In the article Why Do You Think They’re Called For-Profit Colleges? Author Kevin Carey successfully informs readers about the for-profit university business. To portray the full story Carey successfully investigates both the pro for-profit and anti for-profit sides of the argument and provides useful facts, data and opinions from field leaders on both ends. Carey gives the reader enough information to draw their own conclusion regarding the topic, however, I believe that Carey’s argument is that the industry is a necessary evil. This meaning that a lot of what these colleges are doing is wrong, however, there is a need for them since community colleges are filling up fast, these colleges provide night classes and that they can be accessed over
Thanks to weakened regulation in the Education department it made it easier for them to target students that would have otherwise not applied for these loans. This collapse of one of America’s largest for profit
In his article “Why Do You Think They’re Called For-Profit Colleges?” Kevin Carey offers harsh criticisms of for-profit colleges by claiming that they are directly to blame for the disproportionately high quantity of debt that their postgraduate students acquire. His primary reasoning for such is that for-profit colleges are charging more for their degrees than they are actually worth. He himself writes, “for-profits charge much more than public colleges and universities. Many of their students come from moderate- and low-income backgrounds…
It is clear that Andrew Rosen, the chief executive of Kaplan, wants to leave readers of Change.edu with the idea that for-profit colleges are innovative, efficient, and effective in serving people left out by traditional higher education, and that their bad reputation is the result of unfair attacks. I picked up Rosen 's book wanting to see how the power of the market can transform the enterprise and improve student learning. Instead, I am now more concerned about the hazards of for-profit colleges than I was before. The eye-opening, gasp-inducing elements involve Rosen 's descriptions of the intense pressures on company executives to produce quick, huge profits for investors by shortchanging students.
Society has a very skewed opinion of what college is, how it should look, and what each individual type of person should experience while in college. In Tressie McMillan Cottom’s Lower Ed: The Troubling Rise of For-Profit Colleges in the New Economy, she investigates what for-profit colleges are to modern society and how they affect various types of lives. She does this by placing herself into different social roles to put into perspective to her audience the different types of lives that affected by for-profit colleges, the role of for-profit colleges in personal and professional settings, and why she personally understands what for-profit schools are by being in these roles. Cottom takes her societal roles in two directions. The first is
What does it mean to be a college graduate and do they really care about your career? In this essay, “We Send Too Many Students To College (2011)”, Marty Nemko’s, asserts, that colleges are a business as well as students are a cost item. Nemko supports his claim by illustrating authoritative quotes with the nationwide survey conducted by UCLA researchers. Nemko’s purpose points out the way colleges misinform high school students who are seeking a degree where sometimes employment is difficult to acquire, in order to collect billions of tax dollars with minimal accountability.
People attend college to become successful, independent adults, and for-profit schools draw the attention of many students because of the short amount of time the school claims to give out a degree. In the article, Why Lower-Income Students are Drawn to For-Profit schools, by Alexia Elejalde-Ruiz, real-life examples are provided of the negative effects of for-profit schools. What many students thought was going to better his/her future, actually brought it down. High school graduates are reeled into the advertisements of for-profit schools and in the end are left with major debt and even struggle to start his/her career. Alexia Elejalde-Ruiz reveals the secret behind for-profit schools through the use of ethos.
In general, for-profit schools cost more to attend, because they are run like businesses. And it definitely does not take a college degree to see that these high prices plus low income students equal greater risk of default. For-profit colleges began as family owned trade schools but over the years they have expanded into educational businesses that accept any student, regardless of their financial wellbeing or aptitude. On the other hand, traditional schools have neglected to notice the rising need for an education that is flexible and convenient. In his article “Why Do You Think They’re Called For-Profit Colleges,” Kevin Carey writes to an educated audience of higher education students and faculty to convince them the pros and cons of both
Citing the rising student loan debt which are “up 5 percent” and the price of college spiking due to “state budget cuts” in 2011 Ellis asserts. To them education can only be bought and the lower class don’t have a fair fight in the struggle of a higher education. However they fail to acknowledge the increase of financial aid and resources for students. Ellis points out “federal financial aid keeps student debt low”.
The film, College Inc., is about for-profit colleges. A for-profit college is a college that is controlled by a private or profit-seeking business. Usually these colleges are ones that had little to no money to keep the college running, so they were bought by a private business that funds them until the business makes money. A few examples of for-profit colleges are University of Phoenix, DeVry University, and Ashford University. These colleges were saved from bankruptcy by businesses, but the businesses that saved the colleges are only interested in earning money from the colleges.
In this day and age, it is assumed that the majority of high school graduates will be attending college, whether a two year community college or a four year college or university. The problem with this expectation of young people is that college is expensive, which is why numerous people are pushing towards free college for all, not just for the academically talented. While overall publicly funded college is unrealistic, this country could slowly overcome this issue of college debt by providing more two year community colleges across the nation with the tuition of these community colleges drastically reduced. The major reason why many people are pushing towards publicly funded college is a because of the substantial rise in college debt over the last decade.
In the last fifty years the world has gone under many changes but one that is really shocking is the escalating prices of colleges. Since 1985, the price tag in American colleges and universities has
According to the New York Times, “about two-thirds of bachelor’s degree recipients borrow money to attend college, either from the government or private lenders, according to a Department of Education survey of 2007-8 graduates.” On average since 1980, college tuition prices rise 7% a year. In comparison, the inflation rate is just 3.2%. But we have to remember that as long as the demand for higher education continues to rise, the price will also rise. In order to pay for the absurd prices of higher education, students should not have to end up turning to loans.
The expensive nature of for-profit schools becomes clear when the cost of education is analyzed based on the student’s cost to attain a certain degree; an associate’s degree in business administration would cost approximately $33,000 for a student attending the for-profit Kaplan University, however same degree earned from a community college, based on the national average, costs $8,500 (Morgan, 2010). In addition to the higher cost of education at for-profit institutions, students who attend such institutions tend to come from backgrounds with higher rates of default when repaying student loan debt (Government Accountability Office, 2009). The Government Accounting Office identified three student sub-groups with an increased risk of defaulting on student loans: lower-income students, students whose parents have a lower level of education, and older students; for-profit colleges have proportionally more students from these three sub-groups (Government Accountability Office,
Did you know that Forty-one percent of four-year college students did not graduate within six years? College students around the country are in insane amount of debts and have no way to get rid of it and that’s a reason many do not graduate. Due to the rise in costs to attend college there has been discussions about free education, but how the debt could have been minimized and the effects on economy have not been brought up. College education should not be offered for free to all students because of the missed opportunities and unintended costs of free education are very expensive. Students don’t take advantage of the opportunities they are provided in high school, like dual-enrollment, that could save them time and money in college.
