periods for language studies or immersion in a foreign high school environment, but in some cases, longer durations will be possible. While away, students may participate in a range of academic and social activities, including visits to companies and other workplaces.

Speaking at the conference, Prime Minister Meloni urged the audience to consider the new initiative as more than an opportunity to learn another language:

“Living and studying in another country, even if only for a few weeks or months, means learning to deal with new situations, becoming more independent, and engaging with people who have different customs, ideas and cultures from your own. It therefore means expanding your minds and your ability to understand others. It means building self-confidence, learning to cope and broadening your horizons. Furthermore, for us it means enriching our community, because when the young people participating in this project come back, they will bring back much more than just better knowledge of and fluency in a foreign language. They will bring back new ideas, new friendships, greater self-confidence and a broader view of the world, all of which certainly represents an asset for them, but it will also be valuable for their friends, their families, their classmates and the whole of Italy.”

The scholarships will be awarded based on merit but also using the ISEE (equivalent economic situation indicator) to ensure that students from all backgrounds can participate regardless of income. Prime Minister Meloni spoke to the importance of language learning for removing barriers across class:

“Today, we live in an increasingly interconnected world. Universities, employers, research institutions, and companies are looking more and more for people who are able to navigate international contexts, and speaking another language, particularly having a good knowledge of English, is very important. However, it is even more important to be able to use that language in real life, and you can’t do that by simply learning a language from textbooks; you can only do that by managing to experience that language, immersed in the context in which it is spoken.

This is why we decided to invest in this initiative, above all because we believe our talented young people deserve the same opportunities as all their peers in Europe, for example. We believe that, in this day and age, young people’s talent cannot and must not be limited by a language barrier.”

The significance of this new mobility programme arises in part from the fact that Italy is already a major EU sending market for language studies, and it is, for example, a top market for English-language training providers in the UK, Ireland, and Malta.

To be more specific: Italy was the second-largest sending market for Irish ELT schools in 2025, accounting for 14% of student weeks delivered that year. It was the leading source market for UK ELT in 2025 as well, where Italian students booked just over 14% of all English-language learning weeks. And in Malta, Italy was again the second-largest sending market for 2025 with 12% of student weeks for the year.

For its part, English UK was quick to recognise the importance of the new €420-million scholarship programme and signalled to its members that it is already “working with the Department for Business & Trade and the British Embassy Rome to present a unified UK offer.”

For additional background, please see:

• “Italy rises as a study destination but struggles to retain foreign graduates”
• “Malta: Non-EU students keeping ELT weeks stable in the face of falling enrolment from Europe”
• “UK’s ELT sector reports declining enrolments through first quarter of 2026”
• “Ireland’s ELT sector reports modest growth in student numbers but weeks are down amid ‘real and consequential’ challenges”

The post Italy announces its “biggest language training and international mobility programme ever” appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The scrutiny is coming from more than one direction. Admissions offices are tightening their own checks on the authenticity and consistency of English-language evidence, in response to well-documented fraud vulnerabilities and inconsistent evidence standards across the sector.

At the same time, UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) now runs an annual Basic Compliance Assessment (BCA) for every institution holding a student sponsor licence, scoring them on visa refusal rates, enrolment rates, and course completion rates. Falling short on any one of those metrics can strip an institution of the right to self-assess a student’s English ability altogether, forcing a shift to mandatory secure testing across the board. Further, a new Agent Quality Framework is being extended so institutions can no longer treat agent-sourced evidence as somebody else’s responsibility. In short: the English-language evidence an agent helps assemble now feeds directly into a compliance metric that determines whether an institution can keep recruiting internationally at all.

That’s the backdrop and it’s also the opportunity. Agents who understand this chain of evidence, and can speak to it confidently, become more valuable partners to the institutions they work with, and better advisers to the students who trust them.

Academic readiness is the cornerstone of student success

Academic readiness is the strongest predictor of first-year performance, progression, retention, and completion. When students arrive without sufficient English proficiency, the impact is immediate: difficulty engaging in seminars and group work, falling behind in reading-intensive modules, rising stress, and a higher likelihood of assessment failure or withdrawal.

Meeting a minimum entry requirement isn’t the same as being ready to perform at it. A student who scrapes the headline overall score with a weak reading or writing subscore is often the one who struggles most in postgraduate, research-intensive programmes, where extended reading and academic writing carry most of the assessment weight.

In practice, that means: looking with the student beyond the single overall band to the subscore breakdown; recommending a margin above the minimum particularly in speaking and writing wherever a programme is writing- or seminar-heavy; and encouraging an early retake where subscores are borderline, rather than waiting until an offer is at risk. Agents who steer students toward the cheapest or fastest route to a passing score to obtain a visa rather than genuine readiness, aren’t doing anyone any favours: those are the students most likely to need extra support, delay progression, or withdraw outcomes now visible to institutions through the BCA’s own completion-rate metric.

The growing scrutiny of MOI

Medium of Instruction (MOI) evidence is under sustained scrutiny, and institutions increasingly treat it as a case-by-case judgement rather than a standard alternative to testing. Practice varies widely: some institutions require MOI letters to be corroborated by transcripts, curriculum details, or interview; others have withdrawn MOI acceptance for certain markets or programmes altogether, following BCA findings that linked MOI-based admissions to weaker completion or higher visa refusal rates.

For agents, that means treating an MOI recommendation as a considered call each time, not a default and being able to talk a student through the reasoning.

Three questions are worth working through together: First, does the receiving institution’s current policy actually support MOI for this student’s country, subject, and level of study? Policies here shift often, so this is worth checking fresh for each application rather than assumed from a previous case. Second, was the student’s prior study substantively delivered and assessed in English not just described as such on paper in a way that plausibly matches the demands of postgraduate or research-intensive study in the UK? Third, is an MOI-based application more likely to trigger additional verification, delay an offer, or be queried at visa stage for this particular market?

Where any of these three is uncertain, recommending secure testing alongside or instead of MOI is the safer, more defensible choice for the student’s academic readiness, and for the agent’s credibility with the institutions they work with.

Secure testing as a strategic enabler

Secure English language testing is worth repositioning, in conversations with students, as more than an entry hurdle. It supports identity validation, demonstrates genuine academic readiness, reduces institutional exposure, and gives students greater confidence going into study. Viewing testing as an unnecessary cost is short-sighted: the real cost is poor preparation academic, financial, and emotional. Framing testing as an investment in a student’s own success, rather than a bureaucratic step, tends to land better with students and parents alike and it happens to be true.

BCA reviews are raising the bar

The Basic Compliance Assessment is an annual Home Office review of how well a sponsoring institution is managing its international student population against three metrics: visa refusal rates, enrolment rates, and course completion rates. Institutions rated amber or red face restrictions including, in some cases, losing the right to self-assess English-language ability, which pushes their entire cohort toward mandatory secure testing. As English-language evidence sits upstream of all three metrics a student who was never really ready for the course is more likely to be refused a visa, to under-enrol, or to withdraw, institutions are having to demonstrate, more rigorously than before, how that evidence was gathered, verified, and judged sufficient at the point of offer, both to their own compliance teams and to UKVI itself.

Agent-sourced evidence is now squarely inside that chain of justification. As regulatory attention on institutions increases, so does attention on the English-language guidance and evidence that agents provide upstream of the admissions decision. Weak guidance creates a vulnerability that traces all the way back to an agent’s file; strong guidance protects the student, the institution’s compliance record, and the agent’s own standing with institutional partners.

Defining practice that works for students and agents

A forward-looking standard is emerging, and it rewards informed, student-centred practice, which includes:

• Recommending the right test for the destination and programme, factoring in university acceptance, subject demands, security requirements, and timing
• Where subscores are borderline, especially speaking and writing for postgraduate, research-intensive courses, advising testing to a margin above the stated minimum, and supporting an early retake rather than a late one
• Treating MOI as a case-by-case judgement using the three questions above, not a standard substitute for testing
• Communicating secure testing to students as an investment in their own progression, not a hurdle to clear
• Keeping documentation authentic, consistent, and aligned with each institution’s current expectations, since these shift
• Engaging admissions teams early to confirm current requirements and reduce delays

These aren’t extra burdens layered on top of an agent’s advising role they’re the parts of that role now most visible to institutions, most consequential for students, and most likely to distinguish the agents that institutions want to keep working with.

The role of agents in a changing landscape

Agents are often a student’s first trusted adviser. Their guidance shapes not just admission outcomes but a student’s confidence, performance, and ultimately their success once they arrive. Getting the English-language piece right is one of the clearest, most immediate ways an agent can add value to that relationship and one of the clearest ways to build a track record that institutions notice.

How ELSAA supports the sector

ELSAA is the English Language Standard Advisory Authority [link to https://englishlsa.com]. Our mission is to strengthen standards, improve transparency, and support risk-aware decision-making across the English-language ecosystem. We work with agents and institutions to:

• Interpret emerging regulatory and compliance expectations
• Identify appropriate English-language pathways
• Reduce institutional and agent risk
• Improve student progression and retention
• Build trusted, future-ready recruitment practices

Agents who build this expertise put students at the centre of every decision and in doing so, strengthen their own standing with the institutions they work with. Strong English-language guidance isn’t an extra step; it’s the advantage.

The English Language Standard Advisory Authority (ELSAA) is an independent organisation dedicated to improving transparency, understanding, and informed decision-making in high-stakes English language testing. Through independent test reviews, comparative analysis, training, and advisory services, ELSAA supports universities, professional bodies, employers, and policymakers in evaluating and using English language assessments with confidence.

For additional background, please see:

• “Study highlights gaps between English standards set by test developers and those used by universities and professional bodies“
• “Narrowing bands of compliance: How the UK’s new RAG system will impact international student recruitment“

The post Why sharper English-language guidance is becoming an agent’s sharpest tool for student success appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

Now, on 13 July 2026, the Department of Education (DfE) has released its response to the 91 submissions filed during a technical consultation that had been open from November 2025 through February 2026.

Despite considerable opposition from institutions, peak bodies, and other stakeholders, the government has affirmed that . It provides the following details:

• The levy will apply to all institutions registered in the Office for Students’ registry of English higher education providers;
• The levy will apply only to international students – that is, to students who do not qualify for home fee status;
• Each provider will receive an exemption for the first 220 students in a reporting year, for which no levy fees will be charged;
• Student counts will be based on an existing reporting mechanism: the Jisc Student Record for higher education institutions and, for further education providers of higher education courses, the Individualised Learner Record (ILR).

The Department of Education explains that the following student groups will be exempt from the levy:

• Students who withdraw within two weeks of a course start;
• Those enrolled in transnational education (TNE) programmes outside of the UK;
• Students enrolled only in non-credit courses;
• Post-doctoral students.

The Department indicates, however, that the levy will be charged for students who withdraw from their programme of studies after the initial two-week grace period.

The 13 July DfE response also sets out the timeline for implementation, indicating that the government will run two trial cycles during the 2026/27 and 2027/28 academic years. No fees will be charged during those trials, but the levy calculations will be reported back to providers each year. The levy will come into effect on 1 August 2028 and apply to international students from that point forward.

The government will next table legislation to formally establish the levy as part of the Finance Bill which will be introduced after the government brings in its next budget this fall.

Those opposed

As late as last week, sector leaders had urged the government to reconsider. Speaking at a Higher Education Policy Institute forum on 9 July, Durham University Vice-Chancellor Karen O’Brien said that the levy was “absolute insanity” and urged the government to take it “off the table”.

Earlier this month, Universities UK Chief Executive Vivienne Stern said that the levy “puts us in the bizarre situation of the government effectively putting a tariff on a UK export.”

Many of the submissions filed during the November–February consultation projected that the levy would undermine international student recruitment to the UK, and, by extension, the financial stability of the sector.

In its submission, for example, Universities UK says: “Recent data shows that international student recruitment has fallen materially and remains highly volatile. HESA student record data for 2024/25 shows total international enrolments down 6.1% year-on-year, driven primarily by a 12.5% decline in postgraduate taught enrolments, which have historically underpinned institutional financial sustainability. Home Office visa data indicates that while visa issuances have stabilised in aggregate, volumes remain 13.5% below 2023 levels and market composition continues to shift sharply. These data show that international recruitment is no longer a stable or steadily growing revenue base, but one characterised by sharp year-on-year swings, market concentration and policy sensitivity, increasing the risk that a per-student levy amplifies volatility rather than delivering predictable funding.”

Maike Halterbeck, a partner at London Economics, offered this comment on the release this month of a new Higher Education Policy Institute study on :

“This new report provides updated evidence on the substantial economic value that international students bring to the UK economy – value that is spread widely across the country. However, it also demonstrates what the economy stands to lose if and when this major export sector starts to decline. The number of international first-year students coming to the UK has already decreased by around 54,500 (12%) since 2022/23, and is expected to continue to decline as key new policy changes – including the new international student fee levy – come into force.”

Finally, Vanessa Wilson, CEO of University Alliance, said:

“We are very disappointed that the government has decided to press ahead with the International Student Levy despite the serious concerns raised by universities across the sector. As we have consistently argued, international students make an enormous contribution to our economy, communities and campuses, and this levy risks undermining the UK’s attractiveness at a time of intense global competition.

“It remains deeply counterintuitive to tax institutions that are already delivering opportunity, skills, and social mobility at scale, only to recycle that funding elsewhere in the system. We continue to believe international students are being undervalued in policymaking, and we urge the government to use the implementation period to reconsider the levy’s impact on institutional sustainability and the UK’s long-term international competitiveness.”

For additional background, please see:

• “UK confirms international fee levy of £925 per student starting August 2028“
• “UK confirms levy on international student fees as new analysis argues that government is ‘drastically underestimating’ the impact of the move“
• “UK sets out new immigration strategy, will reduce Graduate Route work term to 18 months“

The post England: Government “remains of the view” that the International Student Levy should go ahead; implementation planned for August 2028 appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.

The findings are the result of that 1,455 ISC schools completed, 604 of which hold a license to sponsor international students.

While no direct correlation can be made, a policy change that went into effect in January 2025 is likely a contributor the decline. Before that time, private school education and boarding fees had been exempted from the value-added tax (VAT). But since January 2025, those fees – including advance payments on them – have been taxed at the standard rate of 20%. This makes private K-12 education much more expensive for families.

The ISC divides “non-UK students” into two categories: one where students do not have parents living with them in the UK (about 40%) and the other where students live with a least one parent in the UK (about 60%). The first group declined by -11.0% in 2026 to 22,940, while the second was down -5.5% to 34,270.

The ISC notes:

“In particular, the introduction of VAT on independent school fees and increased difficulty in obtaining student visas are likely to have had an impact on recruitment in 2025 and 2026. While it is not possible to attribute changes in pupil numbers to specific causes, these factors are likely to have contributed to the recent downward trend.”

Including domestic students, the number of students across all ISC schools is down -3.5% in 2026 vs 2025.

China weakens as source country

Mainland China and Hong Kong account for the lion’s share of international K-12 students living without their parents to attend school in the UK, with the vast majority in boarding arrangements. But the number of Mainland Chinese students fell to 5,580 in 2026 (-11% year-over-year), the first dip in two years. The number of Hongkongers fell even more significantly (see chart below).

The largest volumes of international students living in the UK without their parents in 2026 come from:

• Mainland China: 5,580
• Hong Kong: 3,620
• Germany: 1,960
• Spain: 1,110
• Japan: 690

ISC schools overseas

There are approximately 162 ISC-affiliated schools overseas. Asia and the Middle East are the main locations, and Mainland China, the UAE, and Thailand collectively account for 48.5% of campuses and 57% of pupils.

For additional background, please see:

• “British independent K-12 schools expanding overseas campuses”
• “A big-picture view of international student mobility for secondary studies“
• “Education agents the primary channel for K-12 recruitment in China“

The post Independent K-12 schools in the UK hosting fewer international students this year 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.

We reported last month on another important factor affecting UK student visa issuance: withdrawals. Indeed, there have been growing indications in recent months that the number of withdrawn visa applications has been rising quickly.

There appear to be a couple of factors at work. On the one hand, students may choose to withdraw in the face of lengthy processing delays or out of concern that they would have a visa refusal on their record. On the other hand, institutions may withdraw a student’s Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) if they feel the visa application could be rejected.

This is all happening of course in the context of the heightened compliance requirements under the UK’s Basic Compliance Assessment (BCA) framework and its accompanying Red-Amber-Green (RAG) banding system. As of 1 June 2026, the RAG system obliges UK institutions to maintain a visa refusal rate of less than 5%. Universities whose refusal rates reach above that benchmark can be subject to sanctions or even to the suspension of their license to sponsor international students.

The stakes, to say the least, are high. And that underscores the growing role that withdrawn visa applications appear to be playing this year. Home Office data on the clearance outcomes for student visa applicants highlights that, for first time in decades, there were more student visa applications withdrawn in Q1 2026 than there were applications refused.

Writing in newsletter, Spencer Withrington explains:

“Why withdraw rather than be refused? Delays and incentives, on both sides. Processing ran badly behind on the January intake, hitting applicants from South Asia and parts of Africa hardest, with some students still waiting weeks after submitting their biometrics. A student facing a likely refusal, or a start date they will now miss, is often better off withdrawing than carrying a refusal on their record. Universities have the same incentive, and frequently withdraw the [CAS] themselves, because a withdrawn application does not count against their compliance rating and a refused one does.”

This has not been widely understood among students or stakeholders, but a university may withdraw a CAS at their discretion, if, for example, the student has missed important deadlines or has not paid required tuition deposits or filed any outstanding documents. An institution might also move to withdraw a CAS if they discover inconsistencies in the student’s documents or if concerns otherwise arise in internal credibility checks conducted by the university.

The CAS is withdrawn when the issuing institution cancels it with UKVI (UK Visas and Immigration). Once it has been cancelled, the CAS can no longer be used to support a student’s visa application. The university must notify UKVI in such cases; the student may or may not be notified.

A related analysis from points out that the surge in visa application withdrawals in Q1 was especially concentrated among students from South Asia, and from Pakistan in particular: “Prospective students from Pakistan shouldered 43% of all withdrawals. Additionally, only eight student populations withdrew over 50 applications,” including those indicated in the following chart.

“Pakistani students were also among the most affected by the UK government’s processing delays for the January 2026 intake,” adds ApplyBoard. “These delays were largely driven by attempts to clear an application backlog and run additional checks on students from populations considered more likely to stay in the UK beyond their allotted time or claim asylum. While the government encouraged UK institutions to extend their last day of acceptance for students still waiting on a visa decision, some institutions reported that as many as 50% of their students’ visa decisions were outstanding as admission deadlines neared.”

In a situation like that, where every visa refusal counts and where a few too many can tip an institution into an amber or red RAG band, it is easy to understand why both institutions and students would choose to trigger a withdrawal.

This is a significant development, says Mr Withrington, because “it changes recruitment behaviour directly. A CAS withdrawn before the visa decision drops out of the refusal-rate sum entirely. For a provider sitting near the 5% line, the difference between a refused application and a withdrawn one is the difference between a metric that bites and one that does not. That is an uncomfortable incentive the rules have now codified.”

For additional background, please see:

• “UK: Sponsored study visa issuances down, rejection rates up, and more“
• “Narrowing bands of compliance: How the UK’s new RAG system will impact international student recruitment“
• “What is happening to student mobility flows between the Global South and Global North?“

The post UK: Visa application withdrawals surpass refusals in Q1 2026 appeared first on 91ɬ��Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.