Tennessean mini-series on for-profit colleges
If you recall, last month I touched on increased scrutiny of for-profit colleges in Tennessee.
Today, The Tennessean (Nashville, TN) published two articles about for-profit schools operating in the Volunteer State. The first report, “State scrutinizes for-profit colleges”, discusses the current climate there, while also including various enrollment figures. A list of for-profit school complaints is also available in PDF format. I found one complaint against University of Phoenix Online catching my attention.
Student felt mislead by online counselors. She received a teacher’s certificate that is not recognized by the public school system in the county that she lives in; therefore, her degree is useless. Claims the online counselor told her that the certificate would be viable.
It will be interesting to see the resolution for this complaint. Judging from other complaints in the document, I’m happy about at least some sort of existing process for protecting students.
A second report, “For-profits’ tuitions often vary widely”, compares select for-profit and not-for-profit total program tuition. Another PDF (“Paying to get in“) in the right column goes a bit further. But first, check out this comparison.
…According to the Tennessee Higher Education Commission, a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice at ITT Technical Institute costs about $72,900.
That same degree costs roughly half — $36,890 — at University of Phoenix. And at Middle Tennessee State University, the same degree would cost about $21,000 for in-state students….
Unless a bachelor’s degree comes from an Ivy League institution or other elite school, can one truly justify spending almost $73,000 for it? This observation concerning unreasonable tuition costs should not only be placed on face-to-face learning environments; tuition costs for online programs are usually comparable, if not more expensive, at for-profit colleges.
In my opinion, two principle factors contribute to the success enjoyed by the for-profit education industry. Firstly, in regards to traditional face-to-face learning, for-profits fill a niche that, until recently, many not-for-profit 4-year colleges have ignored: accessibility. This factor receives mention in the second Tennessean report. For example, when questioned about the reason for choosing University of Phoenix over the less-expensive Tennessee Technological University, a student replies that she “can’t quit work — that would be the only way I could go to Tech”.
Secondly, I attribute successful information warfare campaigns (okay, marketing to you business people), combined with lower admission standards and aggressive sales tactics, as significantly contributing to for-profit growth. The media — television, radio, WWW — is inundated with for-profit school advertising. For an exceptional analysis on internet-related brand protection methods utilized by the University of Phoenix, please see this masterfully written blog post by SEM Report Card.
Free markets determine many things in our great country. The for-profit vs. non-profit argument is no exception. For-profit schools have indeed exploited a niche left relatively vacant by not-for-profit institutions. From the online learning perspective, I’m seeing increased emphasis given to distance learning media by traditional schools. But considering that not-for-profit institutions spend much less on advertising and recruiting than their for-profit counterparts, this information war still has a long way to go. I’m not saying traditional, not-for-profit colleges should spend more on advertising. Instead, many of these schools could do a better job at making their virtual opportunities known.
