ITT is no longer allowed to enroll students who rely on federal loans and grants

Post by Animats » Fri, Aug 26, 2016, 7:17 AM UTC

coredog64 wrote: post #72

nickff wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is informational asymmetry in every transaction (as well as in non-profit schools); this is a red herring (unless you can show that it is causing a specific, large, unsolved problem). The current administration has repeatedly demonstrated hostility towards for-profit schools, and has chosen to use discretionary enforcement of rules against them rather than enforcing standards universally, because they know that…

No doubt ITT's problem is that Kaplan University had already hired Anita Dunn and there wasn't another White House staffer ready to transition to the private sector.

Post by Broken_Hippo » Fri, Aug 26, 2016, 8:31 AM UTC

thaumasiotes wrote: post #37

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They cannot see if the student is getting financial assistance in the way of food stamps, for example, but the student loan and grant program isn't like that. The federal money goes to the school first, and then anything above and beyond that will be deposited in the student's account. Which means students at this school now can either pay cash or get unsubsidized, non-garunteed funding through the private market, pr…

This is directly contradicted by https://www.justice.gov/crt/title-vi-legal-manual#Direct : > Federal financial assistance may be received directly or indirectly.(11) For example, colleges indirectly receive Federal financial assistance when they accept students who pay, in part, with Federal financial aid directly distributed to the students. Grove City College v. Bell, 465 U.S. 555, 564 (1984) Here's a summary from…

Post by wanderingjew » Fri, Aug 26, 2016, 10:32 AM UTC

copperx wrote: post #97

merpnderp wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that same vein why do public schools get to saddle kids with an average of $30k in debt and leave them with the prospect of $8/hour jobs as many degrees do? Where's the outrage over public schools who do the exact same thing?

A school's main objective is not to make you employable.

Post by crb002 » Fri, Aug 26, 2016, 11:41 AM UTC

Post by munchbunny » Fri, Aug 26, 2016, 11:48 AM UTC

merpnderp wrote: post #88

nradov wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In principle there's nothing wrong with for-profit schools which train people on specific job skills or certification programs. There are some valuable skills that non-profit community colleges can't practically teach. But still the federal government should only support financial aid for such schools if they demonstrate a high rate of job placement for students who complete the program.

In that same vein why do public schools get to saddle kids with an average of $30k in debt and leave them with the prospect of $8/hour jobs as many degrees do? Where's the outrage over public schools who do the exact same thing?