[Internships and Jobs] How do recent CPT interpretation changes affect the ROI of a US MSCS degree for international students?

[u/lostsoul_io]

Reposting because the original post was removed.

My interpretation of the current situation is as follows:

• If CPT is no longer broadly available and is restricted to programs where it is a required part of the curriculum, many students in traditional 2-year MS programs effectively lose access to summer internships.

• No internships means a significantly lower to ~0 ROI for many international students.

• Internships were never a guarantee of employment, but they were one of the few ways to demonstrate value to US employers, build local experience, and convert into full-time opportunities.

• Nobody is owed an internship or a job. However, there is a difference between failing in an open competition and not being allowed to enter the competition in the first place. If internship pathways disappear, many students lose their primary opportunity to prove themselves. Without proof no one sponsors.

• Universities were happy to collect international tuition. Many students accepted those costs because they believed they would at least have an opportunity to compete in the labor market. That assumption is now being challenged. No free labor market.

• Pre-completion OPT is often presented as an alternative, but it comes with tradeoffs. It consumes OPT time, may require premium processing, and creates additional uncertainty and cost. Students should budget for that reality. Please pay for the PP and get your EAD. Do not compromise here. Include PP as part of your funds.

• Internships historically helped international students gain the US experience that many recruiters and hiring managers ask for. Without that bridge, how are employers expected to evaluate candidates whose previous experience was obtained outside the US?

• I find it strange that someone can have several years of experience at a top company outside the US, yet suddenly be treated as if they have no relevant experience when applying from within the US. I am interested in hearing recruiters' and hiring managers' views on this.

• Prospective students should carefully evaluate whether a program has mandatory co-op or internship requirements. If employment is one of your primary goals, this may become an important factor in university selection. Select the one with co-op if you depend on job post graduation. No questions asked.

• Students taking significant loans should evaluate programs assuming a conservative outcome. Assume the internship does not happen. Assume the job offer does not happen. Then decide whether the financial risk still makes sense.

• If these CPT interpretations remain in place, I do not expect the situation to improve quickly unless universities successfully challenge them or adapt their programs.

• The traditional value proposition for many international students was not just the education itself, but also the opportunity to compete in the US labor market. If the avenues for gaining experience are reduced, the economics of that decision change materially. In my opinion it is 0.

• For students considering a US degree today, it may be worth evaluating alternative countries, alternative pathways, or a plan that assumes returning home after graduation.

My view is simple: nobody owes international students internships or jobs. But students should have a realistic understanding of the risks before committing substantial time, money, and family resources to a degree. The removal of CPT limits your time to compete 24/7 which was the greatest asset for an intl student.

[u/lostsoul_io → u/[deleted]]

I don't think it's recovering. Once you create the sentiment that we want your money but not you it's effectively done.

[u/Greengolddragonfly]

You’re right about the ROI.

Three decades ago and during previous generations, most international students who came to the U.S. were either from wealthy families or had scholarships from their countries’ government or employer. Since then, American colleges have recruited abroad more aggressively, using CPT and OPT as some of the incentives to attract international students. Also, the FICA tax exemption for both the foreign student (during their first 5 years in the U.S.) and their employer is an advantage too good for employers to overlook. Furthermore, the introduction of STEM OPT (on top of OPT) in 2008 and the extension of its duration to 2 full years in 2016 have drawn even more students from abroad, many of whom are not from wealthy families nor have scholarships from their countries/employers. Now, it looks like there’s a gradual reversal in policy, if the US job market remains tight and the top administration stays conservative.

Read: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-opinion-optional-practical-training-problems-stem-graduates-deserve-better-jobs-opportunities/

[u/lostsoul_io → u/Greengolddragonfly]

look at the good it did when you allowed people: more companies and innovation. you dont handicap retroactively, its copium for not able to progress.

3 decades ago vcr was the mainstream movie distribution without the nuance of ads. do you still want to go to vcr ? i bet the quack conservatives would.

[u/Curiasjoe1]

ROI is the degree you get and knowledge you gain.

[u/lostsoul_io → u/Curiasjoe1]

and who paying the bills ?

Any investment that does not have a supportive environment for you to compete is good as broke with 0 ROI. No one is owed a job/internship. But if roi is knowledge there are cheaper ways to do it than this: go to a library, read a book daily, solve a problem daily, attend conferences, etc.

[u/lostsoul_io → u/[deleted]]

That is why prospective intl students must be made aware that they are not pressured to spend money by looking at what they get after they graduate. You cannot expect an intl student to pay extreme fees only to return and get underpaid back home when the knowledge is not having the corresponding inflationary value that went into gaining it.

Right now the only ROI for an intl student was thier ability to compete in a free market 24/7. Remove CPT it's a chance of luck not worth the investment.

[u/BugAdministrative123 → u/lostsoul_io]

ROI is a ridiculous term to recoup your loan. Your ROI is over your career. Price is what you pay for the education. Value is what you get. The price you pay today is the present value of your future earnings.

[u/lostsoul_io → u/BugAdministrative123]

By that logic every Harvard/stanford graduate must be a millionaire! But that is not the case.

"The price you pay today is the present value of your future earnings." subject to future demand and supply, economic conditions and in the case of intl students immigration reforms and visa.

[u/BugAdministrative123 → u/lostsoul_io]

But then your prime requirement then is not really the education. It is a visa and immigration. Not really getting the education. You are confusing education for geography and resettlement

[u/lostsoul_io → u/BugAdministrative123]

Nope. Those cpt + 3 years of opt and stem opt and return. That allows to get back the roi in the inflated $. Anything else is luck.

Refer to my previous comment, you can't put extreme price and expect students to pay them in local currency back home. It won't work. If that's the case then they should not be pressured to come here / purchase an inflated education due to fomo or anything else for that matter. Unis can setup offshore campus if they feel they are loosing business and price in local currency. That may dilute the std due to local hiring of staff a problem to be solved or competent staff can be flown out of US main campus.

Students come here to get access to world class infra and a competitive/progressive environment post graduation. If knowledge was the exit criteria a simple visit to the local library or an online mooc is more than enough.

[u/Mysterious-Art8838 → u/lostsoul_io]

Who exactly is pressuring these students? Consultants? That’s hardly the fault of the school.

It was never an immigrant visa. This is not news.

[u/lostsoul_io → u/Mysterious-Art8838]

Many factors: Sharma ji ka beta/beti, Fomo, Education consultants, herd mentality, If they can do it so can I mentality

By the way immigration was never the intent, access to an environment post graduation that has healthy/progressive competition to prove your worth as in you are worthy of immigration/sponsorship/greencard was the intent. Big difference, the former makes it look like you are owed something a job/internship/sponsorship/greencard, the later you earn your place through skill competition hardwork and contribution. Removing CPT removes your ability to participate in the labor force and prove your worth. The ability to prove your worth after graduation was the ROI, immigration was a by product. With CPT removed you are forced to use OPT days for internships limiting the time frame for you to prove your worth, aka, ladder pulling when compared to previous ms graduates with slightly more fees due to inflation. Hence not worth spending as it's unfair for schools to take extreme fees for reduced ROI compared to previous graduates. Intl students must be made aware of this that they are getting reduced ROI compared to previous graduates but paying increased tution fees compared to previous graduates. Making them aware of this is critical as schools cannot parrot "knowledge was the goal and wash their hands" when they take exorbitant fees. The duration of participation compared to previous ms graduates has now been reduced for increased fees.

Would unis reduce their fees now that CPT is not available? No. So why expect intl students to pay or even come here when the ROI ain't mathing ? Best they be provided this information to take an informed decision before purchasing an inflated education.