After more than a decade working in international student recruitment, I have seen policy changes that have a minor to moderate impact and ones that have a game-changing effect. Some changes mean more paperwork for agents and students. Others make families reconsider whether Australia is the right destination in the first place. We are seeing more of the second kind now.
Under Australia’s Genuine Student (GS) requirement, counsellors and agents must pay much more attention to prospective students’ course choice, intentions while in Australia, and financial means. Further visa changes effective from 2 October 2026, including restrictions on students’ dependents, have added to the questions families are asking. There is simply much more for families to think about when it comes to deciding if and how to apply for study in Australia.
I support a credible student visa system. Genuine students and responsible agents benefit from clear standards. At the same time, the conversation cannot end with how many visas were granted or refused. We also need to ask why some students never lodge an application.
The stakes are high
ICEF Monitor reported an overall grant rate of 75.5% for primary student visa applicants in August 2026, and offshore grant rates of 13% for Nepal, 34% for Bangladesh, and 51% for India. In January–March 2026, offshore higher education refusal rates were 69% for Nepal, 45% for Bangladesh, 42% for India, 41% for Sri Lanka, and 37% for Pakistan.
Grant rates and refusal rates in 2026 help to explain why families and agents are having more cautious conversations, and why there are now more students who receive an offer then defer, withdraw, or decide not to apply.
A longer list of barriers
A recent case discussed with me by a counselling team in Nepal brought this point home. A student planned to pursue a Master of Information Technology in Australia and travel with their spouse. The family was preparing to fund the course through several sources: the father’s small business, the mother’s salaried income, savings, and an education loan. The counselling team worked through sponsorship, income evidence, savings, and loan arrangements with the family, knowing that all sources of funding had to be documented and explained clearly. These are the practical conversations that responsible counselling requires, and they take time.
Then came the news in October that most international students would not be permitted to bring their spouses with them. The family decided not to proceed. No application was lodged, so there was no refusal to count.
That outcome is worth understanding. A student can have a genuine intention to study, a family prepared to support them, and a dedication to submitting a letter-perfect application … then be surprised by the addition of yet another restrictive policy. We are seeing more cases of perfectly well-suited students for Australian courses and labour force needs now reconsidering whether to go ahead with an application.
A tailored approach to counselling
In my role with an Australian education provider, I interact daily with counselling teams across South Asia. Through these conversations, I see how families respond differently to policy changes depending on their country and circumstances. These frontline insights help us understand students’ concerns and the importance of tailoring recruitment strategies to each market. Here are five examples that underline this point.
In Nepal, finances often sit at the centre of discussions. Families often plan to fund students through employment, businesses, savings, and education loans. Agents need to establish not only whether funding exists, but also how it can be evidenced. The increased visa application charge also makes families think carefully before committing to a process with an uncertain outcome.
In Bangladesh, there is now more hesitation from students after they receive an offer. Families ask about visa approval rates; what loans and sponsor evidence are acceptable; and the financial risk of applying. For a provider, an offer may look like progress. For a family, it may just be the beginning of another round of difficult decisions.
In India, it is key to explore whether a course is right for a particular student, and vice versa. With so many institutions, qualifications, and price points, it is easy for students and families to get overwhelmed and distracted by the sheer volume of choices. The counsellor’s focus should be on finding specific courses that (1) match a student’s goals and (2) are aligned with policy settings. Under the current Genuine Student requirements, students must be able to explain why a course fits their previous studies, career interests, and present circumstances. This requires counselling to ensure that students can genuinely express why they are well suited and prepared for a specific programme.
In Pakistan, direct engagement with students, families, and institutions is especially necessary due to sweeping visa refusal rates for this market. Immigration officials look extremely carefully at South Asian applications, and both the student and the application need to be credible, verifiable, and well prepared.
In the first quarter of 2026, about 4 in 10 Sri Lankan applicants were rejected for an Australian study visa. Counsellors need to understand the reasons for the trend. This is the first step to helping genuine Sri Lankan students submit applications that have a good chance of success.
What providers may be missing
As it stands, the policy environment in Australia – and in other Big Four destinations – is discouraging many talented South Asian students from:
- Applying;
- Accepting offers;
- Submitting study visa applications.
Counsellors have a direct understanding of why a student ends up dropping out of the enrolment funnel. Through regular conversations with counselling teams, I hear whether the reason was affordability, a new restriction, course availability, uncertainty about the process, or a sense that choosing another destination is the wisest choice given current policy settings.
Those insights are not always visible in a dashboard. If institutions do not consult regularly with qualified, vetted agents, they can miss crucial market signals that can derail their recruitment and enrolment goals. Providers that listen carefully to counsellors’ feedback get a better understanding of market conditions than those that rely only on visa refusal rates.
Six practical responses for counsellors and providers
- Begin financial discussions early. Students should understand tuition, living expenses, insurance, visa charges and the evidence needed to demonstrate access to funds before making major commitments.
- Help students to understand the Genuine Student assessment and then encourage them to take responsibility in decisions about the test. If a student is genuine and credible, they will prepare accordingly. If they do not feel they have what it takes to meet the Genuine Student requirements, they should know that and think carefully about applying. Counselling is extremely important for helping students to decide.
- Record withdrawals and deferrals separately from refusals. Track where the student left the process and, where possible, why.
- Ask families what competing destinations offer that Australia does not. The feedback can help providers to (a) understand what barriers they face in recruitment and (b) understand what they might do to encourage genuine students with a good chance of being approved for a visa to stay in the enrolment funnel.
- Assess counsellors on the quality of their advising and applications, not only on the number of offers or enrolments they generate.
- Communicate policy changes plainly and promptly. After an announcement, counsellors need to know what is in force, who is affected, what exemptions exist, and what is still only proposed. This is more important than ever given that students are very exposed to social media speculation and not always to facts.
Integrity and confidence belong together
Australia is more than right to protect the integrity of its international education system, and I would not argue for weaker checks or less careful assessment standards. But I would say the context demands stronger communication between counsellors and providers. Frequent and sometimes sudden policy changes are significantly affecting the decisions of students and families thousands of kilometres away.
The family in Nepal who chose not to proceed with a Master of IT is not a visa refusal statistic. It is a reminder that the current policies in place demand a different approach to recruitment, one in which local insights have never been more essential to providers’ understanding of what is happening in their key markets. Across South Asia, responsible counsellors are doing everything they can to protect students and providers alike. When they have accurate and timely official information, this becomes much more possible.
If we want genuine students to make informed choices about Australia, we need both rigorous rules and clear communication. From my work in Kathmandu and with partners across the region, I believe the long-term strength of Australian education depends on getting that balance right.
– Mukesh Dhamala is Regional Director – South Asia at NAPS Australia, based in Kathmandu. A QEAC-certified education professional, he has more than a decade of experience in international student recruitment, admissions governance and partnerships. His commentary has appeared in Independent Australia, Pearls and Irritations, The Koala News, and Campus Review, and he has been quoted in The PIE News. He writes in a personal capacity.
For additional background, please see:
- “The questions families are actually asking: Inside the student advising conversation in 2026“
- “Has Australia’s genuine student test gone too far?“
The post One test, five markets: What do Australia’s student visa changes mean for South Asian recruitment? appeared first on ICEF Monitor - Market intelligence for international student recruitment.