Federal Student Aid Requirements At For-Profit Colleges Overhauled

An anonymous reader writes "The U.S. Department of Education has released a proposal for new regulations that would hold colleges that receive federal student aid accountable for the employment success of their graduates. The overhaul is prompted by the fact that students from for-profit colleges account for nearly 50% of all loan defaults yet only account for about 13% of the total higher education population. '[O]f the for-profit gainful employment programs the Department could analyze and which could be affected by [the proposed regulations], the majority--72%--produced graduates who on average earned less than high school dropouts.'"

Comments

Maybe...

[ceide2000]

The majority of people attending these institutions are one stop away from being high school dropouts. I couldn't begin to count the number of companies who refuse to employee individuals from these "tech colleges". I interviewed one "tech college" professor who had no practical knowledge in the industry, no degree outside of a what was taught at the "tech college", and admitted he had limited knowledge on core infrastructure questions outside of the material provided by the "tech college". However he was a professor for the core infrastructure classes at the same "tech college" he graduated from. I promptly put that institution on my not even worth hiring helpdesk support list. If you want someone to really look at your resume go to a community college and be willing to put in the time to learn. Stay away from tech colleges as they are stain on a resume you could never get off.

Re:Maybe...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want someone to really look at your resume go to a community college and be willing to put in the time to learn.

I highly recommend self-education. Any employer who won't look at your resume simply because you don't have a piece of paper isn't one you want to work for, anyway.

Re:Maybe...

[Mike Frett]

I agree that Paper shouldn't determine out Life.

Re: Maybe...

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is going to hire a 22 year old kid with little to no experience or a degree?
It is great to be self taught, don't make seem like should be just as easy to get a job.

Re:Maybe...

[Bengie]

The average person can't self educate and have a hard time with regular education. Most people can't do anything more than they're told.

Re: Maybe...

[Anonymous Coward]

Who's even going to see the application. These days most of the applications are thrown out by screening software before HR even sees a single one. Then they throw out most of the rest and only hand a small number over to the people that wind up doing the interviews.

It's all well and good for folks like the GP to suggest self education, but realistically even if you have a somewhat non-standard degree or one that's in slightly the wrong field it can result in having the application never seen by somebody that might be interested. I know my Dad lost out on a job and when he got it the next year the manager specifically stated that he would have hired him if he'd seen the application.

People don't really get that the resume and application are to get an interview, but if they're never seen by anybody, you won't get the interview.

Re:Maybe...

[david_thornley]

Many positions have far more resumes come in than can be processed. In those cases, there has to be some preliminary filter on the resumes, and everybody claims to be knowledgeable on their resume.

There's plenty of highly competent people with four-year degrees, so round-filing the others isn't going to hurt the business significantly, while it does cut down the number of resumes to read. Other things being equal, the person with the bachelor's degree has demonstrated learning abilities, ability to stick with a program, and a knowledge of general principles.

If an employer has 75 resumes for one position, how is the employer to find the guy who's self-educated and done it well? Unless there's a solid background of open source contributions or something, there's nothing to tell that person's resume from dozens of people who self-educated badly or couldn't hack college.

no practical knowledge in the industry at big uni

[Joe_Dragon]

Where you have professors who have been in school for years and have next to no real experience.

also CS for help desk is just as bad as you can get people loaded with theory and codeing skills but lacking big time in the desktop / system admin side.

There is a goose to that gander

[Stumbles]

If they are going to do that, then the same standard should applies to our public school system. My federal tax dollars are federal tax dollars and that does not change regardless who gets my federal tax dollars.

Re:There is a goose to that gander

[J Story]

If they are going to do that, then the same standard should applies to our public school system. My federal tax dollars are federal tax dollars and that does not change regardless who gets my federal tax dollars.

I agree. The problem, however, is that it's much harder to connect the dots between, say, an elementary school's teaching performance, and outcomes ten years later. That is not to say that the attempt should not be made.

Re:There is a goose to that gander

[Immerman]

First you must ask yourself the question: What is the purpose of the public education system?

If it's purpose is education, then yeah, it's not doing so well. But if you look at the history it was created in the first place in large part to store children someplace out of the way while the adults were busy working, at about the time that child-labor started being outlawed. And it does pretty well at that, as well as indoctrinating students to obey authority even when the authority is ignorant and arbitrary, which I think we can all agree is convenient for those calling the shots in the wider world.

Re:There is a goose to that gander

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Wait... what? Only a small portion of federal taxes go towards education. The vast majority of public schools are funded by the taxpayers in the school district, city, county, or state they are located in. Are you talking about state colleges/universities? This isn't about private vs public. Its about for profit vs non-profit. Non profit apparently does better in most cases.

Re:There is a goose to that gander

[nbauman]

The vast majority of public schools are run by school boards in which parents can have greater or lesser input.

Some districts have smart aggressive school boards that set standards and make sure their kids get a good education; in other school districts it's all about whose brother-in-law gets the lunchroom contract.

It's small-town democracy. If you don't have good schools for your kids, blame your self and your neighbors. It's your responsibility.

Re:There is a goose to that gander

[LF11]

Actually, one of the principle purposes of the public school system is to inculturate immigrants and disparate populations.

Also to make good factory workers, which is a great idea until the factories go away and now your workforce has nothing to do. :(

Obedience to authority is a part of (a) and (b). It is true, but that's not the stated purpose and most people with any understanding of the history of public schooling will look at you like you don't know what you are talking about because it is a bit of a leap between inculturation and obedience training.

Re:There is a goose to that gander

[Immerman]

Have you looked at the history of public education? The US system was based on the ... German system I believe it was, with the intention (stated at least) of dialing way back on the heavy indoctrinational aspects.

My main point though was the whole child storage thing. The rest was just speculation around the edges.

Re: There is a goose to that gander

[LF11]

Prussian (Prussia became Germany). Students were marched under armed guard. So by that standard, quite a lot of the heavy-handed features were dropped. Yet it is still compulsory (less so in recent years) and the purpose is not to educate but to make good citizens for Democracy. Who work. And obey.

Today, schools are certainly used as child storage, by parents. You are absolutely right.

Re:There is a goose to that gander

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Well, yeah thats the way it is for the majority of schools. There are obviously some situations where that is not the case, like Chicago, where the mayor runs the schools. Or my school district when I was growing up, where we were being run by a federal judge due to decades of separate and very unequal education by race.

IT needs apprenticeship and maybe 1-2 year trades

[Joe_Dragon]

IT needs apprenticeship and maybe 1-2 year trade like schools 4+ years pure class room is to much and even 2 years pure class room is pushing it as well.

Sounds Wonderful

[ranton]

While this sounds like posturing that would never actually get passed, I really I hope I am wrong. I went to the University of Phoenix because I was working full time and night program CS degrees at real schools simply did not exist 5 years ago. I knew then that I would only pay for the degree if I was planning on getting a Masters degree at a real school right after. I even called two local schools to ensure they would admit graduate students with UoP undergrad degrees. (BTW, I am in my last semester of my Masters program now)

My UoP degree definitely helped with my career, but only because I was an experienced software developer long before I enrolled. It only helped because of ridiculous HR requirements for applicants with degrees only. The education was atrocious. My second semester database class consisted of just these four assignments: 1) Create a Database, 2) Create a Table, 3) Create Foreign Key Relationships, 4) Load Data into the Tables, 5) Create a Report. They even gave us the commands so all we needed to do was paste them into the console. This may be the most egregious example of the poor curriculum I can think of, but the rest of it was almost as bad.

My fellow students who didn't already know the material were struggling to understand it with no help in sight. I would help them on the forums and over emails, but I knew they would never get the necessary instruction to ever get hired in this field, let alone keep any job they weaseled their way into. It was really sad that they were spending potentially over $50k for a worthless degree. I never said anything to them because I did not want to risk being kicked out after spending so much money.

I hope the government really does start to do something. This problem was primarily caused by real universities that do not offer sufficient night programs for adult students, but it has progressed to the point where government intervention is necessary. These online schools really could provide decent educations if they were forced to. If their programs were decent they would fill a very large void in our country's education system, but in their current form they are nothing more than a parasite.

Re:Sounds Wonderful

[tomhath]

My second semester database class consisted of just these four assignments: 1) Create a Database, 2) Create a Table, 3) Create Foreign Key Relationships, 4) Load Data into the Tables, 5) Create a Report.

Apparently they didn't require very good counting skills either.

Re:Sounds Wonderful

[JimDarkmagic]

The DOE already passed "Gainful Employment" rules once. The first time around, a group representing the for-profit colleges sued the DOE and got the teeth ripped out of the rules. The judge decided the metrics that lead to punishments didn't have enough factual basis to back them up, so they were thrown out. These rules appear to the the second attempt, likely prepared with more thought to defending themselves against the schools with deep pockets.

Googling "gainful employment rules" or "gainful employment rules stuck down" will likely provide more information.

Re:Sounds Wonderful

[ranton]

My second semester database class consisted of just these four assignments: 1) Create a Database, 2) Create a Table, 3) Create Foreign Key Relationships, 4) Load Data into the Tables, 5) Create a Report.

Apparently they didn't require very good counting skills either.

My counting was just fine (see the numbers properly progressing from 1 to 5). My problem was inconsistencies in my writing, caused by remembering the fifth assignment while writing my comment but not properly revising the previous statement.

Re:Sounds Wonderful

[Sarius64]

I attended UoP in a similar situation. UoP is most definitely a survival of the fittest environment. Usually one (two at best) people on a team take charge and lead the rest of the group to success/survival. The one thing UoP did, IMO, was set me up for the realities of the workplace. Very little hand-holding, independent study based upon a very regimented syllabus, very concise scopes needed for success, and lots of people without a clue how to get there. My C++ II class still gives me shivers for the amount of time I spent in conference calls walking the team through simple logic constructs the books never taught.

Having said that, most of the professors were worthless. Their responses were often a week late, their discipline standards ranged from non-existent to nuclear with very little (if any) middle ground, and they blatantly expected leaders to pull everyone else along or receive a punitive grade. As far as expertise, I was severely disappointed by the lack of tutors within the context of the online community. The one shining group was the math professors. Of course, this isn't too far from brick and mortar college experiences and anecdotal experiences I've heard from other students, even today. I had considered a MBA program at UoP till I read over the shoulder of a friend undertaking that program and found he was dealing with the same crazy people that populated my previous classes there. Luckily I found a good MSE to attend. Also, I was lucky enough to pay as I went and not incur the debt.

I agree with your conclusion concerning the lack of adult education. Not everyone exiting the military (for example) was able to take a few years completely off for school. But don't forget the easy money that increased fees dramatically in response to an avalanche of green. Someone told me bachelor class are running $1900 per at UoP right now. Unreal. Also, to add incentive, I think students that fail a class should have to pay a penalty, too.

Re:Sounds Wonderful

[Bazzible]

He had them in an array in his mind, array started at 0.

Re:Sounds Wonderful

[Greyfox]

To be fair though, my nephew is going through a CS program at a university and has asked me about some of his assignments. They're similarly trivial and the example code provided by the professors is atrocious. I like to think they're doing that intentionally, but I know they're not. I was disillusioned with the business programming course I enrolled in right out of high school back in the '80's and ended up finding a small state school with instructors who had real world experience for the rest of my formal education. Even with that, I've learned far more on my own and through work experience than I was ever going to pick up in a university. If a person isn't motivated to learn on his own, he's never going to be a particularly good programmer. Perhaps the for-profit schools just attract a higher concentration of people who are only trying to get into CS for the money and don't have the love of the art that you need to get to that level.

When I'm in charge of hiring, a degree doesn't really factor into my decision. I can tell if you're the sort of person who enjoys programming. I'd take a high school dropout over someone with a Master's, if the high school dropout had a substantial portfolio of open source code he could show me. Assuming the guy with the Master's didn't, naturally. If they both did, I'd want to hire them both, and I'd make a damn good argument to management about it.

Re:Sounds Wonderful

[HornWumpus]

I know someone else that went to UoP for a couple of years. It's a _terrible_ school for anything tech related.

Re:Sounds Wonderful

[mrchaotica]

I can tell if you're the sort of person who enjoys programming. I'd take a high school dropout over someone with a Master's, if the high school dropout had a substantial portfolio of open source code he could show me.

So well-rounded candidates who enjoy programming but have other hobbies are screwed?

Universities are a money grubbing cult

[Anonymous Coward]

We all know they're a business, but the cult aspect is "I went to university, and even though I rarely use what I learned, I will only employ people who went through the same crap I did.". A cult. End of story.

Re:Universities are a money grubbing cult

[skids]

I don't use my degree, properly. I was trained to design computer chips. Instead I administer networks.. There are parts of my education I rarely use, yes, but I would *never* say I "rarely use what I learned" because there isn't a waking hour that goes by where I don't use something I learned in college.

People who filter on college degrees just want the benefit of a pre-screen for candidates who also have a college education to draw on. It would be nice if every business could afford the time to individually assess every resume that comes through the door, but the realities of business are not like that. They all rely of pre-screening in one form or another, and much of that pre-screening has to be free or hiring would be an unaffordable process.

How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[stevegee58]

There is no justifiable federal role in education. Education has traditionally been and should be locally managed.
We don't need more regulation surrounding student loans, we need less. In fact there shouldn't be any federal student loans at all.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[houghi]

In fact there shouldn't be any federal student loans at all.

I agree with this if you look at it from the point of view that education is a right, not a privelage.

Unfortunatly that means some sort of governement involvement. To me that means there will be quota. So not everybody will get the opportunity to go. And not everybody will enlist in what they like. You want to do philosophy and arts and what not? OK, we need X amount of those. You do not qualify, next.

That would mean that you need no loan that you will unlikely be able to pay back.

You want to do Computer Science? Not with the knowledge you have now. You will not be able to get a job.

This is obviously the opposite of 'No child left behind'. It should be "Each child to the best of their abilities.' Some are better at welding, others are better at programming. Just like in sports, we are not all able to achieve the same. In sports it is because of build.

Yes, there will be exceptions. That is a fact of life. Some would have been better of with another system.
Also the current debt per student is on average 27.000USD. That is a LOT of money if the outcome of a job is not so sure. Not only will you have no job, but you will have no job AND a debt of 27.000USD that puts a disadvatage over people who just have no job.

People are waiting for this bubble to burst. It is now a 830 billion USD. debt.

And even when you get a job, you need to pay back that loan and that will put many people into a situation where they can not afford healthcare. Nice way to make people slaves.

What we need is just a law passed where people in debt are no longer allowed to vote as they are not contributing to society.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Rich0]

Education is primarily a social welfare program. Social welfare programs generally don't work if they are localized to jurisdictions that have free trade and immigration. States are required by the constitution to have both - the only reason that state-level primary education works is that the federal government sets uniform standards and will deny substantial funds to any state that violates them.

If you make education purely a state-level system then there will be a race to the bottom. Employers will flee states that have generous education programs in favor of minimalist states that have lower taxes.

Socialism of any kind can really only work at the national level. Employers can't easily flee countries, because they would then become subject to tariffs when selling back to that country. Granted, the US of late has backed free trade, which is why all the manufacturing jobs are going to countries where you can fire workers who get injured on the job and dump your pollution wherever you like.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[stevegee58]

Which part of the US Constitution mandates education?

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you trolling or are you a moron? Higher education absolutely has to be recognized across state boundaries. Let every state, nay let every county and municipality and Dumbfuckville regulate their colleges and universities. To hell with standards! Got a degree from Harvard? Not recognized here, our own Oklahoma State diploma is the gold standard in this neck of the woods. Buyer beware amirite?

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[stevegee58]

Libertarian? Maybe. But nonetheless there's nothing about education in the US Constitution
In fact:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[HornWumpus]

General welfare moron. Before the constitution was reinterpreted that meant the government could not 'help' specific groups or individuals.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[sgt_doom]

Negative, although this isn't a positive move, it is to further defund education in America for the masses. The ONLY way to move towards a real smidgen of meritocracy would be to nationalize American education systems, and enforce an equitable spread of financing not dependent upon local property values.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been reading slashdot since the beginning and yours is without question the most ignorant post I have ever seen.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Rich0]

Which is why it authorized a government run military and post office, as well as for allowing congress to promote the general welfare.

You must have an interesting definition of "socialism" if it includes the military. The post office is a bit more borderline.

You are a fucking moron.

Your mother apparently never taught you manners, or rhetoric...

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Rich0]

Which part of the US Constitution mandates education?

None. The constitution practically forbids socialism of any kind as it is written.

Really? What do you think the military is? What do you think our judicial system is? What do you think a government is? All of these examples are "socialism". All societies are a form of socialism.

Such a definition of "socialism" does little good. You've basically defined "government" as "socialism." Sure, I guess you can do that if you want to, but while we're at it can we define "vegetarian" as "somebody who eats," and "libertarian" as "somebody who believes in a government that does not have the authority to kill two-year-olds for crying in church." Both of those statements certainly pertain to the groups they are ascribed to, but they're basically useless in distinguishing them from just about anybody.

By your definition, anybody who isn't an anarchist is a socialist.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[AnAlchemist]

No federal student loans at all? Are state-level student loans OK? My state (NJ) has a state-level program, but I doubt any state would be able to fill the vacuum of federal money.

Be careful what you wish for: without federal money, many colleges would close down, foreign students wouldn't find it an attractive place to get educated, and we'd lose our R&D prowess (which means our national security would suffer after a while).

How do you think all those highly-educated individuals designing our next generation weapon systems and defense systems got their educations?

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[DerekLyons]

If you make education purely a state-level system then there will be a race to the bottom. Employers will flee states that have generous education programs in favor of minimalist states that have lower taxes.

Except... that didn't happen back before the Feds co-opted education.

You don't seem to realize that Federal control of the educational system is a fairly recent thing - mid/late 1960's.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Rich0]

"I want a high paying corporate job but don't want my children to get an education" said nobody ever.

Given the choice of spending an extra $5k/yr or so in taxes for life vs just sending their kids to private school, most people with jobs would choose the latter, and probably get a better education for it.

The public education system primarily benefits those who can't afford it, as with socialized medicine/etc.

Now, I'd argue that these programs provide more general benefits to society, and a safety net for everybody when they lose their jobs (which happens increasingly often as society becomes more specialized). However, people tend to go for the bottom line, and that means cost-cutting.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Rich0]

If you make education purely a state-level system then there will be a race to the bottom. Employers will flee states that have generous education programs in favor of minimalist states that have lower taxes.

Except... that didn't happen back before the Feds co-opted education.

You don't seem to realize that Federal control of the educational system is a fairly recent thing - mid/late 1960's.

I suspect the average black person would have a different perspective on the quality of public education prior to the 1960s. Also, education was fairly different then, as was the workforce and the employment opportunities for the average American. Somebody who graduated today with the skills of the average high school graduate would find it quite difficult to get a job today. Heck, the average college graduate today has a hard time finding a job...

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Bengie]

By your definition, anybody who isn't an anarchist is a socialist.

Yeah, pretty much, but it seems to cover the argument people are using. Any time someone brings up something that is good for society but doesn't let an individual screw everyone else over, they claim it's socialism. Pretty much to counter their extreme use of socialism to be anything-good-for-society, I just use "socialism" strictly based on the base word. Essentially, I just take the stance that if you don't like socialism, then leave society.

When it comes down to it, all societies really are just variations of socialism, even by definition. It's not "black and white", it's a huge range of grey. "Socialism is a social and economic system characterized by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy". Directly or indirectly, just participating in a society makes this statement true.

I will agree that my usage of the word nearly makes it useless. Kind of like using the word "ice" when I should be using "snow", but really, snow is just a form of ice, so it's still true.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Quila]

the only reason that state-level primary education works is that the federal government sets uniform standards and will deny substantial funds to any state that violates them.

The federal government has supported local primary education from the beginning through land grants and fund disbursements, but it never set uniform standards until recently. Not coincidentally, the downturn of primary education is also fairly recent.

Socialism of any kind can really only work at the national level. Employers can't easily flee countries

It also only works on the national level because people can't easily flee the terror of these socialist paradises.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Rich0]

I get where you're coming from. To some extent almost any government policy requires limited immigration and trade to work. After all, why should the US spend money on a military? If we get invaded we can all just move to Canada and they'll just HAVE to offer us refuge and protect us. Except, they won't, and of course they couldn't if they wanted to.

Limits on immigration and trade give people incentive to invest in what they have locally. It really is the same as owning a home vs renting it, except on a much bigger scale. A home owner is going to take care of his property. Citizens take care of their country.

Re:How about we disband the Dept of Education?

[Rich0]

Socialism of any kind can really only work at the national level. Employers can't easily flee countries

It also only works on the national level because people can't easily flee the terror of these socialist paradises.

No argument there. You can't have socialized medicine if all the healthy people aren't obligated to pay into the system for a service they most likely will never need. Call it terror if you want to.

degrees vs schools. Art history degree?

[raymorris]

TFA and TFS don't make it quite clear - would the SCHOOL lose eligibility, or a specific degree plan? If a student gets a degree in art history or women's studies that probably won't do much for their employment prospects, regardless of whether the school is good or not.

Re:degrees vs schools. Art history degree?

[imidan]

Art history is not the typical program of for-profit colleges. They mostly offer professional degree programs in things like IT and other popular applied fields. The issue is not the area of the degree, but the fact that these colleges prey on people who have aspirations and no money. Most of these people do not manage to finish the program, so they wind up taking large, expensive loans that cover a few semesters of college that do not prepare them for any job. The colleges advertise themselves as a way to improve peoples' lives, but their entire business model is based on enrolling rubes who will get student loans and give all of the money to the college. They don't care whether those people graduate, or even get educated.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[AuMatar]

But they actually know and understand the curriculum. Besides which, professors at real universities aren't hired to teach, they're hired because of the research they've done. So yes, they have experience in research.

The university time tables are a poor fit and..

[Joe_Dragon]

A better system is needed for people who are working but want to learn new / more skills and want them to add up to something why not have some kind of badges systems?

also some skills are a poor fit in to the over all university system also the university system is loaded with all kinds of fluffy / filler classes as well. forced PE classes at a price that is more then a 2 YEAR HIGH COST fitness club membership??

Re:The university time tables are a poor fit and..

[AuMatar]

What college still has forced PE classes? I know my mom had one back in the 70s, but I haven't known anyone who had to take one in the past decade or two.

Re:The university time tables are a poor fit and..

[Joe_Dragon]

cornell and they still have the swim test.

Re:The university time tables are a poor fit and..

[auntfloyd]

So does Columbia.

http://www.wikicu.com/Swim_tes...

Tighten up federal aid

[Anonymous Coward]

I think they're going around the problem backwards. In my opinion, there is a very large % of the college student population who is driven to college due to
A) They found a great way to hang out with friends and continue 'high school'
B). Get out from under Mom and Dad's thumb
C). Family/peer pressure

who do not want to go to college for a higher degree. This segment of the population is of no use at college and basically wastes the time of our educators, their parents money, and federal aid money and come out with a degree that makes them stupider or more useless than when they went in.

College isn't for everyone. Society requires people at all levels, yes I need that burger flipper, the garbage man, the plumber, gardner, etc, multiple positions which are not aimed at college degrees. Our system is getting much more to having the expectation that EVERYONE gets a college degree when a good part of those pushed to college can't handle or don't want to take a useful college degree. (my apologies to English majors, but I do not think we need THAT many English majors in society as we're pumping out, some yes, as many as I see, no)

To be more efficient in federal college loans, we need to tighten up the standards on who actually gets the loans. Those who will gain value from a college education and bring value to society. Those who can't or don't want to do a 4 year college can be encouraged towards tech school (good ones). Yes, we need good electricians, plumbers, welders, etc. Those jobs don't require a college degrees and are extremely useful in both residential and industrial jobs (and expensive due to the lack of supply for them).

TLDR: Stop giving loans to those who come out of college a burden to society.

Re:Tighten up federal aid

[Keybounce]

To be more efficient in federal college loans, we need to tighten up the standards on who actually gets the loans. Those who will gain value from a college education and bring value to society. Those who can't or don't want to do a 4 year college can be encouraged towards tech school (good ones). Yes, we need good electricians, plumbers, welders, etc. Those jobs don't require a college degrees and are extremely useful in both residential and industrial jobs (and expensive due to the lack of supply for them).

TLDR: Stop giving loans to those who come out of college a burden to society.

I agree that we need to tighten up federal aid.
I disagree that we can tell ahead of time of who will be a burden or not.

The real issue is the granting of loans in the first place.

The real issue: As the costs of a degree go up, the size of the loans go up as well. If the maximum size of the loan were to stay down -- or perhaps only go to people getting an education where the costs were limited -- then there would be pressure on the universities to keep the cost down.

In other words:
In a balanced market, if you price your produce -- an education -- too high, fewer people will buy it => you lower your price.
In a distorted market, no matter what price you put on it, someone will fund it's purchase -- and then demand repayment.

To fix the student loan problem, remove the "We'll fund your education at any price", and replace it with "We'll fund your education if it is likely to be repaid".

But that's only part of the answer. The other part is loan insurance.

"We'll fund your education, if it is likely to be repaid, if you agree to pay back the cost, plus a premium for loan insurance, along with the guarantee that if you can't pay it back within N years of graduation, your loan is forgiven". (N should be around 7-10).

In other words, since you know ahead of time that it is impossible to repay every student loan, that you limit the size of the loans, and expect those who succeed will cover the costs of those who fail.

What is the long-term result of that?

1. More people getting loans, and going to school.
2. More people getting degrees, and yet not having the jobs for all of them to get the high-paying jobs that will repay the debts.
3. Partial repayments from most, full repayments from others, and lots of discharged debts
4. As the discharge rate goes up (as fewer graduates, by percentage, can repay), the amount of loan goes down, and the amount of insurance goes up, reducing what can be spent on schools
5. Which in turn forces the cost of education down.
6. Which runs the risk of reducing the quality of education.
7. Which either causes other problems in the future, or forces the education system to fundamentally change.

7 is the fun part. With thousands of schools, and thousands of experiments, someone will succeed. Someone will figure out how to make schooling work better.

And then, either lots and lots of people will copy it, or it will be copyrighted, trademarked, patented, etc, and locked up for just one single group, with extension after extension, until ...

Wait, actually, our current system doesn't sound so bad after all :-)

need to drop the college for all idea and stop job

[Joe_Dragon]

need to drop the college for all idea and stop jobs from asking for a degree for jobs that don't need it / are better off with some kind of tech / trades school (and not being asking for an 2-4+ year one as well).

What will we do want jobs want masters or better and what happens when they get people loaded with theory / class room only and still having skill gaps??

Re:Wrong target

[olsmeister]

Not only that, but student loans are one of the few types of debt that are not normally discharged in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing. It's pretty much with you for life. You'd be better off putting your tuition on a credit card than taking out a student loan for it. Starting off that far in the whole with student loans is one of the worst mistakes you can make, unless you really understand what you are taking on.

Looking at it wrong

[codepigeon]

What this tells me, is that there is clearly a demand that is not being met by 'traditional' colleges/universities. These schools offer people a chance at a diploma that they can put on their resume. If you don't have that piece of paper on your resume, you are not even going to get an interview regardless of how knowledgeable you are in the field (unless you have a contact inside the company already).

These schools give people, who maybe got off to a bad start, a chance to go to classes in the evenings, it is a path for those students who were not necessarily 'good' at school and would score poorly on an ACT or SAT test. When more and more of the jobs those people used to get go overseas or to mexico, they have to have some way into the 'new' economy. Either that or they find a way to game the system with welfare/disability (or get stuck forever in working poverty). They have to live, they have to feed their families. These schools offer them a way to do that. (or more likely, the false hope that they can do that)

I think the traditional colleges need to take notice and start offering programs that mimic what these for-profit schools offer. Flexible schedules for adult students, shorter paths to a certificate or diploma, etc. Side note: aren't all colleges 'for profit'? I see the million dollar salaires of university presidents, massive coffers, and multi-billion dollar sport franchises and have to think that they are all 'for-profit'; the profit just goes in different directions.

Re:Looking at it wrong

[Registered Coward v2]

What this tells me, is that there is clearly a demand that is not being met by 'traditional' colleges/universities. These schools offer people a chance at a diploma that they can put on their resume. If you don't have that piece of paper on your resume, you are not even going to get an interview regardless of how knowledgeable you are in the field (unless you have a contact inside the company already).

The problem is many of these programs simply are designed to make money, not teach students and prepare them for a job. Employers know what degrees are basically worthless; resulting in people with student debt and still poor job prospects. Take away the loans that provide the revenue for non-performing schools will make them go away and help those that actually do provide value for the money.

These schools give people, who maybe got off to a bad start, a chance to go to classes in the evenings, it is a path for those students who were not necessarily 'good' at school and would score poorly on an ACT or SAT test. When more and more of the jobs those people used to get go overseas or to mexico, they have to have some way into the 'new' economy. Either that or they find a way to game the system with welfare/disability (or get stuck forever in working poverty). They have to live, they have to feed their families. These schools offer them a way to do that. (or more likely, the false hope that they can do that)

Given the statistics cited in TFA, false hope is exactly the problem. Their advertising is aimed at those desperate for a better job, they promise one and then don't deliver. There is nothing inherently wrong with a for profit school. I know someone who taught for years at an automotive trade school; one that actually placed their graduates in good jobs because they had the basic skills, could pass the ASE exam, and were competent basic mechanics. They used to offer just a high school dropout a path to a good job, one that would let them repay any debt and earn a living.

I think the traditional colleges need to take notice and start offering programs that mimic what these for-profit schools offer. Flexible schedules for adult students, shorter paths to a certificate or diploma, etc. Side note: aren't all colleges 'for profit'? I see the million dollar salaires of university presidents, massive coffers, and multi-billion dollar sport franchises and have to think that they are all 'for-profit'; the profit just goes in different directions.

Many colleges offer just that, especially community/junior colleges and regional schools. I agree that not for profit doesn't mean we can't make and spend boatloads of money.

Re:Looking at it wrong

[thaylin]

That is what CCs do. CCs dont care about your SATs, they give you a small test to see if you need remedial classes. They care typically cheap and prepare you for work, of if you get a transfer degree, advancement to a 4 year.

Re:Looking at it wrong

[DerekLyons]

What this tells me, is that there is clearly a demand that is not being met by 'traditional' colleges/universities. These schools offer people a chance at a diploma that they can put on their resume.

There's clearly a demand not being met by 'traditional' medicine. Homeopaths offer people a chance to treat themselves. So, should 'traditional' medical schools take note and start training people to be homeopaths?
 
(That's probably a bit over-the-top sarcastic, but it was meant to illustrate how abysmally clueless you are about the issue.)
 

These schools give people, who maybe got off to a bad start, a chance to go to classes in the evenings, it is a path for those students who were not necessarily 'good' at school and would score poorly on an ACT or SAT test.

Some of these schools do that, but by no means all of them do. Others give the students false hope that by earning a specific vocational degree in 'x', the student will get a good paying job in 'y' - except the 'education' they provide (degree 'x') is actually something of a Potemkin village. It looks good from the outside, good enough that they can't be accused outright of malfeasance... but it's actually essentially valueless. (And from the schools point of view, it's not their fault the students can find jobs.)
 
It's the second type of school the Feds are going after. Nor it is the first time, they went after their advertising methods (essentially advertising a product they couldn't deliver) a few years back.
 

If you don't have that piece of paper on your resume, you are not even going to get an interview regardless of how knowledgeable you are in the field (unless you have a contact inside the company already).

Employers are, in general, not stupid. When they see the "piece of paper" is from one of "those" schools (the second type mentioned above), you aren't going to get an interview either.
 

I think the traditional colleges need to take notice and start offering programs that mimic what these for-profit schools offer. Flexible schedules for adult students, shorter paths to a certificate or diploma, etc.

Community colleges have been doing just that for decades. You're way late to the party.

why does party or sports schools look better then?

[Joe_Dragon]

why does party or sports schools look better then then the tech schools that don't have that BS and tech real skills?

some of the sports schools are very lax on classes for people on the football team (the team is full time in season and part time off season)

why can't there be a minor league for football and basketball?

Ping?

[wjcofkc]

These are the sorts of aborted attempts at schools that produce "graduates" with a stack of certifications yet who somehow don't even know what the ping command is. Countless times I have encountered these individuals only to be shocked that despite the year or more they spend in these places I have literally had to instruct them on how to use the basics like ping, traceroute, ip/ifconfig, etc... and then how to use such things to perform basic troubleshooting. How someone obtain an A+, Network+, and more and not know these things is beyond me.

Around the turn of the millennium I briefly attended one such school. I ended up doing more teaching than the teachers, quickly realized it was a scam and dropped out. That particular tech-school was later sued out of existence for making promises they could not deliver on.

This is why I despise the majority of technical certifications: they either measure knowledge or they don't - you can't always tell right away. It can be a matter of learning the material and rightfully passing the exam, or merely learning how to take the exam. I sometimes contemplate teaching a class in Linux so I can teach it right, but then again I would not want to be associated with such an institution.

minor league for football & basketball or trad

[Joe_Dragon]

minor league for football & basketball or let them take trades / tech school classes even if they need to go to a different school to take the classes.

Re:Wrong target

[Anonymous Coward]

The 'Everybody's gotta go to college' trend is just nonsense to begin with. I didn't want to go to college, so I self-educated and found an employer who would accept that. Lots of people either wouldn't fit in in a formal education environment (like me), or don't have what it takes. That's fine. Making it too easy (like now) for all these people to go to college and university will just end up with the colleges and universities lowering their standards, making the education worse for all, and the tuition higher.

Re:Wrong target

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are you blaming students when you say the problem is greedy colleges overcharging. This government proposal targets the greedy colleges. Students are held accountable to their loans more than any other type of loan. This proposal does nothing to change that but also starts to hold colleges accountable for their greed.

Bad Colleges

[JimSadler]

The for profit colleges are suspicious to most people. There are so many gimmick type colleges out there that unless a degree is from a known and long standing, brick and mortar college employers probably see the degrees as nonsense. And frankly they usually are nonsense. And even if the for profit school is sort of real they are much like your local doughnut shop. They want you there a lot! In other words if you are picking a kid's pocket you simply make sure that he is happy and give him good grades no matter how dumb he is. Treat him nice and let him think he is being educated and you can pick that pocket for years to come. College should be limited to those who love academic pursuits, love studying and are somewhat willing to suffer to learn. College is not a trade school and is not designed to be a path to employment.

Re:Bad Colleges

[Sarius64]

Again, as noted multiple times so far, your comments denote your paradigm. The rest of the world is dealing with HR Nazis that list college degree as the minimum entry requirement for filing clerks.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[SpockLogic]

But they actually know and understand the curriculum. Besides which, professors at real universities aren't hired to teach, they're hired because of the research they've done. So yes, they have experience in research.

Tenured professors are hired to do research, adjunct professors are the under paid teachers.

Refunds?

[nurb432]

How about forcing them to refund tuition to people they lied to in order to get them to sign up?

Re:Refunds?

[Anonymous Coward]

First rule of Acquisition

1. Once you have their money, never give it back

Re:Refunds?

[kenh]

How about holding traditional colleges and universities to the same standard?

How many ivy league baristas are there? Book store clerks with Masters & PHds?

Re:Refunds?

[thaylin]

Well if you read the summery, you would see the problem is the disproportionate amount coming from the tech schools not the other way around. 50% of the defaults for a much smaller amount of students....

What is "college" supposed to be, anyway?

[swb]

1) A system of education designed to produce a graduate with a broad yet substantive grasp of human knowledge in art, literature, humanities and basic sciences?

2) A system of education designed to promote a commanding, in-depth knowledge of a specific discipline like engineering, law, medicine or physical science?

3) A vocational system designed to produce employment-ready workers with a sound working knowledge of a specific area of business or government?

4) A finishing system where young people learn the social skills and cultural knowledge necessary to aspire to the elite class of society? While it sounds free from anything like education, these things may require things we do consider education, like learning foreign languages to demonstrate worldliness, and where political history is personally embodied in the elites themselves (aristocracy and nobility), and where proper social manners may be barely distinguishable from what passes for politics and diplomacy.

I think it's mostly grown to be 3 and 4. You go to college to study an occupational field so you can get a job. It's different than 2 because you're not studying as nearly in depth. Accounting isn't mathematics. Before the 1960s you belonged to a fraternal organization to learn to participate in formal society as an adult. After the 1960s its where you go to experiment, find yourself and in practical terms learn to live on your own (pay rent, feed yourself, etc). In more expensive schools there is still a strong emphasis on the social component both from tradition and from aspirational goals of joining some of your fellow students' elite socioeconomic class.

I think for most of the past few hundred years its mainly been 1 & 4, with a strong emphasis on four. When we began indulging girls in education, college was a fine place to find a suitor of suitable class and ambition. But for all, a solid grounding in the liberal arts was socially useful, eliminated provincialism and promoted useful skills in basic mathematics and literacy.

The in-depth education of 2 probably started out ecclesiastically as the means to produce priests and preserve religious knowledge and church canon. Not until the enlightenment and the industrial revolution were most of these subjects studied with any rigor. Until mathematics was applied, engineering was just skilled trades like carpentry, stonemasons and blacksmiths.

Re:What is "college" supposed to be, anyway?

[HornWumpus]

Colleges/Universities started to teach two groups. Priests and Military Officers. The Priest schools morphed into liberal arts schools. The Military schools morphed into engineering schools.

Pretending that Engineering wasn't there from the beginning is BS. Most math was developed to do Engineering, math was not applied to Engineering after the fact.

Also note: It would be nice if liberal arts majors learned basic sciences. They don't.

Re:What is "college" supposed to be, anyway?

[HornWumpus]

I'm sorry, but it's the liberal arts majors who are generally not well rounded. (Unless you define well rounded as taking only remedial math and science).

Science/Engineering/CS people all take some history and english. Most liberal arts majors typically repeat high school math again (and don't get it). The amount of science they can comprehend without any math can fit in one hand.

Granting the history and english I got in college was pretty much repeat. That's because I did a 4 year bit with the Jebbies first.

Re:Wrong target

[thaylin]

If you go to a community college you can get an associates degree, and then you can typically find a 4 year that will accept you, even for online classes.

Re:need to drop the college for all idea and stop

[DarkOx]

The problem is not that jobs need it or not but HR and hiring manager use the fact that you have a degree to as an indicator of a few things:

1) You are able to stick with a project for a long period of time and see it through
2) You are able to accept and complete tasks that seem and probably are arbitrary and pointless because someone says do it.
3) You can take a set of instructions and fill in the blanks on your own and run with it, with something less than constant supervision.

There really is no better indicator of the above available. You might be able to accurately assess that stuff in an interview and you might not. A bad hire can be a costly mistake for a business. There are enough candidates for any given job with a degree right now, there exists no good reasons to gamble on someone without one.

In the current job market I would NEVER consider a candidate without a degree for anything a position above "cleaner" because there is no reason to take the chance, what you have a degree in is less of a concern though. You want to interview for an IT operations job and your degree is in "20th Century Art History" that is not necessarily a problem.

Re:IT needs apprenticeship and maybe 1-2 year trad

[eric4209]

I agree! I run a 12 week program where we use apprenticeship principles in the classroom. It's a more than full time commitment, with very small class sizes (12 max) and we are seeing a 90% job placement rate.

Experience of which industry?

[Roger W Moore]

Where you have professors who have been in school for years and have next to no real experience.

Experience of which industry? I'm a physics prof. Our grads work in fields as diverse as finance, medicine, IT, natural resources, academic and industrial research etc. in a diverse range of positions. University is supposed to give you deep understanding of a subject and a broad range of skills that are useful for a wide variety of positions both in academia and industry it is not a training scheme for job X. Being involved in research means that I can take the latest research results and bring them into lectures so the students learn about them and perhaps find ways to apply that knowledge wherever they end up. This is not only good for the student but good for society as a whole and someone from industry is unlikely to be able to do that.

Re:Experience of which industry?

[Sarius64]

For example, I just set up a NOC that administrates 14,000 devices across Europe. The four main technicians in the role are working toward their various CCIE tracks. You would have to show me a ton of evidence to prove someone sitting in a classroom could have pulled off their products. Admittedly, they're not in a physics industry. Also, when I need people to define large algorithms for other needs, I definitely look your associates up for the job. I think we can all admit that industry, research, and application can be shades of gray, too.

Re:Experience of which industry?

[Sarius64]

Yes, when I need to manage projects with various physics professions as the core theme, I do not hire people from other industries. Maybe that wasn't apparent enough for you to grasp.

Re:Experience of which industry?

[gallen1234]

Experience of which industry? I'm a physics prof. [...] Being involved in research means that I can take the latest research results and bring them into lectures so the students learn about them and perhaps find ways to apply that knowledge wherever they end up. This is not only good for the student but good for society as a whole and someone from industry is unlikely to be able to do that.

You may be a great researcher but can you teach worth a damn? One doesn't automatically imply the other. I've had plenty of professors who were well respected in their fields but had no business being in a classroom. I can see how being a good researcher could be beneficial to teaching but it shouldn't be the end of the conversation in a University job interview.

Re:Experience of which industry?

[HornWumpus]

By the time you are in college you are supposed to be past needing information spoon fed to you.

At that point knowledge is more important then teaching ability. You can make up for teaching ability with learning ability. You can't make up for lack of knowledge.

Re:Experience of which industry?

[Sique]

There are no "physics" professions. Maybe that wasn't apparent enough for you to grasp.

Re:Experience of which industry?

[Sarius64]

Maybe you should check NIST Laboratories. Plenty there mate.

Re:Experience of which industry?

[Roger W Moore]

You may be a great researcher but can you teach worth a damn? One doesn't automatically imply the other.

True but in most institutes unless you are an absolutely incredible researcher you have to have a reasonable level of teaching ability or you don't get tenure.

Re:Experience of which industry?

[Sarius64]

Really, I stay up at night concerned about your opinion. Promise.

Re:Experience of which industry?

[HornWumpus]

Read what I wrote dipshit.

Re:Wrong target

[AthanasiusKircher]

Continue to hold the student accountable. They're the ones that were too stupid to go to a college and get a degree for a job good enough to pay it off. And too stupid to figure out debt v/s income ratios. And maybe their parents if they were involved in the stupid decision to send their kids to college without a means to pay for it.

Your repetition of the phrase "too stupid" seems to imply some sort of innate cognitive dysfunction.

But I think what you really mean is that they don't have the necessary experience and skills to evaluate basic financial math decisions, right? I mean, except for the small percentage of people with actual cognitive impairments, most people should be able to figure this out, right?

So, then you have to ask yourself: how is it that we require students generally to take 11-12 years of mathematics in this country, but they somehow graduate without basic financial math skills to survive in the world?

I taught high school math and science for a few years, so I know the curriculum and debates first-hand. I can tell you about the 140 or so students I was teaching my first year -- mostly high-school juniors and seniors in algebra II (likely the last math class they would ever take in their lives for most). And one day I tried giving them a simple application problem involving compound interest: only 2 out of the 140 students actually knew what compound interest was.

According to the state-mandated curriculum, I had no time to teach them the basics of math that would help them to survive in the real world, but at that point I decided I needed to carve out a few weeks and do at least a little of that... even if it meant some of the scores on our official testing would be a little lower. I can tell you that most teachers probably don't even have time or initiative to do that.

So... with situations like this, you have to ask yourself: how can we expect these "too stupid" students to evaluate basic financial situations when they don't even know fundamental ideas like compound interest, let alone how it might apply to loans or investments or whatever?

Of course, I agree with you that some of the blame should be placed on the students and their parents. But I do think we need to recognize that we require kids to spend over a decade in public schools, and many of them are leaving without fundamental numerical skills to make decisions in the real world.

So are they really "too stupid" or were they just never taught basic numeracy?

Re:Inflated cost of education

[thaylin]

How about the UNC system of schools? Most state run schools are not "for profit" IE, they dont look to make money, only survive. Or does your definition of profit not match up with the dictionary version of profit?

Re:Education != Employment

[thaylin]

The problem is that the for profit schools talked about in this do nothing to further then general pool of knowledge as well, and advertise helping people get a job, which they dont.

Re:need to drop the college for all idea and stop

[Chaos Incarnate]

So between someone with no experience but a degree, and someone with 5+ years experience (at the same company) and no degree, you'd still opt for the degree-bearer?

I would have thought the work experience would show that they can do #1 and #2, and probably #3 as well...

Re:Wrong target

[thaylin]

Many people would prefer not to have to search long and hard for someone to accept self education, besides which most jobs that allow that start you out at high school drop out wages, and will take you longer to work out to the just out of college pay.

Re:need to drop the college for all idea and stop

[Joe_Dragon]

what about 2 year degrees?

Trades schools?

NON degree classes?

Do you pass them over?

How does this compare ...

[jamesl]

... to not-for-profit institutions?

Perhaps public high schools should be held to the same standard. Like Charter Schools.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

Actually having that piece of paper tends to show that you are educated. It does not mean that only people who have that paper are educated, however those people tend to have nothing to prove they are educated. If I am looking for an educated person do I take the chance on someone who at least has a piece of paper from an accredited school that says hey this person is educated, or the guy who walks in and has nothing to show that he is educated?

Re:need to drop the college for all idea and stop

[Sarius64]

It is too bad that HRs are filled with lazy MBA dropouts that simple put "college degree" at the start of every position description. Added onto that all of the colleges telling people that most professional jobs hold that standard as a minimum entry standard. Most of the time, I'd rather take any kid exiting the military for an entry-level position as they normally have more instilled for any job requirement(s).

Re:Inflated cost of education

[Sarius64]

Funny. The leftists in academia make me laugh. Show me a college that is not for profit. It is the free flowing financial aid that inflates the cost of education.

Apologies that someone modded you down mate. A clearer truth could not have been spoken.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

Actually having that piece of paper tends to show that you are educated.

I've noticed no such correlation, and especially so in the workforce. My employer doesn't, either; he turns away a grand majority of people with degrees.

But what that was really about is illogical elitism. "If you don't have a degree in X or Y, you're not educated." Regardless of your opinions on pieces of paper, such statements are ridiculous.

If I am looking for an educated person do I take the chance on someone who at least has a piece of paper from an accredited school that says hey this person is educated, or the guy who walks in and has nothing to show that he is educated?

Again, you act as if a piece of paper indicates that someone is educated. My employer actually takes the time to evaluate people's skills to see if they're educated, which seems like a better approach.

If you don't have time for that, I would suggest getting rid of people who obviously don't know what they're doing, and then discarding people from your list of possible educated people at random. It would probably bring better results, anyway.

Re:Teabagger question

[gIobaljustin]

As opposed to random ACs mocking these supposedly unemployed "teabaggers"?

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

Actually having that piece of paper tends to show that you are educated.

I've noticed no such correlation, and especially so in the workforce. My employer doesn't, either; he turns away a grand majority of people with degrees.

But what that was really about is illogical elitism. "If you don't have a degree in X or Y, you're not educated." Regardless of your opinions on pieces of paper, such statements are ridiculous.

If I am looking for an educated person do I take the chance on someone who at least has a piece of paper from an accredited school that says hey this person is educated, or the guy who walks in and has nothing to show that he is educated?

Again, you act as if a piece of paper indicates that someone is educated. My employer actually takes the time to evaluate people's skills to see if they're educated, which seems like a better approach.

If you don't have time for that, I would suggest getting rid of people who obviously don't know what they're doing, and then discarding people from your list of possible educated people at random. It would probably bring better results, anyway.

Nice fallacy.. I never stated that someone with a piece of paper IS educated, I showed that it tends to show they are, and is better than not having one. Your employer may attempt to evaluate if they are educated but he cannot fully do so. He can see if someone is educated in a very tiny area, but that does not show that they are fully educated on the subject.

Why Attend?

[gpmanrpi]

Why would anyone rightly attend such an institution? As someone who has used community colleges to supplement my knowledge, and to get prerequisites for Medical School, this seems like a fools bargain for students. I mean community colleges, here in FL, are inexpensive, offer flexible class times, have convenient locations, etc. I went to an expensive engineering undergraduate institution (RPI), and some of these places charge pretty darn close to their tuition for an associates degree. The ROI on an engineering degree is sometimes doubtful, how does one repay 100k loans on a culinary arts degree, or cosmetology license? These programs are nothing more than a get rich quick scheme that only burden the student, with lifelong debt, and the tax-payer, with holding the bag on the interest, for a number of these loans when they are deferred. If we were half smart about these programs we would not pay into these institutions. A profession gives the student a lifetime of job security, and society a lifetime of higher tax revenues (not to mention the services of said student). We should be funding public institutions and not private ones, whenever possible- not throwing good money after bad at these trade schools run by bankers.

Re:Why Attend?

[pavon]

Where I live the community colleges are inexpensive, but do not have flexible class times for working people, and most of the tracks that have good job prospects have 2-5 year waiting lists. So many students choose to rack up the debt at TVI, PMI, UoP, where they can start immediately and continue a full-time job.

The problems at our CC are mostly because they can't attract enough instructors. The community college pays them half of what of what they would make working in the field or teaching at a for-profit college, and are horribly mismanaged. In the electronics department, I frequently heard the instructors compain about pressures to dumb things down to pass more students. The place where I work has started to favor techs from TVI & DeVry because the quality of students from the CC has decreased. When my wife was doing her nursing degree, the department head would be constantly changing things (like room locations, curiculum dates, rules about how to evaluate students, etc) literally the night before class, so the instructors could never be prepared for class. Many people are willing to take a pay cut to do something that they enjoy more, or work under a horrible boss if the pay is good, but very few are willing to do both.

Re:Why Attend?

[gpmanrpi]

That does stink. Most of my professors at SPC(St. Petersburg College) were those that worked there a long time and took their jobs very seriously. I suppose YMMV depending on school, Campus and State. Ultimately, it sounds like a funding problem though. If they would pay professors more they would raise the bar. For example, they could perhaps funnel some of the money that was going to the for profits into regular education and probably solve that problem. At SPC, they worked pretty hard to make sure the people taking the classes could actually get something out of them. Plenty of guidance exams, and the like prevented the most unqualified from getting into courses. Were there people that probably didn't belong taking classes? Yes, but they usually tapped out pretty early on. I was taking difficult sciences like Organic Chemistry and Biochemistry. The biology courses seemed to have more of a mix of qualified students because it is a prerequisite for more degree programs. That being said, my classes were not "full" all of the time. My biochemistry course had maybe 15 students, in a classroom build for over 30. The question maybe is how much would the CCs have to charge to get those professors back? When you offer more classes you get more revenue. Someone should be doing the math. Maybe it is worth writing your members of the Legislature, since at a local level you can get a lot accomplished in that regard.

Re:Why Attend?

[Shados]

Same thing as all other consumerism issues. Private colleges are the biggest viral marketing success on the continent (world?).

Everyone's always talking about harvard, MIT, cal tech, CMU, Cornell, etc etc etc.

A bunch of students come out of there amazingly successfully, and everyone forgets the countless students who fail horribly, or end up not better off than the average joes. Then word gets around... We've all seen the bunch of friends who get together after highschool and ask "So, where did you go?!", and when someone answers a college name they didn't hear of (which should be common: no one knows even a fraction of colleges' names by heart), they're surprised. "Oh? Where's that, never heard of it". No one wants to be the person who went to a college no one heard of.

And thus, people go and pay up the wazoo for suboptimal scenarios. Sure, if you're good enough to get top grades at MIT, you're almost guaranteed to succeed in the job market... But please don't go in liberal art at Harvard when you're just barely qualifying and plan on partying all day/all night unless you have one hell of a backup plan.

Re:Wrong target

[Sarius64]

Excellent post, mate.

Re:Wrong target

[nitehawk214]

If you go to a community college you can get an associates degree, and then you can typically find a 4 year that will accept you, even for online classes.

And an associate degree is just as vaulable from a community college as a major school, and costs 1/10 as much. In most areas, if you are a working adult that lives in the city the college is in, you go practically for free. Once there you can transfer to a 4-year school for a bachelors and effectively save half your cost on education.

Cool

[koan]

Hire out to companies for 3 month contracts with jobs like "office boy" or something equally as talentless that doesn't require an education.

Re:Inflated cost of education

[thaylin]

clearer truth? Purposely ignore all non profit public universities and then maybe it is clear, but then it is just idiotic.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

Nice fallacy.. I never stated that someone with a piece of paper IS educated

I was talking about the person the AC you replied to replied to, who said something about an idiotic book.

And there is no fallacy in questioning whether there is such a correlation in general, which is what I did.

I showed that it tends to show they are, and is better than not having one.

You showed no such thing; you just stated it. All I did was state my (and my employer's) experience, which is just anecdotal evidence.

Your employer may attempt to evaluate if they are educated but he cannot fully do so.

Nor does he need to. If they come out of college/university totally unable to write even the simplest of programs or giving an explanation of the simplest theories, then they're not even worth considering

Re:Wrong target

[Greyfox]

I'd be all for that if you could discharge educational debt via bankruptcy as you can with other forms of debt. Once you do that, I suspect lenders will start doing much better risk assessments on individual candidates. It might end up meaning fewer people go on to higher education, but it should also mean fewer people end up in minimum wage (or no) jobs with crushing amounts of student debt.

Re:Wrong target

[thaylin]

Exactly. There is generally no reason to go to these for profit schools other than they are super easy and you generally dont have to do much, after all their pay is directly related to you passing so why would you fail?

This is great news...

[kenh]

new regulations that would hold colleges that receive federal student aid accountable for the employment success of their graduates.

Will this regulation change also apply to "non-profit" colleges and universities?

From the article:

Students at for-profit colleges represent only about 13 percent of the total higher education population, but about 31 percent of all student loans and nearly half of all loan defaults. In the most recent data, about 22 percent of student borrowers at for-profit colleges defaulted on their loans within three years, compared to 13 percent of borrowers at public colleges.

Can a graduate of a "for-profit" school apply for a three year deferral like a student at a "non-profit" school? Odd how their default rates are calculated three years after graduation/leaving school, exactly the same amount of time a college graduate can defer their loan payments...

Re:This is great news...

[thaylin]

Why is it odd, that is the amount of time if you have an economic hardship. Technically if you think about it the time would be 3.5 years, auto 6 month deferment on graduation. However I think the 3 year mark makes perfect sense.

Re:This is great news...

[HornWumpus]

It's odd that anybody is defaulting at 3 years if the rules for deferments are the same.

If the rules aren't the same then comparing default rates isn't an apples to apples comparison.

Re:This is great news...

[thaylin]

The rules are the same, 3 years IF you are having a provable financial crisis. The problem is that not everyone is graduating with a valued degree, or even knowledge.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[Bengie]

At my work, we've had a great experience with even freshmen from the local Uni. The Uni already does a great job filtering out the baddies. They're not all great programmers, but they've all had good potential and many just have slightly different interests, but are otherwise intelligent people.

Re:Inflated cost of education

[Sarius64]

Taking California for an example, the system has been wide open to foreign students capable of paying the extravagant fees but kids from the state have more limited options to enter the programs; necessitating cradle to college programs as their sole means of entry outside of community college programs. As a tax-paying parent, my observation displays a money-hungry group concentrated on taking my tax money and categorically denying access to the majority of California kids in favor of larger fee entrants.

Re:Simple fix

[kenh]

I'll applaud these types of rules when they are applied fairly to all recipients of federal loan money, not just the "for profit" schools everyone likes to vilify.

Maybe it's time to re-think loaning anyone nearly any amount of money to study almost anything... It's great if you are the one profiting, but it lets too many folks invest hundreds of thousands of dollars in an education that has little commercial value after graduation.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

I meant to say " I said that it tends to show" That was a mistake in my statement there.

So your employer does not need an educated person, but a knowledgeable person, there is a major difference, your last statement seems to say he is testing for knowledge not education. The problem with that is you dont know how long it took him to learn to code the simplest of problems. It could have been 5 years and he does not know how to advance past that, where at the educated person may be able to learn what you tested in a matter of hours/minutes and progress past that in weeks/days.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[khellendros1984]

In my university classes, I knew more than one student that weaseled their way through classes without really understanding the material, so I know that those people are out there. A college/university education isn't a panacea; the student has to do work on their own to end up with any level of competency at graduation time.

In my case, I saw two benefits to a college education. First, it showed me what was important to study in my time. Second, it provided me the pass to get past the HR gatekeeper-goons at most employers. A degree is no replacement for having the drive to learn.

Re:Inflated cost of education

[Sarius64]

Great. Let me see their financials because just saying something doesn't make it so.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[HornWumpus]

Yet another reason to pick EE over CS.

For as long as there have been engineering schools, it has been traditional to not hire professors without significant industry experience.

Re:need to drop the college for all idea and stop

[Livius]

Undoubtedly that's true for some jobs, but a lot of the time the degree requirement is simply to eliminate job candidates for no reason other than the number of applicants is so large as to be unmanageable.

Re:Inflated cost of education

[kenh]

"Endowment" is just another word for untaxed profits.

When a "non-profit" college collects hundreds of millions of dollars, and in turn lavishes silly high six-figure salaries on tenured professors, and rich pensions, the difference between "for-profit" and "non-profit" becomes nothing more than a game of semantics.

Re:need to drop the college for all idea and stop

[Immerman]

I would agree with you - except for the case of hiring "newbies". Which would you rather hire? Somebody with a degree, or somebody with a few years experience flipping burgers? The degree is probably more indicative of long-term planning and self-management skills, as well as suggesting the bearer carries a broader range of basic knowledge which may possibly be useful to your organization.

Re:only a few years ago...

[kenh]

Go work at "non-profit" schools - that's where the real money is...

Ask yourself, why is it that students upon graduation from a traditional school can defer payments for three years, and the "analysis" the DOE has done is based on the default rate 3 years after graduation?

Can "non-profit" graduates defer their loan payments for three years? I seem to recall not, but I'm not sure...

Re:Inflated cost of education

[thaylin]

Care to be more detailed about the foreign students? At NC State we have a lot of foreign students in the graduated classes, but not the undergrad, and even then most of the graduate students are paid for by the professors for research, and not the students or their family themselves. In graduate level the mentors typically pay for the education in exchange for the student doing work on their projects.

Looking up the UC system shows that they have a policy of limiting enrollment so that only 10% of the students can be foreign to the US, and currently only 7% are from another state, meaning at least 83% of the current enrollment is from the state... That is a far cry from what you are describing...

Re:Inflated cost of education

[thaylin]

Being a state ran school it is all online, free for you to look at any time you wish to educate yourself....

Re:What Sounds Do You Hear?

[HornWumpus]

I don't disagree about the bankruptcy. But the consequences will not be banks finding students jobs. It will be banks refusing to make loans to some majors/schools and require GPA standards.

Which would be a good thing. The world has too many *studies people already.

Re:Wrong target

[HornWumpus]

There's a reason to go to a diploma mill. They don't have the academic credentials to get into a real school.

If you get straight Cs in CC there is no real 4 year school in your future, and there shouldn't be.

Re:Inflated cost of education

[thaylin]

State ran schools dont use an endowment, they are typically budgeted... So wait, they can only be non-profit if no one is paid a salary, or if they make very little? It is not a matter of semantics, it is a matter of meaning..

Re:Wrong target

[thaylin]

That is not true. There are always options. In NC there is a 17 system public system of university. If you get an Associates degree you can get into this school, as long as you are from the state.

Re:need to drop the college for all idea and stop

[Chaos Incarnate]

I guess I was considering relevant work experience, not flipping burgers. But that wouldn't be a newbie - in that case, I think I agree that the degree is certainly a more useful indicator. :)

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[HornWumpus]

Medicine is a trade? Is that you Sheldon?

If you think Medical, Law and Engineering education is trade school, you are an idiot. Almost certainly a liberal arts major.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[Bengie]

People strait-up lie about experience and background. Doing a simple filter like looking for applicants have a degree from a well accredited school is a very simple way to weed out 90% of the trash. A degree is mostly a way to get your name past the noise created by liars and cheaters.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[metlin]

That is because -- get this -- computer science is not about coding.

It's about math and engineering. Any coding is incidental at best and it's not their job to teach you "programming".

Judging programs on their employability is myopic. If you are smart and logical, then picking up a programming language is trivial.

Most top schools have little to no programming education -- you learn discrete math, graph theory, complexity theory, algorithms, data structures, graphics (which is physics and math), AI (lots of stats and probability), linguistics (if you do NLP) etc.

Even when you learn Operating Systems or Compiler Design, you're learning them from a design point of view. The details of implementation are something you pick up on your own.

You want to teach skills that are transferable and will survive the next programming language or platform fad. Any good CS program teaches that. Learning to code in Java or *nix sysadmin skills are things you should pick up on your own.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

People strait-up lie about experience and background. Doing a simple filter like looking for applicants have a degree from a well accredited school is a very simple way to weed out 90% of the trash.

And having a degree doesn't mean that you're *not* trash. People who have no idea what they're doing somehow get degrees all the time, thanks in part due to shallow employers who require them.

With that said, giving applicants simple tests and tasks is a very simple way to weed out 90% of the trash, and as an added bonus, you'll also weed out all the trash (which happen to be most people, in my experience) that have degrees. What remains are people who are more likely to know what they're doing.

Re: Inflated cost of education

[thaylin]

Mostly true. For UNC, and I would expect UC, the state subsidizes the cost of NC students, and the out of state tuition represents the non subsidized amount.

Re:Wrong target

[HornWumpus]

The option should be to stay in CC until you learn to study. A C average associates will get you a place in a 4 year school? That's just fucked up. There is surely a better qualified applicant.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

So your employer does not need an educated person, but a knowledgeable person

He needs both.

where at the educated person may be able to learn what you tested in a matter of hours/minutes and progress past that in weeks/days.

Educated people who understand the theory would be able to apply it. He even lets them write it in pseudocode (think something like fizzbuzz) and put the explanations into their own words. Anyone unable to do this sort of thing is *not* educated in that field.

Re:Wrong target

[thaylin]

Not typically. UNCP is typically the school you would get into, it is a 4k student school, as apposed to NC States 40k campus. NC state would require a 3.6 GPA, UNCP would take you with a C typically. It is out in the boonies, and typically caters to the Lumbies.

Re:Wrong target

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Well, before I get a mortgage on my house, the bank does an assessment on it to see if its actually worth the money I'm borrowing for it. Not because they want to be my friend, but because they understand that if I am overpaying for the house, I'll be more likely to get try and short sale it, or let it get foreclosed. That hurts the bank.

So, why shouldn't the government who is guaranteeing the loan get similar assurances? Its the practical thing to do as a lender.

Re:need to drop the college for all idea and stop

[Immerman]

Indeed. But from what I've heard, lack of a degree isn't usually much of an issue for people with substantial relevant work experience - they have references to their competence exceeding anything a recent graduate can bring to the table. It's getting the relevant experience in the first place without a degree that's the challenge. For a lot of things a university degree probably isn't actually the best route, but so long as you're competing for those unpaid apprenticeship positions against people who have a degree it's an unfortunate de-facto requirement.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

Is not knowledgeable in the field...Some people who are educated in the field dont do pseudocode. Some still use flow charts, I know very out dated but they do. Others do a very convoluted pseudocode. Being educated means you are taught how to learn, generally about studies, and particularly about a field, being knowledgeable means you know about the the subject matter. There is a correlation, but they are not the same. I would rather have someone who is not quite as knowledgeable, but is educated, than someone who is slightly more knowledgeable but not educated.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

Again no it is not. Most tests that you can give in these situations are trivial and do not reflect anything like you make them out to be able to do. And they surely do not reflect someones capabilities to learn if the job has that requirement.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

Is not knowledgeable in the field...Some people who are educated in the field dont do pseudocode.

They're given every opportunity to show that they know what they're doing. They don't. These people are clueless.

Being educated means you are taught how to learn

It's not like they're asked to do everything on the spot.

I would rather have someone who is not quite as knowledgeable, but is educated, than someone who is slightly more knowledgeable but not educated.

My employer apparently wanted people to both be educated and knowledgeable (where necessary). The people he interviews--even the ones with degrees--are often neither.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

If they're so damn good at learning, then why are they so utterly incapable of doing even the simplest tasks when they know well ahead of time what sort of job it is? They can't even write fizzbuzz in any sort of language.

Look, if this is your idea of an "educated" person, then I don't want to be educated.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

And if you need to be taught how to learn, you were never intelligent to begin with.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

That is not necessarily a reflection on colleges, or degrees. you are over generalizing the situation, the fallacy I was speaking to earlier.

they are not asked to do these tests on the spot? So he gives them time to go out and figure out how to do them?

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

Again with a fallacy, this time a strawman.. I did not say people who graduated would be able to do it on the spot, but generally speaking I would be willing to bet that most of them would be able to figure it would in a reasonable amount of time. It sounds like you want someone knowledgeable, as mentioned before. Besides which your requirements for writing fizzbuzz is a little vague, would echo "fizzbuzz" work for you? LOL

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

That is not necessarily a reflection on colleges, or degrees. you are over generalizing the situation, the fallacy I was speaking to earlier.

There is no fallacy in sharing my personal experiences. That and the standards of many colleges and universities have dropped, what with all the trash being let in and what not.

they are not asked to do these tests on the spot? So he gives them time to go out and figure out how to do them?

He gives them ample time to do the tests. Any truly educated person should be able to do it, especially since *what the job entails is known well ahead of time*. If they're so good at learning and so educated, they'd be able to understand at least this much before their little tests.

Re:Teabagger question

[gIobaljustin]

Looks like you're a closeted teabagger. I don't know about you, but I want nothing to do with them. Have fun.

RCA Institute

[nbauman]

I remember one tech college, RCA Institute, that was actually pretty good. I met their graduates doing pretty good work on pretty good jobs everywhere. Bell Labs used to hire techs from RCA Institute. I met an electrical engineer from India who went to RCA Institute for 6 months to finish off his education. Then he went to work designing IC circuits for the blind. He showed me the first 8086 chip I ever saw in my life.

Then they went into decline. They were going to close down, the teachers tried to make a go of continuing on their own, and it just wasn't working out as a viable model. They changed their name several times. Last time I heard it was called TCI, Technical Careers Institute or something. They had rented a space on 8th Ave. off W. 56th St. in Manhattan, next to McDonald's.

Anybody know more about them? Are they still any good?

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

Again with a fallacy, this time a strawman

If you're going to point out fallacies, at least do it correct. I did not use a straw man; I said that they know well in advance what the job entails, and so they should be able to learn what they need in advance, *especially for the simple types of things that are being tested for*. Look, it's not like he's asking for random obscure knowledge or years of experience, here.

It sounds like you want someone knowledgeable

They don't need to be knowledge; they just need to understand simple programming concepts. Yet, somehow, most of these people are eliminated immediately.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

If you take that experience and assume that as the general rule then yes there is a fallacy.. Which is what you have been doing.

And how are these tests given in a closed room, are they allowed to use the internet or books? Not all languages use the same syntax, shoot some are vastly dissimilar.. Can you program in assembly? That is vastly different than JAVA or C++

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

Another fallacy from you, this time false dilemma ....Everyone knows how to learn in a general sense, but some people are better at it than others, and even still college is supposed to allow you to learn subject matter properly, and efficiently.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

your are assuming that is the line I was talking about. However since I mentioned the strawman part it would probably be the part where you misrepresented my statement so you could attack it, the "Look, if this is your idea of an "educated" person, then I don't want to be educated." part.. Again what type of programming.. When I first learned Cobol at a CC I would not have understood basic programming concepts in C or JAVA, would not have been able to use psuedocode, they used flow charts.

Care to back that up?

[rsilvergun]

With facts or even reasons? Lots of stuff is done traditionally that's just awful (for the sake of not trolling I won't bother listing any of them off).

Large parts of America are struck by enough poverty to count as the third world. So much so that several charities that traditionally work in third world countries have started offering services in America. The Rust Belt had it's entire manufacturing industry off shored. Entire economies literally collapsed. Short of outside intervention there's really nothing for those people.

Now, if you're willing to abandon those people to their fate that's fine. But just come right out and say it. But the fact is there isn't enough money locally to raise those people out of poverty.

I know your concern. Why should you have to pay for it? Well, one nation under God and all that.... Plus, what ever happened to America's Can Do Attitude? When I as a lad it would have been unthinkable to abandon 1/3 of America to abject poverty. Not because of any high and might moral beliefs, but because we took it for granted that there was no problem we couldn't solve.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

And colleges filter out the people who don't know how to learn.

Wouldn't that be nice? Learning is different from just memorization, you know, and that's what so many colleges fail to filter out: People who can't apply their skills in practice and do not have a truly deep understanding of the material.

People who can't figure out how to study effectively drop out and end up as "self-taught" PC technicians working at Staples.

Many college students end up the same way, or have you not been keeping up with the times? There are also the ambitious self-taught people who do just fine, but of course, you wouldn't be unfairly comparing people who didn't actually self-educate to motivated individuals who did, would you?

Re:Simple fix

[thaylin]

You really think it is an issue of not being applied fairly? Could it be that they see the not for profit already adhering to these rules? In addition you see a problem with vilifying these schools that have a 50% of the defaults with 13% of the students?

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

Which is what you have been doing.

And you said I was making straw men.

And how are these tests given in a closed room, are they allowed to use the internet or books?

Yep.

Not all languages use the same syntax, shoot some are vastly dissimilar

You can basically use any language you want, even pseudocode. My employer was a former programmer who had decades of experience, so he gives people that option.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

Another fallacy from you, this time false dilemma

Just stop it already. You don't need to take a philosophy course to know that you're just spewing forth terms without understanding them or understanding how they apply to the situation at hand. Hint: It's a subjective matter.

It's no use playing with one such as yourself any longer.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

However since I mentioned the strawman part it would probably be the part where you misrepresented my statement so you could attack it, the "Look, if this is your idea of an "educated" person, then I don't want to be educated."

Learn to read. We're done here.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

You are self professed self-educated person, dont assume that which you dont know anything about. I can count on 1 hand the number of classes I could just memorize the material in my classes, and even then I would have a remainder...

And look I am self learned myself. I did not go to college until I was 34, after having worked for IBM and Microsoft (the latter laid me off in 2009 which is when I went back to school). That being said I know this from both sides. The number of people who can do what you are talking about is relativly few. There is a good reason for using degrees to weed students out.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

Another fallacy from you, this time false dilemma

Just stop it already. You don't need to take a philosophy course to know that you're just spewing forth terms without understanding them or understanding how they apply to the situation at hand. Hint: It's a subjective matter.

It's no use playing with one such as yourself any longer.

You stated:

And if you need to be taught how to learn, you were never intelligent to begin with.

That is clearly a false dilemma...

Re:Wrong target

[laughingskeptic]

Agree. If federal student aid was capped at 1000 X minimum wage per year (like it effectively was in 1981) then tuitions everywhere would come down. The country has been hoodwinked by the Universities that education is valuable and therefore must be expensive. I got a great education in the 80's for a pittance by today's standards that I paid for entirely on my own. I borrowed money for school, but it was a safety blanket that I fortunately did not need to tap and was able to pay back when I graduated without ever having had to pay a dime of interest. These for-profit schools are taking advantage of the marketing campaigns and congressional payoffs of the major schools, setting up in a strip center with low overhead and making a killing off of the backs of the students they trick into going into debt for their programs.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

I can count on 1 hand the number of classes I could just memorize the material in my classes, and even then I would have a remainder...

And I've seen other people who have the exact opposite experiences, even from some big name colleges. Your anecdotal evidence against mine.

The number of people who can do what you are talking about is relativly few.

Yes, you're right, but it seems to be working out damn good in my workplace, which has about 300 employees. We have many people with degrees (who *did* know what they were doing, and seem ashamed at this sad state of affairs) and many without.

Many people can't self-educate, but that is not the issue. My employer just cares about finding intelligent and educated people who are capable of doing the job, not whether they have degrees.

There is a good reason for using degrees to weed students out.

I think it's because it's easy, and that's what many shortsighted employers and HR drones like. Funnily enough, though, this sort of mindset actually works to *devalue* the education that colleges and universities have to offer, as people will start looking at them as ways to find jobs, and that's not what they're really about.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

I know how to read, and comprehend. Using the if in a rhetorical device does not make it a conditional statement, and it was rhetorical based on the other parts of the paragraph, I just quoted the relevant parts.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

That is clearly a false dilemma...

Stop before you're a hundred thousand miles behind, please. That was my opinion.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

Using the if in a rhetorical device does not make it a conditional statement

"If X, then Y." Deal with it.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

I can count on 1 hand the number of classes I could just memorize the material in my classes, and even then I would have a remainder...

And I've seen other people who have the exact opposite experiences, even from some big name colleges. Your anecdotal evidence against mine.

you dont have any anecdotal evidence, you have hearsay..

The number of people who can do what you are talking about is relativly few.

Yes, you're right, but it seems to be working out damn good in my workplace, which has about 300 employees. We have many people with degrees (who *did* know what they were doing, and seem ashamed at this sad state of affairs) and many without.

Many people can't self-educate, but that is not the issue. My employer just cares about finding intelligent and educated people who are capable of doing the job, not whether they have degrees.

Speaking of anecdotal.....

There is a good reason for using degrees to weed students out.

I think it's because it's easy, and that's what many shortsighted employers and HR drones like. Funnily enough, though, this sort of mindset actually works to *devalue* the education that colleges and universities have to offer, as people will start looking at them as ways to find jobs, and that's not what they're really about.

You do realize there are few if any jobs that actually require a degree to get interviewed right? The majority of jobs will list a degree OR x amount of experience, and if you have that experience then you will typically make it through HR as long as your resume is well formed..... This fact pretty much destroys your entire argument..

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

you dont have any anecdotal evidence, you have hearsay..

I gave you anecdotal evidence. Or do you think I don't see these things for myself?

Speaking of anecdotal.....

Yes, that's essentially what we've both been doing. Not quick on the uptake, are you?

You do realize there are few if any jobs that actually require a degree to get interviewed right?

But many people who do not have degrees or previous job experience will not get hired, whether or not they know what they're doing. That is the point.

This fact pretty much destroys your entire argument..

That doesn't even make sense.

Re:Wrong target

[HornWumpus]

I'm thinking this program should be extended to UNCP and UNCPs accreditation should be looked at.

You seriously have a college just for mouth breathers? I bet those degrees are super well respected.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

You do understand that a fallacy is an error in reasoning? It does not matter if it was your opinion, you still committed the fallacy in your thought and presentation of said thought.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[thaylin]

you dont have any anecdotal evidence, you have hearsay..

I gave you anecdotal evidence. Or do you think I don't see these things for myself?

Unless you were in their classes you did not give me anecdotal evidence, as it would require it to be a personal experience.. You gave hearsay....

Speaking of anecdotal.....

Yes, that's essentially what we've both been doing. Not quick on the uptake, are you?

Oh great a personal attack

You do realize there are few if any jobs that actually require a degree to get interviewed right?

But many people who do not have degrees or previous job experience will not get hired, whether or not they know what they're doing. That is the point.

and that is relavant how? the jobs tht require a degree is not typically an entry level job. If you are seld educated you typically need to prove it in an entry level job

This fact pretty much destroys your entire argument..

That doesn't even make sense.

What were you unable to understand? There are avenues for anyone without a degree to prove their knowledge, you just want to be given an advanced job it seems.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

Not if the matter is entirely subjective, as is the case with intelligence. I decide for myself what I believe is intelligence, and therefore black-and-white thinking like that is no fallacy, because it's entirely subjective to begin with. It *does* matter.

Re:Further Obama bullcrap

[thaylin]

Why does this seem to come off as an attack on Obama when it is Republicans doing most if not all of this?

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

You gave hearsay....

Anecdotal evidence is hardly worth anything to begin with, so the difference is a moot point.

Oh great a personal attack

Yeah.

and that is relavant how?

It seems you've forgotten what the overall topic is about.

There are avenues for anyone without a degree to prove their knowledge

I'm talking about applying for specific jobs and getting rejected because you don't have a degree. You know this.

you just want to be given an advanced job it seems.

I already have one. Not a very good guess.

You're an eyesore, you know that?

Re:For Profit? Not For Profit? What's the differen

[thaylin]

The tuition rate does not matter, the costs are not the same. Online for profit schools that have no campus dont spend as much money and that is where they pocket the profit. Remember that at UC they have to pay for all those buildings and teachers to teach the students.

Re: Inflated cost of education

[Sarius64]

No, my kids received free tuition at the state universities for different reasons. Though I'm sure it gives you some solace to rationalize spending state assets on non-citizens. As for indignities, maybe you should try supporting your own nation/state and stop assuming things you can't possibly validate.

Re:Inflated cost of education

[Sarius64]

Okay, exactly where is your citation for that review, mate?

Re:Inflated cost of education

[Sarius64]

At the moment I'm unable to quote those figures, but let's say it's the 10% you're indicating. The hundreds of millions of dollars that the state and alumni have spent on the CSU infrastructure (California) are not being spent to educate some amount of the citizens of California, or America, and instead are being used to create competition for our citizens. On top of that, illegal aliens are counted as state citizens for purposes of tuition. No matter how minor you conceive the issue, the mandate of the CSU is to teach Californians whose families paid for the taxes to create and sustain those schools.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[Nemyst]

This, so much this. A lot of students get quite the scare when they realize that, gasp, a computer science degree is largely about doing science. While we do have introductory programming courses here, they're mostly seen as giving students the basic toolkit with which they will do their actual degree, a bit like how a physics degree has a few introductory pure math courses. Many courses I've taken don't even have programming at all in them, and some of those were very enjoyable at that!

In the end, the ones who realized that a comp sci degree isn't about learning programming tend to be those who do best at programming. I've met students who'd never used C++ and picked it up in a matter of hours. Perhaps they didn't have as much refinement as someone who's been doing it for 10+ years, but they understood that you can easily transfer high-level notions (ie. the focus of a comp sci degree) to any language.

Perhaps the pitfall of this is for the mediocre students, who don't realize this. They tend to have difficulty adjusting to another language than the one they were taught with.

Re:You're missing the point

[gIobaljustin]

The real point of ACT or SAT is one's ability to fit in fact-driven world

Looks more like the point is to have someone spew facts onto a (mostly) multiple choice test and generally do exactly as you're told. Understanding and creativity are not required, nor desirable.

Re:Inflated cost of education

[thaylin]

You are confusing the words foreigners and out of staters. The OP said foreigners, that is below 10%, out of staters is another issue, but is still small, less than 7%, which I clearly delimited in my original post.

Re: Inflated cost of education

[thaylin]

The state does not spend your resources on the out of staters, that is why they pay pull tuition, not in state tuition, so that they are not a burden on the state.... The cheaper cost of in state represents the subsidy the state pays.

Re:Inflated cost of education

[thaylin]

I dont know maybe google "unc finacial records" Oh wait, here we go, http://www.unc.edu/finance/fd/... 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, lets see, change the 2 to a 3 and now we have the 2013 one... That is just one school... but...Yep can do it for all of them...http://www.fis.ncsu.edu/controller/financial_reports/ Gotta hate lazy people...

DeVry = awful IT curriculum

[AnAlchemist]

I got a job offer from DeVry recently. They wanted me to teach C to their two-year networking students as their first (and only) programming language.

Yes, that's right: C! To community college students studying "network administration".

I didn't take the job. I think I would have been doing the students a disfavor by teaching them C. Nothing to do with C, but you don't teach networking students C at all, let alone as their first programming language (second, if you could Batch/bash).

Re: no practical knowledge in the industry at big

[LF11]

You sound like you work for a company I would choose to avoid. I say this with 12 years of professional experience under my belt and a BS. If you arbitrarily cut off people without a BS, you are missing some of the cream of the crop, particularly those students coming from a homeschool or alternative schooling background. If your company allows you to categorically screen people as you claim to, I would avoid working there.

Of course, personally I think you are full of shit. Anybody looking for programmers these days is going to take a long, hard look at anyone that seems competent, regardless of academic background. Programmers are hard to find, and nobody I know screens for college degrees over experience. That's just dumb.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[Bengie]

With that said, giving applicants simple tests and tasks is a very simple way to weed out 90% of the trash

You just had 10,000 applications for a job position. Filtering on a degree reduces that pool to 1,000. The enemy of good is perfect, and no one has time to go through all of the applicants, so you reduce that list as easily as possible and take the risk that you may have lose a few great applicants, but you probably would have never found them with all of that noise.

You seem to under-estimate the number of people who apply for positions. It's a DDOS and you need to best filter out the noise and a degree is the single easiest and most effective way to do so.

Re:College == vaocaitonal training.

[gIobaljustin]

You just had 10,000 applications for a job position.

That's almost never a problem where I work, but we have had too many people applying for jobs before. First get rid of the people whose resumes are obviously fakes, and then eliminate people almost at random (but still look for people with experience). A much better 'solution' than eliminating people who don't have degrees.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[david_thornley]

Typically, programming is one of those skills you're expected to pick up to the extent you need to while studying computer science. If you can't learn to do it well enough, you probably don't belong in the program.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[lsatenstein]

In my university classes, I knew more than one student that weaseled their way through classes without really understanding the material, so I know that those people are out there. A college/university education isn't a panacea; the student has to do work on their own to end up with any level of competency at graduation time.

In my case, I saw two benefits to a college education. First, it showed me what was important to study in my time. Second, it provided me the pass to get past the HR gatekeeper-goons at most employers. A degree is no replacement for having the drive to learn.

Want a degree from our Quebec Canada universities? It's easy! You just have to learn to work, stay focused, study to understand your subjects, learn to analyse, learn to write and spell and learn to do appropriate math. If your memory is superb, perhaps, on a slim chance, you could write your exams (sorry, no multiple choice questions). That's what I had to do, and what did it give me? A indepth knowledge of my profession, a scolarship to grad school, and a b+ average.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[khellendros1984]

Exactly, but only because you had the drive to study and complete your assignments based on understanding, rather than rote memorization. It's easy enough to recognize a pattern in the answers that a professor is looking for and answer as expected without really understanding *why* you're expected to answer that way. Getting through a university with something more valuable than a piece of paper is work.

On the other hand, if you haven't learned hard work and writing before university, then you're less likely to succeed during it. Or, you could be a self-driven student that would learn the material even if they weren't directed by a university curriculum.

Re:no practical knowledge in the industry at big u

[lsatenstein]

Exactly, but only because you had the drive to study and complete your assignments based on understanding, rather than rote memorization. It's easy enough to recognize a pattern in the answers that a professor is looking for and answer as expected without really understanding *why* you're expected to answer that way. Getting through a university with something more valuable than a piece of paper is work.

On the other hand, if you haven't learned hard work and writing before university, then you're less likely to succeed during it. Or, you could be a self-driven student that would learn the material even if they weren't directed by a university curriculum.

In my classes, there were many "late bloomers". These were young adults from poor families who left high school for the workforce, saved their pennies to return to university full time. They were obliged to do the first year as a evening university student, taking two winter courses, one summer courses, for 6 credits, and when completed, they could transfer to continue full time.
For the full-time student, some of his courses had to be attended in the evening, meaning that the quality of instruction was the same in the evening as what could be obtained during the day. I had to admire these individuals, and what they did for all of us was to instil in us, that desire to achieve.

Is that missing today? Sadly, my view is that with two working parents, that burning desire is now, a tepid flame. Parents are too tired to apply parental pressure on the student to be in the top ten.

Possible loophole:

[q4Fry]

Does this mean that there would be an incentive for a college to prevent the graduation of students who statistically less likely to be employed (as qualified by DeptEd) upon graduation?

Maybe we should take the chance that none of the for-profit schools' bean-counters will ever notice...