For-profit education sector overdue for reform

According to its website, the Atlanta campus of the for-profit University of Phoenix offers bachelor’s degree programs in English, environmental science, accounting, business, health administration and other fields.

According to federal data made available by The Education Trust, first-time, full-time freshmen seeking a bachelor’s degree — the type of student most likely to graduate on time — have a four-year graduation rate of 2.4 percent at the Atlanta campus.

Systemwide in its 42 campuses, according to federal data, the University of Phoenix graduates only 9 percent of first-time, full-time, bachelor’s degree-seeking students within six years. And unfortunately, most of those failed students leave school burdened with loans they have to repay. In a new report, The Education Trust reports that the University of Phoenix “brought in over one billion dollars in Pell Grant funding alone in 2009-10, and this year the school risks exceeding federal limits by deriving over 90 percent of revenues from federal financial aid.”

That 90 percent figure does not include additional revenue derived from veterans’ benefits, which have also become a lucrative funding mechanism for proprietary schools. At 20 for-profit education companies, for example, revenue from Veterans Administration and Defense Department programs “increased from $66.6 million in 2006 to a projected $521.2 million in 2010, an increase of 683 percent,” a new investigation by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee has found.

In many of those schools, veterans and active-duty personnel are squandering their hard-earned GI Bill benefits and federal loans on an education that just isn’t worth much, the committee found.

“For example, one veteran interviewed by HELP Committee staff decided to earn his bachelors of science in a construction management program at a for-profit school because it was a 3-year program. His wife has muscular dystrophy, so he wanted a program that he could finish as quickly as possible to begin working. He received benefits from an earlier version of the GI Bill and also borrowed $12,000 in federal loans from Sallie Mae to attend. The veteran was told that the school was accredited and that his credits would transfer if he wanted to pursue a masters degree.

After enrolling, he became disappointed with the quality of education and said that many students were not engaged and did not complete their work, but that they always received passing grades. One teacher pulled the veteran aside and told him the school did not provide a quality education and that he should enroll in a better school.

At that point, he had earned 52 credits. When he went to transfer to a public, non-profit institution, he found out that none of the credits would transfer.”

It should be noted that some proprietary schools have a significantly better record than their peers. DeVry University, for example, graduates 31 percent of its freshmen within six years. ITT Technical Institute graduates 67 percent of its freshman class. But the industry average is just 22 percent, compared to a 55 percent graduation rate at public colleges and 65 percent at private non-profits.

The proprietary sector is growing incredibly fast, again on the taxpayers’ dollar. Between 1998 and 2008, enrollment in for-profit schools jumped by 236 percent, and its draw on the federal Treasury grew even faster. For example, proprietary schools quadrupled their revenue from Pell Grants in that same time frame.

debt

Source: Federal data, Education Trust

In its report, Education Trust likens much of the proprietary school industry to the pre-crash subprime lending industry, and the comparison seems unfortunately apt.

They prey on the dreams of ill-prepared people, putting them in situations where most will not succeed. They help their victims arrange loans that they won’t be able to repay (federal loans, unlike mortgage debt, can’t be voided through bankruptcy or foreclosure). And when the loans go bad, the U.S taxpayer is left holding the bag while the industry counts up its profits and bonuses.

Is any of this seeming familiar?

The Obama administration, under Education Secretary Arne Duncan, is moving to try to tame the worst excesses of the industry. One possible reform would be to bar federal loans to students attending programs where fewer than 35 percent of former students are paying back loans or are capable of doing so. That hardly seems an unreasonable guarantee that taxpayers and students are getting their money’s worth.

However, U.S. Rep. John Kline, the incoming chairman of the House Education Committee, has already indicated that he will try to block new laws or regulation. The announcement sent proprietary school stock prices to their highest level in two months.

I know I know: Business good, government bad. The mantra is familiar.

But these schools — this industry — would not exist without federal financial aid to students. The idea that the federal government should not regulate an industry that it has created and sustains through taxpayer money is ludicrous.

– Jay Bookman

516 comments Add your comment

@@

December 14th, 2010
1:55 pm

They prey on the dreams of ill-prepared people, putting them in situations where most will not succeed.

Sounds a lot like the Democratic Party.

jm

December 14th, 2010
1:59 pm

Good column Jay. If you want federally guaranteed loans for your students, you should have to meet federal criteria. HOWEVER, the same should apply to non-profit schools, some of which are very crummy, as well.

jm

December 14th, 2010
2:00 pm

“The idea that the federal government should not regulate an industry that it has created and sustains through taxpayer money is ludicrous.”

Amen.

Mick

December 14th, 2010
2:00 pm

Online school and it’s degree’s are not for everyone. I tried one class and it did not work for me. You can see the profit margin for the school, no building, electric and so on. There’s something wrong about higher learning where the students and the environment have been eliminated. You certainly don’t have a chance to find your college sweetheart…

Adam

December 14th, 2010
2:06 pm

While we can agree there needs to be some reform, what form will this reform take. I can tell you I’m against more standardized testing requirements.

Adam

December 14th, 2010
2:07 pm

As for @@’s comment, the two are not equivalent. For one thing, I thought Democrats were socialist and wanted to give everyone free money, instead of them paying on their own, with loans even, to get into a system that they don’t benefit from.

Mick

December 14th, 2010
2:12 pm

Most of the students of univ. of phoenix or cappela university are looking for the easy way to a degree. I guess it’s like anything else, do your homework and know what you’re getting into, there’s some great land in the everglades I’d like to sell you. Even better if I can get uncle sam on the hook for you..

Bosch

December 14th, 2010
2:13 pm

I have been paying on student loans for at least a century now. It is like a utility bill, and now I’ve got a kid in college, I guess I’ll just keep on paying — but education is never wasted.

I’ve thought about just paying them off in lump sums, but the interest is so damn low it’s not that much of a burden.

I do know lots of folks though who just took the “meh, student loan smudent loan, I think I’ll stop paying this” — it’s not like the government can take your diploma back.

Adam

December 14th, 2010
2:13 pm

Mick: I think perhaps many people going to online classes are looking to work at the same time they are getting their degree. At least, when I took online classes that was my motivation. It worked out ok I think, except for the mounds of debt I have as a result :p

Bosch

December 14th, 2010
2:14 pm

For some strange reason, I feel that md will post soon and the word “choices” will be in her opines.

BlahBlahBlah

December 14th, 2010
2:14 pm

Restaurants have to post their health department scores in plain sight. These bogus colleges should have to do something similar – include their graduation rates in boldface 72-point font on the front cover of any application materials and brochures!

Adam

December 14th, 2010
2:15 pm

Bosch: if you default on federal loans, student or otherwise, they can take payment in the form of any future tax returns you have. This happened to a close friend of mine.

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:16 pm

“They prey on the dreams of ill-prepared people, putting them in situations where most will not succeed.”

Always with the excuses, Jay. All those poor, poor, pitiful poor.

Bosch

December 14th, 2010
2:18 pm

Adam,

Oh, yeah, I know, but you can also stop paying for a while, then pay for a month or two, then stop for another year, then pay another payment, then stop for six more months, and then randomly pay a payment — and yes, while that affects your credit score, it does little else.

I have to admit, I’ve done that a couple times in hard times, but I pay them regularly like clockwork now. But the approach above is the way alot of me friends do.

Jimmy62

December 14th, 2010
2:18 pm

Of course there’s also places like Harvard that make billions a year through endowments, and if you can get in, they make sure you graduate.

Normal

December 14th, 2010
2:19 pm

Only the GOP would back a “for profit” organization that makes money, but does nothing for the people they are suppose to help….

http://news.icanhascheezburger.com/2010/12/12/political-pictures-bush-holds-up-a-page-from-the-republican-bible/

Doggone/GA

December 14th, 2010
2:19 pm

“Always with the excuses, Jay. All those poor, poor, pitiful poor.”

an explanation is not an excuse

Bosch

December 14th, 2010
2:20 pm

NORMAL!!! Did you see the picture I left ya?

AmVet

December 14th, 2010
2:20 pm

Corporate parasites…

One Nation Under educated

December 14th, 2010
2:21 pm

“They prey on the dreams of ill-prepared people, putting them in situations where most will not succeed”

-just like Supply side jeebus trickle down economics
-just like the 24/7 propaganda from the AM radio and Fox “news”
-if this was W and Sonneh’s “No Childs Behind Left” this school would be closed
but hey, theah’s money to be made, so its free mahket..sumpn..sumpn…

and we watch this buffoonery and still, the state stays red…..
man, if we could drill for stoopid……

Bhorsoft

December 14th, 2010
2:21 pm

I certainly like the idea that if 35% or less of former students aren’t paying back Federally guaranteed loans, then students from that school should not be eligible for Federally guaranteed loans. I doesn’t matter if they are public or private institutions. Look at it this way — if you’ve only paid back 35% of the loans you’ve taken out in your life time (or at least the last 7 years), would a bank or credit union loan you money?

Normal

December 14th, 2010
2:22 pm

Jimmy62

Havard is a private University.

Southern Comfort

December 14th, 2010
2:22 pm

But these schools — this industry — would not exist without federal financial aid to students. The idea that the federal government should not regulate an industry that it has created and sustains through taxpayer money is ludicrous.

Regulation=bad
Business=good

On a more serious note, what started off as a business with good intentions has turned into “Revenge of the Greed Monster”. I had friends who attended DeVry years and years ago who got job placement and stuff. Back then, I even think some of their credits transferred. Once someone got wind of how much “free government money” you could get from starting a school, that’s where it went downhill. Reform it or do away with it. No need for additional burdens on taxpayers. We already have enough to pay on as it is now.

Normal

December 14th, 2010
2:22 pm

Bosch

December 14th, 2010
2:20 pm

Where?

Union

December 14th, 2010
2:22 pm

having interviewed / worked with college grads from all walks of life and various college educations.. i can tell you first hand that schools are developing much less of a refined product than they did several years ago. i was asked to speak at a college in atlanta a couple of years ago and it was an economics class.. of sorts.. the professor regaled the students in personal anecdotes for 30 minutes prior to my speaking. as he had no business background.. it was all about the business of academia. one of the graduate students explained to me that this was his daily routine.. I felt bad for the students..

anyway.. we do need to reform them and we need to see what is going on. if we are going to spend tax money that could be better used for a public education entity.. i am all for it.

Normal

December 14th, 2010
2:24 pm

Sounds like some of the people here went to the Sam Houston Institute of Technology, better known as S.H.I.T. U.

Union

December 14th, 2010
2:27 pm

@nermal.. (like that name better) i graduated from here..

http://www.topinstantdegrees.com/

Matti

December 14th, 2010
2:29 pm

“Always with the excuses, Jay. All those poor, poor, pitiful poor.”

It was your mother, wasn’t it? The one who told you that you were a “nice guy?” She lied.

JKL2

December 14th, 2010
2:29 pm

I guess I’m unsure how the system works or it has changed over the years. When I go my federal loan, the application went thru the school. If the school is unaccredited, I think that would be an easy fix. The banks wouldn’t process the loan unless it had the proper stamp on it.

stands for decibels

December 14th, 2010
2:29 pm

the University of Phoenix graduates only 9 percent of first-time, full-time, bachelor’s degree-seeking students within six years.

Echoing the post @ 2.14:

Wonder what’d happen if such institutions were required to include such information on their billboards and TeeVee adverts. Wonder how many suckers they’d get to enroll.

jm

December 14th, 2010
2:31 pm

I’ve agreed with Jay to blogs in a row. Should probably contact a doctor….

Gimmie_Gimmie

December 14th, 2010
2:31 pm

Actually the Democrats want to dumb down the educational system so that everyone passes with A’s; then we are all truly equal… Stupid but equal…

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:31 pm

Jay – “One possible reform would be to bar federal loans to students attending programs where fewer than 35 percent of former students are paying back loans or are capable of doing so. ”

How about the school isn’t eligible for federal assistance unless the graduation percent is at least 35% or higher? I mean, if the school gets “over 90 percent of revenues from federal financial aid” then it seems that increasing (or at least establishing) the requirements to get federal dollars would whip their a$$es into shape.

Jefferson

December 14th, 2010
2:32 pm

Rich man goes to college and a poor man goes to work.

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:32 pm

“It was your mother, wasn’t it?”

Oh, Matti, you’re so silly.

Southern Comfort

December 14th, 2010
2:33 pm

Actually the Democrats want to dumb down the educational system so that everyone passes with A’s; then we are all truly equal… Stupid but equal

Sometimes, it’s better to sit silently and let people wonder whether or not you’re an idiot instead of opening your mouth and removing all doubt. Just sayin…

JKL2

December 14th, 2010
2:33 pm

One nation- man, if we could drill for stoopid……

The only place the democrats want to drill is in your back pocket.

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:33 pm

“Should probably contact a doctor….”

And you asked for some more relevant & local topics the other day…and he delivered.

I think a doctor is most certainly in order.

jm

December 14th, 2010
2:34 pm

By the way Jay, nice pre-emptive strike against the warming deniers that were about to come out of the woodwork declaring: “see its cold, no global warming!”

You and George W might’ve gotten along better than you think….

Jay

December 14th, 2010
2:34 pm

Nice Guy, if they tried it your way — demanding graduation of 35 percent or higher — I’m afraid it would incentivize the schools to lower what in many cases are already low abysmal academic standards, just to push people out the door with a diploma.

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:34 pm

Jefferson – “Rich man goes to college and a poor man goes to work.”

Charlie Daniels, I like it.

Union

December 14th, 2010
2:37 pm

Jay
December 14th, 2010
2:34 pm

Nice Guy, if they tried it your way — demanding graduation of 35 percent or higher — I’m afraid it would incentivize the schools to lower what in many cases are already low abysmal academic standards, just to push people out the door with a diploma.

ouch.. sounds like some of our public schools..

Jay

December 14th, 2010
2:37 pm

And of course, some want to recreate this very same situation in the k-12 system by handing out taxpayer-funded vouchers.

But I digress …. slightly.

Gimmie_Gimmie

December 14th, 2010
2:38 pm

The same holds true for you Southern Comfort… SSSShhhhhhhhh

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:38 pm

Jay – “to push people out the door with a diploma.”

(Hands clapping) for taking me off the silent treatment Jay. :)

Serioulsy, though. That’s a fair point. But wouldn’t accreditation (or lack there of) take care of that aspect?

AmVet

December 14th, 2010
2:38 pm

You crybaby cons are just PO’d that the most acclaimed institutions of learning in the land offer Liberal Arts Degrees and not Conservative Arts Degrees!

jm

December 14th, 2010
2:40 pm

FYI folks, don’t confuse DEFAULT rates with GRADUATION rates. Duncan is trying to use default rates and ratios, not graduation rates, which as Nice Guy / Union indicate, would just inflate grades and graduation policies. But DEFAULT rates are a different matter, and a good metric for performance.

“One possible reform would be to bar federal loans to students attending programs where fewer than 35 percent of former students are PAYING BACK loans or are capable of doing so.”

Union

December 14th, 2010
2:40 pm

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:40 pm

“You crybaby cons are just PO’d that the most acclaimed institutions of learning in the land offer Liberal Arts Degrees and not Conservative Arts Degrees!”

Wow, AmVet has a sense of humor. Who knew.

Southern Comfort

December 14th, 2010
2:40 pm

I may be a jackass or smart ass, but I’m far from being an idiot. Just keep making those assinine statements and proving me right….

Normal

December 14th, 2010
2:41 pm

Union

December 14th, 2010
2:27 pm

:lol:

stands for decibels

December 14th, 2010
2:42 pm

Corporate parasites…

[…]

but hey, theah’s money to be made, so its free mahket..sumpn..sumpn…

Looks like the U of Pee’s head honcho, John Sperling, is a good buddy of George Soros and has funded several left-leaning endeavors.

I only mention this by way of introduction. If his outfit is as fraudulent as it appears to be, then being fed alive, feet-first, into a wood-chipper’s too good for the likes of him.

(but then again, maybe Jay’s suggestion that we simply regulate such enterprises more carefully might be a more productive use of resources.)

Normal

December 14th, 2010
2:42 pm

oo,
Nobody likes a smart ass, but everybody likes a little ass…

Bosch

December 14th, 2010
2:44 pm

Normal,

It’s downstairs – top of page 10

iRun

December 14th, 2010
2:44 pm

Nice Guy…isn’t that what’s on the table? That sort of regulation you’re proposing?

Matti

December 14th, 2010
2:45 pm

Normal, is that why I’m so popular? (Heh… j/k….)

Gimmie_Gimmie

December 14th, 2010
2:45 pm

*Sniff* *Sniff* You smell that??? I smell a burn victim… It gonna be okay S_C ~pat~ ~pat~ ~pat~ — dial it down a notch and ease off the throttle, you gonna ash out.

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:47 pm

These for profit schools are actually great investments from a private equity (backed) standpoint. I mean, you get almost all your cash flow up front (before providing the service – tuition), you offer prospective students a value proposition – “you come in making X dollars and you leave potentially making more than that”, and it seems that enrollment is fairly cyclical, in that, during economic downturns you’ll see solid growth and during normal times you’ll see fair growth.

Sounds good to me.

iRun

December 14th, 2010
2:48 pm

Oops, sorry…day late and dollar short…must be the chill in the air…

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:51 pm

“The idea that the federal government should not regulate an industry that it has created and sustains through taxpayer money is ludicrous.”

See, I don’t think there should be any regulation at all that is specific to these places. Rather, there should be realistic standards put in place, that, if the indsutry wants to be eligible for federal (or state) assistance, the standards have to be met… If these places derive over 90% of the dollars from the Feds, then they have to play by the rules.

Southern Comfort

December 14th, 2010
2:52 pm

So that’s what makes you special Matti??? ;)

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:52 pm

“is that why I’m so popular?”

Only you can answer that question, Matti.

Southern Comfort

December 14th, 2010
2:53 pm

Nice Guy @ 2:51

So, are you suggesting regulating the whole for the abuses of a few?

Matti

December 14th, 2010
2:54 pm

Um… I think “standards” and “rules” are what some people mean when they use the word “regulation.” (D’OH!)

jm

December 14th, 2010
2:54 pm

Bond vigilantes. Back? Hmmm……… may not be much longer before the lenders get tired of the deficits.

http://noir.bloomberg.com/markets/rates/index.html

One Nation Under educated

December 14th, 2010
2:55 pm

JKL – The only place the democrats want to drill is in your back pocket

-fair enough, no disagreement there

iRun

December 14th, 2010
2:55 pm

Nice Guy, you just defined regulation…

jm

December 14th, 2010
2:56 pm

FYI – Duncan is not proposing to regulate everyone. Only those schools that receive federally guaranteed loans. However, that also happens to be ALL the for profit schools. But that’s not relevant. If you want to start a for profit school without student loans, no regs.

Bosch

December 14th, 2010
2:57 pm

Does anyone know the answer to this? Are these for-profit schools accredited by SACS or any other agency? Just curious. I really don’t know anything about these schools other than what I heard on NPR a few weeks ago.

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
2:58 pm

“Um… I think “standards” and “rules” are what some people mean when they use the word “regulation.” (D’OH!)”

Ah yes, that Auburn education just keeps paying off, doesn’t it!

Harry Callahan

December 14th, 2010
2:58 pm

Jay

December 14th, 2010
2:37 pm

“And of course, some want to recreate this very same situation in the k-12 system by handing out taxpayer-funded vouchers.”

Vouchers would give poor and/or minority students a chance to escape the miserably failing inner city public schools and escape liberal doctrination/brainwashing/victimology, and it would sap power and funding from the Democrats greatest base, the liberal education establishment. Lord knows we can’t have any of that, right Jay?

Wyld Byll Hyltnyr

December 14th, 2010
2:59 pm

Now, Jay, there you go again only looking at one side to the coin. These schools have been very good for those who had the means and vision to make early stage investments in them. In fact, this is a great example of an industry whose growth would suffer if the capital gains tax rate is arbitrarily and capriciously increased.

Even though the graduation rates are extremely low, albiet higher than the Auburn (Money) Whore Eagle football program, I think society should take a chance on these students since many are from poor minority families that have been oppressed by the white power structure (i.e. “Whitey”) since long before the War of Northern Agression.

Normal

December 14th, 2010
2:59 pm

Bosch

December 14th, 2010
2:44 pm

Hush now! You’ll get me into trouble… :D

Lil' Barry Bailout

December 14th, 2010
3:00 pm

Libbtards remind me of that old saying, “when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail”. In the case of the libbtard, every problem has to be solved by government. Nice job with that war on poverty, by the way.

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
3:01 pm

“Nice Guy, you just defined regulation…”

I was really just trying to distinguish that these ‘for profits’ (namely University of Phoenix) can continue to exist, just that if they want Federal dollars, adhere to the rules. As opposed to saying, if you want to be “for profit” at all, you have to do this, this, and this.

Nice Guy

December 14th, 2010
3:02 pm

Dr.’s appt. time….

Peace.

Harry Callahan

December 14th, 2010
3:02 pm

Lil’ Barry Bailout…has there even been a problem in the entire history of the known universe that liberals couldn’t solve with a tax increase on the rich?

iRun

December 14th, 2010
3:02 pm

Of course, people who say libbtards are awesomeness unto themselves and should be regarded as Prime Oracles. Sheesh. Go for a run and work off that childishness. Otherwise, I might challenge you to a foot race.

Southern Comfort

December 14th, 2010
3:03 pm

Vouchers would give poor and/or minority students a chance to escape the miserably failing inner city public schools

Scholarships to those schools would do the same thing without involving taxpayer money. Those schools don’t seem to have a problem offering scholarships to those poor and/or minority students when they can run a 4.3 or dunk a basketball from behind the free throw line.

USMC dawg

December 14th, 2010
3:03 pm

“You crybaby cons are just PO’d that the most acclaimed institutions of learning in the land offer Liberal Arts Degrees and not Conservative Arts Degrees!”

Amvet, now that was funny! (really)

Harry Callahan

December 14th, 2010
3:04 pm

Here’s a novel idea…charge market interest rates on student loans and let the IRS pursue collection on the delinquents like Bosch. I’m thinking the problem would go away in a hurry.

TnGelding

December 14th, 2010
3:04 pm

Do they make the students think they’re getting a scholarship but hike the tuition that amount?

Mick

December 14th, 2010
3:04 pm

harry & lbb

You guys give cliches a bad name…just sayin

Harry Callahan

December 14th, 2010
3:05 pm

Southern Comfort….private schools often offer scholarships and/or tuition subsidies to minorty students soley on academics and needs. But thanks for continuing the stereotype.

TnGelding

December 14th, 2010
3:05 pm

The war on poverty was never fully funded.

iRun

December 14th, 2010
3:06 pm

Nice Guy, I don’t think you actually disagree with Jay or the Obama admin. I think right now everybody is probably trying to figure out the best way to go about it. I definitely think that to qualify for federal funding you must meet certain criteria (aka regulations) but I do worry about Jay’s assertion that they will turn a place into a diploma mill. So, it would need to be more flexible than one simple criteria, I’m sure you agree.

Guy Incognito

December 14th, 2010
3:07 pm

Lil’ Barr………obviously we just haven’t spent enough on the poor. Let’s toss them a few bil mo’

jm

December 14th, 2010
3:07 pm

BTW – “NO LABELS” while good intentioned, sounds really really stupid.

Matti

December 14th, 2010
3:07 pm

Lil’ Bitty Barry,

Actually, for you, I’d set the hammer down and pull out the duct tape and WD40 which, when applied correctly, would go a long way toward solving your issues. (Learned it in an engineering class at Auburn.)

TnGelding

December 14th, 2010
3:07 pm

None of our “wars” have shown a lot of success since the end of WWII.

Harry Callahan

December 14th, 2010
3:07 pm

“The war on poverty was never fully funded”

It was also a war of choice. LMAO.

jm

December 14th, 2010
3:07 pm

My short Treasury position is doing nicely today. :D

carlosgvv

December 14th, 2010
3:09 pm

The Democrats are trying to regulate an industry that is preying on unsuspecting people. The Rebublicans are doing everything they can to protect this industry. How many more instances of this kind of behavor do you Republican lug nuts need before you finally get the picture?

Southern Comfort

December 14th, 2010
3:10 pm

Harry

What is the ratio for academics vs athletics? As I said, if the schools were truly intent on helping students in poor perforimg schools, there would be more scholarships available. If we’re going to base thinking on stereotypes, then let’s try this one…

Most private school students come from conservative leaning families with good incomes. Conservatives are more charitable than liberals. Conservative families with children at private schools can give more to scholarships so that poor and/or minority students (other than athletes) can attend those better schools and enhance their chances at getting a good education. How was that one for stereotypes?

iRun

December 14th, 2010
3:12 pm

SC, that was a nice solid stereotype! One dimensional statements have their place…

AmVet

December 14th, 2010
3:12 pm

Dawg, I have my moments…

Bosch

December 14th, 2010
3:12 pm

I have a friend who graduated from the U. of Phoenix and for him, it was a HUGE pay increase — he had worked in the IT field for years after getting out of the Marines, and all he lacked was a degree. Once he got his degree, coupled with his years of experience, it was a big boost.

TaxPayer

December 14th, 2010
3:13 pm

I remember finishing my first bachelor’s degree in three years plus one quarter.

HDB

December 14th, 2010
3:13 pm

Harry Callahan December 14th, 2010
2:58 pm

Harry….vouchers don’t work because it’s a diversion of resources from the public sector to the private sector…plus since the mandate of private schools doesn’t match that of public education (educate the discriminate few vs. educate the masses!)…there’s NO WAY that vouchers could be feasible in the long run. What is really needed is to ensure that public education has a consistent funding process, that the teachers be allowed to teach the curriculum rather than teaching to pass a TEST, a diversified educational structure rather than the college-prep structure that is present; that the principal and teachers be allowed to enforce discipline in the classrooms; that alternative educational structures be put in place for those specific discipline problems………

THAT’S the solution to the problems in public education!!

Now…the -for-profit universities are just profit markets whose degrees are not as valuable as a state-institution! When I discovered that U of P wanted $36,000/year for me to pursue a Doctorate….and I could attend Georgia State for that over a FOUR-YEAR period…..it became evident what the real deal was!!

jm

December 14th, 2010
3:13 pm

carlosgvv – preying on unsuspecting (ie dumb) people should not be illegal in my book. on the other hand, the government should have the discretion to supply federal financing to whomever it wants. Or preferably none at all….

Education prices wouldn’t have gone through the roof if there wasn’t federal funding….