Dept Of Justice suing a major For-Profit college company.

Just saw this article a few minutes ago.

DOJ sues for-profit college company

Schools that run under this corporation include Art Institutes, South University, Brown-Mackie, and Argosy.

 

And we wonder why for-profit schools have a bad reputation. This lawsuit has been in the works for a number of years and has been mentioned here in the past. I'm interested to know how it turns out. Thanks for pointing out the new article.

 

Oy Vey!!!!!!!!!!!

Abner

 

Well lets just see if the DOJ makes a change or if this can be added to the growing list of problems with these type of universities. . .

 

Not shocking, this has been in the works for a while.

Okay, now all we need a thread from that condescending clown in the TUI show-cause thread telling us why we are stupid for believing this and that the DOJ will NOT sue EDC based on his expert opinion.

 

Not taking the side of any of those colleges but why should they be blamed for students who signed up in there program without a computer? Shouldn't it be the student who makes sure they have what they need to be successful in any college program? Since when has it become okay for people to not be accountable for their own actions? I am sure there is more to this than what that article showed but people should be held accountable for their own actions and if that means they signed up for an online program knowing they had no computer well that is their own fault, not a college.

 

The problem is that the knowledgeable professionals should not take advantage of those in that position.

 

If the DOJ is correct in its accusations, I have a hard time understanding Education Management. All students enrolling in a fully online program should sign a disclosure statement that they understand the minimum technology requirements for the program and will have access to the technology while they are in the program.

Also, if educational institutions are forbidden from offering incentives to admissions offers who recruit more students, then the university should pay admissions offers a salary as they do other employees. Of course, if admissions officers cannot receive recruiting bonuses, then those working for college and university athletics programs should not either.

 

If the student's education is funded by the government (i.e. the taxpayers), shouldn't the government have some say in the matter as well ?

If a school accepts government education funding, then it has an obligation to play by the government's rules. There is reason to suppose that Education Management may not have respected those rules.

 

What position would that be? The only instance where I can foresee this being a real problem is if the individual has some type of impairment that would limit their ability to understand what they are getting into. You can't tell me that you really believe that an adult who has no impairment shouldn't be required to be held accountable for their own actions. It is almost like saying lets forgive students who rack up 200k in student loan debt for a degree in basket weaving because they didn't know what they were getting into.....Shouldn't it be their responsibility to research, ask for clarification or seek the advice of someone outside the college if they feel they don't understand something? I swear we have become a society who no longer holds it's citizens accountable for anything...

Yes they should have say but the government already has enough of that as it is. Like I said before I am sure that there is more to this article than what the little blurb shows but to say that college students shouldn't be held acceptable or be allowed to sue a school simply because they didn't understand what they were getting into is absurd! It is their job to make sure going into a program that they know everything they can about that school and that program and it should not be the schools job to hold their hand every step of the way. It's college, hand holding was over in grade school.

 

I agree Anthony that students should be required to sign a statement but in all reality it is almost always clearly stated in the degree program information if it is a online degree that such and such is required.

 

I'm not saying to keep from holding the students accountable. Their loans aren't being forgiven here. I'm saying that professional ethics in a university environment should keep these schools from recruiting these students. Students will sometimes make poor decisions, but it is only ethical to expect the professionals in the field to avoid blatantly taking advantage of these mistakes.

 

It's government money. If you want to make mistakes with your own money, fine. You'll note that the government is bringing the suit. The students are not. Why? This kind of behavior turns into a scheme for funneling Title IV money directly into corporate coffers. If the process is above board, then fine. If the company is taking advantage of students with unethical recruiting practices, that's not fine.

 

How dare you suggest we hold people accountable for their actions and decisions? Doesn't it make for a better world when we can make bad choice, search for someone to sue, and wash our hands of the whole thing? If we are held accountable we may actually learn a lesson!

Seriously, if you want to start looking at truth in "selling" something, how about military recruiters? When I signed up for the Reserves they told me if I made it half way through AIT I would make $35K a year easily (1990). That was a complete lie! I graduated from the school and had to fight for a $25K job. If you want to make rules make them apply to all.

 

But you see here lies the problem.....if the government can sue the colleges eventually it will turn into students being able to sue colleges and get their loans forgiven because well they were an idiot and didn't know what they were getting into.... its a downward spiral. I am in no way implying that all of the colleges have done everything right and I am sure that some of these colleges did enroll those who had no business being in the program but seriously why do we have monitor stupid?

I think we should just agree to disagree here.....

 

Because it's our money, as taxpayers, that is at stake -- in this case, some $11,000,000,000. That's why.

The government sets up rules for participation in the financial aid program. If a school wants to participate, then they have to play by those rules. If a school gets caught breaking those rules, they get penalized. It's that simple.

If a college doesn't want that kind of scrutiny, and wants more unrestricted freedom in recruitment, then they don't have to participate in government financial aid programs. Some colleges don't, for that reason.

But EDMC most definitely did want to collect that government cash. The vast majority of their revenues came from government financial aid.

$ 11,000,000,000 is a lot of money, and so it certainly seems possible that EDMC may have had some incentives to bend or break the rules. But it's still fraud.

 

My take on this is that it's not fair that the actions of a few bad players paint all of these schools. So, because of the Kaplan and EDC issues, we should be looking at Ashford and Aspen with a magnifying glass? My argument is, and will be, that for-profit schools will continue to provide options for some learners until some other alternatives arrive.

And in terms of who's at fault in the EDC thing. . .
1. Consumers need to be alert, and people should be careful to read what they're signing up for.
2. No one should be allowed to take unjustly earned public money for anything-- that includes government education funds.

I don't think the two concerns I've pointed out above are mutually exclusive, nor do I believe those two principles violate anyone's views anywhere in the political spectrum.

 

Again, I am not saying they didn't do anything wrong or that the government shouldn't sue them for actually paying people based on how many students recruiters enrolled but again I state the need for individuals to be held accountable for their own actions. I also don't think it is right that this claim was filed in such a way that individuals can also share in the recovery of funds....again slippery slope.. Much of this problem would be removed if the government would stop allowing these colleges to get aid in the first place when the majority of them over charge on tuition etc and allow students to rack up 30k for associates degree but that is going to a whole other topic....

Yes it is taxpayer money but instead of being reactive we should have been proactive and avoided this mess in the first place!

 

If the EDMC school that is accused of enrolling students without computers did, in fact, clearly state the technology requirements and the students, knowing that they did not have computers, went ahead and enrolled, could it be that it was the students, not the institution, that was engaged in the wrongdoing? (*whew* What a long sentence!)

 

Of course. However, this just doesn't seem the like most likely explanation behind this scenario.

If a student knows that he has no computer, then that student has no obvious incentive to go ahead and enroll inappropriately in an online class.

But if an admissions director knows that he will be financially rewarded for every new student that he enrolls -- well, then maybe the incentive for such inappropriate enrollment is a bit easier to imagine.