As immigration rules tighten, visa scrutiny intensifies and post-study work pathways become uncertain, the Indian student interest both in the United States of America and Canada have witnessed a decline.

QS Data accessed by The Indian Express tracking Indian outbound student mobility shows that while enrolments in the US and Canada continued to grow until 2024–25, momentum has slowed sharply. These shifts coincide with growing anxieties around F-1 visa oversight, H-1B lottery uncertainty, hiring freezes, and a cooling global job market, prompting Indian families to reassess long-held assumptions about “safe” study destinations.

Also read | ‘Indian students aren’t abandoning US; they’re recalibrating’: TOEFL chief dismisses rumours of ETS selling testing business

Indian student numbers in the US more than double between 2021 and their peak in 2024 (+149%), before slipping 6% in 2025, indicating early signs of slowdown. Canada peaks earlier, in 2023, recording a 42% increase from 2021, but then declines 8% by 2025.

From 2026 onwards, QS projects a sustained decline: Indian student numbers are projected to fall 26% in the US and 23% in Canada between 2025 and 2030.

In contrast, projected growth in alternative destinations is steep. Germany is forecast to grow 82% between 2025 and 2030, while Ireland is projected to rise 79%, France 116%, and the UAE 77% over the same period. The UK (+31%) and Australia (+17%) are expected to grow more moderately.

These changing student preferences may also have deeper implications for global higher education rankings. With research funding cuts, immigration uncertainty for academics, and concerns about long-term talent retention in the US, there are questions about whether American universities can maintain their long-standing dominance in global league tables.

Read | Student Visas And Immigration 2026: Why the US, UK, Canada, Australia are cutting permits and raising fees this year

Jessica Turner, Chief Executive Officer of QS Quacquarelli Symonds told The Indian Express that sustained policy and funding pressures could eventually impact universities’ research output, citations and academic reputation.

The Indian Express spoke to Turner on the sidelines of the QS Summit in Goa about declining student interest in traditional destinations, the rise of newer study markets, and whether the US risks losing its central place in global higher education:

Q: This is a crucial moment for Indian students looking at international education. Have you seen changes in where international students, especially Indians who would traditionally pursue F-1 visas for the US are now looking to study?

Historically, we talked about the ‘big four’ destinations: the US, Canada, Australia and the UK. Now we’re talking about the ‘big 14’, with 10 additional countries actively competing for international students.

And we’ve seen that in our traffic to our websites and where people are looking for universities. We’ve seen the interest shifting from the US to other countries. We’ve seen that in the student events that we hold and the universities that students want to look at.

While this trend has been building for years, 2025 is when we clearly saw students opening up to more markets, many of which have strong universities.

Countries like Germany, Hong Kong, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Scandinavia are now firmly on students’ radar.

Q: What does this shift mean for universities in traditional destinations like the US, UK, Canada and Australia?

It means they will have to work harder to attract Indian students. Recent global events have changed perceptions, and students now realise that studying in the US is no longer the automatic choice it once was.

Q: Under the Trump 2.0 administration, the US has cut federal funding for academic research for various universities. Would this affect their university rankings?

Yes. We’ve seen some flight of academics out of the US, and over time that will affect research output and citations.

We won’t see the impact immediately, it’s gradual, but over a sustained period it matters. It also weakens the stranglehold US universities have traditionally had on the global top 50 and top 100.

Over time, this could lead to a changing of the guard among highly ranked institutions.

Q: Could this affect Ivy League universities as well?

They will remain great institutions, but they may see a slower trajectory rather than continuing at the same level. At the same time, universities in China and the Middle East are investing heavily in research and talent. The bar for being a top-50 university is rising constantly.

Institutions focused on survival rather than forward-looking research will inevitably fall behind.

Q: With growing anxiety among Indian students about post-study work options especially the H-1B lottery and long-term stay, what has changed in the current environment?

What’s changed is that students now have far more options. A student in India who may have grown up thinking the US was the default destination is now questioning whether this is the right time, given geopolitics and policy uncertainty.

At the same time, many universities in places like Germany, Hong Kong, Malaysia and other countries have spent years building infrastructure to support international students, and they are actively competing for Indian students.

Students today have more choice than ever. Rankings remain a useful guide, but they are only one part of the decision.

Q: Under the current circumstances of a cooling US job market are rankings still reflecting student reality or are they lagging behind?
I think the QS rankings are really trying to reflect the experience that a student has in international education, particularly international students.

QS includes a range of metrics in its rankings. Employability, alumni outcomes and employer reputation are important components. Even after two decades of global rankings, QS is the only ranking that embeds employability in this way, and that matters because students are looking for education that helps them create opportunities and pursue their chosen careers. Understanding how effectively a university and course enable that is absolutely vital.

So yes, I do think rankings are helping to answer that question for students.

Q: You mentioned that employability is a key QS metric. With layoffs, hiring freezes, and visa-linked employment risks, especially for students looking forward to an H-1B sponsorship, how do rankings avoid over-promising?

Any ranking is, by nature, a lag indicator. Rankings published this year rely on data collected last year, so they don’t capture short-term fluctuations immediately.

What they do reflect is the long-term reputation universities have with employers and the ability of graduates to advance their careers over time. That matters for students’ medium- and long-term outcomes.

In the short term, the best protection is skills and experience, choosing a university where students know they will gain what employers are actually looking for.”

Q: Beyond rankings, what should students prioritise in a weaker global job market?

Rankings are useful for understanding which universities belong in your short list. They indicate research quality, teaching strength, innovation, and institutional standing—something students associate their name with for life.

But they are not the only factor. Subject rankings matter, and so do location, cost and personal circumstances. Rankings are best used to narrow options, followed by deeper research.

This is a complex and expensive decision, and rankings should be one tool, not the only one.

Q: Several Indian institutions including the IITs and, more recently, BITS have withdrawn from global rankings, citing concerns about methodology. How does QS respond?

We have made a conscious decision not to allow institutions to opt out. If institutions were removed, others would be artificially inflated. We rank every eligible institution according to our methodology.

These rankings are ultimately for students, and that carries responsibility. Rankings collect the collective intelligence of the sector, and they become more accurate when institutions engage.

Our methodology is less dependent on self-submissions than others, because rankings are inherently reductionist. Universities are complex and cannot be reduced to one number, but benchmarking exists in every global industry and has driven quality over time.”

Q: Is it mandatory for institutions to submit data every year?
“No. Participation is voluntary and collaborative. Institutions can fully engage, partially engage, or not engage at all.

Our methodology is designed around a minimum common denominator, so we can benchmark universities with very different capacities. Much of the data we use is publicly available.

If a university doesn’t submit data, we use public sources or alternative benchmarks. Either way, institutions are benchmarked each year.”