Order of Phoenix

UoP has only itself to blame for this: It agreed to a settlement that clearly left the door open for this FCA suit to go on.

Thus, lawyers serve their own best interests: They win even when they lose!

Glen McGhee, FHEAP, at 8:20 am EDT on August 21, 2007

Stupid is as stupid does

Gene, surely you jest?

Why not just bring back the “correspondance schools” of the early 1900s? Get the students in, get their tuition money, and forget ‘em.

Yeah, proprietary schools — good money-makers! Don’t even have to waste money printing diplomas because the “students” were never ready for college and we didn’t invest money in helping them learn.

Good capitalistic plan. Send me $10,000 and I’ll set up a college web site. When the profits start rolling in, I’ll send all the partners your cut (after the politicians and lawyers get their cuts).

Dr. F. Gump, at 9:25 am EDT on August 21, 2007

for profit operations

I don’t see for profit schools as intrinsically problematic, and there are plenty of real problems in non-profit institutions, but the University of Phoenix isn’t a great example. My sister, who is an elementary school teacher, took some continuing education classes through University of Phoenix and was not impressed.

I applied to teach there at one point, and the more that I saw of their operations, the more it smelled like something two steps up from a diploma mill. All the motions were correct, but I did not come away with the impression that education was the primary goal—profit was.

The other problem with the University of Phoenix is that it creates competitive pressures that encourage non-profit schools that are in the same market segment to start engaging in the same tactics of reducing the amount of work that students have to to do to complete a degree.

Let’s be real here: some non-profit universities, even ones with decent reputations, are operating programs aimed at working adults that are profit centers—and without going into any more detail, let’s just say that the net effect is that competition from U. of P. encourages a race to the bottom of academic standards.

One institution competing in that market segment didn’t want me back because in a class of seven students, there were four As and three Bs—and the concern was that those Bs might discourage students from continuing in the program, when they could go to the University of Phoenix.

Clayton E. Cramer, at 11:40 am EDT on August 21, 2007

What minimum standards?

Which brings us back to the fact that there are no minimum standards in US higher education.

NYTimes brought this up regarding UoP.

Part of the problem is equating distance learning modes with old fashioned seat-time metrics. Distance ed providers use study-group activities as a surrogate for in-class instruction, about 50% of the time.

I have no idea what the studies say about this practice, but this kind of thing is what gives the national accrediting agencies a bad name with those regionally accredited.

An interesting study would compare the distance ed offered by regionally accredited, brick-and-mortar schools, versus those web-based and nationally accredited.

Org theory tells us that even the traditionals would cave to the lower standard (due to mimetic isomorphism). I even heard a prof say his new American History web-course wasn’t college level. Well, what do you expect?

Where are the minimum standards?

Glen S. McGhee, FHEAP, at 12:25 pm EDT on August 21, 2007

Heeere we go againnn...

The proprietary vs traditional education debate dribbles on...

Proprietary schools typically cater to students who are not as strong academically as those at Ivy League and big state universities. Let’s call it McEducation. Like the fast food chain that this epithet is based on, McEducation is more about quantity than ambiance.

However, the regional accrediting bodies that oversee proprietary schools seem to think that these schools are doing a good job. Otherwise, the accrediting bodies would withdraw their accreditation.

Accrediting bodies are made up of representatives of competing institutions. It is a peer review process. When representatives of traditional schools make on-site accreditation visits to proprietary schools, they often are loaded for bear. Proprietary schools do not get a free pass.

Dig through the archives of Inside Higher Ed, and you will find stories going back several years about scandals at ITT, AIU, and others. This is evidence that the system works. If it did not, then these schools would not have gotten in trouble.

Standards are set. Standards are met. When the standards are not met, the axe falls.

When the axe falls, profits fall, and heads roll. That is the nature of a profit-making enterprise.

Getting back to the McEducation analogy, not every restaurant is going to be Tavern On The Green; not every university is going to be Harvard. Fast food chains and proprietary universities serve very large constituencies that cannot afford Tavern On The Green or Harvard. Local health inspectors and regional accrediting bodies ensure that minimum standards are met, and the system works.

We see a lot of criticism for University of Phoenix, AIU, and others for their sleazy admissions practices, and yet we don’t see the same vitriol aimed at Ivy League schools that admit the offspring of the rich and powerful, even though they are academically and intellectually weak.

University of Phoenix is paying a price for its acts. This is not an indictment against proprietary education. This is an indictment against managers who violated their fiduciary duty to their shareholders. If only the Ivy League and big state universities were scrutinized as closely!

Charles Evans, Executive Director at Free Curricula Center, at 12:25 pm EDT on August 21, 2007

I am a current and long time employee of UOP, both as an administrator and as an instructor. And of course, I can see the eye’s rolling out there, with you thinking about my obvious bias. But there is a huge focus on rigor here. The Academic Affairs department places a very strong emphasis on grade point average in all courses. Any instructor who, somehow, manages to give every student in a course an “A", is strongly counseled by his/her chair in the concept and value of academic rigor. They are often required to take and pass grading workshops. Those who cannot learn the principles of accurate and rigorous grading, will not be offered courses. And a strong focus on retention of students, only makes fiscal sense, for any university. In addition to offering tutoring, writing and math workshops to assist students we work to create relationships with students. Name any other large institution in which academic and finance counselors call every one of their students betwween courses to touch base and help keep them on track. I know first hand that we serve a different population of students, but the diploma mill doesn’t hold water. I did not get my Master’s degree from this University, but from a well respected non-profit. That was a walk in the park, compared to the courses in our programs.

Inez Matric, at 1:25 pm EDT on August 22, 2007

the issue is whether or not UoP 1. broke the law 2. new about breaking the law i briefly worked for this “university” within the past couple of years and they did in fact have enrollment counselors on commission. if they want to be able to use federal financial aid then they have to follow the rules. UoP simply is/has not. they are guilty as charged

jeremy, at 1:35 pm EDT on August 24, 2007