Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by Maniac Craniac, Sep 29, 2010.
For-profit colleges under fire over value, accreditation - USATODAY.com
Here is an idea - look at the system as the issue. How about just one accrediting body for all schools to allow for the transfer of credits as long as the class matches?
Sounds like a plan. It will cut down on all the confusion. I am all for that one, Randell1234
I see advertisements every day on television for Everest. They have a minority female that you would assume had a child at a young age and no father around (she doesn't say as much, but the verbiage used implies as much). Its almost as though they are targeting this demographic because first of all, this demographic is usually eligible for federal aid. Secondly, this demographic is less likely to research their options and will be willing to go with Everest without question. At least other for-profits like UofP aren't picking the weak ones from the herd and they are at least Regionally Accredited. I don't think there needs to be one all powerful accrediting body as there needs to be full disclosure by every educational institute that before anyone is allowed to enroll anywhere, they be required to pass and sign a disclaimer of sorts that they fully aware of the differences in accredidation and are fully aware of the accredidation of the institution for which they are enrolling in.
I don't think all for-profits are bad. It's just that some for-profits defrauding people, mostly, folks who are ignorant of accreditation issues, excessive tuition rates etc. It is sad that a nationally accredited school can rip people off this way, and no one can do anything to stop it. This is a clear example of how chasing after "big profits" are bad for all of us. Just because other institutions are charging high tuition does not mean that every school should charge high tuition because " that is what the market can handle," a position that I keep reading in this forum that says there is nothing like "excessive profits."
I'm afraid, we will continue to hear these stories until there is a collapse in the system such that we all loose.
The article was less about the value of for-profit degrees, then it is about a topic familiar to Degreeinfo" the value of national versus regional accreditation. Had Everest been accredited by Northwest (the same agency that accredits the U. of Utah), rather than ACICS, there would have been no story to report. I site on the advisory board of an ACICS-accredited college that has special articulation agreements with regionally accredited schools. Students are counseled that if they intend to transfer, they must contact the school of interest to verify the transferability of their programs and courses. If Everset employees did misrepresent the transferability of their program to the U. of Utah, then they deserve to lose the lawsuit.
Honestly, this is not anything new. I've had coworkers around 4 years ago that were in similar situations. They were mostly pretty bright Caucasian males I worked with that were in the same boat. They earned associates degrees ITT Tech and were in student loan dept in the area of 40k. They wanted to transfer to a 4 year university and found out their credits wouldn't transfer. Of course back then that wasn't news because they were employed (although not really making enough to live and pay back student loans) and they were Caucasian males as opposed to being single moms. I assume that's why they didn't make USAToday with their dilemma?
But Everest is also regionally accredited (they have RA and NA schools). As far as the disclosure, I don' really agree. You can disclose any you want but if the receiver does not understand what it means to them it really does not matter much. Should only NA schools be required do "disclose" information? Would NA non-profits have to disclose the same thing? What about RA schools that are not AACSB? Should they disclose that a business degree student may have to take extra classes to get into an AACSB MBA program? Where do you draw the line and let people take some personal responsibility?
But why is their associates degree in criminal justice that expensive. Why is their degree more expensive than better and superior schools? The greed that is driving this drive to steal money from people must be stopped. It is time for the federal government to limit the availability of loans at these schools. Instead, federal loans should be made available to students who attend "regular" schools that are not frauds.
I can't comment on the price. Why is Sak Fifth Ave more expensive then MACYs for the same product? Isn't there a limit to the amount of student loans you can take out (I really don't know)? And who defines "regular" school? How is this school a fraud- based on price?
Isnt that distinction rather hard? Many will justify cost.
Private for-profit schools are the ones engaging in deceptive practices. If we continue to ignore this problem, it may crash the system. Just like the sub-prime mortgage mess, acting as though nothing can be done to stop this problem may eventually lead to total crash of the federal loan system, whereby, no money is available for any anyone. Let students who want to attend for-profit schools take out non-public funded loans to pay $30 for a useless associates in criminal justice.
No one takes out federal loans (public money) to shop at Saks Fifth Avenue. If you own a home, would you gladly pay property taxes to your local government so that they hand-over that money in the form of loans to people who want to shop at Sak Fifth Ave, or give it to schools for degrees that are worthless?
They can charge what they want. And then students who want to attend those schools can take out private loans and hand over the money to them. Giving loans to people who will never repay them because they cannot get a job from the worthless degrees that they earned are things that leads to tax increases.
Because some students refuse to be responsible doesn't mean the government cannot be. Should we rather wait until the federal loan system crashes (just like the sub-prime mortgage)?
Are you saying that ONLY private for-profit schools engage in deceptive practices and that ALL private for-profit schools engage in deceptive practices? What about paying property taxes to, say, public community colleges or universities, where students may take classes and never receive their degree? Should students who drop out of publicly funded higher education institutions be compelled to pay back the tax money on them. Do not forget that your local community college student is receiving a higher annual total tax subsidy than any student at a two year for-profit school.
I think I over reacted. I see your point, and the fact that discriminating against for-profit schools based on problems that is not be peculiar to them only may not solve the problem. While any/all school is/are prone to these issues, ultimately, students are responsible for knowing the loans that they take out, and the school that they decide to attend (especially, considering scenarios like this). I guess the complexity in dealing with these for-profit versus non-profit schools, and federal loans explains why the problem is not fixed, or why a quick or easy fix may not even be available from a "central planning" perspective. I retract my position on this story.
What about the stories of people graduating from traditional schools $90-100K in debt with an art degree - should that be reviewed also?
Randell, I retracted my position. See my post -the one immediately above yours.
I just saw it - thanks.
People need to understand that not all N/A schools accept each others credits even when both schools are N/A.
I had 30 plus credits from SASC that my local WASC junior college wouldn't accept because they were from a different accreditation.
Lesson to be learned, contact the college you eventually what to transfer too and see if what your doing at your current college will be accepted. DON'T ASSUME !!
Separate names with a comma.