Slashdot Mirror
Universities Hold Transcripts Hostage Over Loans
Hugh Pickens writes "Dave Lindorff writes in the LA Times that growing numbers of students are discovering their old school is actively blocking them from getting a job or going on to a higher degree by refusing to issue an official transcript. The schools won't send the transcripts to potential employers or graduate admissions office if students are in default on student loans, or in many cases, even if they just fall one or two months behind. It's no accident that they're doing this. It turns out the federal government 'encourages' them to use this draconian tactic, saying that the policy 'has resulted in numerous loan repayments.' It is a strange position for colleges to take, writes Lindorff, since the schools themselves are not owed any money — student loan funds come from private banks or the federal government, and in the case of so-called Stafford loans, schools are not on the hook in any way. They are simply acting as collection agencies, and in fact may get paid for their efforts at collection. 'It's worse than indentured servitude,' says NYU Professor Andrew Ross, who helped organize the Occupy Student Debt movement last fall. 'With indentured servitude, you had to pay in order to work, but then at least you got to work. When universities withhold these transcripts, students who have been indentured by loans are being denied even the ability to work or to finish their education so they can repay their indenture.'"
And the bubble continues to press against the thumbtack.
I have a feeling this collapse is going to be bigger than anything we've seen yet. Dot Coms or Real Estate be damned.
Considering almost no one pays for college without loans today, any college whose students could not get loans would be dead in the water. That gives a lot of leverage for banks to "ask" colleges to play along.
Then there is the unspoken truth that most of these degrees are worthless. If banks ever released official statistics on what degrees from which colleges resulted in the most defaults, it would hurt a lot of programs. (and immensely help out prospective students, but who cares about that?)
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
You can't work until you start paying us back and you can't pay us back until you start work.
Seems a bizzare way of organising things. In the UK you can't pay back your student loans until you earn a certain minimum wage and then it starts to come out from your pay like a tax as a percentage of your wage. And like the summary says it is the government who hold the debt, not the individual Universities/colleges. If they really want to stop the problem of defaulting then surely it would make more sense to reduce the number of degress that didn't have much job prospects, rather then block the people with degrees from getting jobs.
This seems like a great way to get alumni to donate when they eventually do start making good money. The affected alumni are not going to harbor any resentment at all.
If I was a lawyer I'd look at this as a Great opportunity to file a class-action lawsuit. As the summary states the colleges are not owed any money, therefore they hve Zero grounds to hold hostage the record of the students 4-5 years. They are committing a crime (charged money but did not provide the final document promised in the contract).
Go for it Mr. Lawyer.
Rape the bastard colleges.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
She concedes it's a difficult issue but says that "it's the only tool we have to make them pay."
A music major ... was making payments on his $62,000 student debt after graduation while working as an adjunct professor for Temple.
So we have institutions lending $62,000 to majors that have terrible job prospects, then when they can't get jobs they don't know how to get the money back... okay. How about don't lend that much money to someone who you can be pretty sure won't pay the money back? I know higher education should be accessible to all and this and that, but perhaps 62 grand for a degree in music should give us pause to reconsider a) why does a degree in music cost 62 grand and b) why does someone want to spend 62 grand for a degree in music.
I can partiall answer b). I was at a advisory board meeting for my university's CSE department recently, and some undergrads were asked the question: "So what is tuition now?" No one could answer. They don't even KNOW that they are paying $40k+ a year in tuition. This is because they don't even look at their bill. They fill out the fafsa, press a button, sign some papers, and get free money that gives another year of partying. The reality only hits them AFTER they graduate and look back at their full bill. This attitude on the student's side has got to stop
There's also the attitude on the institution side, that they can loan someone $60k for a degree in basket weaving and reasonably expect to get it back. This has to stop as well, but I don't know how to fix it.
Who is muddying these waters?
The schools have been paid, have they not? That's the whole point of a loan - lender pays now, and you pay the lender.
And, as others have said, it's a little short-sighted to stand in the way of those in debt, since the best way for them to pay off those loans is to be successful. Again, that's the whole point.
Any institution engaging in this sort of behavior is way out of line. In fact, it's rather rare to see such a clear-cut case of wrongdoing when it comes to financial/political entanglements.
Back off, universities. You are not moral guardians, gatekeepers, or creditors. You are educational institutions, and your obligation is to the students, not to whatever twisted group of people suggested you monitor you alumni for credit score violations.
A declining credit score is already one hell of a millstone - like weight gain, it's much easier to damage your score than improve it. The last thing we need is universities undercutting those students who need their credentials the most - those who essentially gambled a portion of future success on the hopes of a beneficial education. Do they want us to pay our loans off or not?
they should have no interest in doing so
They have a very big interest in student loans; without affordable loans the number of students would drop dramatically. Students who don't pay back their loans are costing everyone who does make their payments extra in the form of higher interest rates. Instead of getting a big attitude, try working with the system instead of against it.
And what kind of thing would that be? Businesses demanding payment for services rendered? Or gubmint demanding payment of money owed? Try not paying your taxes Mr Teat Partier, and see what happens.
What this needs is a car analogy:
You need insurance for your car, so you buy some from ABC, and put in on your Visa credit card. So far so good.
Then some idiot rear ends your car... so you call your insurance company, and they tell you your claim can't be processed because you missed a payment on your credit card, and they won't honor your insurance until you repay Visa.
See why this is both weird and wrong? Your insurance is paid up, and paid in full. Its none of ABC's business whether or not your account with visa is in good standing. That's between you and Visa.
That's the problem that is happening here. The government (taking Visas place) loaned the student money to purchase an education. The student then used that money to purchase an education from the school (taking the insurance companies place). So the transaction between you and the school is complete, and the school was paid in full for your education.
Its no more more the school's business to collect payment on your student loan than it is the insurance companies business to do collections for Visa.
Government needs to get out of the business of supplying endless money to students. This is the exact reason why college tuition has skyrocketed in recent years. Universities don't have to care about keeping expenses low, they just need to feed all the students through the government loan line effectively. If loans had to be secured only through private means or at LEAST the gov loans were very low, universities would have to lower prices to keep getting new students.
Wow 60% huh? I'm guessing because you're shunning ignorance and embracing science, that you simply hit enter before actually providing us with the source for a number. I mean, what kind of a idiot would base such a bold statement on his mere feelings.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
If the government REALLY "got in the middle", this wouldn't be a problem in the first place since public colleges and universities would be dirt cheap or even free, as they are in most other OECD countries.
In fact if you look at tuition, aside from Australia, the US government is less-involved in college education than any other developed country in the world.
As a Canadian, where the government is heavily involved in both providing student loans and subsidizing education, I have to say that you're totally wrong.
I graduated in 2004 with an Electrical Engineering degree. The total I had in student loans was $0. (zero) Co-op paid for most of my expenses. Courses were about $400, six per term, a total of $2400 per semester. (I know, holy shit, right?) Books were the typical ass-rape, but in the non-lubed Canadian version. (A couple of books were $120, lots at $80, I eventually just gave 'em all away.) I was not living with my parents, and rent was about $500 a month.
It's dirty socialism, right? Nope, it's long-term thinking. I pay more in taxes now than I did before I got my degree since I'm earning 2.5x what I got when I started school. I'll be paying 2.5x more taxes (more actually, since we have progressive taxes up here) for the rest of my career.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
The American education system itself isn't that bad. It's not the best, but it's not the worst, either.
One huge problem is that the schooling (schooling, not education) centers around rote memorization and teaching to the test. How things work, why they work, how to apply them... those kinds of questions are nonexistent in most cases.
I put all three kids though the UNC system, Chapel-Hill, NC State and Greensboro + grad school with no debt to me or to them. Maybe NYU and the Ivies and Columbia and all the rest need to re examine the efficacy of charging ridiculous sums of money especially in this economy. And increasing rates at 2x the rate of inflation year over year over year every year for the last 30 years. Maybe students need to re examine the efficacy of getting an MFA in post modern Marxist-Anarchist-Lesbian critical literary theory when literally the only job they can get is teaching that to the next crop of like minded students. Maybe parents need to stop enabling their kids to do whatever they like wherever they like for whatever it costs when it doesn't cost the students anything or they've convinced themselves that going a hundred thousand dollars in the hole is no big thing because they're a special snowflake and somebody somewhere will swoop in to bail them out. I got news for you. Anyone who MARRIES someone with huge student debt is an enormous idiot. So all the snowflakes should all work that crap out before they move on to the next phase of their lives, which no doubt will be moving in with their parents for Adolescence II, The New Beginning.
I have zero sympathy for anyone involved in this, just like the janitors who took out liar loans on half million dollar houses and now cry to Mother Government to bail them out because the banks went broke selling smoke and bullshit to EACH OTHER. Jesus Christ in a shopping cart does ANYONE bother with due diligence anymore?
It's the same as the goddamn health care "arguments" from the US right.
"We have too much government involvement! Of course it's expensive! If we get the damn government out the market will fix everything!"
Yeah, maybe, I guess. Or we could do the opposite of what you're saying and get guaranteed results, as proven in reality, not some ideological model.
If this pattern continues, next the poor dumb bastards will start arguing that government-subsidized education infringes on the average american's right to start and run a student loan corporation, or to choose which loan corporation fucks them in the ass.
When education, to escape the McDonalds job's pay...
Step 1: Finish highschool
Step 2: Pick a trade, something fun but challenging.
Step 3: Get ticket, and work for someone for awhile.
Step 4: Quit, use all those contacts you've been building up for the last 6-7 years and start a business of your own.
Step 5: Hire an apprentice or two, then run the business.
Step 6: Enjoy the money.
I still find it funny that the majority of people on /. think that the only way to get good money is to have a university education. Skip it, get a trade.
Om, nomnomnom...
I'd guess that those other places don't allow for-profit institutions to access government subsidies.
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
Woah... That was an epic Slashdot circle jerk. You managed to bag on all the elitist neckbeard enemies in one post. Hipsters, gangstas, religious fanactics all in one post and blame them for something completely unreleasted you got upvoted to Score:4 Interesting! Congratulations!
When a society fails, fear is created. Fear of failure, unemployment, homelessness, destroyed relationships and depression. We are now seeing the results of our government's change to the laws that favored wall street and moneyed interests. The last bastion for personal confidence after all has failed is religion. What we are seeing now is just the tip of the iceberg for the chaos that is coming .
If students at the University of Utah where I studied Physics can run one of 33 teaching nuclear reactors in the U.S., I'm pretty sure letting them near an email server would probably be OK. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705368841/University-of-Utah-has-own-nuclear-reactor-tucked-away.html
When I was working on a CS degree, one of the work study jobs a number of people in CS could get was computer operator on the campus computer system, which in fact gave them the keys to the kingdom. Unsurprisingly, the world didn't end as a result, nor were the operators grades ever 4.0 across the board.
-- Terry
Golly. That's quite scary. 60% - or more! - of Americans who deliberately reject a useful education? Naturally, you have the statistics and references to back this up, unlike those other fools.
Actually, could you please provide your references for, umm, well, basically everything after the first three sentences?
What exactly is our $600+ billion military budget protecting us (or other countries) from? No other governments want to attack us because their countries are too busy selling stuff to us. A few terrorists (which will ALWAYS be around, ESPECIALLY when you spend $600 billion annually on new explosives to destroy their communities and take their resources) don't qualify as a threat to an entire country's national security. Even if they did (and there would need to be A LOT of sporadic attacks to argue that), how exactly do gigantic fleets of warships, nuclear submarines, fighter jets, rocket launchers, tanks, and all other sorts of things (which have together ended a grand total of 0 extremist ideologies) "secure" us?
And anyway, it's fairly obvious that I meant "free" in the same way that a pre-college education is free. And substantially cheaper per capita than private alternatives. It's astounding how much public services can provide when they're actually made to service the public instead of a few rich people.
My income tax rate's not far under that, all things considered, and I do all right but I'm far from rich (FICA is a bitch--a regressive-ass bitch). For it, I get poor transportation infrastructure (my state's roads are exceptionally bad, to say nothing of public transit, or rather, the lack of it), no help toward health care (so, like most, my health and my family's is dependent on my employment; there's a nice extra risk to discourage entrepreneurship), and some minimal aid toward education should I want to use it (didn't before, don't expect that I will).
I'd happily pay another 10% or so to gain what people in many (most?) other OECD nations have--I'd be a fool not to, since it's a bargain.
What I've found is that most of the people who whine about high taxes and say that they prefer the American solution fit into one of three categories:
Greedy 'I got mine' Rich Person: They make enough money that the lack of public infrastructure and government support doesn't impact them in a meaningful way and want to hoard as much money as possible, presumably so they can pretend they're Scrooge McDuck and swim in a pile of gold. They don't give a shit about the hoi polloi and despise having to give anything back to the society that enabled their success.
Wannabe Rich Person: They've bought into the lie that all it takes to become super-rich is a bit of hard work and want to be one of the above jack-asses when they get there so they support low taxes and deny the need for government help even though it would benefit them greatly as they are now because they think it'll make things better once they 'make it big'. They don't realize that realistically, you need to be either incredibly lucky or be born into it to get rich enough that lower taxes actually benefit you more than the complete lack of adequate social services that enables such low rates hurts you.
Free Market Drone: Maybe they read a bit too much Ayn Rand. Maybe someone forced them to watch Cold-War era propaganda films for days on end, Clockwork Orange style, perhaps a Marxist molested them as a child. Whatever the reason, this is a true believer. Unlike the other two, this isn't sociopathic self-interest (or the delusion of future such self-interest) but rather a genuine belief that the government is always evil, the market is always right, lower taxes are always better and that completely unfettered markets would lead to anything other than a cyberpunk dystopia.