

Immigration Reform: Should We Treat Engineers Differently Than Bricklayers? - rdouble
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2013/01/immigration-deal-could-turn-into-bonanza-for-universities.html

======
geebee
Interesting angle on the benefits of a system that requires a job offer over
merely obtaining a degree. The author is correct that this could lead to very
expensive and low quality MS degrees that mainly exist to charge would-be
immigrants for a way to bypass the usual immigration system, and he does make
a good point that the requirement of a job offer from a company willing to go
through the H1B process may be a better filter than a one year MS degree.

As I understand it, this is already what Australia does. Australia gives
points for youth, english language proficiency, and valuable work skills, and
if you cross a certain threshold, you are allowed entry into the country. The
threshold is lower if you have a job offer.

Here's the huge difference - while the job offer helps the immigrant gain
entry to the country, the visa itself is not controlled by the employer.

To me, it seems incredibly obvious that if you allow an employer to control an
employees right to reside in the US, this will be abused, badly. This is
probably the single worst thing about the H1B visa - and it seems to be one of
the few things everyone agrees on.

~~~
easternmonk
Instead of just saying "degree" it might be more sensible to white-list
certain universities alone based on their reputation. These names can be
published every year.

~~~
geebee
That still makes me a little nervous, though it would be an improvement.

Part of my problem with this is that I think a day of reckoning needs to come
for higher education in STEM fields, and the sooner the better. PhD programs
have atrociously high attrition rates and extremely long completion times
compared to the professions, and MS programs are often a neglected stepchild.
Employment prospects according to a RAND study[1] are surprisingly bad for
such a challenging career path.

Americans are already shunning these programs, and I think this is a good
thing to the extent that it will force the PhD programs to adapt and become
more attractive (perhaps by following a professional school model, with far
lower attrition rates and much more predictable and shorter completion times).

The problem is, PhD programs benefit enormously from the low cost labor of
graduate students, and they don't want to adapt. One way they've avoided
adapting is by tapping into international students who need their degree to
gain admission into the United States. People who already have US residency
may not bother, but people who don't have it yet will put up with all kinds of
crap.

It's a strange situation. Should people who get a PhD from a top US
institution be allowed to stay in the US? Hell yes! Should PhD programs be
trusted with the power to bestow US residency on students? Hell no.

[1] <http://www.rand.org/pubs/issue_papers/IP241.html>

