About Damn time!

[ivebeenduped2]

Title: Wow someone in congress has finally noticed
Date: October 10 2009
Author:

You guys have to check out this link:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Congress- ... l?x=0&.v=1

About time!

[oneANGRYelf]

Right on. But will they follow through?

[ivebeenduped2]

I dont think that they can over look this anymore. With current state of the economy and the lost revenues because of it ,I think that they are looking at this from a numbers point of view. They just recentley changed the ways that the cohart default rate is calculated and it wasnt pretty for any of the for profit post-secondary schools. The government has almost a trillion dollars invested in student loans and for profits make up 38 percent of that money. After the default rates were recalculated they found that for profits were responsible for something like 36 percent of all defaulted student loans and with enrollment on the rise at these schools the government has a lot to lose. You should check out a site called paa investments, they are a private investment advisor group and have some very disturbing data on ESI not to mention that they imply in some of they're data that students might be better off not attending itt at all, just search in there library under ESI.

Yours truly takingdownitt

[aka name]

Interesting, but I think congress has mulled this issue in the recent past, with nothing to show for it.

Not so recent past (February 17, 1988):
http://www.edweek.org/login.html?source ... velId=2100

[ivebeenduped2]

Very true but circumstances were a little different in what was Bennett was trying to accomplish. Some of the for profits in that time frame were accepting students with no high school diploma or GED and he found a direct coralation in that students with no diploma or GED were much more likley to withdraw midway throught the program or may have to repeat calsses several times in order to graduate thus increasing the debt accumalated versus a student that had a diploma or equal. He wanted to mandate that any student in order to be eligable for TItle 4 funds to have one or the other. Also he wanted more oversight on these schools addmintance policies. What I am refering to is a recent investiagation by the GOA the states an undervoer operation in which they sent in " prosepective students " to intintionally fail the ABT tests to see what the schools did and sent the same people into these schools and claimed they had no diploma or equivalent to see how the recuriuters would react. The outcome is how you and I figured it would, follow this link :http://www.gao.gov/ and scroll down to report:Proprietary Schools, check out page 2 and page 4. Not only does this show the true side of these companies but by the governments own investigation it depicts, no proves fraud and deception. Congressman Miller , who headed this investigation also happens to be the chairman of the House education comittee so there is no debating his call to action, only the way they go about it and what new protective measures are instilled. Now the fun part, the firm that I am working with poses the question " If these schools acted decpetivley during the addminssion process in which students were to prove they were in fact eligable to effectivley and compentantly go forward with higher learning, what is to prove that they didnt aply the same practices to these victims while they were attending the actual degree programs?" Bascially posing the question, were they just passing otherwise failing students to gain illegal compensation from the government by using otherwise ineligable students to collect Title 4 funds? Therefore flooding the job market with underperforming students that can't retain jobs in there degree field due to the fact they the dont posses the necessary fundamentals to perform. And by flooding the market with underqualifying gradutes devaluing the worth of an education attained by these schools. Example: John, Bob, Mike and Sally perform poorly while attending one of these schools and Jill performs well, all are graduated, regardless of actual academic performanc. Then they enter the job market andJohn,Bob ,Mike and Sally are hired by a respectable employer only to be let go weeks or months later because they cant perform the job that they're school said they are qualified for. Then comes Jill and while she has performed well in school and is able to perform her work realted duties the employer that had already hired and then fired the former students will remember the lack of performance that came from that school and associate that with her resume stating her education( I have lots of proof of this ). How is that giving her a competitive edge? More like a disablility. While these schools are out to pad they're pockets, they have devalued they're educational worth and given students ,sorry ,victims just the opposite of what they are paying for( at an astronomical figure might I ad.)

[aka name]

the employer that had already hired and then fired the former students will remember the lack of performance that came from that school and associate that with her resume stating her education

My class heard stories similar to your example during my last year at ITT. The employer found out the guys he hired from ITT weren't worth anything so he stopped accepting applicants who had an ITT Tech "degree."

[kayot]

I know I've had better luck leaving ITT off my resume. I still don't have a tech job however, as the market is flooded with highly experienced tech's that are out of work.