2. Internalization, Mobility, and the Conditions of Participation
Internationalization has shifted from mainly focusing on student exchanges to a wider agenda that includes transnational partnerships, English-medium programs, and fierce competition for global talent
| [1] | Altbach, P. G., & de Wit, H. (2024). “Everything that quacks is internationalization”: Critical reflections on the evolution of higher education internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153231221655 |
| [8] | Choudaha, R., & Chang, L. (2012). The global market for higher education: Sustainable competitive strategies for the new era. Routledge. |
[1, 8]
. Institutions in high-income countries often pursue internationalization to enhance their global reputation and diversify revenue, especially through full-fee-paying students. Critical scholarship warns that this approach can turn international students into commodities and strengthen geopolitical hierarchies. Marginson
argues that international education is not just about cross-border learning but also about “self-formation” within unequal global systems, where students’ choices are limited by their national background, class, and visa policies. Yao and Viggiano
show how interest convergence leads institutions to accept international students when their presence supports financial or political goals, even though their long-term security and rights remain secondary.
Beyond just mobility Figures and partnership deals, scholars have shown that internationalization increasingly aligns with market forces and institutional rivalry. Universities attract fee-paying students to stabilize their budgets, enhance their prestige, and demonstrate global relevance, even when public funding decreases or local enrollments decline. In this framework, international students serve as both symbols of cosmopolitanism and sources of revenue, with their tuition helping to subsidize other institutional priorities. These dynamics are especially evident in private colleges and arts-focused schools that depend heavily on income from enrollment. Therefore, internationalization is not merely a neutral response to globalization; it is a political and financial venture that shifts risk and responsibility onto students and their families, while enabling institutions to extract the symbolic rewards of engaging globally.
Research shows that international students experience discrimination, social isolation, and status-based exclusion even as institutions promote “global diversity”
| [2] | Andrade, M. S. (2006). International students in English-speaking universities: Adjustment factors. Journal of Research in International Education, 5(2), 131–154.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240906065589 |
| [15] | Lee, J. J., & Rice, C. (2007). Welcome to America? International student perceptions of discrimination. Higher Education, 53(3), 381–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-4508-3 |
| [23] | Suspitsyna, T., & Shalka, T. R. (2019). The Chinese international student as a (post) colonial other: An analysis of cultural representations in U.S. media discourse. The Review of Higher Education, 42(S1), 287–308.
https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2019.0053 |
[2, 15, 23]
. A sense of belonging, meaningful interactions with faculty and peers, and supportive campus environments are linked to academic success and well-being
| [12] | Glass, C. R., & Westmont-Campbell, C. M. (2014). Comparative effects of belongingness on the academic success and cross-cultural interactions of domestic and international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 38, 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.04.004 |
| [22] | Strayhorn, T. L. (2019). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students (2nd ed.). Routledge. |
| [26] | Zhao, C.-M., Kuh, G. D., & Carini, R. M. (2005). A comparison of international student and American student engagement in effective educational practices. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(2), 209–231.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2005.11772284 |
[12, 22, 26]
. However, international students are often expected to adapt individually to institutional norms without corresponding institutional changes
| [6] | Caplan, N., & Stevens, M. (2017). Academic challenges faced by international students: A review of the literature. Journal of International Education Research, 13(2), 89–102.
https://doi.org/10.19030/jier.v13i2.10073 |
| [13] | Glass, C. R., Wongtrirat, R., & Buus, S. (2015). International student engagement: Strategies for creating inclusive, connected, and purposeful campus environments. Routledge. |
[6, 13]
.
While this body of work has documented important patterns, less attention has been paid to how international students themselves understand and navigate these intersecting systems. Many studies focus on adjustment, satisfaction, or specific challenges like language, academic expectations, or discrimination. Far fewer focus on students’ interpretations of the institutional, financial, and legal regimes that organize their lives, especially in specialized settings like performing arts colleges. This study addresses that gap by highlighting former F-1 students’ narratives as a form of policy knowledge. By examining how students together made sense of and responded to institutional rules, financial demands, and immigration regulations, the study links everyday experiences to the broader effort of internationalization.
Financially, many international students pay full tuition, lack access to federal aid, and face work restrictions that limit their ability to reduce costs. Bailey and Yin
show that students use complex coping strategies, including unauthorized work and relying on family debt, to manage expenses. Immigration policies also shape their paths: work authorization is limited, status depends on full-time enrollment, and post-graduation options are uncertain
. Overall, this literature indicates that the “global campus” is shaped by overlapping financial, institutional, and legal systems.
4. Methods: Research Design
The study employs a qualitative design with semi-structured, in-depth interviews to examine how former F-1 visa students experienced and responded to institutional, financial, and immigration systems. This approach aligns with transformative qualitative traditions that aim to reveal inequities and highlight participants’ agency and critique
| [18] | Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass. |
| [19] | Mertens, D. M. (2012). Transformative mixed methods: Addressing inequities. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(6), 802–813. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211433797 |
[18, 19]
.
4.1. Site and Participants
The research was carried out at a private, accredited four-year performing arts college in a major U.S. city. International students make up about 10 percent of the student body, twice the national average, and pay nearly $250,000 in tuition and fees over four years, with limited access to institutional aid. The institution emphasizes global diversity in recruitment materials but operates within the broader constraints of U.S. immigration law.
Ten former international students took part in the study. All completed their degrees between 2015 and 2023 and studied on F-1 visas. Participants came from diverse regions, including Latin America, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East, and pursued a variety of majors within the performing arts. Pseudonyms are used throughout.
Participants were recruited using a mix of institutional records, social media outreach, and snowball sampling. Initial invitations were sent to alumni who had studied on an F-1 visa, completed a program at the institution, and had been out of full-time student status for at least six months. Respondents were encouraged to share the invitation with peers who might be interested. This method enabled the study to reach graduates pursuing various post-graduation paths, including work on Optional Practical Training, further education, and careers outside the U.S. Although the sample is not statistically representative, it reflects the diversity of the institution’s international student body in terms of gender, region of origin, and program of study, and it highlights voices often missing from institutional reports on internationalization.
4.2. Data Collection
Data were collected through individual semi-structured interviews lasting 60–90 minutes, conducted via secure video conferencing. The interviews invited participants to share their educational journeys, from decision-making and arrival through graduation and post-graduation transitions. Questions explored experiences with tuition and funding, interactions with institutional offices, visa and work authorization processes, and feelings of belonging on campus.
The semi-structured interview protocol was designed to encourage participants to share detailed, layered stories rather than brief survey-style responses. This approach aligns with established qualitative interviewing methods that prioritize depth, meaning-making, and the reconstruction of lived experience over time
| [21] | Seidman, I. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences (4th ed.). Teachers College Press. |
[21]
. Questions followed a chronological order, starting with pre-arrival decision-making, then moving through on-campus experiences, and ending with post-graduation transitions. For example, participants were asked how they first discovered the college, what influenced their decision to enroll, how they financed their education over time, and how they understood key immigration milestones like visa renewals or OPT applications. Follow-up prompts encouraged them to describe specific interactions with staff, faculty, and peers, and to reflect on moments when institutional policies felt supportive, confusing, or harmful. This approach allowed participants to connect individual episodes to broader patterns, aligning with the study’s emphasis on institutional, financial, and legal systems.
Interviews were audio-recorded, professionally transcribed, and checked for accuracy. Participants were given the opportunity to review their transcripts and clarify or add to their responses, which increased credibility and provided them with more control.
The study received ethical approval from the university’s Institutional Review Board, and all participants provided informed consent.
4.3. Data Analysis
The analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s
six-phase approach to thematic analysis: familiarization, initial coding, theme identification, theme review, theme definition and naming, and the production of the analytical narrative. Codes were both deductive, informed by the conceptual framework (e.g., legal violence, conditional inclusion, belonging), and inductive, emerging from participants’ language and stories.
Throughout the analysis, CPA and the guiding concepts were used to link individual narratives to broader structures and highlight the policy implications of participants’ experiences. Analytic memos and reflexive journaling supported ongoing focus on positionality and interpretation
| [18] | Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass. |
[18]
.
4.4. Trustworthiness and Data Quality
Several strategies were employed to strengthen the trustworthiness of the study. First, member checks involved inviting participants to review their interview transcripts and clarify or expand on sections that seemed incomplete or misrepresented. Second, analytic memos documented emerging interpretations and were revisited during the coding process to explore how the conceptual framework influenced the researcher’s understanding of the data. Third, patterns were compared across participants from different regions, programs, and post-graduation paths to identify both commonalities and differences. Finally, the researcher engaged in ongoing reflexive work regarding her own positionality as a former faculty member at the institution, including discussing initial themes with colleagues who had different perspectives on internationalization. These steps do not eliminate subjectivity but help make the interpretive process more transparent and rooted in participants’ accounts.
4.5. Researcher Positionality
As a former faculty member at the research site, the researcher has extensive experience in teaching and advising international students. This insider perspective provided valuable knowledge of institutional policies and practices, along with long-standing relationships with international alumni. At the same time, it required careful attention to power dynamics and potential bias. The researcher approached interviews as opportunities to learn from participants’ expertise, used open-ended prompts, and clearly explained that participation was voluntary and would not influence any institutional relationship.
4.6. Findings
Four themes outline how participants perceived and reacted to institutional, financial, and immigration systems.
Theme 1: Constrained Choices and Trade-offs
Participants’ decisions to study in the United States were motivated by hopes for artistic growth, global mobility, and long-term stability. However, their choices were constrained by visa regulations, institutional offerings, and family finances. Many mentioned selecting programs not only for academic compatibility but also for perceived visa advantages, such as access to Optional Practical Training (OPT) or locations in cities with larger immigrant communities.
Once enrolled, participants consistently balanced artistic goals, financial needs, and visa requirements. Some took jobs or roles less aligned with their artistic interests because they offered more stable income or were perceived as safer under visa regulations. Others avoided internships that could have advanced their careers due to fears of risking their visa status. Participants’ descriptions challenged common assumptions that international students freely “choose” U.S. higher education from a menu of global options. Instead, they framed their decisions as constrained negotiations among limited information, family expectations, and unclear policies. Several emphasized that they did not fully understand how restricted their work options would be or how difficult it would be to change institutions after arriving. Others noted that they had little room to question recruitment promises because their families had already invested heavily in application fees, test prep, and deposits. What appeared as choice in institutional reports often felt, from students’ perspectives, like a series of narrowing paths where each decision limited their options instead of expanding them. These trade-offs show how legal and institutional systems restrict students' options and force them to continuously weigh which sacrifices to make.
Theme 2: Financial and Legal Precarity as Everyday Reality
Participants’ stories highlighted the serious financial and legal instability underlying their education. Tuition payments were described as “overwhelming” and “terrifying,” especially when family finances fluctuated or when sponsors’ circumstances unexpectedly changed. Several participants recalled moments when a delayed payment or miscommunication with the bursar’s office nearly caused registration holds that could have resulted in status violations.
Visa regulations worsened this instability. Students faced restrictions on the hours they could work on campus, often holding low-paying jobs, and most found it difficult to access off-campus work without complicated approval processes. Participants described constantly monitoring their enrollment status, work hours, and expiration dates. One participant explained this situation: “I felt like any mistake, even a small one, could cost me my whole life here.”
These experiences connect to the idea of legal violence, where laws that seem neutral still foster ongoing fear, instability, and vulnerability
| [17] | Menjívar, C., & Abrego, L. J. (2012). Legal violence: Immigration law and the lives of Central American immigrants. American Journal of Sociology, 117(5), 1380–1421.
https://doi.org/10.1086/663575 |
[17]
. For participants, legal violence showed up through strict deadlines, confusing rules, and the constant threat of removal.
Financial and legal insecurity also influenced how participants understood everyday campus interactions. Tuition reminders, registration holds, or emails about policy changes were rarely seen as simple administrative matters; instead, they were interpreted through the lens of “What does this mean for my ability to stay?” Several participants described avoiding contact with certain offices because previous encounters had made them feel blamed for situations beyond their control, such as sudden currency devaluation or delayed wire transfers. Others recounted spending hours searching government websites or online forums to verify information received from institutional staff. These stories show that the administrative burden of internationalization is shifted onto students, who must constantly translate bureaucratic language into strategies for survival.
Theme 3: Emotional Toll and Fractured Belonging
Despite their contributions to campus diversity, many participants described feeling like “guests” rather than full members of the campus community. Some faced overt discrimination from peers or community members, while others experienced subtle forms of exclusion, such as assumptions about their language skills or cultural knowledge
.
Financial and visa pressures influenced their emotional lives. Participants described feelings of anxiety, shame, and isolation tied to their uncertain status. The expectation to constantly show gratitude for the “opportunity” to study in the United States sometimes made it hard to express criticism or ask for help. This pattern illustrates conditional inclusion, where students are reminded that their presence depends on ongoing compliance and performance
| [4] | Ben-Porath, S. (2012). Citizenship under fire: Democratic education in times of conflict. Princeton University Press. |
[4]
.
Participants described moments of genuine connection with faculty and peers that fostered a sense of belonging and validation. Courses that encouraged students to draw on their home cultures, or faculty who acknowledged the stress of immigration, helped counteract epistemic injustice by recognizing international students’ knowledge as valuable rather than peripheral
| [11] | Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press. |
| [12] | Glass, C. R., & Westmont-Campbell, C. M. (2014). Comparative effects of belongingness on the academic success and cross-cultural interactions of domestic and international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 38, 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.04.004 |
[11, 12]
.
At the same time, participants were cautious about sharing their critiques within institutional spaces that praised internationalization as an unqualified good. Some feared that expressing frustration would be seen as a lack of gratitude or as evidence that they did not “fit” the institution’s culture. Others discussed carefully choosing what they shared with faculty or staff, revealing only the parts of their experiences that felt safe, such as homesickness or academic stress, while hiding concerns about immigration status or family finances. This self-censorship can be understood as a form of emotional labor that upholds institutional narratives of welcoming global campuses while concealing the underlying uncertainty many international students face daily.
Theme 4: Uneven Institutional Support and Peer-Based Networks of Care
Institutional support was described as inconsistent and dependent on the person. Some offices provided clear, proactive guidance, while others gave contradictory information or responded slowly to urgent questions about visas or finances. Participants recalled being redirected between departments and warned that even small paperwork errors could have serious consequences, which increased their stress.
In response, international students created peer-based networks of care. They exchanged information about visa policies, housing, and jobs, translated institutional emails, and accompanied each other to appointments. These networks served as informal advising systems and emotional support networks, often filling gaps left by the institution.
Participants highlighted specific staff or faculty members who acted as advocates, leveraging their institutional knowledge to interpret policies, negotiate deadlines, or connect students to resources. These relationships demonstrate the potential of relational, humanizing practices within otherwise strict systems, but they also reveal the inequity of a support model that relies on chance rather than policy.
These peer networks also acted as informal labs for understanding policy. Participants talked about sharing email templates with advisors, comparing responses from different staff to similar questions, and working together to Figure out how new rules might apply to their cases. In doing this, they created knowledge that exceeded what any single office could provide, blending institutional rules, immigration guidance, and personal experience into useful advice. This work was often unseen by leaders, but it was crucial for making internationalization work in practice. By seeing international students as contributors to policy knowledge rather than just service recipients, institutions are challenged to reconsider whose expertise influences decisions about internationalization.
5. Discussion
This study expands on internationalization scholarship by highlighting how international students experience the overlap of institutional, financial, and immigration systems, rather than viewing these areas separately. Participants’ stories confirm previous research on discrimination, financial struggles, and the significance of belonging
| [2] | Andrade, M. S. (2006). International students in English-speaking universities: Adjustment factors. Journal of Research in International Education, 5(2), 131–154.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240906065589 |
| [3] | Bailey, L., & Yin, M. (2021). Financial challenges and coping strategies of international students. Journal of International Students, 11(4), 835–852.
https://doi.org/10.32674/jis.v11i4.2345 |
| [12] | Glass, C. R., & Westmont-Campbell, C. M. (2014). Comparative effects of belongingness on the academic success and cross-cultural interactions of domestic and international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 38, 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.04.004 |
| [15] | Lee, J. J., & Rice, C. (2007). Welcome to America? International student perceptions of discrimination. Higher Education, 53(3), 381–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-4508-3 |
| [22] | Strayhorn, T. L. (2019). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students (2nd ed.). Routledge. |
[2, 3, 12, 15, 22]
. They also build on this work by illustrating how legal violence and conditional inclusion are embedded in the structure of internationalization.
Within research on internationalization in higher education, this article broadens discussions in two key ways. First, it focuses on a performing arts college, a type of institution often overlooked in comparative studies that typically emphasize research universities and large public systems. Second, it connects micro-level experiences such as budgeting, advising appointments, and classroom interactions to macro-level questions about how internationalization is funded and managed. By highlighting the intersection of institutional, financial, and legal systems, the study complements work examining student mobility patterns, institutional strategies, and internationalization at home, while also calling for greater attention to the everyday infrastructure that enables or hinders those strategies for students.
First, the findings challenge narratives that portray international students as mainly responsible for their own adjustment. Participants’ “choices” were continuously influenced by visa regulations, tuition policies, and institutional timelines. When internationalization is pursued as a revenue strategy without equal commitments to financial fairness and legal literacy, institutions risk reproducing the very inequalities they claim to address
| [1] | Altbach, P. G., & de Wit, H. (2024). “Everything that quacks is internationalization”: Critical reflections on the evolution of higher education internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153231221655 |
| [25] | Yao, C. W., & Viggiano, T. (2019). Interest convergence and the commodification of international students and scholars in the United States. Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity, 5(1), 82–109.
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2642-2387.2019.5.1.82-109 |
[1, 25]
.
Second, participants’ experiences show how international students act as policy interpreters and informal advisors, not just as policy beneficiaries. Their peer networks convert institutional and legal language into practical strategies. Seeing international students as policy actors, rather than only service recipients, can change how institutions view internationalization and accountability.
Third, the study emphasizes the importance of epistemic justice. When international students’ knowledge about the systems that affect their lives is neglected, institutions miss chances to identify policy gaps and develop more equitable practices collaboratively. Including international students in decision-making bodies, advisory councils, and program design processes can help shift internationalization from mere marketing to a shared-governance approach
| [13] | Glass, C. R., Wongtrirat, R., & Buus, S. (2015). International student engagement: Strategies for creating inclusive, connected, and purposeful campus environments. Routledge. |
| [16] | Marginson, S. (2014). Student self-formation in international education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 18(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315313513036 |
[13, 16]
.
Framing international students as policy interpreters also creates new opportunities for institutional learning. Participants in this study regularly identified ambiguities, contradictions, and gaps in institutional communication that were not obvious to staff who designed those systems. Instead of viewing these observations as individual complaints, institutions could see them as diagnostic data about how internationalization policies work in practice. Establishing structured ways for international students to share what they have learned about navigating tuition deadlines, work restrictions, and visa paperwork, and rewarding them for that expertise, would not only enhance services but also shift epistemic authority. Such actions would show that internationalization is not something done to students, but a project built with them.
Implications for Policy and practice
Institutional Policy and Advising
Institutions should invest in visa-literate, coordinated advising systems that acknowledge immigration as a core, not a secondary, part of internationalization. This includes:
Training academic advisors, financial aid staff, and administrators in fundamental immigration literacy and referral pathways.
Establishing cross-office teams that regularly review how institutional policies (e.g., payment deadlines, course load requirements) intersect with visa rules.
Offering clear, multilingual guidance on work authorization, tuition payment options, and post-graduation paths.
Such efforts shift advising from reactive troubleshooting to proactive, equity-focused support.
Financial Commitments
If institutions rely on international tuition as a revenue source, they also have a responsibility to mitigate financial precarity. Options include:
Targeted scholarships, emergency grants, and flexible payment options for international students.
Data-driven assessments of how tuition hikes and fee policies disproportionately impact students from various regions and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Partnering with external organizations to develop paid, legally compliant experiential learning programs.
These steps align financial policy with the ethical aspects of internationalization
.
Campus Climate and Belonging
Institutions can handle conditional inclusion by:
Integrating international perspectives throughout curricula instead of limiting them to special events.
Helping faculty create assignments that incorporate students’ transnational experiences and knowledge.
Establish ongoing forums where international students can influence programming and policy, rather than just sharing cultural performances.
Such practices see international students as co-creators of institutional knowledge and culture, aligning with research on belonging and engagement
| [12] | Glass, C. R., & Westmont-Campbell, C. M. (2014). Comparative effects of belongingness on the academic success and cross-cultural interactions of domestic and international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 38, 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.04.004 |
| [22] | Strayhorn, T. L. (2019). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students (2nd ed.). Routledge. |
| [26] | Zhao, C.-M., Kuh, G. D., & Carini, R. M. (2005). A comparison of international student and American student engagement in effective educational practices. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(2), 209–231.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2005.11772284 |
[12, 22, 26]
.
Advocacy Beyond the Institution
Finally, institutions can leverage their collective influence to promote immigration policies that enhance the stability and contributions of international students. Through professional associations and policy networks, institutional leaders can demonstrate how current laws create uncertainty and advocate for reforms such as expanded work authorization, clearer post-study pathways, and shorter processing delays. Aligning internationalization rhetoric with advocacy can help transform the broader policy environment in which students decide where to study and build their futures.
Limitations and Directions for Future Research
This study examines a single private performing arts college and a relatively small group of graduates who completed their programs successfully. It does not include perspectives from students who left early, were unable to maintain their status, or studied at other types of institutions. Future research could use multi-site comparative designs, longitudinal studies, or mixed methods to explore how international students experience policy and institutional changes over time.
Additional work could also examine how intersecting identities, such as race, gender, class, and nationality, influence experiences of legal violence and conditional inclusion, especially for students from the Global South or historically marginalized racial groups
| [9] | Dados, N., & Connell, R. (2012). The global South. Contexts, 11(1), 12–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504212436479 |
| [20] | Patel, L. (2021). No study without struggle: Confronting settler colonialism in higher education. Beacon Press. |
| [23] | Suspitsyna, T., & Shalka, T. R. (2019). The Chinese international student as a (post) colonial other: An analysis of cultural representations in U.S. media discourse. The Review of Higher Education, 42(S1), 287–308.
https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2019.0053 |
[9, 20, 23]
.
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download
