by Emily Banks, University of North Carolina

Whether it’s around the corner or halfway around the world, college is a new experience for everyone. It’s a place where young people from all over the world leave behind the comforts of home to challenge themselves with new ideas, difficult responsibilities, and an occasional party (or two). For some students, the journey to college takes a bit longer than a drive down the street. Each year, over 500,000 international students attend U.S. universities. The majority of these students come from India, China, South Korea, and African nations. Some stay and get a job in America after graduation, but others return to their home countries with their valuable American degrees. Similarly, professors from these less-developed countries often come to the United States to earn money and prestige, only to return home a few years later. The migration of skilled intellectual people to and from the United States, called the “brain drain,” greatly affects the American higher education system and the global economy.

It is undeniable that international students can bring a lot to a college community. College is an opportunity for American students to expand their viewpoints and experience new things, and interacting with students from foreign countries is a good way to accomplish that. Many universities have programs designed to incorporate international students into campus culture, including diversity-themed floors and student organizations. Meeting a student from another country can be a great way to learn about another culture without paying airfare. Exposure to different cultures and ways of thinking is valuable in today’s global economy, as many students--particularly those in the field of business--are likely to work with people from other countries after they graduate. International students can also offer different points of view in class discussions, broadening the spectrum of ideas presented.
The debate over brain drain is thus ultimately one over educational philosophy. Some perceive education as a product that students buy with their tuition. What students choose to do with the product—whether it is staying and working in the US or moving abroad—is their prerogative. Others see education as an investment in America’s future, preparing generations of students for jobs and providing resources necessary for students to be contributing members of society after graduation. In this view of education, the investment would go to waste if students were to take their diplomas and leave without positively impacting the US.

The idea of education as an investment in a state’s future is the cornerstone of state-run public universities. Being from New York, I was daunted when applying for admissions at the University of North Carolina. UNC has a strict 80% in-state quota, meaning that at least 80% of students must be from North Carolina. And while that quota worried me as an applicant, I now understand why it’s in place. As a state school, UNC should primarily serve students from North Carolina, who pay taxes in the state and who are more likely to stay here after graduation. While not all American universities are state-run public schools, nearly all institutions receive funding from the government, usually through grants. Thus, American universities should primarily serve American students.

Many American students, who intend to live and work in the US for the rest of their lives, are denied higher education due to socio-economic conditions. From elementary school on, American students are—in most cases—given an education proportional to their parents’ incomes, and that makes it much more difficult for lower class Americans to get into college. On average, schools in poorer neighborhoods have fewer resources and greater drop-out rates than schools in affluent areas. Thus, poorer students are at a disadvantage when applying to college. Even if they do get into college, students from lower socio-economic classes also have trouble paying exorbitant tuitions that many universities charge.

Similarly, the issue of international professors who do not intend to live in the US permanently is two-sided. Professors from less-developed countries come to the US hoping to earn money and then use their research and teaching experiences to build their resumes and help them get professorships back in their home countries. These professors are generally highly qualified in their fields, and universities see them as potentially beneficial both to students and to their research programs.

Despite their academic qualifications, though, foreign professors sometimes have difficulty in teaching American students. I often hear students, especially those pursuing degrees in business, math, or science, complain about professors with strong accents and confusing teaching styles. While that may sound trivial and even xenophobic, it is a symptom of the overarching problem that students find “brain drain” professors less accessible than others.
As an English major, I’ve never actually had a professor from a foreign country, but even within my department I’d have to say that my favorite professors are the ones who are fixtures at the University and have taught here for a long time. These professors have built a reputation and rapport with students, and learned through experience how to best get material across to us while understanding our needs, limitations, and extra-curricular obligations. After teaching similar courses semester after semester, professors gain an understanding of what concepts students find difficult and what they can do to make the subject more palatable. Professors who are only in the United States for a few years do not have that experience. So, despite extensive knowledge in their fields, they are limited when it comes to developing relationships with their students.

It is also necessary to consider the effect that the brain-drain has on the developing countries from which students and professors come to the U.S. It is difficult for these countries to improve their education systems when their most qualified students and educators are constantly leaving, and it is also difficult for those who cannot afford to live temporarily in the U.S. to compete economically with those who can. Even when these people come back to their countries, it is also difficult for them to become economically self-sufficient without the most academically promising people staying to build their education systems.

The continent of Africa is particularly affected by this phenomenon. Since 1990, approximately 20,000 people have left the continent every year to work or go to school in North America and Europe. This has caused a huge problem in the medical field. According to the UN Development Program, 60% of the doctors trained in Ghana during the 1980’s have since immigrated to other countries. It may be helpful for us to have these doctors working in our hospitals and teaching in our medical schools, but in their home country--where they’re undoubtedly needed more—suffers because of it. In an attempt to reverse the negative effects of the brain drain, African countries spend approximately $4 billion each year on programs that seek to employ non-African expatriates.
It is difficult to say what should be done about this issue. The incorporation of other cultures into our own is a cornerstone of the American “melting pot,” and I would not advocate demolishing that by excluding foreign students from our universities altogether. It is, in many ways, beneficial for American college students to have international classmates, and it is true that American universities can benefit from qualified professors from developing countries.
But we must also consider harmful effects of the brain drain on the educational systems and the economies of other nations—nations that waste millions, even billions, trying to retain the “brains” of their population. At the same time, we also have to consider the impact of an influx of foreign students and professors on American students. While we do not want to be isolationist or xenophobic, we must still keep our students’ best interests at heart. After all, it is American students who will shape America’s future.

Perhaps the key to correcting both issues is a shift in focus. Rather than concentrating on attracting foreign students and professors, American universities should focus on offering opportunities to underprivileged American students. In addition, some form of help or aid should be given to other nations with weaker institutions of higher learning, so that they’ll be able to retain more of their best students and professors. Once we have shifted our focus and achieved necessary results, we can welcome back the cultural exchange with more positive results.