他们为什么以为自己可以申请毕业工签？
Read in English2026年7月，阿尔伯塔省卡尔加里，一场围绕毕业后工作许可 （Post-Graduate Work Permit，PGWP）的争议持续发酵。 数十名国际学生在市中心搭起帐篷抗议， 其中部分学生更开始绝食， 希望加拿大政府重新审视他们的PGWP申请。
根据媒体报道，这些学生大多就读于 Portage College Continuing Education Diploma项目， 课程由Portage College与合作院校共同提供。 毕业后，他们向加拿大移民部（IRCC）申请毕业工签， 却陆续收到拒签决定。
IRCC认为，他们所完成的是Non-credit Program （非学分课程），因此并不符合PGWP资格。 事件很快引起加拿大社会广泛关注。
很多人看到新闻后的第一个问题是： “为什么毕业以后拿不到毕业工签？”
但作为一名移民顾问，我认为， 这并不是这件事情真正值得讨论的问题。 因为加拿大从来没有规定： 毕业以后，就一定能够获得毕业工签。
真正值得思考的是： 这些学生为什么一直相信， 自己所读的课程符合PGWP资格？
目前公开的信息，其实还有很多空白
截至目前，根据公开报道， 我们能够确认几件事情。
第一，这批学生确实完成了课程， 并依法递交了PGWP申请。
第二，IRCC拒签的主要理由， 是认为有关课程属于Non-credit Program， 不符合PGWP资格。
第三，Portage College表示， 学校一直与IRCC保持沟通， 但毕业工签资格始终由IRCC依法决定， 学校不能保证任何毕业生一定符合PGWP要求。
除此之外，还有许多关键事实， 目前仍然没有公开完整的信息。
例如：
- 这些学生究竟是哪一年入学？
- 他们入学时，IRCC当时公布的PGWP政策是什么？
- 学校或招生机构当时如何介绍课程与PGWP之间的关系？
- 这些课程过去是否一直被认为符合PGWP资格？
- IRCC这次拒签，是因为政策发生了变化， 还是一直认为这些课程不符合资格， 只是现在开始严格执行？
这些问题，目前仍然没有公开答案。
因此，在事实尚未厘清之前， 无法简单地认定学生、学校或政府 任何一方正确或错误。
为什么这些问题如此重要？
因为这关系到一个非常重要的原则： 申请人是否有理由相信，自己符合申请资格。
假设一名学生在选择课程时， 根据当时公开的信息， 合理相信毕业后可以申请PGWP， 并因此决定来加拿大完成学业。
几年以后，当他毕业时， 却发现课程被认定不符合资格。
那么，问题就不仅仅是最终能否取得工签。 而是：申请人在作出重大教育和财务决定时， 所依据的信息是否准确。
相反，如果有关课程从一开始就不符合PGWP资格， 只是在招生过程中出现误导， 或者申请人自己误解了政策， 那么这又是另外一个完全不同的问题。
目前我们还不知道答案， 但这些问题值得继续关注。
这也是加拿大国际学生制度正在发生的变化
过去十多年， 很多国际学生对于加拿大留学 都有一条十分熟悉的发展路径： 从留学到毕业工签， 积累加拿大工作经验，然后移民。
PGWP也因此成为加拿大国际教育 最具吸引力的政策之一。
然而，近几年， 加拿大开始持续调整国际学生制度。 包括：
- 取消部分公私合作课程的PGWP资格；
- 为PGWP增加语言要求；
- 对部分非学位课程增加专业限制；
- 根据加拿大劳动力市场需要， 不断调整符合资格的专业名单。
这些改革说明： PGWP已经不再只是完成加拿大教育后的一个 “标准配套”。
它越来越成为加拿大劳动力市场政策的一部分。 政府希望留下真正符合加拿大长期发展需要的人才， 而不是让所有毕业生自动取得开放工签。
作为移民顾问，我更关心的是申请人如何避免类似情况
很多人在讨论：到底是谁的责任？
坦白说，目前还很难回答。 因为真正关键的事实没有全部公开。
但作为移民顾问，我更关心的是： 未来的申请人，如何避免遇到同样的问题。
我认为，至少应该关注以下几个方面。
第一，不要只确认学校，更要确认具体课程。
即使同一所学校，不同课程， 也可能适用不同的PGWP规定。
第二，不要把招生宣传当成最终依据。
学校负责提供教育。 毕业工签资格，则始终由IRCC根据法律决定。
任何关于工签或未来移民资格的信息， 都应该结合IRCC官方政策进一步确认。
第三，关注政策，也要关注政策可能带来的风险。
加拿大移民政策一直都可能调整。
对于一个需要几年才能完成的学习计划来说， 不仅要了解今天的政策， 也要考虑未来如果政策发生变化， 会不会影响自己的规划。
第四，把留学放在整体人生规划中思考。
今天选择课程， 不只是为了取得一张毕业证书。
更重要的是： 它是否能够支持未来的职业发展， 是否符合自己的长期目标， 以及是否仍然存在可行的发展路径。
最后
卡尔加里国际学生绝食事件最终将如何发展， 目前仍然有待观察。
随着更多事实公开， 也许我们会更清楚地了解： 学生当初为什么会相信自己符合PGWP资格， 学校提供了哪些信息， IRCC又是如何理解相关规定。
但无论最终结果如何， 这起事件已经提醒所有准备来加拿大留学的人： 今天需要认真研究的， 不只是“毕业以后能不能申请工签”， 而是“为什么我认为自己符合资格？ 我的判断依据是否准确？”
在加拿大移民政策不断调整的今天， 真正重要的，不是依赖一种普遍的预期， 而是在申请之前， 对课程资格、政策要求和未来发展路径进行充分核实。
因为，一次正确的规划， 往往比毕业以后寻找补救办法更加重要。
Why Did These Students Believe They Were Eligible for a Post-Graduate Work Permit?
What the Calgary Student Hunger Strike Reveals About the Risks of Study Planning in Canada
In July 2026, a dispute over Canada’s Post-Graduate Work Permit (PGWP) program escalated into a student hunger strike in Calgary.
Dozens of international students set up an encampment in the city, with several beginning a hunger strike in an effort to persuade the federal government to reconsider their refused PGWP applications.
According to media reports, many of these students completed a Continuing Education Diploma associated with Portage College, delivered through partner institutions.
After graduation, they applied for a PGWP but were refused by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).
The reported reason was that their programs were classified as non-credit programs, making them ineligible for a PGWP.
The story quickly attracted national attention.
For many people, the immediate reaction was: “Why were these graduates denied a Post-Graduate work permit?”
As an immigration consultant, however, I believe a different question deserves greater attention.
Why did these students believe they were eligible for a PGWP in the first place?
There Are Still Important Facts We Do Not Know
Based on the information currently available, several facts appear to be clear.
The students completed their programs and submitted PGWP applications.
IRCC refused many of those applications because the programs were considered non-credit programs that do not qualify under the PGWP program.
Portage College has publicly stated that it continues to communicate with IRCC regarding the situation but also emphasized that PGWP eligibility is determined solely by IRCC and cannot be guaranteed by the institution.
Beyond these facts, however, significant questions remain unanswered.
For example:
- When did these students begin their studies?
- What were the published PGWP rules at the time they enrolled?
- How was PGWP eligibility presented during the recruitment process?
- Had these programs previously been regarded as PGWP-eligible?
- Did IRCC change the policy, or has it consistently considered these programs ineligible and is now applying the rules more strictly?
At this stage, the public simply does not have enough information to answer these questions.
For that reason, it would be premature to conclude that the students, the school, or the government is entirely right or entirely wrong.
Why Do These Questions Matter?
Because they go to the heart of one fundamental issue: Did the applicants have reasonable grounds to believe they were eligible?
Imagine a student who chooses a program after reviewing the information that was publicly available at the time and reasonably believes that graduating from that program would make them eligible to apply for a PGWP.
Several years later, after completing the program, they discover that the program is considered ineligible.
The issue is no longer simply whether they qualify for a work permit.
It becomes a question of whether the information on which they based significant educational and financial decisions was accurate.
On the other hand, if the program was never PGWP-eligible and the misunderstanding resulted from inaccurate recruitment information or a misunderstanding of the immigration rules, the situation would be very different.
At this point, we simply do not know which explanation is correct.
These are precisely the questions that deserve further examination.
A Broader Shift in Canada’s International Student System
For more than a decade, many international students viewed Canada’s education system through a relatively predictable pathway:
Study in Canada → Obtain a PGWP → Gain Canadian work experience → Apply for permanent residence
The PGWP became one of the most attractive features of Canada’s international education system.
In recent years, however, the policy landscape has changed significantly.
Canada has introduced a series of reforms, including:
- ending PGWP eligibility for certain public-private partnership programs;
- introducing language requirements for most PGWP applicants;
- restricting eligibility for many non-degree programs based on fields of study; and
- regularly updating the list of eligible programs to better align with Canada’s labour market needs.
These reforms demonstrate that the PGWP is no longer viewed simply as a standard benefit following graduation.
Instead, it has increasingly become part of Canada’s broader workforce and immigration strategy.
The government’s objective is no longer to provide an open work permit to every international graduate, but rather to retain graduates whose education and skills align with Canada’s long-term economic priorities.
Looking Beyond This Particular Case
Many people are asking the same question: Who is responsible?
At this stage, I believe it is still too early to answer that question.
Too many important facts remain unknown.
As an immigration consultant, however, my primary concern is not assigning blame.
My concern is helping future students avoid finding themselves in similar situations.
For anyone considering studying in Canada, I would recommend paying close attention to four important issues.
First, verify the specific program—not just the institution.
Different programs offered by the same institution may have different immigration consequences.
Second, do not rely solely on recruitment materials or verbal assurances.
Educational institutions provide academic programs.
Eligibility for a Post-Graduate work permit is determined exclusively by IRCC under Canadian immigration law.
Whenever immigration benefits are discussed, students should verify the information against official IRCC guidance.
Third, understand that immigration policies can change.
A study plan often spans several years.
Students should not only understand today’s rules but also consider how future policy changes could affect their long-term plans.
Finally, treat education as part of a broader career strategy.
Choosing a program should involve more than obtaining a diploma or degree.
Students should also consider whether the program supports their long-term professional goals and whether it continues to offer realistic opportunities after graduation.
Final Thoughts
The Calgary student hunger strike continues to evolve, and additional facts may become available in the future.
As more information emerges, we may gain a clearer understanding of why these students believed they were eligible for a PGWP, what information they received before enrolling, and how IRCC interpreted the applicable rules.
Regardless of how the dispute is ultimately resolved, the case offers an important lesson for anyone planning to study in Canada.
The question is no longer simply: “Can I apply for a Post-Graduate work permit after I graduate?”
A more important question is: “Why do I believe I will be eligible, and what is that belief based on?”
In today’s rapidly evolving immigration environment, successful study planning requires more than assumptions or general expectations.
It requires carefully verifying program eligibility, understanding current immigration policies, and evaluating potential risks before making significant educational and financial commitments.
In many cases, thorough planning at the beginning of the journey is far more valuable than trying to solve unexpected problems after graduation.