Posts Tagged “for-profit education”
Arthur Kaiser, chairman of the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities, authored a recent article for the Daily Caller describing how for-profit schools could be a boost for the economy.
Mr. Kaiser highlighted the value of PSCUs:
“Private sector colleges and universities (PSCUs) offer students valuable advancement opportunities, at minimal cost to taxpayers. And we’re not talking about small numbers here. PSCUs educate 3.8 million students, many of whom are non-traditional students, including working adults, returning veterans and single parents. Our schools — with flexible schedules and online classes — give these Americans the rare opportunity to create meaningful, sustaining careers, rather than bounce from one low-paying job to another with no hope of earning a living wage. In fact, our students are often those who have lost their jobs and need new skills and training to establish sustainable careers.”
And, as we all know, “a postsecondary education is a prerequisite for employment today. PSCUs train students for in-demand jobs, at a time when Americans need those jobs most. Students consistently praise our schools for providing strong individual instruction, restoring their confidence in their skills and making the connection between classroom learning and employable skills they readily see upon graduation.”
Despite the contributions private-sector schools are making to the job force , “the federal government continues to single out the private sector schools with unfair regulations. For example, the U.S. Department of Education’s ‘gainful employment’ regulation requires that private sector schools face stricter standards for student loan repayment or risk losing federal student aid.”
Critics of the for-profit industry “have questioned why the student loan default rates for students at private sector schools are higher than those for non-profit or public college students. But this way of thinking discounts simple economics. Default rates are tied to demographics. Since PSCUs educate a high percentage of lower-income students who have fewer resources than their peers, these students are more likely to default on their loans. When you compare similarly situated cohorts, our students’ default rates are almost identical to those at community colleges and traditional four-year colleges.”
In conclusion, Mr. Kaiser warned of the negative impacts recent legislation would have in tough economic times:
“as a result of unwarranted regulation, students will have less access to programs and will not gain the critical skills needed to compete in today’s global workforce. Considering the stagnant economy and weak labor market, can we afford these regulations?”
For more on this story, click here.
Recently, two university professors, Clayton M. Christensen and Henry J. Eyring, discussed the future of higher education. They discussed how for-profit institutions are the only real competition for large public and private universities.
Throughout our lifetime, we’ve seen companies come and go and new inventions come along to make entire products or services become obsolete. But when was the last time you heard of a large university closing its doors? According to Christensen and Eyring, part of the reason for this is a lack of competition. Large universities are modeling their programs after other large successful universities to give the customers what they want. They said, “the strategy of most schools is one of imitation, not innovation. Little-known and smaller institutions try to move up in the ranks by adding students, majors, and graduate programs, so as to look more like the large universities.”
They also mention that for-profit institutions would be the most likely competitors for large public universities since they offer many desirable features which traditional universities seem to lack. Specifically, for-profit colleges incorporate a large online component that is attractive to nontraditional students like working adults, veterans, and career changers. Furthermore, for-profit institutions offer flexible scheduling and summer courses allowing students to graduate in a relatively short amount of time and get back into the workforce.
For more on this article, please click here.
July 15, 2011
President Obama Wants More College Graduates
President Obama’s assistant education secretary, Eduardo Ochoa, recently announced that the President wants more college graduates. Ochoa told higher education leaders that the “country is not producing enough people with college degrees and is losing its global competitive edge. The United states has slipped from first to ninth when it comes to the number of 24-to 29-year-olds with post-secondary degrees.”
Ochoa said that, “Obama has outlined a goal to increase the number of Americans with post-secondary degrees from 40 percent to 60 percent by 2020.”
While this is a noble aim, “the state of higher education in this country is not without challenges.” One major challenge has been harsh regulation targeting for-profit colleges that threatens the accessibility of federal aid to for-profit college students. This is especially problematic since, out of all the higher education institutions, for-profit colleges have experienced the most growth recently, granting degrees to nearly 10 percent of all college students in the U.S.
With recent legislation threatening federal aid to for-profit college students, the majority of non-traditional students will not be able to afford tuition. It goes without saying that these students – usually veterans, parents, career changers, and mid-career employees – are put at a disadvantage within the job market and unable to compete without the right training. In a time where job creation is our top priority, we cannot afford to restrict access to higher education.
For more on this article, please click here.
July 12, 2011
The Importance of Technical Education in Today’s Economy
In recent article by Frederick Hess for The Atlantic, economists have estimated that “25 percent of the unemployed are out of work due to skill-job mismatches. Experts have also said that today’s unemployment rate of 9.2 would be closer to 8 percent if a majority of these jobs were filled. When it’s difficult and costly for employers to find skilled workers, employers either don’t hire or they concentrate their growth overseas.”
“The training and skills discussion is less about bachelor’s degrees and more about those who need a top-shelf technical education.” So where can mid-career employees seek additional technical training?
The fact is, “community colleges retain a balky and inconvenient academic calendar, and frequently do a less-than-stellar job of linking their instruction to local workforce needs. Moreover, they’ve been slow to meet new needs, instead insisting that they first require new state subsidies.”
Therefore, most growth in career and technical education in the past decade has been driven by for-profit institutions. With flexible scheduling, accessible online courses, and niche degree programs, workers have turned to for-profit colleges as a “convenient, cost-effective, high-quality option for an advanced degree.”
With high-quality retraining offered at for-profit schools, it is no longer likely for “workers in struggling industries to get stuck in the same job, for their skills to atrophy, and for their networks and work habits to erode.” Heavy regulation targeting for-profiting schools contributes directly to the shrinking supply of skilled workers, discouraging employers and leading many big firms to outsource.
When it comes to job creation, for-profit institutions provide a crucial lift for the business community. While job creation is an especially timely challenge, the robustness of the for-profit education industry can make an enormous positive change in our economy.
July 11, 2011
For-Profit School Invests in Moreno Valley Community
Pacific University of Moreno Valley, a for-profit institution offering bachelor’s and master’s degrees in sports management and related fields, “will rescue Moreno Valley’s old, and worn down Cottonwood Golf Course which is expecting a loss of $200,000 for the fiscal year 2010-11.”
Under a new proposal, “Pacific University would invest $1.3 million in renovating the golf course for instructional and public use. The money to fund this investment would be money received through Pacifica’s tuition, endowments, fundraisers and projects.”
“The university plans to renovate the kitchen, construct a practice hitting area, improve the course, and launch lessons and clinics for the cities’ children. This arrangement will create a self-sufficient operation within four to five years, according to Michael McCarty, city director of parks and recreation.”
Pacifica University’s involvement with the Cottonwood Golf Course will not only “bring revenue into the city but it also provides additional hands-on experience to Pacifica’s students. Pacifica offers a bachelor’s degree in golf management and students will learn how to care for the fairways and greens through a working golf course.”
With regulation attempting to stifle the for-profit college industry, it is important to keep in mind that there are many schools, like Pacifica, that bring jobs and revenue into a struggling city. Cutting federal aid to students that attend colleges like Pacifica not only puts high-risk individuals at a disadvantage but can also needlessly prevent income and jobs from coming into a city that could use a boost.
For more on this story, click here.
July 7, 2011
A Compelling Case for College Education
Recently, New York Times columnist David Leonhardt advocated for more Americans to attend college and earn an advanced degree. He listed employment, salary increases and increased tax revenues as the top returns on investment.
Mr. Leonhardt writes, “three decades ago, full-time workers with a bachelor’s degree made 40 percent more than those with only a high-school diploma. Last year, the gap reached 83 percent. College graduates, though hardly immune from the downturn, are also far less likely to be unemployed than non-graduates.”
In agreement with Leonhardt’s article, readers are speaking out in favor of earning an advanced degree. As one pointed out, “salary bumps reported for cooks, cashiers, child care workers among others translate into increased local, state and federal tax revenues.”
Beyond increased tax revenues, “college graduates are also less likely to consume tax dollars spent on law enforcement, Medicaid, and welfare.”
It is important to note that for-profit schools are granting degrees to roughly 10% of all college students in the country. In addition to the reasons given above, “those who complete college are also much more likely to start new businesses and grow existing ones.”
For our communities and for our nation, college does indeed pay off. Legislators need to be mindful of how new laws in the for-profit education industry could potentially stunt our nation’s growth.
For more on this article, please click here.
June 23, 2011
New Online Education Firm Aimed at Baby Boomers
This morning, Encore Career Institute, a new online educational company, announced that it has raised $15 million in funding. It is headed by “millionaire entrepreneur Steve Poizner, a 2010 GOP primary candidate for governor, and major Democratic donor Sherry Lansing, the first woman to head a Hollywood film studio and chairwoman of UC’s Board of Regents.”
The for-profit institution will “offer a customized curriculum, job-retraining classes and certificate programs in an online program intended to help America’s estimated 77 million Baby Boomers pursue jobs in diverse fields such as finance, education, health care and environmental sustainability.”
According to Poizner, Encore plans to “advance online education by marshaling technologies – Web development tools, social networking, mobile devices and multimedia – to offer the “2.0″ of online education supported by job counseling and job placement advising.” These new models of online learning are specifically designed for baby boomers.
With unemployment at 9.1 percent, “the need for creating jobs and retraining the older workforce was underscored by a Rutgers University Center for Workforce Development study released late last year.” The research concluded that the United States is “witnessing the birth of a new class – the involuntarily retired” – represented by millions of over-50 residents who “believe they will not work again at a full-time ‘real’ job commensurate with their education and training.”
Hopefully, “Encore will help the job market optimize the wisdom, life lessons, and judgment that only come with age and a little gray hair.”
For more on this article, click here.
A new article published in Forbes this morning details “the story of one for-profit college – American Public University System (APEI) – that has achieved where public universities have failed. Through its American Military University (AMU) subsidiary, APEI has focused on a larger niche within the for-profit online education sector.”
“A former Marine Corps instructor, Major James P. Etter, founded AMU in the early nineties to address the need of highly mobile, financially strapped, and irregularly employed young soldiers who lacked the educational flexibility to advance in rank and career.”
In 2001, “AMU expanded into the American Public University System and established American Public University or APU, APEI’s civilian education arm,” in response to a demand for “post-military career preparation.” APU has prospered by including “in-demand programs such as psychology, sports, management, and business.”
“APU differentiates itself with its world-class faculty and that flexible, cost effective courses. Classes cost about $250 per credit hour, which is around 10-15% less than average in-state tuition at public institutions.”
APU, like other for-profit universities, continues to offer accessibility to an underserved population. With a diverse course catalog, students attending APU or other APEI colleges pay less and are afforded the same, if not better, scholastic opportunities as their nonprofit counterparts.
For more on this article, click here.
June 20, 2011
For-Profit Colleges Serve Student, State Well
In response the Herald-Leader’s “Getting money’s worth not partisan; Tax dollars fund for-profit schools,” Sullivan University System Chancellor, A.R. Sullivan, is setting the record straight.
Public community colleges in Kentucky, according to recent statistics, “graduated less than 20 percent of their students while for-profit schools graduated roughly 61 percent.” Sullivan argues, “So which is a better investment? A college that has a 61 percent success rate or one that has less than a 20 percent success rate?”
“With federal funding pumped into public colleges that are not awarding degrees to about 80 percent of their students, one has to question whether current legislation — i.e. the “gainful employment” rule — is extended over enough players.” If the criticism is about utilizing government funds, then “legislators need to take a closer look at public institutions, particularly ones with such low graduation rates like those in Kentucky.” “And since for-profit schools receive no direct funding from either state or federal agencies, an important question to ask is, where is the federal and state funding return on investment best measured?”
Sullivan went on to also question “the tuition costs of a public tax-supported college and costs at for-profit schools – which are not tax-supported or tax-avoiding but, in fact, taxpaying.” “A more reasonable comparison,” he says, “would be tuition costs of private for-profit colleges with private nonprofit colleges.” “These costs,” he argues, are very similar.” “Amazing how tuition has to rise to the real cost of education when thousands of our tax dollars are not used to support institutions to allow for lower tuition,” he added.
For-profit colleges have educated tens of thousands of Kentuckians and have a history of providing indispensable training to the state’s workforce.
For more on this article, click here.
June 15, 2011
House Votes to Block For-Profit College Regulations
Today, the House Committee on Education passed a bill called the “Protecting Academic Freedom in Higher Education Act” to block various portions the Department of Education’s new regulations affecting for-profit colleges.
The Committee approved the “Protecting Academic Freedom in Higher Education Act” that “repeals new regulation that requires states to follow federal requirement when deciding whether to grant a college or university permission to operate within the state.” Essentially, this regulation is a “one-size-fits-all requirement that piles on unnecessary costs on both the state, taxpayers, and the institution.”
The new bill also “repeals the regulations attempt to set a definition of a credit hour – the basic unit on which aid packages are built. Standardizing a credit hour is not a legitimate tool to measure student learning and will restrict innovation, limit flexibility, and obstruct innovative teaching methods.”
These repeals put the responsibility back into the “hands of private sector colleges and the states in which they serve; it allows each institution to make certain budget and academic adjustments based on the needs of their students.”
Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) introduced the bill and states the regulations would “negatively impact states and institutions of higher education across the country [as well as] allow the federal government to interfere in areas that have historically been the responsibility of institutions and states.”
Echoing that point was bill-supporter and Committee Chairman John Kline (R-Minn.), who stated, “In order to best prepare today’s students to join tomorrow’s workforce, we must ensure we are not overwhelming schools with unnecessary regulations. Too much federal overreach into post-secondary education will undoubtedly lead to higher costs and reduced access to education opportunities for millions of students,” Kline said in the statement. “In turn, this will undercut our efforts to build a stronger, more competitive economy. “
Without the passing of this bill, for-profit institutions can face even further overreach from the federal government further reducing student choice. For more on this article, click here.
