People who ask this question have failed to understand the most important thing about the new changes, which is that there is now no course which is a safe pathway to permanent residence.  The whole point of the latest change, which represents a radical break with the past approach to skilled migration, is that student visas will be granted for educational purposes which have no particular connection with subsequent permanent residence.  Education is to be one thing, and skilled migration is to be another.  As the Immigration Department effectively states, people should no longer choose a course because they expect to get PR out of it.  Courses should be for people who wish to use them for a career.  There is to be no guarantee, and there should be no expectation, that any course will lead to some entitlement to migration later on.  Skilled migration is to be based on the skills which Australia needs, not on the courses which overseas students have completed.
 
For this reason there is no point in asking a migration agent, education agent or anybody else which course a student should take in order to get PR.  The SOL is to be revised every year, and there is no guarantee that an occupation which is on the list when a student enrols in a course will still be on the list when he or she completes the course.  Therefore no honest agent can confidently suggest any course.  At best, one may make an educated guess that a few specialized occupations, mostly related to the medical and nursing professions, are likely to still be on the list in two years’ time.  Students should be aware, however, that courses leading to these qualifications are difficult ones requiring high academic ability and a high level of English language skill.
 
I have heard that some agents are suggesting that students should do a short course in business management, followed by another short course in some subject that is on the SOL at the time they complete business management.  I do not believe this is a sensible idea.  The entire two years of study must be relevant to the occupation one nominates.  It is true that at the Migration Review Tribunal it has sometimes been held that business studies are relevant to some unlikely-seeming occupations such as Cook.  But on the other hand, sometimes it has been held that there is insufficient relevance.  It seems to me that DIAC is unlikely to accept business studies as relevant to many occupations.  In the first place, a field in which one could acquire the necessary skills with just one year of study plus a bit of business training is unlikely to represent the kind of specialist skills that Australia needs.  In the second place, the proposal, if widely accepted, would effectively allow students to circumvent the purpose of the new rules and select themselves for migration rather than Australia selecting the people it needs.  While the idea may work in a few cases, I doubt that it would be effective for most people, and it certainly represents a very high risk of wasting thousands of dollars in course fees as well as of two years of a student’s life.
 
The emphasis now is on targeted migration which meets the needs of specific areas of Australia and specific employers.  Therefore there will be a strong emphasis on sponsorship by States, Territories and employers.  State migration schemes are being developed which concentrate on skills which are in demand in particular areas.  These schemes will, I hope, open doors to skilled migrants.  It is to be expected that more modifications will be made to the system in future which will give more emphasis to these factors.
 
Provision has been made for most current overseas students to obtain temporary residence on the basis of the existing SOL.  Permanent residence, however, will be a different matter.  One way of looking at it might be to say that you can no longer expect to obtain PR just because you will complete a particular course in two years.  Rather, the issue will be whether you already have the skills which are in demand at the time you apply.  This makes sense from the point of view of the Australian economy. 
 
Ultimately, I must agree with the view which is put by the government, that students should choose a course based on their abilities and interests, and perhaps with a view to furthering their careers in their own countries, but not in the expectation that they will achieve PR in Australia.  This is how things used to be about 10 years ago.  Making a connection between education and PR has not worked well for Australia, as it has not given Australia the skilled migrants it needs.  It has not worked well for international students either, who often end up in menial, low-paying jobs and are often victimized by private colleges, education agents and employers.  The return to the old way of doing things will disappoint many who had unrealistic expectations, and will cause hardship in some cases, but on the whole I believe it is the only sensible way to proceed.