APSCU Now

Brian Moran's Interview on the Lars Larson Show

2012-01-06T15:31:00.002-05:00

Brian Moran, APSCU's interim President and CEO, appeared on the nationally syndicated Lars Larson Show on December 27, 2011. Below are clips from his interview discussing private sector colleges and universities.

Click the "Play" button to start listening now.
Clip 1:

If you see this text, you need to download the lastest Flash Player from Adobe or use the link at the bottom of the page to download the file to your computer.

Length of Audio: 00:00:46

Clip 2:

If you see this text, you need to download the lastest Flash Player from Adobe or use the link at the bottom of the page to download the file to your computer.

Length of Audio: 00:01:03

Clip 3:

If you see this text, you need to download the lastest Flash Player from Adobe or use the link at the bottom of the page to download the file to your computer.

Length of Audio: 00:01:14

Brian Moran Interview on Business Talk Radio Network

2011-12-09T17:33:00.001-05:00

Brian Moran, APSCU's interim president and CEO, appeared on the nationally syndicated Mike Siegel Show on the Business Talk Radio Network to discuss current issues facing private sector colleges and universities.The program has 1300-1400 affiliate stations nation wide.

Click the "Play" button to start listening now.

If you see this text, you need to download the lastest Flash Player from Adobe or use the link at the bottom of the page to download the file to your computer.

Length of Audio: 00:18:23
Download the recoded session Right-Click on the link and "Save Target as..."
(File: MP3; Size: 4.21 MB; Length: 00:18:23; Date: 12/08/2011)

ASPCU Responds to ClarionLedger.com Article

2011-10-27T14:49:00.000-04:00

APSCU's Brian Moran, Interim CEO & President, commenting on the ClarionLedger.com article Nation's For-profit Colleges Creating Real Horror Story on October 26, 2011:

Charlie Mitchell makes an inaccurate claim that for-profit colleges are “tricking people into signing papers that will treat them to a decade of debt.” This couldn’t be farther from the truth.

It is true that college costs are climbing, pushing some students to take out more loans, which is an issue that private sector colleges and universities take seriously. But this issue is not unique to our schools. On the contrary, a new College Board study found that public and community colleges costs for the current academic year increased more than 8 percent, a higher rate than at private colleges and universities. And private sector schools receive no direct financial support from state governments.

Mitchell also recycles the statistic that students at private sector schools account for half the loans in default. However, this argument is misleading. For the most recent year, 2009—a year beset by a woeful economy--defaults by PSCU students accounted for approximately .005 of all students in higher education. Meanwhile, our schools serve a non-traditional population that does not have as many resources, and therefore, is more likely to default. In reality, rates of loan default of lower-income students at PSCUs are nearly the same as rates of lower-income students at community colleges and four-year colleges.

As even Mitchell contends, private sector schools “do some people some good.” The truth is, our schools provide almost four million, often non-traditional, students like single moms, veterans and working adults, with invaluable advancement opportunities. The Department of Education recently found that graduates of four-year private sector colleges and universities were employed in higher percentages than graduates of either public or private non-profit universities. Mitchell should re-evaluate the record. The only thing our educators are treating our students to is the opportunity for advancement.

APSCU responds to thenorthwestern.com editorial

2011-10-24T18:16:00.001-04:00

A response to thenorthwestern.com editorial: Economy has dire consequences on student debt on October 20th, 2011.

We agree that excessive debt is a bad thing for borrowers, communities and economies. But a few points of order and a bit of context will help your readers better understand the situation:

Student loan debt now exceeds credit card debt in part because borrowers are using their student loans to fund living expense purchases. The Department of Education does not limit the types of expenditures that may be made using student loans, and the government’s student loan interest rates charged are often lower than commercial bank credit card interest rates. What's wrong with this picture?
Rising college debt may, as you say, ring like an advertisement for community college to some students, but not all. A recent report found that federal, state and local taxpayer dollars total $3 billion over five years to cover the education cost of community college dropouts. Taking nothing away from Fox Valley Technical College or Moraine Park Technical College, their graduation rates, better than most of their peers, still lag the graduation rates of two-year career college programs. Studies show that program completion rates help determine student loan repayment rates.
Contrary to the assertion that for-profit schools are "unproven," our schools prove themselves everyday with outcome metrics like graduation and placement. Seventy percent of graduates from nationally accredited career colleges are placed in-field, even in a tough economy.
Looking at all student borrowers, 91 percent repay their loans. Career college student borrowers represent 28 percent of all borrowers going into repayment. Of the nine percent of all borrowers who default, career college student borrowers represent 48 percent or four percent of all borrowers. This percentage of students who default represents the fact that a majority of career college students are of lower socioeconomic status: independent career college students have an annual family income of less than $40,000.

Brian Moran
Interim President and CEO
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

APSCU Responds to Short Sellers

2011-10-18T14:38:00.000-04:00

"Can’t think of a more predatory business? Take a look in the mirror, Jim. Short sellers like Chanos have been talking down private sector colleges and universities for two years. Not because the education is bad, but because the profits of selling short are good. The claim that PSCU degrees are worthless is simply not supported by the observable facts. Listen to PSCU students and graduates, not short sellers, at http://www.youtube.com/ccamedia1."

Brian Moran, Interim President and CEO of APSCU, commenting on the article For-Profit Education Sector Drops; Chanos Calls It “A National Shame” from Barron's on October 17, 2011.

"Can for-profit institutions grow while their reputations sink? Unlikely. More likely is the motivation of short-sellers and their fellow travelers to talk down for-profit institutions--the impact on students, families, communities or the economy be damned. These “analysts” have turned the business of trash talk into personal gold. Are for-profits “notorious” for being unable to place their graduates? Despite a tepid economy, nationally accredited institutions place 70 percent of their graduates. Moreover, graduates of four-year private sector colleges and universities (PSCUs) were employed in higher percentages than graduates of either public or private non-profit universities, according to a recent study by the U.S. Department of Education. Almost four million students are sitting in our classrooms or attending our classes online today, working on a better future, just like their counterparts in traditional higher education. The only difference? Traditional students do not have short sellers seeking to subvert their efforts at skills attainment and a better life."

Brian Moran, Interim President and CEO of APSCU, commenting on the article Are For-Profit Colleges Worthy of Shorting? from MSN Money on October 12, 2011.

Response to The New York Times Editorial

2011-10-14T08:53:00.001-04:00

In response to The New York Times editorial, A Broader G.I. Bill on October 2, 2011.

Buyer beware, the New York Times advises in an editorial targeting GI bill recipients attending private sector colleges and universities (PSCUs). Speaking of old adages, what about "Don’t believe everything you read in the newspaper?" Such as the editorial's presumption that our schools do not provide a quality education. That bias could be dispelled by visiting a few PSCUs and talking to military service and veteran students, not just parroting the partisan Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee findings. A few cases in point:

PSCUs do not "snap up" a disproportionate share of GI bill dollars. Private institutions, whether non-profit or for-profit, cost students more than do public institutions, which enjoy generous taxpayer subsidies. Once the cost of the education is taken into consideration together with the enrollment there is virtually no difference between the two types of private institutions in terms of the ratio of students to benefits, although not surprisingly that ratio is higher than for public institutions.
While charged with "dismal graduation rates and dubious curriculums," the reality is that “apples to apples” comparisons of at-risk student populations at PSCUs and other types of institutions show that our schools actually do better at graduating students. Or to come at the problem from a different perspective, just look at the graduation rate of community colleges, America's public policy solution for educating non-traditional students: 21 percent. Can we spell unsatisfactory? Meanwhile, two-year PSCU programs graduate 60 percent of students and most of our students find in field employment—the whole point of going to school in the first place. Dubious indeed.
Recycling the Senate HELP Committee charges, the Times notes that eight large PSCUs saw over 409,000 degree seeking students drop out within a year of enrolling. With approximately 1.25 million enrollments combined, this constitutes a rate of 39 percent. While every true drop out is lamentable, many students “drop” and return for various reasons, including economic hardship, job and schedule changes, family responsibilities and other "life happens" situations. Also, it’s worth noting the public school dropout rate is 44 percent. Context is all.
Many critics, including Holly Petraeus, are throwing the 90-10 regulation around as the rationale for PSCUs seeking to serve GI Bill eligible students. The accusation is wrong. Most PSCUs receive far less than 90 percent of their revenue from Title IV sources and are not in danger of exceeding the statutory limit. In fact, two-thirds are at 79 percent or lower. Military serving students are naturally attracted to PSCU education because it is flexible, career-focused and populated largely with older, more “cut to the chase” students. Moreover, while 90-10 relates to federal student loans and grants, the GI Bill is an earned benefit. Telling a military serving or veteran student to attend one type of school versus another would be like telling that person to shop at Kroger not Safeway. Can soldiers and sailors serve their country but not select their college?

The Veterans Administration says it will take a closer look at institutions serving more than 300 GI Bill students and we welcome their review. PSCUs already stand up to scrutiny by federal and state regulators and accrediting agencies. But while doing so, be sure to bring the same level of scrutiny to other types of institutions serving GI Bill students. Meanwhile, let’s not do a disservice to 150,000 service members and veterans attending PSCUs by denigrating their education. Instead, get the facts. Start by visiting our schools and talking to our military serving and veteran students.

Brian Moran
Interim President and CEO
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

Comment on the Press Telegram Article

2011-09-29T11:48:00.002-04:00

In "Fix the For-Profit Colleges," (9/25/2011), the Press Telegram correctly points out the important role that career colleges play in educating low-income students who work part-time or need to attend classes at night or online. The author contends that these schools are "a much better choice" than community colleges for this segment of the American population. But then he goes on to make the outrageous assertion that "many of the for-profits themselves are in a corrupt relationship with the government, siphoning off up to 90% of their revenue from grants and loans, then leaving the bills to taxpayers when almost half of those students default." His solution: for-profits should "screen their student applicants for college readiness, and assume some of the losses when students default."

The Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities represents the for-profit education arena. And we have news for the Press Telegram: our sector--far from being in a "corrupt relationship" with government-is actually highly regulated by a triad of state, federal and regional authorities. We advocate the highest standards of conduct for our members, and lead webinars for them on key regulatory developments and compliance issues so they will be operating in accordance with the law.

As you correctly point out, America needs both community colleges and career colleges to reach President Obama's ambitious goal for global postsecondary leadership. The problems of student debt, however, are less about "greasing palms" and more about understanding the nature of a special cadre of men and women, sometimes called non-traditional students, who burn the midnight oil to study, work and turn their lives around. If better screening were the answer to anything, all students who attend colleges and universities using merit based admissions criteria would graduate. Only about half do. Whether open admissions or selective admissions, student motivation and perseverance are elusive qualities, not susceptible to easy measurement.

To find out more, we invite the Press Telegram's columnist to visit our YouTube channel: www.youtube.org/ccamedia1, and listen to some stories of real students talking about how their career college education transformed their lives.

Brian Moran
Interim CEO and President
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

Kudos to theatlantic.com

2011-09-28T16:30:00.000-04:00

Kudos to theatlantic.com for figuring out what we have been saying for months, greater transparency not more complicated policy formulas are needed to assure the return on investment for all college students. Historic patterns of jobs and work are shifting, and while a college degree cannot guarantee upward mobility or a comfortable middle class lifestyle, we know that only value added education and skills are likely to lead to value added employment. In the vacuum created by manufacturing jobs having gone offshore, we need to provide prospective college students-both young and not so young-with the information they need to make effective
choices. So let's focus on the risks faced by every skill seeker in the new economy and not allow policymakers to skirt the issue by scapegoating with one type of school or student.

Brian Moran
Interim President and CEO
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

In reference to The Atlantic article, Do Colleges Need a 'Calorie Count'?, by Julie Margetta Morgan on Sept. 27, 2011.

Stephen Joel Trachtenberg gives introductory remarks at an APSCU Event

2011-09-28T16:07:00.000-04:00

Introductory remarks by Stephen Joel Trachtenberg, President Emeritus, George Washington University at the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities panel event “Creating the Classroom of the Future: Technological Innovation Transforming Higher Education” on September 21, 2011.

I’m delighted to have the opportunity to say a few words about the world of educational technology, to which career colleges have played an important role, and contributed many innovations in the field, such as e-learning.

For the first 40 years of my academic career, I dictated all my correspondence to a group of administrative assistants well trained in the art of stenography – a short-hand method of communication that allows the note taker to copy down verbatim speech in real time by using a collection symbols that can best be described as a mixture of script and geometry, a combination of straight and curved lines, large and small, with open and closed forms that, to the untrained eye, look like a doctor’s signature on the bottom of a prescription. Stenography’s roots go back to ancient Greece; contains a heavy dose of influence from Japan and China; and its modern form was perfected during the 19th century by two Englishmen.

Stenography’s popularity in the last century is quite similar to the present-day 21st century net lingo abbreviations: B-T-W (by the way), L-O-L (lots of laughs or laughing out loud), O-M-G (oh my God) – each of which in shorthand is comprised of a set of three strokes made by the quick flick of the wrist going up, down and across the page. You might say that my speeches were translated into “text messages” years prior to my knowledge of that term.

I’m sure you have all heard that Al Gore invented the Internet. Well, today, I wish to publicly stake a similar claim that has not previously appeared in the news. Long before the Winklevoss twins told Mark Zuckerberg that THEY and not HE invited Facebook, I – Stephen Joel Trachtenberg - created social networking. Just ask any of the hundreds of friends of mine who are linked together by shared common interests: administrators I mentored are now college presidents communicating regularly with each other about their work; nineteen GW alumni, who served as presidents of the student-association, regularly chat with each other about jobs and family; classmates from James Madison High School share vacation plans and photos, and so on. I must have started over two-dozen “friends-groups” - some with more privacy controls than others.

Now, it’s true, I used phones, faxes and the U.S. mail to get my messages from place to place, and not the Internet, but that is a mere technically, as they say.

The development of communications technology is evolutionary - like so many other human tools: it began in pre-historic times with sharp rocks and pictograms on cave walls; it morphed into blinking lights from ship to ship at sea; smoke rings signaling war, peace and Papal elections; dots and dashes across the wires of telegraphic messages; to apps on smart-phones and with everything in-between from charcoal to pencils to lasers – from fresco cycles to power point. Technology is but an aid for the answers to three basic questions:

What more can we discover?
How can we share with each other what we have learned?
How best to preserve what we know?

In schools we teach techniques for investigation: critical thinking, judgment, methods of experimentation and research, and explorations of creativity. For each generation, new technology allows individuals to probe deeper, calculate faster and make connections to more complicated and random factoids than ever before.

Bless technology for the aid it provides the learning process, but never succumb to the belief that it is THE ultimate panacea.

Remember that every generation considers what they are witnessing in real time to be novel and unique, newly minted and original. Let’s not typecast memories merely as anachronisms of an earlier era but understand they represent trends and linkages from the past going forward.

Students need proper tools to excel. They require and deserve schools with roofs that don’t leak, windows that open and close, toilets that flush, classrooms that come with chairs, desks and computers, hot lunches, outdoor play spaces for their bodies, and most of all, teachers who are competent, enthusiastic and able to excite young minds. Children taught under these conditions will come to college prepared to intellectually soar.

When they get to universities, they need find places that are economically affordable and well managed, institutions that utilize the resources of human capital, physical plants and technological infra-structure to provide options for learning that fit a variety of learning styles and academic disciplines. For some, one-on-one tutorials will be best while for others e-learning will provide the most suitable format. Place-based campuses will serve one group while at home e-learning centers suit others.

Location, delivery systems and instructional styles will increasingly become more and of a smorgasbord, a table where the learner will actively participate in what and how she learns.

The electronic platform will be a social equalizer, reducing the hierarchy between professor and students, leveling the playing field by giving students added power over curriculum. In a method of open-source learning, the questions and answers will continually flow to and from tutor and student, pushing the envelope to new heights. Courses will be free flowing lines of inquiry, motivated not only by faculty expertise but also by individual student and group projects that are shared activities.

During the 1980s, the Carter Administration, the high cost of energy drove colleges and universities in New England to close down for a month during the coldest part of the winter. With remote access to lectures and libraries, that old type of hiatus is unnecessary.

Over the years, GW has worked closely with the U.S. Navy to offer continuing education instruction to sailors serving on submarines and aircraft carriers floating around the world. At first, this was accomplished by using VHS tapes – those bulky black boxes once considered state of the art portable learning. Of course, with the advent of more advanced technology the delivery systems have changed formats many times but the general concept of studying while sailing continues.

If students can work at the bottom of the ocean, why can they not also do so on the surface of the moon, or for that matter, from their living rooms or office cubicles? Pod-casts can travel with you in a slender holder smaller than an old-fashioned cigarette case.

It is the interaction with knowledge, not the mere passive acceptance of information that makes the difference. To make a break through in knowledge, you must walk in front of technology, not sit behind it. As the saying on the T-shirt points out, “If you’re not the lead dog, the view never changes.”

Innovation is the key to success.

Watch a replay of the live event on the APSCU Website.

Doing the Military a Disservice, a response to Campus Progress

2011-09-27T18:01:00.001-04:00

In response to the Campus Progress article, Student Veterans and For-Profit Colleges: A Match Made in Hell? by Emily Crockett on September 23, 2011.

Campus Progress has one hell of a nerve, leaning left while trashing the hard won education of non-traditional students, including roughly 150,000 service members and veterans now attending private sector colleges and universities (Student Veterans and For-Profit Colleges: A Match Made in Hell? September 23, 2001). Having served their country, many putting themselves in harm’s way to do so, these are individuals who have first-hand experience with predators. While Campus Progress clearly revels in the idea of "predatory for-profit schools," does it not do military service and veteran students attending private sector colleges and universities a great disservice by describing this education as worthless? Were the education indeed worthless, would not word spread like hellfire through the military ranks? Or is this the case of an agenda driven organization feeding on the misfortune of a particular military student?

A few other points of clarification: looking within their respective student body populations, private sector colleges and universities educate about the same number of undergraduates as do private non-profit colleges and universities. The ratio of students to Post 9/11 GI bill dollars is also the same. Private colleges and universities do not receive generous taxpayer subsidies as do public colleges and universities, thus explaining the relative difference in GI bill dollars spent. Add the taxpayer dollars back into the equation and differences vanish.

PSCUs serve significantly poorer student populations. As a result, PSCU default rates are higher than schools serving more affluent students. Dropout rates are another matter. If only about half of traditional college and university students graduate, where do the rest of these students go? While the prevalence of short-term certificate and diploma programs at PSCUs make "apples and apples" comparisons with traditional colleges difficult, one suspects that those termed dropouts by Campus Progress are actually completers now on the job and getting on with life.

On including GI Bill benefits in the 90-10 calculation, if we are going to start telling military service and veteran students where they can spend their earned benefits perhaps we should also limit their spending at community colleges whose graduation rates fall below a certain threshold—say 50 percent. Otherwise, why throw this money away on otherwise worthless education? Perhaps because choice among competing higher education alternatives is critical less postsecondary education come to resemble public K-12 education.

And using the discredited GAO report as the touchstone for finding abuse in the PSCU sector? The agency had to modify its findings and reshuffle its investigative staff. One abuse of military service students or veterans is one abuse too many. Perhaps that rule should start with Campus Progress.

Response to The New York Times Op Ed Piece

2011-09-27T15:44:00.001-04:00

In response to The New York Times Op Ed, For-Profit Colleges, Vulnerable G.I.'s by Hollister K. Petraeus on September 21, 2011.

One instance of a military service member being abused by an unscrupulous for-profit college is one instance too many. Having served our country, service members deserve our unqualified support. But how does it serve the interests of these individuals to make claims in the nation's leading newspaper, not substantiated, that cast a pall over the educations of roughly 150,000 service members and veterans now attending private sector colleges and universities? That is exactly the tactic used in a recent op-ed by Holly Petraeus in the New York Times (For Profit Colleges, Vulnerable G.I.'s, September 22, 2011).

Much is made of the fact that GI Bill dollars are not included in the government's 90-10 calculation, a regulation that requires career colleges eligible to participate in Title IV student aid programs receive no more than 90 percent of their funding from Title IV sources. This distinction leads Petraeus to conclude that for-profit colleges have an incentive "to see service members as nothing more than dollar signs in uniform." On reputation and word of mouth alone, schools over-marketing and under-serving military students would quickly fail. Yet the author creates the impression that our schools act in a venal way as a matter of course, rather than as a matter of a few isolated exceptions (such as is the case at every level of higher education).

As a society, we've moved beyond the point where we hold the group accountable for the actions of an individual member. Yet Petraeus castigates our sector with a very broad brush, basing her attack on opinions, not data.

For instance, in charging that for-profits "generally" have low graduation rates and a poor record of student placement, Petraeus ignores the fact that two-year career colleges out-perform community colleges in terms of graduation rates three to one or that nationally accredited career colleges place 70 percent of their graduates. While it is true that career colleges do have higher-than-average student default rates, it is equally true that career colleges serve a higher-than-average percentage of at-risk students-single moms, the less affluent, older workers, and, yes, military service members and veterans. Petraeus also cites the difficulty that career college students have transferring credits between institutions but fails to mention the difficulty that any student has in transferring credits, regardless of the school he or she attends. She talks about "a number" of for-profit colleges with questionable credentials. But what number? If the Department of Education’s own program reviews are the basis for drawing any conclusions, that number is very small.

It's time to start beating our rhetorical swords into plowshares, fostering the type of dialogue that puts our military students first, eliminating abuses where they exist, but not calling into question the hard work and accomplishments of those who have attended America's career colleges.

Jim Hutton, PhD
Communications Committee Chairman
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

Response to a Newsday Article

2011-09-07T15:17:00.000-04:00

In response to a Newday Article: Chef-school students protest ripoff on September 5, 2011.

People "lured" to follow their dreams? That point of view is difficult to swallow. No doubt the culinary arts are a "passion profession." Those attending culinary arts programs should be thinking in terms of long term careers rather than graduating to jobs providing instant monetary gratification. And certainly, in deciding to pursue a passion, students should have the best available information to trade off the demands and rewards of a given profession. It's silly to suggest, however, that the experience of two disgruntled students, participating in litigation, are indicative of the thousands of individuals now in culinary programs. Or that students do not receive value by attending and graduating from these programs. Many jobs don't offer generous compensation starting out, but that doesn't stop journalists, teachers, social workers, and others pursuing a career passion from making their professional start. Nor should it stop chefs, patissiers, sommeliers, or others with a taste for the food and beverage life. Students should pick the program that best suits their needs and interests. For some, that will no doubt mean low cost, publicly subsidized community college. For others, those interested in a more immersive and personalized education, a career college is the best recipe for success.

Responding to a Sun Sentinel Editorial

2011-08-29T17:00:00.000-04:00

In response to Sun Sentinel Editorial: AG needs help watching for-profit colleges on August 27, 2011.

Student loan defaults are a real concern, wherever they occur. Postsecondary institutions of all types need to do a better job of loan counseling, disclosure of information that reflects on the likelihood of students to repay, and preparation of students to budget wisely in future years. The federal government needs to consider steps that would limit borrowing to true education expenses and end the practice of student loans becoming an extension of consumer debt. All that being said, the truth about these defaults is that they are most likely to occur among the economically disadvantaged. Students attending private sector colleges and universities (sometimes called for-profit colleges), community colleges, or historically black or Hispanic colleges and universities, have substantially similar default rates because they have substantially similar working class backgrounds. So why not see the problem for what it is? And understand that those who are most at risk by virtue of reduced financial circumstances are also those most at risk for student loan default, regardless of where they go to school.

Brian Moran
Interim President and CEO
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

Response to CBS Money Watch: The Secrets of Attending College Without Student Loans

2011-08-29T16:37:00.000-04:00

In response to CBS Money Watch post: The Secrets of Attending College Without Student Loans by Lynn O'Shaughnessy on August 25, 2011.

The best way to avoid college debt is to be born with a silver spoon in your mouth.
The next best way to avoid college debt is to get on the college track, avoid the distractions that plague the working class young, and compete to attend a top notch, heavily subsidized public college or university.
The next best way to avoid college debt is to come from a family that has avoided the collapse of the housing market; or from a family where your parents have not split up and, along with marriage obligations, lost their commitment to your college education; or from a family where your mom or dad has not lost one or more jobs; or from a family who?s investments and savings have not evaporated in a roller coaster stock market.
The next best way to avoid college debt is to attend a low cost community college briefly, be treated like a number rather than a person, and drop out.
The best way to incur college debt is to be born to a family of modest means and want to improve your lot in life, be willing to do what it takes to climb the economic ladder, and to take on reasonable student loans to make it happen.
The best way to understand college debt is to understand context and not rely on simplistic lists.

Bob Cohen
SVP
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

Brian Moran on NPR's Morning Edition

2011-07-19T17:14:00.000-04:00

APSCU's Interim President and CEO, Brian Moran appeared on NPR's program Morning Edition. Mark Kantrowitz, Publisher of FinAid.org, Anthony Carnevale from Georgetown Univeristy and other higher education specialists also appeared on the program to discuss life after "Gainful Employment". With increasing student debt in all sectors of higher education, some would like to see similar standards for non-profit universities and colleges applied. Listen to the interview below.

Response to "The Fear and Frustration of Faculty at For-Profit Colleges", a post on The Chronicle of Higher Education's blog

2011-07-12T12:40:00.001-04:00

In response to The Chronicle of Higher Education blog post: The Fear and Frustration of Faculty at For-Profit Colleges by Anonymous; Posted: July 10, 2011.

Over 250,000 people work for private sector colleges and universities. Is it reasonable to suppose that the view of one individual, anonymously expressed, represents the views of all, or even a significant percentage of this total? Yet that is the leap of faith the Chronicle implicitly requests from its readers in publishing a column titled, "The Fear and Frustration of Faculty at For-Profit Colleges." Anonymous makes outrageous assertions in a manner that suggests his (or her) experience as an instructor is the rule within our sector and not the exception.

Peering at the universe of career education through the wrong end of the telescope, Anonymous finds no academics who willingly work at for-profit colleges but only those driven by want to accept their positions. The claim is nonsensical on its face, given that most instructors at PSCUs are professionals who love to teach rather than teaching professionals. By doing so, they meet accreditor credentialing requirements, often extend their work days to serve others, and bring real world expertise on a host of topics to the classroom. Legitimate learning has no place in our institutions, Anonymous claims, yet 3.8 million students attend our classes annually and pay the bulk of the tuition themselves in order to do so. They often tell their friends and family about the caliber of the education, bringing still more students into the career education orbit.

Anonymous makes charges such as falsifying student grades and attendance which, if true, constitute fraud. If the author has evidence to substantiate these claims, at a minimum it should be shared with the Department of Education's Office of the Inspector General or the state Attorney General. Institutions engaging in "corrupt policies," handed down by the corporate office to undermine academic standards or to condone cheating would quickly find themselves under investigation not only by the Department of Education, but also state higher education commissions and accrediting bodies.

Ranting on, Anonymous discusses the open admissions environment at private sector colleges and universities as though only PSCUs conduct admissions on this basis and as if non-traditional postsecondary students are rarely (if barely) worth the bother. Illiteracy, learning disabilities, low intelligence, or untreated psychological problems are just some of the reasons that students, Anonymous says, find themselves at a PSCU. Consider the nation's largest postsecondary open admissions environment: Almost two of three students at community colleges require remedial work, and only one in five students at community college actually graduate. PSCU students sometimes do receive the help they need to overcome learning, emotional and social handicaps. We view helping non-traditional student to succeed as nothing for which an apology is needed.

In essence, Anonymous charges PSCUs with being diploma mills: handing out degrees to unprepared students in return for tuition payments. Graduates leave these schools without employable skills, according to the author, and wind up as cashiers and custodians. Left unexplained is the 70 percent in field placement rate of those graduating from nationally accredited schools, or the high pass rates on nurse licensing examinations and other types of certifications.

Having spent four years teaching in an environment marked by intimidation, threats and even physical abuse from all quarters, Anonymous has finally broken free of the PSCU realm, ethical values intact. This individual obviously did not have a positive teaching experience (if the author is an instructor at all) and that is regrettable. But what are the ethics of substituting one's limited first-hand experience with the experience of the world at large? And what are the journalistic values of the Chronicle for publishing such a piece?

Brian Moran
Interim CEO and President
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

A Frontline Response: Educating Sergeant Pantzke

2011-06-30T18:01:00.000-04:00

Every service member and veteran deserves the opportunity to pursue a higher education. Selecting the right path to a college degree is absolutely critical and should be carefully considered. Enrolling in any type of postsecondary program is no guarantee of success, however, and students sometimes do fail to complete their programs, regardless of whether they attend a traditional or a private sector college or university.

The Frontline program, Educating Sergeant Pantzke, aired on June 28, 2011, created the false impression that private sector colleges and universities (PSCUs) target students with military backgrounds, generally to their detriment. As with all institutions, from time to time specific students have specific problems. Deceptive, misleading or unethical practices by schools or mistreatment of students are unacceptable. Those institutions “coloring outside the lines” should be sanctioned, and federal, state and accrediting agency oversight exists to assure regulatory compliance. Frontline based its report on three cases of military students who face distressing situations. Such occurrences, however unfortunate, are no more representative of the PSCU sector or the student experience overall than they would be having had occurred elsewhere in academia. Over 75,000 military members and veterans attend PSCUs on the Post 9-11 GI bill. Frontline presents trial by anecdote, a sensationalized approach to reporting that represents a few trees as the entire forest.

The following address specific issues raised in the Frontline report:

Do PSCUs receive a disproportionate share of military education benefits? No. The Post 9-11 GI Bill opened the door to a wave of active duty as well as veteran military personnel to attend college. Many have selected PSCUs because the convenience, flexibility and concentrated focus of this type of education match the military lifestyle. Even so, the per capita amount in military tuition assistance for PSCU programs is not substantially different from spending at private non-profit postsecondary institutions. PSCUs programs account for 36.5 percent of Post 9-11 GI bill benefits and 23.3 percent of the students, or a 1 to 1.57 ratio. Non-profit private schools have almost exactly the same ratio, educating 15 percent of beneficiaries and receiving 23.7 percent of Post 9-11 GI bill dollars, or a 1 to 1.58 ratio. In dollar terms, PSCUs receive $8,337 per military recipient; private non-profit institutions received $8,410 per military recipient. PSCU tuition costs on average are actually less than the tuitions charged by private, non-profit institutions and the out-of-state tuition charged by public institutions. While it may cost the service member or veteran less to attend a public college or university, the taxpayer is already paying a substantial amount to subsidize this education. For every $1 in direct government support for PSCUs, private not-for profit institutions receive $8.69 and public institutions receive $19.38.
Do PSCU credits transfer between institutions? Transfer of credit is a problem, whether the student is seeking to move from a community college to a four-year state institution in the same university system, or from a PSCU to traditional college or university. While the Council for Higher Education Accreditation prohibits its member institutions from denying credit transfers based solely on the source of the sending institution’s accreditation, the practice unfortunately exists. As a result, institutions should make the difficulty of transferring credits readily apparent. If students are not pursuing terminal degrees or certificates and intend to go on in postsecondary education, they should have a clear understanding of credit transfer policies at both the PSCU and the institutions they may seek to attend in the future.
Do employers frown on PSCU awards? Are they less likely to hire a PSCU graduate? Every hiring manager has his or her own preferences. The record, however, shows that 70 percent of graduates at nationally accredited PSCUs find employment in their field. Relationship building with area employers is a key component of PSCU success. Many PSCUs maintain employer councils to glean market trends and use this information to shape curricula and program offerings. These relationships are also used to build critical internships and, in certain career fields, clinical opportunities. PSCU career services departments actively network with area employers to find jobs for graduates and many employers use local PSCUs as a readily available source of appropriately skilled workers.
Do PSCUs leave special needs students to sink or swim? Hardly. PSCUs feature small class sizes and more, not less, personalized attention. Also, nationally accredited PSCUs are measured by outcomes. That means that if they fail to attain certain retention and graduation rates, they risk exclusion from federal student aid programs.
Do PSCUs offer only online education? No. On the contrary, most PSCU programs are conducted in brick and mortar classrooms. Military students do appreciate the availability of online courses, but this is because such courses fit their schedules, duty assignments, and post transfers, in the U.S. and around the world. While the Frontline program created the impression that PSCUs are synonymous with online education, the truth is that many large state universities are offering extensive online programs. Institutions are also using models which blend in-class and online education and the academic literature suggests that hybrid approaches actually improve learning outcomes.
Do PSCU graduates earn less than their traditional college and university counterparts? Possibly. First of all, one should be careful in how one interprets earnings data because the occupation categories may not be specific enough to allow for accurate comparisons. For example, a nurse with the same credential who works in a large urban hospital may earn more than one who works at a small nursing home. In the same vein, the reference made to earnings in the Frontline program lacked context. PSCU graduates are non-traditional students. They have fewer financial resources, tend to be older adults, may be single mothers, many have been either laid off or seek an alternative to multiple dead-end jobs. They may not be able to re-locate to take a better paying job; they may not be able to work in occupations that require working certain shifts because they interfere with childcare needs; they may not be able to travel, for the same reasons and thereby may not have access to higher paying jobs. In other words, there myriad reasons that can explain the salary differences having nothing to do with the institutions they attended. In short, they begin their careers at a lower rung of the social and economic ladder than their traditional student counterparts. They lack the social networks and other advantages of affluence and academic prowess. PSCU education prepares students to pursue desired careers but it cannot guarantee pay equality.
Do PSCUs relentlessly market to military personnel? PSCUs cannot count on hundreds of years of history or an NCAA sports team to get their names known. They do engage in Internet advertising and other means to generate student inquiries. But PSCU education depends to a substantial degree on word of mouth referrals. Because of their concentrated programs and skills-based, hands on approaches to postsecondary education, PSCUs tend to be “military friendly” by their very nature. This status is enhanced by the fact that PSCU students tend to be older, working adults rather than young people entering college directly from high school.

Response to "Who Goes to For-Profit Colleges?", a post on The Chronicle of Higher Education's blog

2011-06-29T11:04:00.000-04:00

In response to The Chronicle of Higher Education blog post: Who Goes to For-Profit Colleges? by Frank Donoghue; Posted: June 27, 2011.

Frank Donoghue inclined to take the most cynical view of private sector colleges and universities? Hardly shocking. Donoghue is a persistent critic of our sector, and he is entitled to his opinion (patronizing as it is). The truth of the matters raised in his column is, however, quite different. Private sector colleges and universities bring an important alternative path to postsecondary education for many, including economically disadvantaged and minority students. This is a path too often blocked at traditional colleges and universities, institutions that dramatically under-serve this population despite fat taxpayer subsidies of tuition and related expenses. Although Donoghue claims to be heavily influenced in his view by the GAO report on PSCU marketing practices, he fails to reveal that the report itself has been largely amended (and arguably discredited) with several material misstatements and misrepresentations corrected.

While holding the expansion of Post 9-11 GI benefits against the sector, he does not include the fact that numerous veterans groups lobbied to include PSCUs in the legislation's purview. And while Sen. Harkin did issue a report questioning the role of our sector in military education, there is no disproportionate share of military students or dollars in our sector. To put the matter into perspective, the per capita amount in military tuition assistance for PSCU programs is not substantially different from spending at private non-profit postsecondary institutions. PSCUs programs account for 36.5 percent of Post 9-11 GI bill benefits and 23.3 percent of the students, or a 1 to 1.57 ratio. Non-profit private schools have almost exactly the same ratio, educating 15 percent of beneficiaries and receiving 23.7 percent of Post 9-11 GI bill dollars, or a 1 to 1.58 ratio. In dollar terms, PSCUs receive $8,337 per military recipient; private non-profit institutions received $8,410 per military recipient. PSCU tuition costs on average are actually less than the tuitions charged by private, non-profit institutions and the out-of-state tuition charged by public institutions.

Perhaps Donoghue views his fellow citizens as ignorant and easily fooled. We think they are attracted to PSCUs by the very attributes many traditional colleges and universities have long abandoned: small class sizes, flexible schedules, concentrated programs, support services and other elements that improve learning and the odds of graduation. Meanwhile, community colleges are rapidly becoming the postsecondary waiting room for universities such as where Donoghue himself works.

Perhaps Donoghue's liberal arts students can afford the time and cost involved in earning degrees which do not directly prepare them for the workforce. Many other students simply do not have this luxury. While this educator throws stones at the system, 3.8 million students have figured out a better way to make the system work for them. If that equates to more than a single entity in higher education, so be it.

Arthur Keiser, PhD
Chairman of the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

Response to The Chronicle of Higher Education blog post "Student Debt and For-Profit Institutions"

2011-06-21T13:55:00.000-04:00

In response to The Chronicle of Higher Education blog post: Student Debt and For-Profit Institutions by Sandy Baum and Michael McPherson; Posted: June 20, 2011.

Sandy Baum and Michael McPherson say they want to cut through the debate on for-profit colleges and frame the discussion in terms of analysis and evidence rather than ideology. This is a welcome approach which unfortunately they fail to use. Rather, they proceed to adopt a highly patronizing point of view in a discussion that uses sweeping generalizations to advance an ideological argument that is neither supported by analysis nor evidence.

To take issue with some of their points:

The authors say private sector colleges and universities are not and never will be a "text book" example of competitive markets because they rely on the federal government for revenues. Perhaps not, but education is considered a public good and like many other industries, including defense, healthcare, and agriculture, relies on the federal government for revenues. Students borrow government money to attend school, but most of this money is repaid. Plus the government receives the benefit of a more competitive workforce, paying higher taxes and drawing on less government assistance;
Almost half of PSCUs have what the authors refer to as "official" student loan default rates over 20 percent. While this is true for the "trial" three-year cohort default rates, the authors fail to mention that the same factors that explain the likelihood to default, such as a preponderance of low-income students, cut across all institutions; so all institutions and not just private sector institutions serving predominantly low income students have similarly high default rates;
The authors claim institutions meeting the needs of their students are a dwindling portion of the PSCU sector. They present this assertion without any empirical basis, using undefined concepts and no analysis. The authors say the rapid enrollment growth in this sector does not reflect informed consumer response to a high quality product. No evidence is presented to support the assertions about what students know or the quality of the education they receive. While the bias of the authors leads them to conclude that student futures are being damaged by attending PSCUs, the reality is quite different. Non-traditional students, representing numerous at-risk factors, have a better chance of success at our schools than at traditional colleges and universities. PSCUs account for a growing percentage of awards, graduate a higher percentage of at-risk students, on average place seven out of ten graduates in chosen fields of study and yes, continue to enroll increasing numbers of students;
The authors claim that students attending traditional institutions who are worse off than when they arrived are the "exception" but "appear to be the norm" in the PSCU sector. Perhaps in their opinion, which is what this, individuals who graduate from college with employable skills are somehow placed at a disadvantage. Or could it be, as reason suggests, that the disgruntled student is the disgruntled student, no matter where he or she goes to school? Without evidence to the contrary, the exception hardly proves the rule;
The authors maintain that publicly traded schools are driven by shareholders to maximize profit. Doing so might be a strategy for short term success, but long term profitability is only achievable and sustainable through a commitment to value and quality;
Students who enroll in institutions that graduate few of their students are playing the lottery, the authors say. Perhaps, but two-year institutional graduate rates at PSCUs are three times higher than their public school counterparts. By the authors' own reckoning, our schools must be a winning ticket.

We agree with Baum and McPherson that students deserve full disclosure of outcomes, like graduation and placement, so that they can make informed choices. This is true for all students, not just those attending private sector colleges and universities. We disagree that students need self-anointed wiser heads in Washington, D.C. to help them make such choices.

Brian Moran
Interim President, APSCU

Convention Countdown, with Katie Calabrese

2011-05-25T16:41:00.000-04:00

The 2011 APSCU Convention & Exposition is almost here! It opens June 6, 2011 in Grapevine, Texas, and this week, APSCU Events Team is pulling out all the stops to make it the Convention & Expo the biggest and best ever!

Here is a behind-the-scenes peek at APSCU’s Katie Calabrese and her team as they gear-up for the final preparations before heading down to Texas from Washington, DC.

Response to Gaius Publius' article on the AmericaBlog website

2011-05-18T17:39:00.000-04:00

In response to the AmericaBlog article: For-profit colleges fight back against gov’t attempt to make them deliver education by Gaius Publius; Posted: May 15, 2011.

By choosing the not so clever nom de plume Gaius Publius, the author indicates he/she is either from ancient Rome or the time of our nation’s founding. In either case, when it comes to providing a higher education for all of the people who need one, times have changed dramatically. Since 1998, private sector colleges and universities have seen their enrollments increase substantially. Small wonder. Since 1998, more than three million manufacturing jobs have been lost to overseas competition, and shift from a manufacturing to a service economy has accelerated. Americans need new skills that they can use to obtain and remain in middle class jobs-- jobs that will stay in the United States. Harvard and Reed and the University of Washington are not going to educate these workers in transit to become medical assistants or broadband network installation specialists. Community colleges might as one of their multiple missions, but they are severely budget constrained and plagued with the kinds of pedagogical problems that turned many young people away in the first place.

With new populations of students entering or returning to college after years in the workforce, transformative, scalable models are needed to deliver these credentials. And why are these competitive models so important. Because most of these students our country needs to add to the higher education system are older adults, with families, jobs, fewer financial resources, and less time to spend obtaining their sheepskins. That does not make them less savvy education consumers. “Many, perhaps most, for profit-colleges” existing to “vacuum as much money as they can” while delivering the least education possible would hardly be a successful business model. Nor would such a model produce 16 percent of our nation’s higher education graduates, though representing only 12% of higher education. Nor would such a process pass the oversight of federal and state agencies and accrediting bodies in place to assure that such is not the case.

Beyond issuing strictly subjective and unsubstantiated opinions, Gaius stumbles in attempting to relay several points of fact or to provide appropriate context for a real understanding:

On graduation rates, the correct graduation rate for four-year private sector colleges and universities is 35 percent of students, not the 22 percent cited, even though the 35 percent is also probably lower than the reality. The difference springs from the fact that unlike traditional colleges and universities, students attend PSCU institutions for a mix of degree and certificate level programs, not just baccalaureate degrees. Why 35 percent and not 70 or 80 percent? First, traditional colleges and universities fall short of these high graduation rates, with many state colleges and universities also in the mid-30 percent range. In addition, PSCU students are far more likely to be students at-risk for graduation. With fewer resources to fall back on, they are more likely to be knocked off course by events like a sick child or lost job. The difference (and inherent bias) is also underscored by the “first-time, full-time” nature of government statistics. Many PSCU students are returning to postsecondary education after an unsuccessful start at a community college or elsewhere and are not included in the government data. Meanwhile, “apples and apples” research comparisons of at-risk students, regardless of the institution type they attend, show PSCUs do as well or better than traditional schools at helping these individuals successfully graduate.
On median debt for graduates of four-year programs, PSCU students borrow more because they are less affluent than their traditional sector counterparts. Also, their educations are not heavily subsidized by taxpayers, as are those who attend state colleges and universities. PSCU students are approximately four times as likely to be first generation and low income college attendees as are those at either four-year public or non-profit private institutions.
On revenue and its source, while Gaius is happy to point out that a majority of PSCU revenues originate with federal loans and grants, the writer fails to point out that traditional colleges and universities are likewise heavily reliant on taxpayer money to deliver education. Traditional colleges and universities not only generate revenue through federal loans and grants, but also though subsidies like research grants, appropriations, tax credits, and the fact that they pay no federal, state or local taxes on their surpluses/profits. PSCUs on the other hand pay taxes and, with very few exceptions, institutions get no direct assistance from the federal, state, or local government. After federal loans are repaid, the true picture of federal revenue that emerges is quite different. Community colleges, for instance, hang on to 69 cents of every federal dollar they collect while two-year PSCUs retain just 33 cents. While the writer claims “many” PSCUs receive 90 percent of their revenue from federal grants and loans, only about 14 percent have federal revenue of 85 percent or above. The vast majority of PSCUs see 80 percent or less of their revenue coming from federal sources.

Real life may come as a shock to Gaius Publius, but not to the 3.2 million people who pursue their postsecondary educations at private sector colleges and universities. A small number of these individuals, not actors, recently appeared in advertisements to underscore the importance of choice in higher education.

Wrong again guy.

Response to The Chronicle of Higher Education article "Faculty at For-Profits Allege Constant Pressure to Keep Students Enrolled"

2011-05-09T17:55:00.004-04:00

In response to a The Chronicle of Higher Education article: Faculty at For-Profits Allege Constant Pressure to Keep Students Enrolled by Kelly Field; Posted: April 26, 2011.

Falsifying student attendance records, inflating grades or misrepresenting placement numbers are completely unacceptable. Institutions that engage in such practices as a stated or implied matter of policy deserve sanction, whether they be traditional or non-traditional colleges. Satisfactory academic progress is first and foremost a responsibility of the student, but it is also an administrative matter for title IV administration; institutions can and should encourage, inspire, motivate and mentor students to achieve, but there can be no substitute for real accomplishments.

Other issues raised in the article do not constitute misconduct, and only can be construed as such by someone with an ideological ax to grind:

There is nothing wrong with an instructor or other staff member encouraging students to attend class. Too many traditional school faculty do not care if their students show up except for their midterm and final examinations, and students know this. Private sector college and university (PSCU) faculty, on the other hand, do care intensely about attendance of their students and understand that non-attendance is often a road to failure. Also, as they prepare students for careers, the faculty imbue their students with the thought that not showing up for class is no more acceptable at a PSCU than is not showing up for work after they graduate and expect to be respected as a good worker. Maintaining high attendance can be a special challenge for institutions serving at-risk student populations, such as PSCUs. With fewer financial resources and more family obligations, these students face greater life challenges that make uninterrupted college attendance more tenuous. A broken down car or an unreliable child care-giver can mean the difference between going to class and not going to class. As a matter of mission and purpose, private sector colleges and universities work with their student populations to solve issues that may impede class attendance.
There is nothing wrong with students performing extra-credit assignments to improve their class standing. This is a standard practice in all of higher education.
There is nothing wrong with using student evaluation surveys as one input into overall instructor evaluation. Again, this is a standard practice in all of higher education. Students sharing information about the degree of difficulty applied in a particular class or the grading standards of particular instructors is a practice as old as higher education itself (for those who may have forgotten how the Universities of Bologna and Paris were organized). Students are savvy consumers and are not amenable to seeing their hard work short changed. Instructors artificially inflating grades to gain higher survey scores and better compensation would quickly be found out, regardless of the type of institution at which they teach.

While this article is based on “more than a dozen” interviews with current and future instructors at PSCUs, one could easily envision the same problems being gleaned from interviews with hundreds, perhaps thousands, of instructors at traditional colleges and universities. This will not happen, however, because the journalistic dynamic is very different. Localized infractions of the rules at non-profit institutions are considered just that—local, anecdotal, and incidental to the delivery of higher education. These mistakes do not become sensationalized or represented as sector-wide, even when the overall data—e.g., graduation rates of 22%
nationwide at community colleges—suggest otherwise.

PSCUs focus on outcomes, which, absent the pay day of triple damages lawsuits and much aggrieved whistle-blowers, are widely considered a good thing.

Harris N. Miller
President, APSCU

Letter to Hannah Fearn of the Times Higher Education

2011-04-28T17:51:00.000-04:00

The following is a letter sent to Hannah Fearn, regarding her story in the Times Higher Education titled American administrator sounds for-profit warning.

Ms. Fearn: Your report on private sector colleges and universities based on one organization’s incredibly biased and self-serving view is extremely disappointing. As one who lived in the UK for two years while working as a Research Assistant to a Member of Parliament (John Roper, now in the Lords), I have the highest respect for your publication. So I was incredibly surprised to find you took the views of one person as an accurate reflection of private sector colleges and universities in the US, schools that now educate 12% of students in higher education, and, just as one example, have graduation rates almost three times higher than students at our heavily state and local government subsidized community colleges. And while we are 12% of higher education nationally, 17% of degrees and certificates earned in the US last year were from our schools, demonstrating once again that we have better outcomes than traditional schools overall. We do not claim to be competing with Harvard or Cambridge, any more than a US community college or state college does, but for the population we serve—non-traditional students—we do extremely well, which is good for the students and for the US economy, which badly needs these skilled workers.

If you really want to educate your readers about PSCUs, and why I and others think they will be a growing part of the UK educational system, just as they have become in the US, we would be pleased to talk to you, and provide you the research to back up our claims and to counter the biased opinion of one organization’s representative.

Harris Miller
CEO and President
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

Response to a Huffington Post Article "Education Comes With a Price Tag"

2011-04-28T10:06:00.001-04:00

In response to a HuffPost College article: Education Comes With a Price Tag by Beth Kobliner; Posted: April 26, 2011.

Beth Kobliner's column on higher education (Education Comes with a Price Tag) combines practical, real-world advice on selecting a college with assumptions and statements that are ridiculous. A few examples of the latter:

Student loan defaults are similar to the housing mortgage market collapse is false. Speculation and appreciating housing values, along with securitized and under-analyzed mortgage investments, and the absence of regulatory oversight fueled the overheated housing market; there is simply no analogue to higher education, in which speculators are not driving the train, the return on investment to students and taxpayers has been repeatedly documented, and each institution is regulated by three separate bodies;
Private sector colleges and universities (PSCUs) have "scandalously low" graduation rates is false. Every college or university can do better, but graduation rates at two-year PSCUs are three times higher than at community colleges. PSCUs generally serve at-risk, non-traditional students. These students are older, poorer, more likely to have family obligations and job commitments that interfere with education. PSCUs do a better job of graduating these "at-risk" students than do traditional colleges and universities. Most have to achieve pre-established job placement rates for their graduates in order to continue to accept students with federal aid, while traditional schools do not even monitor their placements. In terms of debt management, PSCU graduate default rates are similar to rates among at-risk students in other postsecondary settings. Research has demonstrated that student demographics, not tax status of institutions, explains higher default rates;
Students are being misled is false. All postsecondary schools have enormous disclosure requirements. PSCU students are often the first in their families to attend college. While Kobliner assumes that "ambitious parents" share a "dream" about college education, the truth is that for many non-traditional students, parents and high school guidance counselors are simply not a factor at all. These individuals are financially independent adults, making the decision to pursue higher education having misplaced, misapplied or missed out on earlier opportunities altogether. These students have not been groomed since birth for academic laurels;
Students should avoid debt by going to community college is a nice wish, but not valuable for many. By and large, high school guidance counselors already do steer less competitive students to community colleges. Whether or not such an institution has strong academics, a record of placements, or successful transfer rates is problematic. What too many students find at community college is an extension of high school, with little personal attention and long wait lines to be accepted into the most popular, career-focused programs. In California, where community college enrollments represent about one in four of all community college enrollments nationally, 70 percent of degree-seeking students had not received an award and had not transferred to another institution within six years. Rather, most have dropped out. The problem is even worse for minority students. On top of that, the head of the California community college system was recently quoted as saying the system would turn away 400,000 students this fall because of budget cuts;
High school guidance counselors should "warn their students" about the "dangers" of private sector colleges and universities is nonsense. What the counselors should do is visit their local private sector colleges and universities, meet with faculty and staff, talk to current students and speak with graduates and employers who hire the graduates. Doing so would be illuminating to them, who often should recommend students to consider PSCUs, but do not, because of bias or ignorance. It will also reveal the silliness of Kobliner's assertion. Graduates of nationally accredited PSCUs gain jobs in field at a rate of 70 percent. Can most traditional colleges and universities make the same claim? Or are many of these students home, on the couch, pondering the value of their postsecondary education and driving their frustrated parents crazy?

No one wants to see college turned into an expensive nightmare. Let’s reach the President's 2020 goal by building on facts, not fantasy. And let’s not assume our way to spurious conclusions.

Harris Miller
CEO and President
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

Harris Miller Says Student Loan Changes Build Barriers

2011-04-19T10:52:00.002-04:00

For most Americans the message is simple: Go to college. Get a good job. Build a solid career. But the U.S. Department of Education, through its controversial “gainful employment” proposal, could make it much more difficult for those attempting to do so.

At a time of high unemployment, Washington is building barriers instead of bridges to better jobs and lives.

The gainful employment proposal, the government’s answer to excessive student debt, singles out career-oriented private sector colleges and universities (PCSUs) — in the department’s vernacular, “for-profit” schools. More than 100,000 New York students are currently enrolled in these institutions.

Excessive student debt is a problem in all of higher education, in part because borrowers can use federal student aid programs to borrow far more than they need to pay for education. Rather than tie lending amounts to tuition and reasonable fees, the gainful employment rule would create a debt-to-income ratio for determining program eligibility in student aid programs. The government would bar students using federal aid from entering programs that fail the pre-set ratio. The department is expected to issue its final rule on this matter shortly.

Here’s the problem. The payback of attending college takes place over a lifetime. The federal formula covers the first three years following graduation. If the gainful employment proposal is a good idea, it should apply to all college students, not just those in career-oriented programs.

Instead, the proposed regulation targets the nation’s non-traditional students. These are individuals who entered the work force after high school, enlisted in the military, started families or pursued other life interests. Most are returning to an academic setting, not entering directly from high school.

By closing this door, the proposed rule limits student choice and diminishes the value of private-sector education. The move also has the potential to push up to 2.3 million students out of higher education in the next decade. That will mean workers with fewer skills, fewer opportunities to deploy those skills, a less capable local work force to attract employers and investment, and a less vibrant economy overall.

Washington claims its gainful employment proposal is about reining in excessive student loan debt. Among baccalaureate degree programs, students at public and private nonprofit colleges and universities account for 90 percent of excessive debt ($45,000 or more) and, at the associate’s degree level, these students account for 62 percent ($25,000 or more). These disparities exist despite the large taxpayer subsidies supporting both public and private nonprofit postsecondary institutions.

So what’s the real issue here? Private sector colleges and universities account for 12 percent of higher education enrollments, growing from 1.7 million to 3.2 million in the last six academic years. That kind of growth attracts plenty of attention. Making the issue about private sector colleges and universities takes focus away from far more intractable problems, like spurring job growth, spreading equality of opportunity and shoring up the shrinking American middle class.

No sector of higher education is perfect. Private-sector colleges and universities make their share of mistakes — as do all types of postsecondary institutions. If the question is about education quality, frame the debate in that light and include all players, not just some players. If the question is about debt, look at ways of limiting borrowing so that student loans do not become personal loans.

The public understands the relationship between choice, education and jobs. Time for Washington to understand it, too, and to stop experimenting, especially when the livelihoods of hardworking New Yorkers hang in the balance.

Harris N. Miller
President and CEO
Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

This Op-ed appeared on syracuse.com as a Monday commentary: http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2011/04/mondays_commentary_harris_mill.html