Fenwick graduation 2012
Ponitz graduation 2012
Cars and Parts Swap Meet
Christopher Magan writes about higher education.
Kelly Mori writes about health and higher education.Home > Blogs > On Campus > Archives > 2010 > June > 08 > Entry
For-profits fighting new regulations
I just caught up with an interesting NY Times story from Sunday about the fight for-profit colleges are waging against possible regulations that would limit the amount of debt students could take on depending on what they could expect to earn after graduation.
Tamar Lewin reports students would only be able to carry an 8 percent debt-to-income ratio and 10-year repayment schedules. The story also notes that in 2007 students at for-profits made up only 7 percent of those in higher education, but 44 percent of those defaulting on loans. Read The Times story here.
Local for-profits also have high default rates, many in double digits and some above 20 percent. These rates are typically much higher than public and private institutions, but there are a few exceptions, as I reported in May.
Steven Eisman, famous for having anticipated the housing crash, is quoted by The Times saying that without better oversight for-profit student loans could be the next national fiscal problem, with $275 billion in loans at stake.
The Chronicle of Higher Education also reported the for-profit college’s lobbying efforts in a May story.
Permalink | Comments (5) | Post your comment | Categories: Money & Management
Comments
By Whistle Blower
June 8, 2010 10:29 AM | Link to this
These proprietary schools are almost always a rip-off. Years ago I was hired as Director at Southwestern College of Business. Calling it a college is a joke. I quit after only 6 months when I saw that the owner’s greed left no room for spending money necessary to give students a real education. He wanted all the money for himself. You can get better training and pay a lot less money by attending Sinclair Community College.
By Max
June 8, 2010 1:48 PM | Link to this
I agree Whistle Blower……one of the problems is a corrupt accreditation process which enables these loans. But, be careful of Sinclair as well.
By It's Great in Dayton!!
June 9, 2010 7:25 AM | Link to this
For-profit colleges are, generally, a rip-off and should be banned. Dayton is particularly vulnerable to this rip-off, because of high unemployment and a terrible public school system. People are desperate, and if their only exposure to education has been via DPS, they have no idea what real education looks like.
By dale1
June 18, 2010 2:23 PM | Link to this
I agree these schools are not that good in most cases. For specialized cases like nursing, IT, etc they are good but too expensive. I agree with the debt to income ratio but think it should apply to all schools not just the for profit schools. I know people who owed $50K for a liberal arts degree that afforded them $35K a year in income. I am sick of people having two set of rules one for for profit companies and one for government. Lets face it the government wastes more money than most coroporations and the goverment is way more expensive than most private corps. I pay more in taxes than it would take me to pay my house payment and all my bills so who is really ripping us off. The thing about these schools is you do not have to attend the school, I have no choice but to pay my taxes, unless I was in Obama’s cabinent.
By Dorothy White
July 1, 2010 11:46 AM | Link to this
I was confused by the term “regionally accredited”, which was misused by Union Institute and University, an online school based in Cincinnati, OH. They were referring to the Ohio Board of Regents, which is not a nationally accepted regional accreditation agency. Union lost it’s ability to receive money from federally insured student loans, but kept up a probationary accreditation by the Ohio Board of Regents. I agree with the legistation, because these institutions mislead people all the time. I’m organizing a lawsuit against Union. Log on to complaintsboard.com for more information and search for the schools name.