[www.washingtonpost.com]

Quote

Bachelor’s programs cost an average of 20 percent more [than public colleges], and associate’s programs an average of quadruple public school tuition. This isn’t too surprising when you look at how for-profit colleges are spending their money. The Harkin report found that 22.7 percent of revenue at for-profits goes to marketing and recruitment, that for-profits have an average profit margin of 19.7 percent, and pay an average of $7.3 million a year to their chief executives. That’s all money that drives up tuition without going to educational programming. Actual instruction made up a paltry 17.2 percent of expenses.

There was an excellent thread some time ago about the effect the 'new' for profit Universities have had on students, and how many of these scam artists push students into maxing out their student loans, knowing full well that the students may not get anything worthwhile out of the 'education'.

There's also a whole subset of 'vocational training' predatory 'schools' established specifically to suck money out of various governmental training programs for the unemployed.

Of course some of these programs ARE quite good, and most of the intructors are quite earnest and principled people. But the machinery behind the instructional face can be quite crooked.

YMMV, etc...

My kids go to local community colleges and then onward to state Universities. I was the product of a private University, but one with over a hundred years of existence and a stellar repution (at the time one of the top 10 engineering schools in the US).

The Frontline documentary on this subject is an eye opener.

[www.pbs.org]

Never figured out the distinction between profit and nonprofit institutions. Nonprofit simply means you spent all you made. Any organization can manage that. There is nothing sacred about non-profits.

>>Nonprofit simply means you spent all you made.

Not at all true. They are different legal entities. This impacts the structure and function of the institution.

Quote
mattkime
>>Nonprofit simply means you spent all you made.

Not at all true. They are different legal entities. This impacts the structure and function of the institution.

And purpose.

---

Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.

Quote
mattkime
>>Nonprofit simply means you spent all you made.

Not at all true. They are different legal entities. This impacts the structure and function of the institution.

Can you be more specific? My place of work is a nonprofit and there are a zillion places they can put their money away. I assure you they have surplus every year but they just don't call it profit.

Sadly, I think for-profit colleges are going to affect the non-profit colleges because for-profits can "buy" students right out from under a non-profit. It's all about the numbers.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

You must be trying to say something. "Buy" students? How?

Quote
Avenger
Can you be more specific? My place of work is a nonprofit and there are a zillion places they can put their money away.

none of those places are investor or shareholder pockets.

---

The article discusses "Buying Students". It's called recruiting, and providing unique services.. iPads, strippers, etc...

Quote
mattkime

Quote
Avenger
Can you be more specific? My place of work is a nonprofit and there are a zillion places they can put their money away.

none of those places are investor or shareholder pockets.

There you go with your vendetta. What is the difference? Students and parents aren't getting it back. In a true non-profit model they would. The money is stashed away and called endowment, emergency fund or whatever.

I think you've mistaken your vendetta for mine.

....but I knew that when i engaged in conversation. And still I opened my mouth.

Quote
Avenger

Quote
mattkime

Quote
Avenger
Can you be more specific? My place of work is a nonprofit and there are a zillion places they can put their money away.

none of those places are investor or shareholder pockets.

There you go with your vendetta. What is the difference? Students and parents aren't getting it back. In a true non-profit model they would. The money is stashed away and called endowment, emergency fund or whatever.

---

Well, since everyone insists on quoting Dakota I can see he is tragically confused as usual.

A non-profit is an organization which is non-profit-distributing, that is, not returning profits to their owners or directors. Any profit is channeled back into the institution. Yeah, endowments etc. Endowments create income for the College so it is not just being "stashed away" it is helping to sustain the organization. The Board of Directors and the Administration do not own shares in the institution and do not "profit" (aside from salaries for the Administration).

Profit is not the same thing as income.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

Quote
$tevie
Sadly, I think for-profit colleges are going to affect the non-profit colleges because for-profits can "buy" students right out from under a non-profit. It's all about the numbers.

There's some information in the article on a graph (gasp) that I think sheds an interesting light on this side discussion started from a non sequitur:




It differentiates between private colleges and non-profit colleges. In the text of the PDF this graph came from it explains that the term "private colleges" refers to non-profit private colleges. This is also from the PDF:

Quote

For-profit schools enroll far more high- dollar borrowers. Fifty-seven percent of Bachelor’s students who graduate from a for-profit college owe $30,000 or more. In contrast, 25 percent of those who earned degrees in the private, non-profit sector and 12 percent from the public sector borrowed at this level.

This is all pretty strong evidence that paying profits is costing students more than they would have to pay to go to a non-profit school and thus these things are evidence that the conclusion in the subject line of the OP is correct. There are also claims in the PDF that for-profit colleges also have lower graduation rates which, if true, makes them an even worse deal.

I work for a non-profit institution and am used to for-profits being vilified so it's interesting to have some data to back up the emotional reactions. We've had a for-profit school call students who've been accepted and offer them $5,000 off their retail price, so to speak, to come to that school. Like being at a yard sale or something.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2012 01:09PM by $tevie.

Quote
$tevie
Well, since everyone insists on quoting Dakota I can see he is tragically confused as usual.

A non-profit is an organization which is non-profit-distributing, that is, not returning profits to their owners or directors.

So if a company returns profits to the shareholders, who could be in the millions of ordinary people, and not to the CEO then they must be non-profit too.

They don't return profits to anybody. Are you proud of being an idiot?

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

You have no idea what you are talking about, and you are work at a college?

Quote
$tevie
I work for a non-profit institution and am used to for-profits being vilified so it's interesting to have some data to back up the emotional reactions. We've had a for-profit school call students who've been accepted and offer them $5,000 off their retail price, so to speak, to come to that school. Like being at a yard sale or something.

Is that really much different than a school offering a "scholarship" discount to a student?


BTW, the above is a question, not a challenge.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2012 05:01PM by Mac-A-Matic.

It is because we can't afford to slash someone's tuition at the last minute like that. Our scholarship packages take time to assemble and we can't just say, Oh, okay, we'll cut $6,000 off the price. We need the $6,000 or we wouldn't be asking for it.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

<<We need the $6,000 or we wouldn't be asking for it.>>

The student needs it more. What do you say to that?

$tevie-
Can you explain further because I've been under the impression that a university-sponsored scholarship is essentially absorbed by the institution, ostensibly covered under a school's endowment fund? Or is the school seeking actual funding from a separate source?

I don't know how to explain it right, I guess.

I am a student. I say, thank you but I have chosen to attend Artsy Fartsy U instead of Dollar Sign Institute. Whereupon Dollar Sign Institute says, what if we lob $5,000 off the tuition? So the student goes back to Artsy Fartsy U and says, Dollar Sign just slashed another $5,000 off my tuition. To which Artsy Fartsy has no comeback because they do not have the means to arbitrarily lower someone's tuition.

Scholarship packages are carefully worked out based on merit and need and the college's ability to cover the student's tuition via money assigned for that purpose. Also on how many students are coming who are paying full freight which helps grease the wheels, too. There isn't any cash lying around to cover such a spontaneous and costly sales technique.

Just suddenly slashing prices as if it was a President's Day Sale is not the same thing as a financial aid package.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

Quote
$tevie
I don't know how to explain it right, I guess.

I am a student. I say, thank you but I have chosen to attend Artsy Fartsy U instead of Dollar Sign Institute. Whereupon Dollar Sign Institute says, what if we lob $5,000 off the tuition? So the student goes back to Artsy Fartsy U and says, Dollar Sign just slashed another $5,000 off my tuition. To which Artsy Fartsy has no comeback because they do not have the means to arbitrarily lower someone's tuition.

Scholarship packages are carefully worked out based on merit and need and the college's ability to cover the student's tuition via money assigned for that purpose. Also on how many students are coming who are paying full freight which helps grease the wheels, too. There isn't any cash lying around to cover such a spontaneous and costly sales technique.

Just suddenly slashing prices as if it was a President's Day Sale is not the same thing as a financial aid package.

So if an academically ineligible student with superior or just above average athletic skills were to appear at your doorstep, seeking admission, what would do?

Quote
$tevie
I don't know how to explain it right, I guess.

I am a student. I say, thank you but I have chosen to attend Artsy Fartsy U instead of Dollar Sign Institute. Whereupon Dollar Sign Institute says, what if we lob $5,000 off the tuition? So the student goes back to Artsy Fartsy U and says, Dollar Sign just slashed another $5,000 off my tuition. To which Artsy Fartsy has no comeback because they do not have the means to arbitrarily lower someone's tuition.

Obviously there's some sort of confusion because my question was on how an institution (non-profit) handles covering the cost of the scholarship and not how a for-profit simply "slashes" prices. Though in both cases, the cost of the discount or scholarship would have to be covered somehow.

Quote
$tevie
Scholarship packages are carefully worked out based on merit and need and the college's ability to cover the student's tuition via money assigned for that purpose. Also on how many students are coming who are paying full freight which helps grease the wheels, too. There isn't any cash lying around to cover such a spontaneous and costly sales technique.

This is more along the lines of what I am asking. My understanding has been that most institutions (NP) operate via their endowment as the actual monies in the form of tuition is not enough to cover the costs of operating the institution. Which goes back to how scholarships are treated - is the cost of the university-sponsored scholarship just absorbed by the university? Or is that cost funded from some external source?

Our scholarships come from donors who specify the money go to scholarships and endowments set up for scholarships and of course some stuudents get scholarships from outside sources like state senatorial scholarships or local scholarship awards. And so on.

I can't figure out what you are driving at. We have no "Exxon scholarship" or "McDonalds scholarship" if that's where you are trying to take this.

EDIT: okay here goes:

Scenario: The admission process is finished all over the country. All the colleges and universities have admitted the students of their choice, and offered financial aid packages to the students who require them. It's all over. All that is left is for the students to choose from among the colleges which have accepted them. It's over and done with.

BUT suddenly, after a student HAS decided and informed the college of their choice that they have chosen THEM, this for-profit college calls (weeks after the entire process is done and laid to rest) and says, Don't go there, go here. Here's $5,000 out of the blue to sweeten the pot.

Does that explain it better?

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/31/2012 10:49AM by $tevie.

Quote
RgrF

Quote
$tevie
I don't know how to explain it right, I guess.

I am a student. I say, thank you but I have chosen to attend Artsy Fartsy U instead of Dollar Sign Institute. Whereupon Dollar Sign Institute says, what if we lob $5,000 off the tuition? So the student goes back to Artsy Fartsy U and says, Dollar Sign just slashed another $5,000 off my tuition. To which Artsy Fartsy has no comeback because they do not have the means to arbitrarily lower someone's tuition.

Scholarship packages are carefully worked out based on merit and need and the college's ability to cover the student's tuition via money assigned for that purpose. Also on how many students are coming who are paying full freight which helps grease the wheels, too. There isn't any cash lying around to cover such a spontaneous and costly sales technique.

Just suddenly slashing prices as if it was a President's Day Sale is not the same thing as a financial aid package.

So if an academically ineligible student with superior or just above average athletic skills were to appear at your doorstep, seeking admission, what would do?

That's why there is an application process and a financial aid application process. If they show up after the deadlines, we would tell them to apply for next year. That's an entirely different thing than seeking out eligible students who have already made their choice as to college and stealing that student out from under the college that the student has already agreed to attend.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

Quote
$tevie
Our scholarships come from donors who specify the money go to scholarships and endowments set up for scholarships and of course some stuudents get scholarships from outside sources like state senatorial scholarships or local scholarship awards. And so on.

I can't figure out what you are driving at. We have no "Exxon scholarship" or "McDonalds scholarship" if that's where you are trying to take this.

I thought I was explicit in stating "university-sponsored" scholarship rather than an external source, such as Exxon or McDonald's.

As I said in my first post, this was a question and not a challenge - since you presented yourself as being part of a university system and in the position to know these things better.

Under your situation, the scholarship is an actual fund of donations that's administered by the university. Is that fund depleted as scholarships are awarded?

Quote
$tevie
Scenario: The admission process is finished all over the country. All the colleges and universities have admitted the students of their choice, and offered financial aid packages to the students who require them. It's all over. All that is left is for the students to choose from among the colleges which have accepted them. It's over and done with.

BUT suddenly, after a student HAS decided and informed the college of their choice that they have chosen THEM, this for-profit college calls (weeks after the entire process is done and laid to rest) and says, Don't go there, go here. Here's $5,000 out of the blue to sweeten the pot.

Does that explain it better?

I still don't understand why you continue on a for-profit institution offering a discount when my question has always been on the topic of non-profit institutions.

We have a budget for each fiscal year and part of that budget is for financial aid. Yes, that yearly allotment can and is depleted. We have found work arounds in emergency situations such as 2008 when so many parents lost their shirts but it required raiding other parts of our budgets and was frankly painful.

Also, we are not going to start playing games like that. It is, as they say, a slippery slope and we can't start raiding other budget lines to play it.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

Quote
$tevie


BUT suddenly, after a student HAS decided and informed the college of their choice that they have chosen THEM, this for-profit college calls (weeks after the entire process is done and laid to rest) and says, Don't go there, go here. Here's $5,000 out of the blue to sweeten the pot.

Does that explain it better?

How do we know this sort of stuff happens. How do you know? Even if does happen, so what? Just pick someone else.

Quote
$tevie
We have a budget for each fiscal year and part of that budget is for financial aid. Yes, that yearly allotment can and is depleted. We have found work arounds in emergency situations such as 2008 when so many parents lost their shirts but it required raiding other parts of our budgets and was frankly painful.

Also, we are not going to start playing games like that. It is, as they say, a slippery slope and we can't start raiding other budget lines to play it.

Okay, understood.

And it's always a shame that we can't play with our budgets like our politicians do...

Yes, it would be much easier if we were able to run our finances the way they do...

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

Mikulski, Harkin, Merkley Introduce Legislation to Stop Colleges from Peddling Worthless Degrees

Quote

Under a loophole in federal financial aid laws, schools that are institutionally accredited may offer individual programs that lack state licensing or programmatic accreditation, even when they are required in order for their graduates to enter the occupation they were prepared for. Students enter these programs believing that they are preparing for a job in that field, only to discover after graduating, often with heavy debt loads, that they are not qualified to work in that field or take an occupational exam. The Protecting Students from Worthless Degrees Act would require programs offered by institutions to meet any state licensure requirements and programmatic accreditation that is necessary for entering an occupation in order to receive taxpayer-funded tuition such as Pell Grants, Stafford Loans, G.I. Bill benefits, or Department of Defense Tuition Assistance funds.

[www.mikulski.senate.gov]

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

Quote
$tevie
Mikulski, Harkin, Merkley Introduce Legislation to Stop Colleges from Peddling Worthless Degrees

Quote

Under a loophole in federal financial aid laws, schools that are institutionally accredited may offer individual programs that lack state licensing or programmatic accreditation, even when they are required in order for their graduates to enter the occupation they were prepared for. Students enter these programs believing that they are preparing for a job in that field, only to discover after graduating, often with heavy debt loads, that they are not qualified to work in that field or take an occupational exam. The Protecting Students from Worthless Degrees Act would require programs offered by institutions to meet any state licensure requirements and programmatic accreditation that is necessary for entering an occupation in order to receive taxpayer-funded tuition such as Pell Grants, Stafford Loans, G.I. Bill benefits, or Department of Defense Tuition Assistance funds.

[www.mikulski.senate.gov]

Now that makes sense.
(Mikulski is the best. Love her.)