SFU-aerial

US and International

SFU has a highly diverse community, with both faculty and graduate students from around the world. International students comprise 20–25% of the graduate student population as a whole and 40–60% in science and technology areas.

The largest numbers of our graduate students come to SFU from China, Iran, the United States, India and Germany, but we have students from over 100 countries. (Want to know more? See our engagement map)

In most programs at Simon Fraser University, US and international students pay the same fees as domestic students for graduate programs (Masters, Doctoral, Graduate Diploma). See fee chart for details.

Application Process

The graduate school application process is the same for domestic and US/international students.

Different graduate programs have different application deadlines.

International applicants are encouraged to apply early in order to ensure adequate time to obtain study permits and make travel arrangements. In some countries, it can take months to obtain a study permit, especially if a medical exam is required. (See important tips: how to avoid delays in study permit processing)

If you have questions about your admission qualifications, please contact your target department of enrollment directly.

Top Questions

These sections will answer most of your questions about living in Vancouver and Canada.

SFU's International Rankings

Search the Graduate Studies website

Print

Defences and Events

  • Brian Uher-Koch, MSc Thesis Defence, Biological Sciences
    2:00 PM - 4:00 PM
    May 21, 2013
    Supervisor Dr. Ronald Ydenberg Thesis Title: Latitudinal and seasonal variation in non-breeding survival of surf and white-winged scoters
  • Joshua Newman, PhD Thesis Defence, Political Science
    5:00 PM - 8:00 PM
    May 22, 2013
    Location: SFU Harbour Centre, The Repap Policy Room (1425) Title: The Governance of Public-Private Partnerships: Success and Failure in the Transportation Sector Abstract Since the economic crises of the 1970s, the political climate in many developed countries has been reoriented from a focus on the public provision of goods and services to an emphasis on curbing government spending, reducing taxes, and limiting bureaucracy. As a consequence, alternative service delivery arrangements, in which non-government entities and private sector corporations are involved in public service delivery, have become increasingly popular in the last 30 years. The term “governance” is now commonly used to signify this shift away from a traditional hierarchical mode of government to a more horizontal environment of policy formulation and implementation. For many supporters of alternative service delivery, increased freedom for the private sector is regarded as the key to successful governance. Public-private partnerships (P3s) are a family of alternative service delivery mechanisms that allow the private sector to finance, own, and deliver goods and services to the public through long-term contractual arrangements with governments and other public sector agencies. P3s fit comfortably into the logic of alternative service delivery, which implies that by removing some – but not all – elements of the public sector and replacing them with some – but not all – aspects of the private sector, a balance between public sector accountability and private sector efficiency can be struck. However, this presents an inherent conflict, as the public sector is viewed simultaneously as the problem and as the solution to improving public service delivery. This inherent conflict in governance arrangements can sometimes lead to governance failure, a phenomenon that is not sufficiently understood. First, I show that governance failure can have negative consequences for the state and society. Then, I examine two case studies in P3 delivery of transportation infrastructure, the Canada Line in Vancouver, Canada and the Sydney Airport Link in Sydney, Australia, to determine how governance failure occurs and how it can be avoided. These two cases have similar technical parameters and political motivations, but in the Canadian case, where the public sector demonstrated policy leadership through the fostering of policy networks, through bounded-rational policy learning, and through a collaborative institutional approach to project implementation, successful governance was achieved. By contrast, the Australian case, in which the government was not substantially engaged in the partnership, resulted in governance failure. From an analysis of these two cases I conclude that public sector policy leadership is essential to the prevention of governance failure.
  • Adhi Susilo PhD Education Thesis Examination
    10:00 AM - 1:00 PM
    May 30, 2013
    No Description

    • Download .ics