Blog Post 10

The For-Profit Business Scheme: Enslavement With Education

Abstact:

For-profit universities have made millions of dollars in revenue by targeting vulnerable, low-income and minority populations. With deceptive tactics for-profit recruitment personnel pressure students into enrollment. Recruiters, however, are pressed to act ruthless by their own administrators. A hierarchy of intimidation

is created in which for-profit directors press employees to relentlessly target and take advantage of low-income and inner city students.  Low-income students are left repaying debt to the for profit companies for the rest of their lives, oppressed into a life of poverty and limited social movement.

Work Cited

Cellini, Stephanie R. "Financial Aid and For-Profit Colleges: Does Aid Encourage Entry?" Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29.3 (2010): 526-52. Wiley Online Library. 7 June 2010. Web.

College, Inc. FRONTLINE. PBS, 2010. Online Program.

Gibson, Robert A. "Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. DuBois: The Problem of Negro Leadership." Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute 2 (1978): n. pag. Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute. Web. 09 Dec. 2012. <http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1978/2/78.02.02.x.html>.

Giroux, Henry A.  "Neoliberalism, Corporate Culture, and the Promise of Higher Education: The University as a Democratic Public Sphere." Harvard Educational Review Vol. 72 No. 4 (2002): 426-463. Print

Kinser, Kevin. "Access in U.S. Higher Education: What Does the For-Profit Sector Contribute? ." Program for Research on Private Higher Education. University at Albany, State University of New York, Mar. 2009. Web. 07 Dec. 2012.

Roderick, Melissa, Jenny Nagaoka, and Vanessa Coca. "College Readiness for All: The Challenge for Urban High Schools." Future Of Children 19.1 (2009): 185-210. Print.

Williams, Jeffrey. "Academic Freedom and Indentured Students." Academic Freedom and Indentured Students 98.1 (2012): AAUP:. Web. 08 Dec. 2012.

U.S. Congress. Government Accountability Office. Postsecondary Education: Student Outcomes Vary at For-Profit, Nonprofit, and Public Schools. (1-91) Washington: Government Printing Office, Dec. 2011.

U.S. Congress. Government Accountability Office. FOR-PROFIT COLLEGES: Undercover Testing Finds Colleges Encouraged Fraud and Engaged in Deceptive and Questionable Marketing Practices. (1-27) Washington: Government Printing Office, Aug. 2010.

U.S. Senate. HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR AND PENSIONS COMMITTEE.  For Profit Higher Education: The Failure to Safeguard the Federal Investment and Ensure Student Success (1-181). Washington: Government Printing Office, July. 2012

U.S. Senate. HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR AND PENSIONS COMMITTEE.  For Profit Higher Education: The Failure to Safeguard the Federal Investment and Ensure Student Success PART II: Profiles of 30 For-Profit Education Companies (202-720). Washington: Government Printing Office, July. 2012

Blog Post 8

            For my interview, I spoke to Associate Research Professor Roland Anglin, who is the Director  of the Joseph C. Cornwall Center for Metropolitan Studies School at the Public Affairs and Administration department of Rutgers University-Newark. Anglin recently transferred to this office form the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers-New Brunswick, where he was Executive Director of New Jersey Public Policy Research Institute. Anglin is an expert on poverty, race, urban affairs and local economic development. Anglin’s career includes more than two decades of experience working in the public, educational, and philanthropic sectors.
            I asked about the hindrances that low-income students may come across in their efforts to pursue higher education. Anglin first pointed out the inadequate  educational programs in urban communities, stating that students are "not being prepared by good schools". This leads to lower grades and higher college dropout rates for the minority population. Anglin also added that there are other "socio-cultural challenges such as [higher] crime rates". The culture that students experience is one that drives them away from the educational path, toward one that is influenced by drugs, gangs and crime. Anglin followed with noteworthy examples in which the state makes efforts to improve the situation of urban communities. The socio-cultural obstacles that low-income students face are met with "social policies that try to address this problem." These policies include, "earned income tax credit, workforce development, [job] training, and community development programs".
            I moved directly into the issue with for-profit colleges, and their alleged targeting of vulnerable populations for large revenue. Anglin said that according to congressional reports he has come across, "targeting low-income students may be what [for-profit colleges] are doing." He believed that for-profits purposely target the "people who qualify for [federal] aid." Anglin also assessed the general results of enrolling targeting these students who are not prepared for higher education.  He added "unfortunately, these are the ones that have lower graduation rates, or graduating with no real skills." He believes that although for-profit education programs are suspect in many cases, considering the negative outcomes of enrollment. Still, he said they are necessary. Not all students have access to traditional schooling.
            I chose to speak with Professor Anglin because of his decades of experience. Not only has  Anglin is renowned for his economic and community development studies of marginalized communities, he has also supervised research programs in New Jersey, exploring to the role of crime prevention and youth development. I believe that his expertise in his field has helped me to gain further insight into the socio-cultural issues that low-income college students face. Also, I believe that he has first-hand experience of these issues. He received his bachelor's degree from Brooklyn College, his master's degree from Northwestern University, and his doctoral degree from the University of Chicago. Anglin has worked  his way through areas filled with the issues that minorities face, making his experience in the effects of societal issues on urban schooling a notable one.

Roland Anglin, PhD
Associate Research Professor;
Director, Joseph C. Cornwall Center for Metropolitan Studies

47 Bleeker Street, Newark, NJ 07102
ccms@andromeda.rutgers.edu
973-353-1750


School of Public Affairs and Administration (SPAA)
Rutgers University-Newark

Blog Post 9: Visual

The Privatization of Higher Education

Literature Review # 5

(1)    

(2)    U.S. Senate. HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR AND PENSIONS COMMITTEE.  For Profit Higher Education: The Failure to Safeguard the Federal Investment and Ensure Student Success (1-181). Washington: Government Printing Office, July. 2012

(3)     The US Senate's HELP committee researched the deceptive tactics that for-profits used during their enrollment process. Their results show that for-profits will go to extreme lengths to recruit students, including targeting the most vulnerable parts of the population.

(4)    The US HELP committee is a portion of the Senate. It handles manners concerning the health, education, and work force of the nation.

(5)   Pain Funnel - sales tactic used by for-profit recruiters that elicits pain in students, causing them to make decisions without much thought

      Objections - doubts or concerns students may have about enrollment. Recruiters used scripts or aggressive language to overcome student objections.

(6)    "After a recruiter located a prospective student’s pain point, the “pain funnel” presented a number

of questions that the recruiter can ask that are progressively more hurtful" (HELP 62).

Students are mentally backed into a corner with the pain funnel method. Then, recruiters would offer the solutions to all of the students' problems in the form of a for-profit degree.

"For instance, Vatterott’s internal “Student Profiles,” part of a manual to train recruiters, detailed the demographic subgroups that the company targets for enrollment: 'Welfare Mom w/Kids. Pregnant Ladies. Recent Divorce. Low Self-Esteem. Low Income Jobs. Experienced a Recent Death. Physically/Mentally Abused. Recent Incarceration. Drug Rehabilitation. Dead-End Jobs-No Future'"(HELP 58).

Low-income and minority populations are targeted by these companies, and recruiters are trained to find and take advantage of students who fit the description.

"An internal Concorde email indicates that company employees had visited 'welfare offices' and 'unemployment offices,' although recruiters were later told to stop visiting these offices because it may be a violation of accreditation standards" (HELP 58).

In their attempt to exploit low-income neighborhoods and find prospective students, some recruiters have been known to show up at social service organization offering for-profit education as solutions to vulnerable people.

(7)     This study explicitly shows the methods used by for-profit college in their efforts to take advantage of the low-income communities. Students are pushed to the edge, emotionally, and then offered a solution in for-profit education. If students do not comply, they are met with more aggressive methods of recruitment. 

Literature Review #4

(1)     

(2)   U.S. Congress. Government Accountability Office. FOR-PROFIT COLLEGES: Undercover Testing Finds Colleges Encouraged Fraud and Engaged in Deceptive and Questionable Marketing Practices. (1-27) Washington: Government Printing Office, Aug. 2010.

(3)     The GAO conducts a study in which their agents visit 15 for-profit colleges in an effort to uncover the enrollment process of for-profit schooling.The study finds that for-profits use deceptive tactics to enroll students and also falsify student information to maximize their financial aid award.

(4)    The GAO is part of the legislative branch of the US government. It serves to audit, evaluate, and investigate the use of public funds. The GAO makes reports in order to maximize efficiency in public spending.

(5)     FAFSA - free application for federal student aid
Federal  student aid - helps students pay for college with free grants, work study programs, and loan programs
.

(6)     "Within a month of using the Web sites, one student interested in business management received 182 phone calls and another student also interested in business management received 179 phone calls" (14).

As soon as students sign up for websites affiliated with for-profits, they are immediately targeted, receiving calls from unrelenting recruiters. 


"Three colleges required undercover applicants to make $20–$150 monthly payments once enrolled, despite the fact that students are typically not required to repay loans until after the student finishes or drops out of the program"(13).

For-profit recruiters would use deceptive tactics to persuade students to pay fees, which sometimes did not even exist.

"At the same Florida college, multiple representatives used high pressure marketing techniques, becoming argumentative, and scolding our undercover applicants for refusing to enroll before speaking with financial aid" (12).

Students are pressured to enroll in for-profits and if they are not complying, recruiters would often become aggressive.

(7)     This study shows the harshness of the for-profit recruitment process. Students, such as those in the minority population, are easily taken advantage of by these schools. Desperate for an opportunity for schooling, students are often misled into paying more for education, enrolling into for-profit schooling without taking the time to research the educational institution.

BLOG POST #7 : Argument & Counter-Argument

In my paper, I argue that low-income students will find more benefit in enrolling in community colleges or traditional schooling, rather than enrolling in for-profit colleges. One counter-argument supports the rise of for-profit colleges and learning activities provided within the institutions. Occupational colleges focus on providing students hands-on learning classes that helps the students gain major experience in their relative field. Career services building are major offices in most for-profit schools, emphasizing the institution's desire to help their graduates, including many disadvantaged students, acquire and maintain a career.

Literature Review Blog # 3

(1)

(2) U.S. Congress. Government Accountability Office. Postsecondary Education: Student Outcomes Vary at For-Profit, Nonprofit, and Public Schools. (1-19) Washington: Government Printing Office, 2011.

(GAO) conducted two studies that assess the quality of education in proprietary colleges and traditional universities. Studies showed that for-profits schools had higher graduation rates for certificate programs, similar graduation rates for associate's degree programs, and lower graduation rates for bachelor's degree programs than students at traditional schools.

(4) The GAO is part of the legislative branch of the US government. It serves to audit, evaluate, and investigate the use of public funds. The GAO makes reports in order to maximize efficiency in public spending.

(5) "Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS) Longitudinal Study" - survey of beginning students at three points in time: at the end of their first year, and then three and six years after first starting in postsecondary education.  

" Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) " -  captures detailed enrollment data from all schools participating in federal student aid programs.

(6) "An ongoing study suggests that students who started at for-profit schools had similar annual earnings, but higher rates of unemployment compared to students who started at nonprofit and public schools" (GAO 6).

Graduates of proprietary colleges seem to be less able to maintain a career in their relative majors.


"One ongoing study shows that for-profit schools had a higher proportion of students default on their student loans than 4-year nonprofit schools and 2-year nonprofit and public schools" (GAO 6-7)


The high cost of for-profit education causes more students to have trouble paying off student loans, when compared to traditional universities.


 "Available data indicate that for-profit schools enroll a higher proportion of low-income, minority, and nontraditional students who face challenges that can affect their educational outcomes. Students with 
these characteristics tend to have less positive educational outcomes than other students" (GAO 2-3).

Low-income, and minority students have lower chances of becoming successful when enrolling in for-profit education.


It seems that for-profit institutions are taking advantage of the low-income and minority population. Those that enroll in proprietary education may not be as successful as they could be. The studies show that minorities will not be able to find employment as easily, nor will they be able to relieve themselves of student debt.