One Minute Read
USCIS recognizes STEM work as nationally important — but not all STEM work equally. Teaching STEM subjects, even at the graduate level, is treated very differently from researching or applying STEM knowledge. Many STEM professionals do both, and framing the wrong activity as your core endeavor can cost you Prong 1. This article explains the distinction and how to position yourself correctly.
Why USCIS Distinguishes Research from Teaching
The Dhanasar decision itself drew this line clearly. The same petitioner who succeeded on Prong 1 for his aerospace propulsion research did not succeed on Prong 1 for his teaching activities. The AAO stated: “While STEM teaching has substantial merit in relation to U.S. educational interests, the record does not indicate by a preponderance of the evidence that the petitioner would be engaged in activities that would impact the field of STEM education more broadly.”
This distinction matters for every professional whose work touches instruction, mentorship, training, or curriculum development alongside their research or applied work. USCIS is not saying that STEM teaching is unimportant. It is saying that classroom instruction, without broader field-level implications, does not rise to the level of national importance required by Prong 1. The reason is that national importance requires prospective impact beyond the immediate recipient of the activity. Teaching a class benefits the students in that class. Research that advances a field benefits everyone who uses or builds on that knowledge.
The USCIS Policy Manual reinforces this: “A proposed endeavor to engage in classroom teaching, without broader implications for a field or region, generally does not rise to the level of having national importance. Citing the general importance of the profession of classroom teaching would not alone be sufficient to demonstrate national importance in the context of a national interest waiver request.”
What Counts as Research-Level Impact
The key phrase in the Dhanasar analysis is “broader implications.” Research has broader implications when its findings can be adopted, built upon, replicated, or applied by others beyond the immediate project. A published study on software testing methodologies has broader implications because any practitioner in that field can read and apply its conclusions. A course taught to twenty students does not have that same reach unless the curriculum itself is published, disseminated, or adopted by other institutions.
Applied work in industry can also have broader implications even without formal academic publication. A professional who develops a new quality assurance framework and implements it across a sector, or whose methodology gets adopted by other organizations, has created broader implications from non-academic work. Similarly, open-source tools, publicly released datasets, technical standards contributions, and white papers distributed through industry channels can all demonstrate the kind of prospective, field-level impact that teaching alone typically cannot.
USCIS officers look for evidence that your work can travel beyond your immediate employer or classroom. The question they are asking is: will this work affect the field, the industry, or the public in a way that extends beyond your direct participation? If the answer depends entirely on you being personally present, the impact is probably too narrow.
When Your Work Involves Both Teaching and Research
Many professionals, especially those in academia and applied sciences, do both. A university professor conducts research and teaches classes. A corporate trainer develops methodologies through applied research and then teaches those methodologies. A medical professional sees patients, conducts clinical research, and trains residents. In all of these cases, the challenge is ensuring that your proposed endeavor statement emphasizes the activities with broader implications while explaining how the teaching component supports and advances the research rather than defining it.
The safest approach is to treat research and application as your primary endeavor and position teaching or training as an enabling activity. You might write: “My proposed endeavor is to advance research on data integrity frameworks for healthcare information systems, contributing findings through publications and professional presentations. My instructional activities directly support this endeavor by developing the next generation of practitioners who will implement and refine these frameworks across U.S. healthcare organizations.” In this framing, teaching is not the endeavor — it is described as instrumental to advancing the broader research mission.
This framing also helps you avoid the common mistake of describing teaching as evidence of national importance simply because the field is nationally important. USCIS has been explicit that “citing the general importance of the profession” is not enough. You must demonstrate that your specific activities have specific broader implications.
The STEM Policy Manual Advantage — and Its Limits
USCIS has acknowledged in its Policy Manual that STEM endeavors often carry an inherent advantage in the national importance analysis. The manual states that “many proposed endeavors that aim to advance STEM technologies and research, whether in academic or industry settings, not only have substantial merit in relation to U.S. science and technology interests, but also have sufficiently broad potential implications to demonstrate national importance.” This is a meaningful positive factor for STEM professionals.
However, this advantage applies to endeavors that aim to advance STEM technologies and research. It does not apply automatically to all work performed by someone with a STEM degree. A STEM professional whose proposed endeavor is to teach introductory programming does not get the benefit of this STEM presumption, because the work itself is not advancing STEM technologies or research. The degree creates eligibility potential; the proposed endeavor must carry the national importance argument independently.
This means that even with a strong STEM background, you still need to describe a forward-looking research or application agenda. The degree helps establish Prong 2 positioning. Prong 1 depends on what you plan to do and why it matters, regardless of what credentials you hold.
Practical Steps for STEM Professionals
Start by identifying the specific research questions or applied challenges your proposed endeavor addresses. If you cannot state a specific problem you are working to solve, your endeavor statement is probably too vague. Then describe how your work produces outputs that extend beyond your immediate employer or classroom: publications, frameworks, tools, standards, or practices that others can use.
Gather evidence that your field considers these questions nationally important. Federal agency reports, Congressional testimony, executive orders, NSF funding priorities, and NIST publications all signal where the government believes STEM investment is needed. Connecting your specific research agenda to these documented priorities is one of the most effective Prong 1 strategies available to STEM professionals.
If your work includes teaching, document separately why the teaching component advances a broader mission rather than being the mission itself. One or two sentences in your petition letter can make the difference between a teaching-first reading and a research-first reading of your profile.
References and Further Reading
DHS STEM Designated Degree Program List — https://www.ice.gov/doclib/sevis/pdf/stemList2024.pdf
Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016) — https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/err/B5%20-%20Members%20of%20the%20Professions%20Holding%20Advanced%20Degrees%20or%20Aliens%20of%20Exceptional%20Ability/Decisions_Issued_in_2016/DEC012016_01B5203.pdf
USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 6, Part F, Chapter 5 — https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-part-f-chapter-5
NSF — Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2022-2026 — https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf22068
White House Office of Science and Technology Policy — https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/
