If graduates can’t find jobs and pay back loans, for-profit schools could lose federal aid

Related to our discussion the other day over whether public dollars should fund degrees that don’t lead to jobs: The U.S. Department of Education will now impose a “gainful employment” rule, which will ban for-profit schools from federal financial aid if a sizable number of their graduates can’t find jobs that that enable them to repay their student loans.

While students at for-profit institutions represent 12 percent of all higher education students, they represent 26 percent of all student loans and 46 percent of all student loan dollars in default. The median Federal student loan debt carried by students earning associate degrees at for-profit institutions was $14,000, while the majority of students at community colleges do not borrow for the same degrees.

The for-profits live on public dollars as more than a quarter receive 80 percent of their revenues from taxpayer-financed federal student aid. Given their reliance on federal aid, this would seem to be a spur for reform within their ranks.

The new rules do not go far enough, according to José Cruz, vice president of the Education Trust. In a statement, Cruz said:

“The abuses of career colleges have been well documented. But the final, watered-down rule does not do nearly enough to curb these abuses. It provides students and taxpayers with only the most meager of protections against an aggressive industry bent on exponential growth and ever-escalating profits. In the end, the 436-page document is little more than an a la carte menu of ways these institutions can game the system.

For example, under the new regulations, many of the most toxic career education programs will continue to operate — largely at taxpayer expense — for three years with no requirements to improve. And because 81 percent of these programs are two years or fewer, the vast majority of students will be out of school and into the job market, shouldering huge debt and holding a certificate or diploma that may or may not lead to gainful employment before any sanctions are levied against the programs that shortchanged their dreams and made off with their cash.

In announcing the regulations, Secretary Arne Duncan told The New York Times that “as a country, we need this sector to succeed.” This is a troubling statement, but makes clear the point of view the administration took in finalizing these regulations. America does not need this sector to succeed. We need our students to succeed. Regulation designed for the success of the sector won’t help our students, our economy or our democracy.

According to US DOE:

Today, the Obama Administration released final regulations requiring career college programs to better prepare students for “gainful employment” or risk losing access to Federal student aid. While many career college programs are helping to prepare America’s workforce for the jobs of the future, far too many students at these schools are taking on unsustainable debt in exchange for degrees and certificates that fail to help them get the jobs they need or were promised. These regulations are designed to ramp up over the next four years, giving colleges time to reform while protecting students and their families from exploitative programs.

“These new regulations will help ensure that students at these schools are getting what they pay for: solid preparation for a good job,” Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said. “We’re giving career colleges every opportunity to reform themselves but we’re not letting them off the hook, because too many vulnerable students are being hurt,” Duncan continued.

To qualify for Federal aid, the law requires that most for-profit programs and certificate programs at nonprofit and public institutions prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation. Under the regulations introduced today, a program would be considered to lead to gainful employment if it meets at least one of the following three metrics: at least 35 percent of former students are repaying their loans (defined as reducing the loan balance by at least $1); the estimated annual loan payment of a typical graduate does not exceed 30 percent of his or her discretionary income; or the estimated annual loan payment of a typical graduate does not exceed 12 percent of his or her total earnings. While the regulations apply to occupational training programs at all types of institutions, for-profit programs are most likely to leave their students with unaffordable debts and poor employment prospects.

“While for-profit schools have profited and prospered thanks to Federal dollars, some of their students have not. This is a disservice to students and taxpayers, and undermines the valuable work being done by the for-profit education industry as a whole,” Duncan continued.

Efforts to regulate abuse by for-profit institutions date back to the Reagan administration, under the leadership of then Secretary of Education William Bennett. However, regulations were weakened during the previous administration, leading to the rapid growth of enrollment and default rates at for-profit institutions seen in recent years.

These problems and wide-spread evidence of waste, fraud and abuse prompted the Obama administration to embark on an 18-month negotiation with the higher education community over new regulations. During the negotiation, the Department worked with stakeholders to develop a set of proposals around 14 specific issues that strengthen the integrity of the Federal student aid program and ensure that taxpayer funds are used appropriately. The final gainful employment regulations published today follow that two-year process and will go into effect on July 1, 2012.

Based on thoughtful consideration of public comments and concerns, the new regulations improve upon the Department’s previously released draft proposal. The rules issued today, which reflect the principles outlined in the President’s recent Executive Order on improving regulations, provide students and consumers with the information they need to make good educational choices and give failing programs ample opportunity to make needed improvements. Institutions will now be required to disclose their total program costs, loan repayment rates, graduates’ debt-to-earnings ratio and other critical consumer information to help students better choose the gainful employment program that’s right for them. And poor performing programs must fail the debt measures three times in a four-year period before losing eligibility to participate in Federal student aid programs, rather than losing eligibility immediately.

The first time a program fails to meet the debt measure it must disclose to students why the measurement was missed and how the issue will be addressed. After missing the debt measure for the second time in four years, programs must inform students that their debts may be unaffordable after graduation, that the program is at risk of losing eligibility to participate in Federal student aid programs, and what their existing transfer options are. After a third failure in four years, the program loses eligibility to participate in Federal student aid programs and cannot reapply for eligibility for at least three years. Under this framework, the first year a program could become ineligible would be 2015, based on its performance in FY 2012-2014.

“We’re asking companies that get up to 90 percent of their profits from taxpayer dollars to be at least 35 percent effective,” Duncan said. “This is a perfectly reasonable bar and one that every for-profit program should be able to reach. We’re also giving poor performing for-profit programs every chance to improve. But if you get three strikes in four years, you’re out.”

–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog

58 comments Add your comment

catlady

June 2nd, 2011
10:24 am

Something similiar was proposed before, but was lobbied out.

Dr NO

June 2nd, 2011
10:29 am

Very good idea.

jarvis

June 2nd, 2011
10:57 am

For-profit colleges are a total scam. Completely unrespected in HR circles.

You might as well have no college on your resume when compared to having a UofP degree on there. They cost more than a not-for-profit, and they have almost no respect. Schools without acceptance criteria are just not seen a being on equal footing. Don’t waste your money.

William Casey

June 2nd, 2011
10:57 am

I agree. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with “for profit” schools, after all, this is America. However, my advice to anyone considering enrolling in one: remember that what they are actually selling is the “dream of a better life” (a noble aspiration) rather than an ACTUAL JOB. Of course, this is true of traditional colleges and universities as well. There are no guarantees. I’m a great believer in education but the bitter fact of the matter is that is doesn’t matter how qualified one is if no one is hiring for that specific occupation. Perhaps a better idea would be to enact “pay half now and half (interest free) over time once the student has an actual paying job. This might discourage “for profit” schools from offering training in areas in which there are few jobs and accepting unqualified students. As things stand now, there is no motivation for either.

jmike

June 2nd, 2011
11:01 am

For Profit schools are getting what they deserve. I used to work for one, until they laid my dept off nationwide. They knew last year that this was coming. Charging a student $40k for a 2 year degree..then they graduate, earning @ $7-$11 an hour- basically making it almost impossible to pay off the debt. Not to mention their interest rates are pretty steep too. Atlanta has their fair share of these for profit schools.

jmike

June 2nd, 2011
11:03 am

agreed jarvis- when i was working at one of these schools- i’d see students who barely passed high school or barely get their GED. Not to mention, they mostly targeted minorites/low income individuals. Ever wonder why so many advertisements for For Profit schools are plastered all over Marta buses, stations and trains??

ABC

June 2nd, 2011
11:08 am

Good. Those things are gigantic scams.

seen it all

June 2nd, 2011
11:27 am

You can’t necessarily dismiss all for-profit universities. I am currently taking an M.Ed program at the American College of Education. The college is fully accredited. The coursework is on par with other state institutions I am familar with. The work is more actually because the instruction and coursework are crammed into a 5 week period.

Since we are talking about teachers, on an education blog, I’ll tell you that most of the people in these programs are teachers WITH JOBS. People attend these colleges for career and pay advancement. If you learn some from it, it’s that special individual who can draw knowledge and wisdom from it.

My life experience has taught me that no matter where you are, most people are into teaching strictly for the money and benefits. They do ONLY what they need to do to maintain their jobs. I have been involved in education for 15 years now. I have seen a lot of things. I have taught in America and overseas. The MOST of the truly motivated teachers I have seen were either in the suburbs, teaching the white middle class child, or a few exceptional African American teachers “trying to make a difference” in the hood. You go overseas and it’s mostly people who are unqualified to call themselves a teacher, can’t get a teaching job back in their home country, want a free yearlong vacation, or are after some money they can’t earn back home.

Nobody really wants to teach.

So it really doesn’t matter where the people get their degrees from. The people in the programs like University of Phoenix or Kaplan are already working since they are in the programs to boost their pay (move up on the pay scale). Otherwise they would never waste their time or money slogging it out in the WAY OVERPRICED programs.

My question is– who are these people who are in these college programs who are waiting to get a job after “graduation”.

Inman Park

June 2nd, 2011
11:41 am

There is simply no reason for anyone to go to a ‘for profit” college, university, or tech school. The state of Georgia has more than its share of community colleges and vocation-tech schools which are not only less expensive but offer a quality education. People out of work or untrained are being lead astray by these ridiculous television commercials from “for profit” schools promising “great careers!” They are an utter and complete waste of money. As a person in a position to hire people, I always look with a jaundiced eye when I see an applicant list one of these schools on their application. The fact that they went to one of these “schools” at all is at least some evidence of overall incompetence.

dc

June 2nd, 2011
11:54 am

Why stop at “for profit” colleges. Any college that promises their prospective students a better life, in order to get them to spend (borrow, in many cases) 10s to 100s of thousands of dollars, and fails to produce marketable value, should face the same.

This should include all public colleges as well.

jarvis

June 2nd, 2011
12:05 pm

@Inman, I won’t go as far as to say the people are incompetent, but I do believe they are gullible. The curriculum might be more intense than a traditional school (I don’t know, I didn’t go to a for-profit), but I can tell you that their degrees are not respected. This may not be fair, but it is a fact.

You are not getting what you pay for.

Dr. Craig Spinks/ Augusta

June 2nd, 2011
12:28 pm

Educrats at any level who defraud their students of appropriate educational opportunities should incur criminal penalties.

Atlanta Mom

June 2nd, 2011
12:33 pm

“if a sizable number of their graduates can’t find jobs ”
I don’t know anything about for profit schools, but this sounds like a loophole to me. They have to graduate. What are the graduation rates of for profit schools?
Also, how does their graduation rate compare to our Georgia colleges that have no SAT requirement? Aren’t many of the students at those schools getting federal guaranteed loans?

Ron

June 2nd, 2011
12:33 pm

Seen it all – this is the most idiotic post I have read in quite some time. I work with many that want to teach, not for the money bit for the love of teaching. Myself, I loved it so much I spent 38 years teaching in “those schools” that are perceived as less than desirable. As for overseas, you are saying that DODDs teachers are not capable of getting a job in the states? Check again, it is the same for many other countries. Their requirements are very tough and very difficult to get one of those jobs. As for it does not matter where your degree is from – HAH!. More and more systems are shying away from those schools that are handout universities. They are a scam and apparently you think that because you say so makes it so.

NCR

June 2nd, 2011
12:37 pm

Awesome. All these schools have got to stop promising what they know they can’t deliver. Way too many schools, way too many kids drowning in debt, getting overpriced educations that will offer NO REALISTIC way to payback. Spending $30K+ just to get a piece of paper that says “I OFFICIALLY KNOW SOMETHING”. Whatever. Poor kids getting screwed even before he walks out the school door.

bob leblah

June 2nd, 2011
12:46 pm

Univ of Phoenix etc are jokes, however so is this bureaucratic mess the White house created. An exerpt,
“graduate does not exceed 12 percent of his or her total earnings”, so if its 11.98% its ok. These kinds of bills are non-sense and create their own problems. This is another bill to protect people from being stupid.

bob leblah

June 2nd, 2011
12:55 pm

Ladies & Gentleman, I am a Dr from the University of Phoenix. I have received extensive training including clamping forceps down on a patient by using my mouse. Anyone need a family doctor?

Chris

June 2nd, 2011
1:01 pm

To me it doesn’t matter if it is a good idea or not. The bottom line is this is the government trying to legislate private citizens and private universities. This should not be the role of the government. Those students are still responsible for their student loans. If an indiviaual qualifies for government student loans, it shouldn’t matter where that student applies the loan.

Henry Thoreaux

June 2nd, 2011
1:12 pm

Inman Park: jaundiced eye? I don’t think that that is used correctly. It is a noun, and you are using it as an adjective. Jaundice is a yellowish pigment of the skin. It can also mean a state or attutude characterized by hostility or distaste. Just a heads up. Knowing is half the battle.

Neil Murray

June 2nd, 2011
1:14 pm

If the lobbyists don’t kill this second effort at protecting taxpayer dollars, watch for more tear-jerking full-page ads in the AJC suggesting that the federal government wants to kill the dreams of hard-working students.

I see a pattern here. The Obama administration also wants to institute performance criteria for hospitals to weed out the weak institutions that do little more than devour public money. And Obama’s critics say he is a far-left, entitlement liberal. Not so! On the whole, he’s a moderate, a pragmatist, and he wants to make sure the government gets what the people’s money is supposed to be paying for. (Gosh, that sounds almost conservative, doesn’t it?)

Marg

June 2nd, 2011
1:38 pm

Long time reader, first time poster. Love your blog Maureen! I applaud the fed’s move on the for-profit front and wish it had occured earlier. To posters critical of the fed’s move to regulate the relationship between adult students and for-profit institutions, remember that the fed isn’t attempting to prevent the formation of the relationship, the fed is regulating taxpayer subsidy of the relationship, which is appropriate considering the budget deficit and startling statistics on for-profit student default rates.

Teaching is worse in FL

June 2nd, 2011
1:45 pm

And student athletes who make it into a professional league should pay back their scholarships if they don’t finish their degree.

BTW, SEC football coaches presented a plan to pay athletes for “expenses.” (A blog idea, Maureen?)

WTW

June 2nd, 2011
1:46 pm

Like most well-intentioned government programs, the details matter. According to the article,

“Institutions will now be required to disclose their total program costs, loan repayment rates, graduates’ debt-to-earnings ratio and other critical consumer information to help students better choose the gainful employment program that’s right for them.”

A troubling question about this statement is how it would be possible for an institution to supply factual data for such a report. Does this mean as a condition of enrollment, students are required to henceforth supply financial statements to their alma mater? Is it not possible private non-profit or public institutions could be similarly guilty of selling dreams?

Would this be a unique reporting requirement of for-profit institutions? Does it mean only those institutions receiving federal loan money on behalf of their students are required to provide financial disclosures?

While it is probably a good idea for the government to step in where schools are making fraudulent claims using truth in advertising laws, it would seem consenting adults should be left to make their own informed choices about what educational programs are appropriate for their own needs.

Rather than assuming adults are not capable of making their own choices, perhaps the better solution is to just require all institutions to clearly disclose a student’s total costs for their program and how this compares to other institutions and their programs. Might also supply results of some ongoing student survey that measures their satisfaction and perceived efficacy of the experience. Such a survey might be conducted after the student’s first year, last year, and then 1 and 5 years after graduation.

MM

June 2nd, 2011
1:50 pm

Perfect example of the “free market” at work in the worst way. An economist would say there are important “information assymetries” at work. The potential customer is too ill-informed to make a good decision and, literally, there’s no way to get objective, unbiased information. Watch out–it’s a jungle out there and the weak pay a high price for their ignorance.

The TV ads tell a one-sided and inaccurate view of for-profit education (often online delivery). It’s more or less harmless if the ad is for is for a consumer frill but an overly expensive college education is another thing. Extensive lobbying of Congress coupled with ideological blinders makes this kind of robbery legal. Muggers go to jail for this but white-collar “educators” get rich.

ABC

June 2nd, 2011
1:59 pm

Chris: it’s not just private citizens and private entities. These people are using govt money. YOUR money. MY money. So heck yeah they can (and should!) have something to say about where it goes!

Ernest

June 2nd, 2011
2:24 pm

Good post WTW! Making providing this information in a transparent manner a requirement for getting federal loans will ensure compliance.

It would be interesting to know for any school their placement rate at the school major level along with some idea of wages. This way someone could looks at the time and costs required then determine when they could expect an ROI if they pursue that major.

Freedom Education

June 2nd, 2011
2:43 pm

So where in the constitution does the federal government have the right to loan money for education? Like most of the federal government actions, there is no constitutional provision. Everyone needs to read Inside American Education: The Decline, The Deception, The Dogmas by Thomas Sowell (1993). “A private college or university which kept its tuition affordable… could forfeit millions of dollars annually in federal money. For example, if College X can provide a good education at a tuition of $8,000 a year, while its average student’s family can afford $9,000, then it loses opportunities to receive federal money. By raising its tuition to $12,000, it not only gets an additional $1,000 per student from their families but also an additional $3,000 per student from the government” (p. 263). This was required reading for my doctoral class in a non-profit private university.

Teacher Reader

June 2nd, 2011
2:52 pm

On line schools are accepted for administrative degrees throughout DCSS. Wonder what other government agencies take people with degrees from these places as freely as they would universities that have been around for a long time and require true entrance criteria?

catlady

June 2nd, 2011
3:25 pm

For-profit schools prey on the uneducated and naive.

There are also waayy too many on line “educational” degrees–private and for profit that take your money in exchange for Mickey Mouse work and worthless “education.”

bob leblah

June 2nd, 2011
3:58 pm

Good so you have a choice.. don’t get a degree from there…. Once again more legislation protecting the stupid from themselves.

APS parent

June 2nd, 2011
4:33 pm

Chris, WTW, and Ernest: Because these for profit schools run almost exclusively on federal student loan money (I believe it is about 90% of their revenue that is derived from federal student loans), the federal government absolutely should carefully monitor and regulate who the money is going to and how it is spent. It’s our tax dollars that are funding these dubious schools, and paying for expensive and largely worthless degrees that an alarming number of the student borrowers cannot pay back (i.e., the taxpayers eat it while the for profit colleges ride off into the sunset with all the money). If it’s all about “freedom of choice” to you, that’s fine — but have all these for profit college students pay these crazy tuition amounts with their own money. If that were the case, all of these for profit colleges would be out of business, which would be fine by me.

Preamble

June 2nd, 2011
4:35 pm

@ Freedom Education:

It’s in the first paragraph of the Constitution (preamble). “Promote the General Welfare”

Dekalb taxpayer

June 2nd, 2011
4:36 pm

Bob, I disagree; it’s legislation protecting taxpayers from the stupid.

QE3

June 2nd, 2011
4:42 pm

This could be seen as a condemnation of public education. The majority of Americans have been educated in public schools however, our nation’s debt is insolvent. Current unemployment is worse than the Great Depression and housing is in a double dip (down over 30%) recession. Whose record is worse?

APS parent

June 2nd, 2011
4:48 pm

It’s legislation protecting the taxpayers from the stupid and seedy profiteers.

Lee

June 2nd, 2011
5:41 pm

Let’s see, ADULTS make a bad decision and now the federal government has to pass a law to protect them from themselves????

Have you ever taken a gander at some of the offerings of our flagship university? http://bulletin.uga.edu/MajorsHome.aspx

African American Studies? Women’s Studies? Really?

If they want to guarantee a return on our money, maybe they should take a look at the Lotteries?

APS parent

June 2nd, 2011
5:50 pm

Lee: These people are making bad decisions (after heavy recruitment and a phony sales pitch by sleazy schools) with taxpayer money, so yes, the federal government needs to look into stopping that.

seen it all

June 2nd, 2011
6:02 pm

I disagree with the blanket statement that all “for-profit” universities are garbage and for losers. If the school is accredited by a regional accreditation authority, then the program must have the same coursework and rigor as a “public” university. We are not talking about the beauty college or diploma mill here. I attend a “for-profit” university. The work is the same, if not more, than the local in state college I would have attended if I were in the United States.

I am learning just as much as the students at the local “public” college. I don’t pay all those crazy fees like the teens as state u. pay. But do you know how I know that the work and rigor at my school is just as equal to city college? The minute the programs at these LEGITMATE colleges are not of equal rigor to the state schools, the schools will lose accreditation. And the minute that happens, the degree will be worthless and EVERY student at the school will drop it like a hot potato.

But I contend the ALL teachers (give or take a few) go to college and get master’s degrees, etc. for career and pay advancement. Nobody is doing this just for the love of learning and personal growth. Whether you are at the University of West Georgia or the University of Phoenix, in the end it’s all about the money.

And personally I think the haters out there are just jealous. They know they would rather get their degree sitting in the comfort of their home rather than slogging it out to sit in some silly class twice a week. You are writing the same papers I am. I just don’t have to listen to “Dr.” Nobody babble on for 2 hours about something I can read from a book.

Ernest

June 2nd, 2011
7:50 pm

It would be interesting to see the dollar amount for total education aid defaults. That might also help citizens determine the ROI from this assistance provided.

another comment

June 2nd, 2011
10:05 pm

Not only do people look at these worthless degrees but they look at the Made up names with odd spellings that parents of certain classes and races impart upon their offspring. Simply put you do not see CEO’s with degree’s from these institutions or names that look like they are on the 11:00 news or the lastest gang member trial names.

When I went to top 20 colleges a Private non-profit, tier just below the IVY’s for undergraduate and then one of the top 5 Public Engineer Schools in the Nation for Graduate School. The professors over and over told you college was about learning to think. It is also about living in the dorms and participating in the on-campus residence life. So much is learned, so many future connections are made by the university connections. I went to school with a major city mayor, former state lt. governor, former chair of the DNC, former chair of the RNC, I met numerous atheletes in college who went pro and introduced me to other pro atheletes, I have tried on a Chigaco Bears Super Bowl Ring ect… You simply can not discount the connections you obtain from going to a University that is in the top 20 in your major and living on Campus.

Parents also need to think to the future and make sure they give their children future CEO names. Otherwise their resume goes in the circular file or will not make the program on resumes to go forward, to hiring officials. Except in places like Dekalb where it seems to be a black patronage system based on the pervert Eddie Longs New Birth’s Church.

Teaching is worse in FL

June 2nd, 2011
10:19 pm

@seen it all: “But I contend the ALL teachers (give or take a few) go to college and get master’s degrees, etc. for career and pay advancement. Nobody is doing this just for the love of learning and personal growth.”

A degree is an investment, just as much as the stock market. I did not get mine just for the money; I happened to enjoy learning. Don’t presume to speak for me.

I would abolutely love to get a doctorate, but it is not worth the investment of my time and money.

Alecia

June 2nd, 2011
11:41 pm

For profit institutions represent 46 percent of loans in default. So…public(non profit) institutions represent 54 percent of the loans in default. Sounds like we need to look at all institutions. For profit and nonprofit universities offer programs, which have a slim chance of leading to employment. How long does it take to pay off a student loan from a large state university with a degree in Dance or Political Science?

Emily Morgan

June 3rd, 2011
3:59 am

The U.S. government is cracking down on for-profit schools, aiming to protect students from taking on too much debt. The Department of Education said most students attending vocational schools or career colleges take out student loans, and many of those students have a hard time finding jobs once they graduate, causing them to default on their loans. The department is cracking down on taxpayer dollars that fund for-profit schools. The “gainful employment” rule will ban schools, such as DeVry University or the University of Phoenix, from accessing federal aid dollars if too many of their graduates owe too much relative to their incomes or if too few of them are paying back their loan on time. The Department of Education said students at for-profit schools, such as culinary or technical programs, account for 12 percent of higher education students, but they default on 46 percent of student loans.
http://cashadvancesus.com/student-loan-debt/

catlady

June 3rd, 2011
7:53 am

Alecia–54% of the loans in default are from public AND PRIVaRE nonprofit colleges, such as Piedmont, Shorter, Mercer, Emory–you get the idea. And, percentage wise, the lower tier non-profits (both public and private) contribute a great deal of the unpaid debt, as they tend to matriculate less affluent students to begin with, and less prepared students. Emory has a much lower percentage students with defaults, than, say, Piedmont or Shorter, UGa has a lower percentage than Atlanta Metro, on the public side.

catlady

June 3rd, 2011
7:56 am

You also have to ask yourself what percentage of the students attend these for profit schools. Let’s say 10% of postsecondary students, yet they accrue 46% of the bad loans. Well, that certainly seems even worse.

Progressive Humanist

June 3rd, 2011
9:27 am

Great idea but the penalties outlined above are way too soft and allow too much underhanded behavior to go on far too long. There’s no way taxpayer dollars should be used as welfare money to prop up for-profit schools when the students get nothing but debt (and no acceptable livelihood) to show for it. So the taxpayers are out of their money, the students are either paying tens of thousands back while working a $9 an hour job or their credit is forever ruined, and the for-profit administrators are laughing all the way to the bank.

I hope this applies to all the graduate-level school of education diploma mills as well (although “Dr.” Proud Black Man would throw a hissy fit about his Argosy “diploma” being negated). The state of Georgia literally pays tens of millions each year in extra compensation to educators who got online master’s degrees in a year or online doctorates in two years but didn’t get the education that goes along with it. This is one of the things that’s killing education in Georgia because these “doctors” often get promoted to positions they are unqualified for and do tremendous harm to public school students because they don’t have the prerequisite knowledge necessary to do the job.

Throw ‘em all out.

Progressive Humanist

June 3rd, 2011
9:40 am

And did anyone realize that this for-profit fiasco is exactly what a private school voucher system would look like? Public tax dollars would be going to private for-profit schools that don’t have to meet the same standards (CRCTs, EOCTs, graduation tests, etc.) or face any accountability for their students’ performance or for the way they spend taxpayer’s dollars. The few studies that have been done on the efficacy of a voucher system show that when typical public school students (low income, culturally diverse) have gone to these unregulated private schools on vouchers they have performed more poorly than their public school counterparts.

Beck

June 3rd, 2011
10:23 am

Let the for-profit schools use their own private money and let’s see how fast that student aid dries up.

The students at those schools should NEVER have been eligible for federal student aid. It should be for LEGITIMATE public institutions and used sparingly at PRIVATE institutions.

QE3

June 3rd, 2011
10:58 am

Let’s go after the failing public high schools. Did we not just discuss the APS CRCT CHEATING SCANDAL? Didn’t Bev Hall just “retire” with all the “performance based” bonuses intact? Who has been punished? Who has restored the STOLEN money from the taxpayers? What has happened to the teachers who went along with the coverup? This is a WORSE crime than the for-profits! Many more dollars have been wasted. The public schools should quit the pretense that ALL children can be educated. This is obviously not true because the public schools have NEVER accomplished this feat. Instead, they take money from hard working, productive individuals and give it to the lazy, incompetent students to pay for 12 years of daycare! All schools should be private, and the government should get out of the education business. The good teachers and students will succeed in the private system, and the poor ones will be eliminated. Bring back the apprenticeship system for those who have skills in the trades. Those who don’t make the cut will provide the cheap labor that we now go to China for. Our current system is broken beyond repair.

Chief

June 3rd, 2011
1:29 pm

Apply the “Gainful employment” rule to ALL higher learning institutions.