For-profit colleges need additional oversight

By The Des Moines Register

-----

Jeff Conlon, chief executive officer of Kaplan Higher Education, visited The Des Moines Register recently to talk about for-profit colleges. These schools, including Kaplan, enroll about 10 percent of college students across the country who receive $24 billion a year in taxpayer-funded grants and aid.

And they have been getting a lot of negative attention in Washington, D.C. Like other for-profit schools, Kaplan wants to defend its reputation.

Conlon stressed many of its nearly 100,000 students at more than 70 campuses and online aren't traditional college students. They have more “risk factors” for not completing college. These may be single parents, minorities or low-income people.

“We build institutions around students,” he said, offering the convenience of Internet-based or evening classes. There is a need for educational opportunities that cater to many types of students in this country.

That is a legitimate point.

But it doesn't lessen legitimate concerns about these schools or the importance of the Obama administration's response to those concerns.

The U.S. Department of Education is in the midst of implementing controversial regulations on for-profit schools. Among the goals: more transparency and limiting how much money students can borrow to attend. Some for-profits say they are being unfairly targeted and held to a higher standard than nonprofits. The standards are different from those that public and non-profit colleges must meet.

But the regulations are a step in the right direction because something is wrong in the world of for-profit higher education.

The U.S. Department of Education recently reported that 25 percent of students who graduated or dropped out of these schools in 2008 defaulted on their loans within three years. Compare that to 10.8 percent of students in public schools.

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Ia., has investigated the schools and held congressional hearings on their practices. In addition to findings of deceptive marketing practices and high default rates on loans, Harkin identified “emotionally abusive tactics” schools use to encourage students to enroll.

Among those speaking at congressional hearings was Kathleen Bittel, a career services advisor for a for-profit art school. She said she was repeatedly pressured to call former students and persuade them to sign forms stating they were using the skills learned in school at their current job.

Among the “stretches” to document that students were placed in their field of study: A “game art and design” student working at Toys R Us, earning $8.90 an hour. With $100,000 in debt, he was selling video games. Bittel talked about graphic design students working at Starbucks who were asked to agree they were using their skills to make signs for daily specials.

Harkin found 57 percent of students who enrolled in for-profit schools left without a diploma. According to his report, 69 percent of students in Kaplan's associate degree programs dropped out after attending a median of 4.2 months.

Conlon acknowledged this, but noted these students left with about $4,000 in debt, less than the public is being led to believe.

People seek a college education because they are trying to secure a better future. Many incur a lot of debt, regardless of where they go to school. But Washington has an obligation to ensure the taxpayer money funding education through grants and loans is well used. It also has an obligation to protect students, particularly those with more “risk factors” who likely need someone looking out for them.