
Inside the sordid world of America's for-profit colleges - SmkyMt
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/nov/09/fail-state-documentary-for-profit-colleges
======
skh
When I first started teaching in higher education the implied client was
society at large. It was my duty to ensure that those who passed knew the
material sufficiently well. This was when a student's tuition paid for 1/3 of
the cost and the government funded the other 2/3.

Now it's the other way around. Now the student is the client. Now I no longer
think it's my duty to ensure that those who pass know the material. It's my
duty to keep enrollment up because we need the tuition dollars. I'm constantly
hounded to increase my passing rate. No one who matters to our funding cares
about people knowing the material they are supposed to be learning.

In the last assignment for the algebra course I'm teaching a student changed
all fractions in a weird inconsistent way. For instance they changed 3/4 to 34
but then changed 5/7 to 75. No apparent rhyme or reason. This is the type of
person we recruit and the type of person I'm supposed to pass.

The for profits are bad but we aren't much further behind.

~~~
HarryHirsch
At my current institution a new lecturer got a chewing-out from the
departmental chair because the pass rate in an introductory class was too low.
The institution managed to keep enrollment constant but had to drop admission
standards markedly this year to be able to do so. Other faculty members
noticed the poor performance of the incoming freshman class compared to
previous years as well.

New kid came fresh from a PhD program at a credible university and thought the
purpose of a university lecturer was to teach to a minimum standard. The
naivete!

This is at a large state school in the Southern US.

~~~
skh
Ha. I've told new hires that one thing they must keep in mind is that this job
is not about teaching.

~~~
Sharlin
As Robin Hanson has said, school is not about learning [1]. Increasingly it
feels that higher education is becoming a cargo cult, a coming-of-age ritual
where you jump through certain hoops in order to be awarded a piece of paper
which then gives you access to jobs.

[1] [http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/08/school-isnt-about-
lear...](http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/08/school-isnt-about-
learning.html)

~~~
shoguning
IMO there is a difference between K-12 and higher ed.

K-12 is actually more about enforcing cultural norms of dilligence,
punctuality and ideally some civic norms.

Higher ed (paraphrasing Peter Thiel) is a mix between insurance and a
tournament. It is _supposed_ to ensure a basic living standard. But it's also
a competitive tournament where the high prestige colleges grant access to
higher pay/prestige careers.

~~~
Sharlin
Agreed that Hanson focuses on primary education in that article. I could've
sworn he has written similarly about higher education but couldn't find
anything relevant by quick googling.

~~~
WillPostForFood
Yeah, Hanson has similar thoughts on higher education:

[https://www.businessinsider.com/is-college-a-waste-of-
time-a...](https://www.businessinsider.com/is-college-a-waste-of-time-and-
money-bryan-caplan-2018-2)

------
seibelj
The for-profit education model would work much better if there were no special
class of “student” loans, and instead the loans offered were normally
dischargeable in bankruptcy. This would cause colleges to charge manageable
tuition and bankrupt the colleges that produced graduates unable to pay.

The current situation of student loans is a racket, and for-profit
universities like Corinthian exist specifically to fleece the government.
Destroying the lives of their students is a byproduct.

~~~
chongli
If students can discharge their loans in bankruptcy, then what stops this from
becoming standard practice on graduation day? After all, a student has no
assets to auction off. The education they received cannot be taken away from
them.

~~~
jkaplowitz
They were dischargeable in bankruptcy until 10-15 years ago.

I don't believe declaring bankruptcy on graduation day was ever a standard
practice, nor do I see why reversing the discharge exception would change
that.

By and large, people intend to repay debts they incur, and they don't want to
deal with the 7 to 10 years (not sure of exact duration) of bad credit that
results from bankruptcy if they can avoid it.

Having difficulty buying or leasing a home or car without paying the total
cost up front, inability to get those jobs where a credit check is involved,
etc... that will never be standard practice by choice.

------
JPKab
I can't begin to describe how corrupt these institutions are.

A few years ago, I had to (for stupid work reasons) take an official test to
get a Cloudera certification. I went to a for-profit university testing
location to do so.

It was one of the big chains.

While I waited and waited for the grossly incompetent staff to get the testing
machine working, I sat and listened to students coming in to an office
concerned with payment. The door was wide open, and I could hear the
conversations clearly.

People who weren't equipped to a level of waking up on time, let alone getting
to class, were trying to stop attending classes and leave. They were
repeatedly goaded and told that they should stick with school, despite the
fact that there was zero chance these folks were going to be able to get jobs
with these bullshit degrees.

All financed by US taxpayer subsidized loans that aren't covered by
bankruptcy. Truly depressing and made me sad.

------
hprotagonist
On its face, some entities just oughtn't be for-profit. The evidence for, and
obvious risk of, perverse incentives going totally bananas is just too high.

\- Educational institutions

\- Hospitals

\- Fire departments (i don't think these exist, at least not yet, but the idea
comes up in Discworld)

~~~
izzydata
I can't say that I've ever seen the word "oughtn't" before. I get that it is a
contraction of "ought" and "not", but it seems more difficult to say and the
same amount of characters.

~~~
jfk13
Seems familiar enough to me (as a UK reader). Some dictionaries suggest it has
become rare in North America, however.

------
olivermarks
I'm also highly aware of how much UK higher education has changed. Warwick
University for example has grown enormously and advertises heavily, relying on
attracting overseas students and research grants.

The bigger question in my mind is whether this is inherently 'bad'. The
Academy of Art University in San Francisco was founded as the Academy of
Advertising Art by Richard S. Stephens in 1929 as a vocational training. Like
Warwick in the UK AofA Uni is now enormous (biggest property owner in San
Francisco) and attracting foreign and out of state students.

There seems to be pretty low barriers to entry (except high prices) to attend
AofA and be taught about the arts. Whether this is a good use of time and will
lead to a career is highly debatable. I wonder about the regulatory aspects as
these giant institutions become an important part of local economies and
seasonal housing, and whether the money gets in the way of the academic
realities

~~~
spacejunk
I feel like the difference lies in that Warwick (and some other UK
universities who do the same thing, including my own) do still have a
relatively high barrier to entry that sets them apart from the American for-
profits.

Not to say that Warwick & other institutions aren't as for-profit as places
like Corinthians, but they definitely manage to get away with it by still
maintaining academic excellence.

~~~
olivermarks
You could make the argument that the ivy league is 'for profit' but their
qualifications will typically get you a career to pay off your massive student
loans...it's the quality of what's being sold that is the interesting element
here, I'd suggest.

------
internet555
As a former employee of one of these (quite famous), the curricula are
oftentimes relatively good, with an emphasis on practical skills. But it’s
difficult for me to see them as a good thing given the issues marked out. Many
of them take lots of government money (through GI bill etc) as well

------
exabrial
"For profit" College is fine. No one is making you give your money to them.
Especially when you could attend a much cheaper community college in the
middle of nowhere for a 1/50th of the price.

"Government subsidized loans" given to people which no creditor would
rationally give you money are the problem. Who would honestly lend you $175k
to receive a music therapy degree and hope for a return on their investment?
I'm not to say that such degrees could not be a satisfying career path for an
individual, but the "fund everyone" program in the USA is the root issue.

------
apo
In the middle of this entire mess sits the federal government with its
interest payments, payment deferments, and loan guarantees.

Loans are made to people who not only have no business going to college, but
have no business taking out a life-altering loan as their first step into
adulthood.

Everyone is affected by this problem, as the flood of easy money has
contributed to the steep rise in tuitions across the country. The result is a
vicious cycle of inflationary bubble economics.

Here's hoping the documentary covers this angle.

------
advertising
I worked at a call center for a random online for profit uni as one of my
first jobs.

Quickly saw we were calling random leads generated by click bait ads like
“become a swat expert” or enter to win type stuff.

We would call people who had no idea they had signed up to get called and push
them to “further their education and future”.

First priority was to check to see that they could get a loan. Then
aggressively get them to sign up for school.

I had access to the online courses and they were absolute trash.

Complete racket based on federal funding.

------
jancsika
Couldn't you start a small for-profit uni that uses all the tactics described
in the article to recruit students, but then pay teachers to deliver a _high
quality_ , practical education?

You'd get all the benefits of the loan lock-in. Your grads would have a higher
likelihood of getting a decent paying job that would pay back the loan in a
shorter time. Then you could aim your collections aholes at your _dropouts_
and use the loan lock-in as leverage-- either they keep getting their part-
time wage garnished or they finish the program so they can get a higher paying
job.

~~~
rleigh
The main problem as I see it is the dynamic that "if you pay, you pass". I've
seen first hand the unwillingness to fail students who have done no work and
have zero aptitude or willingness to learn. And that's just the lazy ones. I'm
not even including the students who tried but will do poorly. They all get
passed! I've only seen one person be failed, and it took several months of
investigation before it happened. They didn't attend any sessions or lab
project work for months, but they didn't want to kick them out because they
were a rich foreign student.

This clearly devalues a university education for those who do work hard and
succeed. And it also devalues the institution for its lack of intellectual
rigour and enforcement of strict standards.

I would be more than happy for paying students to be held to strict and high
standards, but having money be a big part of the equation seems to have
corrupted even well regarded universities. (My perspective is from the UK
universities; when the courses were completely funded by the government
through local education authorities, they didn't have a problem with giving
mediocre or bad students the boot, but today it's nearly impossible.)

------
martythemaniak
Is this really a problem? America seems to place far more importance on the
freedom of an individual to scam or fleece other people, rather than on
protecting people from their own weaknesses.

Scammy for-profit colleges seem like one of dozes of byproducts of this
mentality and there's no reason to think Americans would like to have it any
other way. In fact, it often seems to me as if Americans reserve extra respect
for these scammers for being so good that they're able to convince and con so
many people.

~~~
dopamean
You're right that we seem to have extra respect for these scammers. After all
we did elect one President.

~~~
garysahota93
Haha good one!

~~~
dopamean
I wasn't even trying to make a joke. The guy literally had to pay a $20
million settlement for the fraud around "Trump University."

