Jelani Pritchard
Professor Werry
20 Oct. 2014
Bank Of America
How
bad do you want yourself or your kids to receive an education that will allow
you to succeed? Young adults in America thrive to succeed. To reach success in
today's world, education is pretty much mandatory. In "Why Do You Think
They're Called For-Profit Colleges," a 2010 article published in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Kevin Carey argues that although the
higher level education institutions, such as for-profit schools, are here to stay,
they have major flaws in their system. Carey is a writer for The Chronicle of Higher Education that discusses the negatives of
for-profits in America and also the way these schools benefit education. Carey defends the for-profits although
the system of the way it is ran, is a huge fraud and have victimized college
students. These For-Profit schools have been accused with a flawed
recruiting process, leaving students with huge amounts of debt, or
even leaving them unemployed with a degree in their hand. For-Profit schools
such as University of Phoenix, Kaplan College, Corinthian College,
Grand Canyon University, etc are now ran like a business with the main goal
of gaining profit instead of giving students quality education for the price
they paid for. With For-Profit schools having 90% of the revenue
coming from federal government assistance, rewarded Pell Grants and
loans taken out from students are used to pay off their tuition is. Many
of the students have taken out loans from the government with the kind help of
the school itself. Schools target young adults who have the strong
desire to receive a higher education, even with the possibility that they are not
suited to receive it. College acceptant rates at For-Profit universities
are almost at 100% with the schools not even bothering to ask for students'
high school transcripts. Many of the students that are enrolled come from a
low-income family, but that does not stop them from targeting them for
loans.
For-Profits are out to look for themselves, even with faulty
recruiting tactics. Never the less to say, even with problems with
the creditability or quality of education they provide, the treatment of
students, and the profit first mentality, For-Profits are here to
stay.
Carey believes that the schools are here now and that the fact of the matter is
that there needs to be acceptance of it. For-Profit does indeed
give students another option to receive a higher level of education and also
does give them a more specific career path to fulfill after high school.
For-Profit schools play a big role in providing students alternatives.
They are here to help fix failures left by traditional public or private
college/universities, such as not providing certain courses due to
expenses. This helps students consider in enrolling into a For-Profit institution
that does have benefits that traditional schools don't. Although Carey defends
for-profit schools by arguing that they are here to stay, the flaws of the
institution seem to outweigh the positive insight Carey has. In this paper I will analyze Carey's text by illustrating, extending,
and complicating his claims by bringing in several outside sources that will
support my analysis.
Although, Carey
claims that we "do not have the credibility to determine if the quality of
education given by For-Profit schools are less than traditional
institutions" (14-16), excerpts from a government
accountability report on For-Profit universities, published in the full
article, "For-Profit Colleges: Undercover
Testing Finds Colleges Encouraged Fraud and Engaged in Deceptive and
Questionable Marketing Practices," obtains several pieces of evidence that complicates
his claim. It is argued that finding
employment after graduation of a college is in the sole responsibility of the individual, but several For-Profit schools deceived possible
recruitments in order to gain their interest. In an undercover study/experiment, an applicant was told "deceiving or questionable
information on about employment and prospective salaries after graduation by 5
different For-Profit schools. One
small for-profit school that specializes in beauty told the applicant that
barbers can earn up to $150,000 to
$250,000 a year, while according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 10% of Barbers make more than $43,000 a year" (11). Another For-Profit
school deceived an undercover representative by telling them that instead of
obtaining a criminal justice degree, they should consider a medical assisting certificate that
would only take 9 months to complete at the college, earning up to $68,000 a year. With
data found by the BLS, "90%
of all people working in this field make less than $40,000 a year,"
(12) contradicting the deceiving information told. It can be argued
that For-Profit schools should not being responsible for finding employment for
individuals after their graduation or obtainment of degree . But the schools do indeed make several guarantees or false
information to possible future For-Profit students in the recruiting process. Allowing individuals to question the quality or
credibility of the degree they earned at the For-Profit institution they
attended. The GAO reports provides evidence that shows us
that students were promised employment and outstanding salaries after
graduation. This also exposes how the quality of degree the for-profit schools
does not help post grads actually find employment. If for-profs are promising
successful results by attending the schools, students should either be employed
or make the expected salary the schools promised them. Instead they were told
false information and were left with a questionable degree, if they are
unemployed.
Recruitment
of students not only affects the outcome of revenue of the for-profit, but also the outcome of the students future. Questionable recruiting tactics have been taken into
initiative by for-profit "advisors" that present students with a
deception of hope. The main goal
for for-profit schools is to obtain as many students as they can for profit. Giving for-profit schools the label of "for profit." The tactics of the recruitment process are almost
ruthless. For-profits
will do almost anything to meet their own goals. Carey claims that of "large numbers of graduates of
for-profits are having trouble paying back loans; because of aggressive
recruiters" (8). The
recruitment process of such schools seem to be flawed. By comparing a traditional institution, San Diego State University, and a for-profit school, American Public University System, data from collegeresults.org, extends Carey's claim by showing that the average high
school GPA of college freshmen was at a 3.6 while there was no average GPA recorded for the
for-profit school. Data also
shows that there was no SAT or other test scores recorded. With an 100% acceptance rate, the American Public University System admitted students
without the requirements of a high school transcript with a recorded GPA nor
any test scores. If schools are
accepting anyone from anywhere regardless of their educational or income
background, they are aware
of the possibility of either drop outs and unpaid loans. Although that is a possibility, schools do not care as they nonchalantly recruit an
individual regardless of the circumstances, keeping their goal in tact of gaining profit. Some for-profit institutions will find a loop hole in
order to fulfill their goal of recruiting and profit. In the article, “For-Profit Colleges, Vulnerable G.I.’s,” by Holly Petreaus,
examples of the recruitment process of military veterans also extends on
Carey's claim. With having "a strong incentive to enroll
service members and veterans, in large part because of the '90-10 rule', created
by the 1998 amendments to the Higher Education Act," (5),
they are able to gain more revenue legally through a loop hole.
The 90-10 rule states that "a for-profit college must obtain at least 10
percent of its revenue from a source other than Title IV education funds,
the primary source of federal student aid"..."Funds from Tuition
Assistance and the G.I. Bill are not defined as Title IV funds, so
they count toward the 10 percent requirement, just like private sources
of financing" (5). The for-profit institutions are not only targeting
young ambitious students but also military veterans for recruitment,
which does not exclude a marine with brain damages. Questionable tactics of
recruitment by the schools plays a huge role in the flawed system of for-profit
institutions.
Young students in the modern era
desire higher level education after they graduate high school. Why? Competition, that is why. Finding quality employment is a difficult task, but to do so without a college degree in your hand almost
makes it certain for an individual to work at a McDonalds. That is why students have ambition to receive a higher
education. But there is a
problem and For-Profit schools may think they have a solution. Not all students can be admitted to a 4 year university or
even afford it, but with
For-Profit institutions breathing on their back, students are now looking for an alternative. Blinded by tricky recruitment, For-Profit schools are able to lure students to apply and
attend their institution. With
tactics such as deceiving an individual with future success, they are able to have young ambitious adults to take out
loans to pay for their tuition. Some
may argue that some traditional institutions may be cheaper or equal to the
cost of attending a For-Profit, and
they may be right. But with
several For-Profit institutions giving a
nicely detailed pitch to students that a career path is set up for them
to follow in order to succeed, they
are convinced that loans will be paid off in time of their employment. The real problem with that is now that For-Profits are
rapidly becoming accused of handing out worthless degrees, students are unable to find employment. Without employment there is no revenue and without no
revenue, loans cannot
be paid back, leading to
large student debt. Carey argues
that "For-Profits won't take responsibility for the debt to income ratio
they leave students with.."
and that "large numbers of graduates of for-profits are having trouble
paying back loans; because of aggressive recruiters and worthless degrees"
(8-9). Carey's claim can be supported and
illustrated with Kai Wright's article, "Young, Black and Buried
in Debt: How For-Profit Colleges Prey on African-American Ambition." Published
in 2009, Kai Wright, writer for Salon News, states that " between 2004 and
2010, black enrollment
in for-profit bachelor’s programs grew by a whopping 264 percent, compared to a 24 percent increase in black
enrollment in public four-year programs" (7). The numbers of the statistic "mirror a simultaneous trend in
eroding security among ambitious black Americans with shrinking access to
middle-class jobs" (8). This helps
support the argument that for-profits are seeking young ambitious students who
have a desire receive a higher education in order to obtain quality employment. The results of for-profits actually fulfilling
their goal to employ students after graduation says otherwise. Out of the post grad students from a for-profit
school, "96% of
students, according to a
2008 Department of Education survey — are unemployed and leaves with debt. Debit that students cannot pay" (9). For-profit 'advisors' try their hardest to
recruit any student with a pulse. Regardless of the income or educational
background the individual has, as long as if the person is breathing, the
school will be seeing revenue. This shows that for-profits either do not
acknowledge or are unaware of students who are at high risk in leaving the
school with debt because of either their educational or income background. Wright's
findings does a good job of complicating or even further extending Carey's
claim of for-profits leaving large amounts of debt to students they recruited
themselves.
For-profit
institutions seem to carry a lot of load on themselves. And when i say load, i
mean money. Because the amount of revenue that is made by for-profits are
almost a gift from the government. With questionable degrees and quality of
education, students are unable to find employment and are left with huge amount
of debts. Victims of for-profit schools are in deep from the very beginning,
starting with ruthless recruiting tactics. The GAO report and information from
the comparison of SDSU and American Public University System provides
statistical data that shows false information being told by for-profits to help
enroll students. Students were left with the sensibility of promised success
but were left with a worthless degree that allowed them to be on a long search
for a job. For-profits will go out of their way in order to achieve their goal
in recruitment. This goes as far as finding loop holes through the government
individuals such as recruit military veterans, who can pay for any college with
the help of the GI Bill. Schools also target young students who has the desire
to obtain a degree in order to find a place in the work force in the future.
Kai Wright and Holly Perteaus' claims help extend Carey's claim of aggressive
recruitment tactics and the amount of debts students are left after graduation.
It seems as if education for for-profit schools are second on their list of
goals to achieve right under profit. If Carey was correct in his article about
for-profit schools, along with its many flaws, being here to stay, then they
will continue to generate huge amounts of money. Becoming a school that is ran
like a bank in America.
Work Cited
Carey, Kevin. "Why Do You Think
They're Called For-Profit Colleges?." RWS
100 Course Reader. Ed. Department
of Rhetoric and Writing Studies. San Diego. Montezuma Publishing, 2014 53-55.
Print.
College Results Online. Data of the Comparison of San Diego State University
and American Public University System.
collegeresults.org 2010. Web. Oct
2014.
Government Accountability Report. "Excerpts from
For-Profit Colleges: Undercover Testing Finds
Colleges Encouraged Fraud and Engaged in Deceptive and Questionable Marketing Practices." GAO 4 Aug 2010. 1-4. Print. Oct 2014.
Perteaus, Holly. “For-Profit Colleges, Vulnerable
G.I.’s.” New York Times 11 Sept 2011.
1-2.
Web.
Oct 2014.
Wright, Kai. "Young, black and buried in debt: How for-profit
colleges prey on African American
ambition." Salon Magazine 9 June
2013. 1-6. Web. Oct 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment