Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 304 posts

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#291

Post by ben_jones »

ramblenode wrote: post #249

> Students now enrolled at the company's technical schools will be able to cancel any federal student debt they incurred for their education if they decide against transferring their credits elsewhere... Taxpayers will record a loss on those debt cancellations. This seems very unfair to taxpayers, who are essentially forced creditors. If the college reneges on its contract with students, then the students should seek…

If you wanted to you could also point out that we're forced creditors on the trillion dollar F-35 program... doesn't get us very far.

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#292

Post by enraged_camel »

dntrkv wrote: post #264
ohyes wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The end result you describe isn't much different than a number of 4 year undergraduate degrees, PhDs or masters programs (all at "good" colleges). The best advice I ever received was to not pursue a Ph.D. in philosophy. It's wrong to think that departments at not-for-profit schools don't have a marketing incentive that is (at best) indifferent to the best interests of the student.

A couple differences between the two: a. A diploma from a public university carries a certain level of prestige, unlike a for-profit college diploma, which is more of a red flag when looking through resumes. b. The cost of that diploma will be, on average, much higher from a for profit college. This issue gets compounded by the fact that people applying to these for-profit colleges are, on average, of lower income br…

A third difference is that credits you earn from an accredited university are transferable, whereas those you earn from many of these degree mills aren't.

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#293

Post by enraged_camel »

tadfisher wrote: post #222
cstejerean wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is, why should tax payers subsidize liberal art programs with no job prospects? Giving student loans in exchange for getting an education that will increase their earning power makes sense. Not only will the loan be paid back, but the increased earning power will also increase the tax base. But someone graduating with $200k in student loans with a degree that will barely qualify them for a $35k per year…

Taxpayers do this already: it's called grade school and high school. The public has an interest in an educated populace. I'm not seeing any direct correlation between the cost of an education program and the earning power of graduates from the program, so in the absence of that evidence, I couldn't say with any confidence that tying subsidies to earning power will do much at all to bring program costs down. If I were…

>>Taxpayers do this already: it's called grade school and high school. The public has an interest in an educated populace.

If society has an interest in an educated populace, then we should go ahead and make college free for everyone by funding it directly with taxpayer money, versus indirectly with student loans.

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#294

Post by lern_too_spel »

tadfisher wrote: post #222
cstejerean wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is, why should tax payers subsidize liberal art programs with no job prospects? Giving student loans in exchange for getting an education that will increase their earning power makes sense. Not only will the loan be paid back, but the increased earning power will also increase the tax base. But someone graduating with $200k in student loans with a degree that will barely qualify them for a $35k per year…

Taxpayers do this already: it's called grade school and high school. The public has an interest in an educated populace. I'm not seeing any direct correlation between the cost of an education program and the earning power of graduates from the program, so in the absence of that evidence, I couldn't say with any confidence that tying subsidies to earning power will do much at all to bring program costs down. If I were…

Where do you draw the line? Would you have the public subsidize an education in tarot reading? In duck duck goose? These are fine amusing hobbies, just as literature is a fine diversion, but the economic prospects of a skilled duck duck goose player are pretty grim, just as the economic prospects of a literature buff have become. Let people who want to explore their hobbies do so on their own dime without society suggesting to them that it's reasonable to take out a $100k loan to do so. Then they won't be wondering why they are unemployed and $100k in debt when they finish their studies.

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#295

Post by paulddraper »

This is an instructive lesson.

"Free education" they say. "It will solve problems" they say. "Education will be better" they say.

No, it won't. Free education -- or subsidized loans -- puts a disconnect between education and its cost.

If the person paying is not the person deciding, a poor decision will be made. It's just like how HSAs prompt people to think about what they're spending their money on.

ITT would not exist but for government spending. Sure, some will beat the dead horse of more regulation. But the real answer is STOP SUBSIDIZING. Stop subsidizing education, stop subsidizing mortgages, stop subsidizing GM, stop blowing decisions sideways by removing the universal language of cost from the discussion.

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#296

Post by lexhaynes »

tadfisher wrote: post #208
bradleyjg wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While there may well be more bad (by whatever metric) for-profit colleges there are also bad non-profit colleges. And non-profit itself is a bit of misnomer. It is true that registered non-profits can't pay dividends to their shareholders, but they can and sometimes do pay exorbitant salaries to those that have control over them. As the gainful employment rule[1] currently stands it exempts degree programs from publi…

Be careful what you wish for. This would basically kill liberal arts programs and the idea of a well-rounded post-secondary education. The incentive would be to transform universities into job-training programs. I know there is an ongoing debate about the worth of a liberal arts education in the modern economy, but there's something to be said about the traditional notion of education for education's sake, rather tha…

I completely believe in the value of education for its own sake, but why does a liberal arts education need to be 4 years long? Couldn't we have a system where a student spends one intensive year focusing on liberal arts, and the rest of the time at university can be devoted to job training?

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#297

Post by peter303 »

Will coding academies go down the same route as for profit colleges? Right now they are the darling of politicians who think they could solve the country's unemployment and tech shortage problems. But once your put Wall Street in charge and scale them up handle large numbers of students, I wonder if they will become the next ITT.

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#298

Post by themartorana »

paulddraper wrote: post #295

This is an instructive lesson. "Free education" they say. "It will solve problems" they say. "Education will be better" they say. No, it won't. Free education -- or subsidized loans -- puts a disconnect between education and its cost. If the person paying is not the person deciding, a poor decision will be made. It's just like how HSAs prompt people to think about what they're spending their money on. ITT would not e…

Stop subsidizing education? Do you propose this for just higher education? Or is it all education you'd like taxpayers to stop paying for?

Unsubsidized education either a) means more private loans somehow now exempt from bankruptcy proceedings or b) education is now only for those that can afford it.

I am the complete and total opposite of your position. How it is that we provide 12-14 years of education for free, but then burden the economy with an insane amount of unsecured debt for the last four is insanity. It places our economy at risk, it severely stunts upward mobility, it burdens our youngest minds with mortgage-sized debts, and it sinks people into a lifetime of debt.

If college is, in general, required to actively participate in our society, it should be paid for the same as (Pre)K-12.

Edit: I'd like to say that I agree that subsidizing activity as a direct pass through of money from government to for-profit enterprise is a bad idea. Don't subsidize for-profit colleges. But they were never needed to begin with.

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#299

Post by paulddraper »

themartorana wrote: post #298
paulddraper wrote: post #295

This is an instructive lesson. "Free education" they say. "It will solve problems" they say. "Education will be better" they say. No, it won't. Free education -- or subsidized loans -- puts a disconnect between education and its cost. If the person paying is not the person deciding, a poor decision will be made. It's just like how HSAs prompt people to think about what they're spending their money on. ITT would not e…

Stop subsidizing education? Do you propose this for just higher education? Or is it all education you'd like taxpayers to stop paying for? Unsubsidized education either a) means more private loans somehow now exempt from bankruptcy proceedings or b) education is now only for those that can afford it. I am the complete and total opposite of your position. How it is that we provide 12-14 years of education for free, bu…

The average college grad makes something like a million dollars more over his lifetime than a non-college grad. If that last 4 years cost the most, I can see why.

Anyway, option B. Having a restaurant is only for those who can afford it. Owning a house is only for those who can afford it. Starting a start-up is only for those who can afford it.

Fortunately, we have a system that allows people to pay each of those costs over a period of time (in some cases, even over a lifetime, as you pointed out).

Maybe your restaurant goes under, or your house goes underwater, or your skills aren't valuable, or (however unlikely) your start-up fails. I don't know what to tell you. Reality's a bitch. Hopefully your research and efforts are enough for you to make the right decisions.

It's quite possible for a $20k education to produce a $1 million payoff. In that case, anyone can afford it. It's also possible for a $150k education to produce a $90k payoff. In that case, few can afford it

I'm not going to tell you what to do, pay for it, or take your earnings. You alone can make those decisions.

Re: ITT Technical Institutes Shuts Down

#300

Post by coroutines »

dntrkv wrote: post #130
donatj wrote: post #54

I went to a similar for-profit school in Minnesota who also similarly shut down last year. I still feel like they get a bad rap. Was it overpriced? Probably. Did I learn a ton and have small class sizes. Absolutely. The instructors had all previously worked in the industry, and knew their topics very well. On top of all that, after graduation their persistent pestering of "how many places did you apply to this week?"…

Just because you had a great experience does not negate the fact that for-profit college students, statistically, fare much worse. A common pattern I have seen: Person does terrible in high school, doesn't get into a good college because they don't have the drive or commitment to get good grades. They go to community college, and surprise, they again get terrible grades and stop going. After a while they want to go b…

There's a middle ground between your statement and the experience the fellow above had. I'd prefer a good community college with a career counselor that pushes you to make the necessary steps toward employment after graduation.
Post reply on HN