Not just Harvard: See where 1.2 million international students learn in the US
Not just Harvard: See where 1.2 million international students learn in the US
The Trump administration is targeting Harvard's exchange student program, attempting to revoke student visas for Chinese nationals, and initiating deportation proceedings for students who participate in pro-Palestinian protests. So we took a look at where the college exchange students in the United States are located. Here's what we found:
The latest data available from Immigration and Customs Enforcement is from 2023 — it gives details of people receiving an F-1 visa, which is the most common type for international students, scholars, and trainees. While private schools such as Harvard do receive large numbers of exchange students, so do major public universities.
How many international students are at U.S. colleges?
As many as 1.5 million international students were in the United States in 2023 using F-1 or M-1 visas, based on a count of records in a system managed by the Department of Homeland Security. Just under 1.4 million of those were seeking degrees in 2022, and there could be duplicates due to people seeking more than one degree at the same time.
A big portion of these international students were not enrolled that year, but instead participated in post-graduate training programs. For example, Columbia University wrote in its 2023 annual report that it had just under 14,000 enrolled international students, plus about 6,500 students in training programs, and about 3,000 scholars.
Of the universities granting the most F-1 visas, the top 500 had more than 1.2 million international students combined, according to USA TODAY's analysis. This is the type of visa required to enroll in a degree program, including associates degrees, bachelor's degrees, masters degrees, and doctorates. The vast majority are pursuing bachelor's and masters degrees, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Foreign nationals can also receive F-1 visas to work in their field of study for up to three years, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Which college has the most international students?
The college campus with the most international students that year was New York University, with nearly 25,000 F-1 visas issued at its main campus, and about 7,500 issued at its Brooklyn campus. Other campuses with high international populations were in other major cities — Northeastern University (Boston), Columbia University (New York), and the University of Southern California (Los Angeles).
Which public schools have the highest number of from exchange student visas?
Arizona State University had nearly 18,000 international students in 2023, the data shows, placing it fifth on the list. Other public universities with major international student populations were the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; the University of North Texas, and Purdue University in Indiana.
How many international students are at Harvard?
In 2023, Harvard did not rank in the top 20 of U.S. colleges for foreign students, according to the data. The university ranked No. 21 nationwide, and third in the Boston area, behind Northeastern University and Boston University. The school had about 9,700 F-1 visa students in 2023, according to the data.
The Trump administration on May 22 attempted to rescind Harvard's participation in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, which certifies schools to allow them to enroll international students, including F-1 visa holders. The administration eased up a week later and introduced a longer process to allow Harvard a process to argue it should be able to use the program.
How many international students have visas at my college? Search the list.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
13 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
US Revoking Chinese Student Visas Is a Matter of National Security, Not Brain Drain
Commentary As the Trump administration revokes visas for Chinese students, critics cry xenophobia, but evidence shows that the United States has been training and funding China's future military and tech dominance.
Fox News
21 minutes ago
- Fox News
Democrat-controlled budget office wrongly analyzed Trump's big bill, missed record savings, White House says
The White House is challenging the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's assessment that President Donald Trump's sweeping tax and spending package will raise the federal deficit by trillions of dollars throughout the next decade. The national debt, currently $36.2 trillion, tracks what the U.S. owes its creditors, while the national deficit measures how much the federal government's spending exceeds its revenues. So far, the federal government has spent more than $1 trillion more than it has collected this fiscal year, according to the Department of the Treasury. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) issued an analysis Wednesday predicting that the so-called "big, beautiful, bill" the House passed in May would increase the federal deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years. But according to the White House, the CBO's analysis is based on a faulty premise because it assumes that Republicans in Congress will fail to extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts. Rather, the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) forecasts that the tax and spending measures would independently reduce deficits by $1.4 trillion. Additionally, the White House argues that the measure, coupled with other initiatives like tariffs and other spending cuts, will lead to reducing the deficit by at least $6.6 trillion over 10 years. The "big, beautiful, bill" has faced criticism from figures including SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who labeled the measure an "abomination" and argued that the bill would increase the federal deficit. The measure now heads to the Senate, where lawmakers, including Sen. Rand Paul, R-K.Y., have voiced opposition to the legislation. Meanwhile, OMB Director Russell Vought told lawmakers on the House Appropriations Committee Wednesday that he believed the CBO's analysis was "fundamentally wrong." "It will lead to reduced deficits and debt of $1.4 trillion," Vought said. "It will reduce mandatory savings of $1.7 trillion. I don't think the way they construct their baseline, not only does it not give a fair shake to economic growth, but it fundamentally misreads the economic consequences of not extending the current tax relief." Failure to pass Trump's tax package would trigger a recession, according to Vought. "We'll have a recession," Vought told lawmakers. "The economic storm clouds will be very dark. I think we'll have a 60% tax increase on the American people." Meanwhile, the White House has accused the CBO of employing those who've contributed to Democratic campaigns, even though CBO Director Phillip Swagel served in former President George W. Bush's administration. "I don't think many people know this: There hasn't been a single staffer in the entire Congressional Budget Office that has contributed to a Republican since the year 2000," Leavitt told reporters Tuesday. "But guess what, there have been many staffers within the Congressional Budget Office who have contributed to Democratic candidates and politicians every single cycle since. So unfortunately, this is an institution in our country that has become partisan and political." The CBO director is appointed according to the recommendations of the House and Senate Budget Committees. Then-Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyoming, first recommended Swagel in 2019, and then Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, recommended Swagel again in 2023. The CBO did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital on OMB's analysis or claims from the White House about the office being full of staffers who've backed Democrats.
Politico
26 minutes ago
- Politico
The Ideological Schism Fueling the Trump-Musk Fight
Amid the fallout of the messy public feud between Doland Trump and Elon Musk, it is instructive to think back to Dec. 26, 2024. That day marked the start of another intra-GOP skirmish that nearly fractured the elite core of the MAGA coalition. The December brawl — which, like the latest one, unfolded primarily online — pitted two high-profile factions of the Trumpian right against one another over the issue of high-skilled immigration. The nationalist-populist right, led by MAGA strategist Steve Bannon, urged the incoming administration to end the H-1B visa program as part of a broader crackdown on immigration. The so-called tech right, led by Musk, wanted Trump to defend the program on the grounds that high-skilled immigration is integral to spurring economic growth and fueling 'American dynamism.' Ultimately, the tech right carried the day, with Trump intervening in the online spat to defend the H-1B program. After the feud, the two sides struck a tentative peace, and the contretemps quieted down as Trump reentered office. But the renewal of hostilities between Trump and Musk this week shows that the underlying ideological disagreement between the two factions was never really resolved. And despite all the current bluster about the 'big, beautiful' spending bill, the Epstein files, the ballooning national debt and Musk and Trump's overlarge egos, that divide still runs straight through the same issue that carved up the factions back in December: immigration. That may seem counterintuitive, given that the latest blow-up between Trump and Musk is ostensibly over the fiscal consequences of Trump's megabill — and specifically Musk's contention, supported by independent analyses but rejected by the Trump administration, that the bill would add significantly to the federal debt. But when you strip away all the salacious controversies swirling around the 'BBB,' the fight over the legislation ultimately boils down to the question of whether cracking down on immigration should stand alone as the Trump administration's guiding priority. In the eyes of the MAGA populists, the $155 billion that the BBB appropriates for immigration enforcement and Trump's mass deportation efforts more than justify its passage, whatever its fiscal shortcomings might be. As Stephen Miller, the populist right's go-to immigration hawk, recently put it, the bill includes 'the most significant border security and deportation effort in history' — a fact which 'alone makes this the most important legislation for the conservative project in the history of the nation.' That immigration is at the center of the administration's pitch for the bill should come as no surprise. Since 2016, the issue has been the ideological keystone around which Trump has built his protean and sometimes unwieldy coalition. During the 2024 campaign, Trump and his running mate, JD Vance, proposed solving practically every issue that was thrown their way — from the housing shortage to inflation to 'wokeness' — by tying it back to their promised immigration crackdown. Once in office, the president's first acts included claiming unprecedented emergency authority to carry out his plan for mass deportations. But the centrality of immigration created tension as Musk and his fellow travelers on the tech right began to enter MAGA fold in the leadup to the 2024 election. The tech right threw its weight behind Trump's proposed agenda on immigration, but it was never the group's top priority. Much more important for MAGA's tech faction was taming the federal deficit, which Musk and others moguls — notably Marc Andreessen and Peter Thiel — continue to view as an existential threat to the country's future. Their anxiety about the federal debt is rooted as much in their libertarianism as it is in their self-interest: every dollar the federal government spends servicing the federal debt is a dollar that it does not invest in the supposedly revolutionary technologies — backed by their firms — that they believe will lead to true 'American dynamism.' The misalignment between the priorities of the populist right and the tech right was clear from the start. It was apparent to Miller, who just this week raged that 'you will never live a day in your life where a libertarian cares as much about immigration and sovereignty as they do about the Congressional Budget Office.' It was also apparent to Vance — a perceptive observer of the coalitional dynamics within the MAGA movement — who dedicated an entire speech earlier this spring to arguing that immigration restriction and technological innovation could be mutually-reinforcing goals. 'This idea that tech-forward people and the populists are somehow inevitably going to come to a loggerhead is wrong,' said Vance, identifying himself as 'a proud member of both tribes.' Vance, it turns out, was wrong. To the contrary, the Trump-Musk schism is proof that MAGA loyalists can't have their cake and eat it too. They must choose — a maximalist immigration crackdown, or something else. The vengeance with which the populist right has turned on Musk since his spat with Trump is proof of what happens when a Trump ally — even the richest man on Planet Earth — chooses something else. That the fight really hinged on immigration became clear from the commentary coming out of the populist right. 'Debt is BAD. The migrant crisis is orders of magnitude worse,' posted the activist Charlie Kirk in the midst of the blowup. 'I've never seen debt hold an apartment building hostage,' added another conservative commentator, referring to reports of gang-occupied apartment buildings in Colorado. Then there was Bannon himself, who responded to the feud by suggesting — what else? — that Trump should deport Musk. The near-term consequences of the Trump-Musk schism remain to be seen. Whispers of peace talks between Trump and Musk flitted around Washington on Friday, and Trump has publicly downplayed the significance of the skirmish. At this point, no other big names on the tech right have followed Musk in breaking from Trump. And even if Musk were to actively challenge Trump's GOP — by funding primary challenges to Republican incumbents or even trying to start his own party, as he hinted at on Thursday — the consequences would likely be less dire for the future of the MAGA movement than he might think. Vance, the presumptive heir to the MAGA throne, has been building his own independent fundraising network since 2022, which could insulate him from any Musk-related financial aftershocks. Vance 2028 would certainly like to have access to Musk's campaign dollars, but it's not reliant on them. In the long run, though, the Trump-Musk feud will cement immigration as the critical litmus test for membership in Trump's GOP. The critical ideological fault line within the MAGA movement runs between people who view immigration restriction as a means to an end and those who see it as an end in themselves. The thrashing of Elon Musk is a warning to anyone who finds themselves on the wrong side of that divide.
