U.S. immigration reform for STEM doctorates.

Abstract

In their Policy Forum “Rethinking immigration policies for STEM doctorates” (22 January, p. [350][1]), M. Roach and J. Skrentny suggest that U.S. immigration reform should provide an easier path to permanent residency for those who work in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields and have Ph.D.s from U.S. universities. Before implementing the strategies they suggest, policy-makers should address such a program's unintended consequences. Granting permanent residency to STEM doctorates upon graduation may stimulate educational institutions to seek STEM designations for their traditional non-STEM programs, such as business, management, and social sciences, to attract more foreign applicants. To counteract declining international applications ([ 1 ][2]), some business schools have already been working with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to classify their MBA programs as STEM programs. This designation would make international students with F-1 visas eligible for an extended Optional Practical Training period ([ 2 ][3]), currently an extra benefit granted to STEM students only ([ 3 ][4]). Indiscriminately expanding the scale of STEM designations could conversely result in chaotic consequences in the immigration system. Each year, there are approximately 140,000 employment-based immigrant visas made available to qualified applicants around the world ([ 4 ][5]). Granting green cards to all STEM doctorates, including those graduating from the nontraditional STEM-designated programs such as business, management, and social science, could crowd out applicants who majored in science and engineering, potentially leading to unpredictable and long delays for all types of immigration applications. As a result, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services may have to implement new rules to score and prioritize the extremely high volume of applications. Permanent residency for STEM doctorates may also spur some universities to adopt new strategies. Of the 4034 U.S. postsecondary institutions in 2019, 736 were private for-profit institutions ([ 5 ][6]). These institutions may consider launching “accelerated” doctorate programs as a new revenue stream and lower the admission bar for students applying for these programs for the purposes of immigration. Proper oversight by accreditation agencies could ensure the continued integrity and rigor of the acceptance, supervision, and graduation of STEM doctoral students to prevent abuse of the system. Scientific, technological, and engineering advancement is a critical foundation of U.S. competitiveness, and the talented, qualified STEM doctorates studying and working in this country are key to maintaining an edge in these fields. Thus, the proposed policy should be designed to primarily benefit those who are contributing to the traditional STEM disciplines after completing rigorous training. 1. [↵][7]1. C. Cutter , “Elite M.B.A. programs report steep drop in applications,” Wall Street Journal (2019). 2. [↵][8]U.S. Department of Homeland Security, STEM OPT Extension Overview (2016); . 3. [↵][9]1. M. Cheng , “Why MBA programs want to be classified as STEM studies,” QUART at WORK (2020). 4. [↵][10]U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Permanent Workers (2020); [www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/permanent-workers][11]. 5. [↵][12]National Center for Education Statistics, “Number of degree-granting postsecondary institutions and enrollment in these institutions, by enrollment size, control, and classification of institution: Fall 2018” (2018); . [1]: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/371/6527/350 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #ref-3 [5]: #ref-4 [6]: #ref-5 [7]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [8]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [9]: #xref-ref-3-1 View reference 3 in text [10]: #xref-ref-4-1 View reference 4 in text [11]: http://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/permanent-workers [12]: #xref-ref-5-1 View reference 5 in text