Accreditor ACCSC Again Grants Maximum Renewal To Troubled For-Profit Colleges (David Halperin)

College accreditor ACCSC has renewed approval of four for-profit colleges owned by California-based International Education Corp. (IEC), a company that was forced to shut down many of its campuses in the past year after a U.S. Department of Education investigation revealed the schools were rigging student entrance exams and engaging in other fraudulent conduct.

By memo dated November 15, ACCSC noticed the public that it had renewed accreditation of four IEC-owned schools for five years, which is the maximum period of renewal that ACCSC grants to colleges. Three of the schools — in Gardena, Riverside, and Sacramento, California — are branded as UEI College, while the fourth, called United Education Institute, is in Las Vegas.

Abuses at IEC schools

In February, the Department of Education terminated financial aid eligibility to another IEC-owned chain called Florida Career College, and the school closed. As part of the resolution of that matter, the CEO of IEC, Fardad Fateri, stepped down. The Department acted because it found, as described in a detailed 38-page letter sent to FCC in April 2023, blatant cheating at FCC on “ability-to-benefit” entrance exams for students without a high school diploma.

Republic Report, relying on interviews with numerous FCC staff, had first exposed that long-running rampant misconduct, along with other blatant recruiting and financial abuses, at FCC. FCC’s misbehavior lured numerous students — veterans, single parents, immigrants, and other struggling Americans — into low-quality school programs that left them deep in debt and without the career advancement they sought.

The Department’s February settlement agreement with IEC indicated that the Department had an open investigation of potential violations at UEI similar to those found at FCC. The settlement barred UEI from administering ATB tests going forward. As part of the settlement, the Department agreed to end its investigation of UEI, if UEI complied with the settlement agreement. That investigation of UEI is apparently now over.

However, a September 2023 letter from ACCSC to IEC revealed that the company was also under investigation by California’s attorney general. It’s unclear whether that investigation remains open.

ACCSC was not the accreditor of Florida Career College, but it does accredit some of the UEI campuses. Soon after the Department announced in April 2023 that it was moving to cut off federal student aid to FCC, ACCSC placed UEI College and International Education Corp. on “System-Wide Warning” status, citing the Department’s findings that senior IEC leaders knew of and encouraged the cheating, and also citing IEC’s alleged failure to inform ACCSC of the Department’s investigation in a timely manner. ACCSC also noted that IEC had voluntarily halted ability-to-benefit testing and enrollment at UEI; the accreditor’s May 2023 order included a requirement that such testing and enrollment be suspended — suggesting already that there might be questions about ATB testing at UEI.

Yet now ACCSC has renewed accreditation for IEC/UEI schools for the maximum period, the same renewal that it would grant to the best-behaving schools. The renewals are effective back to dates in 2020 and 2022, reflecting in part that ACCSC delayed decisions on renewal while the schools were being evaluated, so the schools must seek renewal again soon. But it’s fair to ask whether the full five-year renewals were appropriate, or whether, instead, ACCSC continues to tolerate college abuses, to the detriment of both students and of the U.S. taxpayers who support the hundreds of millions in federal financial aid that have flowed to ACCSC schools.

ACCSC executive director Michale McComis did not respond to a request for comment regarding the renewal for the IEC schools.

Abuses at other ACCSC-accredited schools

The question of ACCSC’s tolerance for predatory college abuses is again squarely presented as ACCSC faces its own next review: its application to be renewed in 2026 by the Department of Education as a recognized accreditor, a status that allows schools it accredits to be eligible for federal student grants and loans. The maximum renewal period for this gatekeeper status is also five years. That review process is already underway at the Department.

The last time ACCSC was up for renewal, in 2021, the Department, citing failures by ACCSC in curbing long-running abuses at another awful predatory college operation, the Center for Excellence in Higher Education (owner of now-shuttered Independence University), delayed renewal of recognition, required ACCSC to explain its conduct, and ultimately extended ACCSC f0r three years instead of five — although the way the process went forward, the practical effect, disappointingly, was a five year renewal.

Data shows many ACCSC schools have left students worse off than when they started.

Since ACCSC’s last review, the accreditor has engaged in other troubling behavior.

Most notably, as Republic Report first reported, in July 2023, ACCSC had watched while Atlantis University, a Miami-based for-profit school, acted in blatant violation of an ACCSC rule governing the use of “branch campuses” tied to a school’s central campus. Atlantis’s executive director was, at the time, the chair of ACCSC.

The Atlantis branch campus, called Florida Palms University, shut down soon after our report. ACCSC then put Atlantis on warning status, via a letter that, as we noted at the time, was heavily redacted in the version released to the public. Whatever problems the many blacked-out passages of the October 2023 letter concealed stood in sharp contrast to ACCSC’s unconditional five-year renewal of Atlantis in December 2022. ACCSC removed Atlantis from warning status by February 2024.

This year, after Republic Report had repeatedly been able to learn valuable information about the bad behavior of some ACCSC-accredited schools through the public release of detailed letters from the accreditor to schools like UEI and Atlantis — at least the unredacted portions — ACCSC moved away from transparency and accountability. It started releasing, instead of the actual letters to schools, vague summaries that keep the public in the dark about what is actually happening.

ACCSC is also the accreditor of troubled Connecticut-based for-profit Paier College, which faces possible closure after losing access to federal student aid and having been sued for deceptive practices by the state’s attorney general. ACCSC placed Paier on warning status in June, citing low graduation rates and weak validation of faculty credentials. But that action by ACCSC came six months after the school, facing scrutiny from the U.S. Department of Education, voluntarily withdrew from eligibility for federal student grants and loans.

Another ACCSC school, Career College of Northern Nevada (CCNN), abruptly closed in February, replacing its website with a closure notice and literally locking students out of the building.

In June 2023, yet another ACCSC-accredited school, Hussian College, suddenly shut down. In June 2022, ACCSC had put Hussian on system-wide warning, citing concerns about student achievement at the schools. But ACCSC removed the warning and renewed Hussian’s accreditation in December 2022.

ACCSC also accredits Florida’s for-profit Southeastern College. There is much evidence suggesting that that school, owned by ultra-rich Floridians Arthur and Belinda Keiser, effectively receives improper subsidies from Keiser University, a non-profit college controlled by the Keisers.

ACCSC’s renewal application and the new Trump administration

Members of the public have until December 6 to submit written comments to the Department of Education regarding ACCSC’s bid for renewal.

The Biden administration, and U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona, to their credit, took much more seriously the Department’s obligation to review accreditors for their vigilance in guarding against predatory college abuses than the first Trump administration and Secretary Betsy DeVos did. If the second Trump administration, and new education secretary pick Linda McMahon, truly want to help students, and truly want to implement the incoming administration’s professed commitment to rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse in federal government programs, then it should continue the Biden team’s work of holding predatory colleges accountable — and also holding accountable the accreditors that allow such abuses to persist.

[Editor's note: This article originally appeared on Republic Report.] 

The Roaring 2020's: For-Profit Education and Incarceration Profit from Trump Win

American investors are betting heavily on for-profit online education and mass incarceration. Shares of LRN (Stride), a company that operates cyber charter schools, have increased in value by about 60 percent over the last 30 days, reaching an all-time high today.  Stride has a number of institutional investors, including state employee and teacher retirement funds.  

Shares of GEO Group (GEO), an owner and operator of private prisons, have increased more than 90 percent over the last month. It also has a large number of big investors, including BlackRock, Vanguard, and Goldman Sachs.  

Seeking Whistleblowers in Higher Education

The Higher Education Inquirer is seeking whistleblowers who can tell us what is happening in higher education as the Trump Administration takes control over the federal government. The information needs to be reliable and credible. Leads are fine, but verifiable documents are better. 

We are particularly interested in obtaining information related to the US Department of Education, Department of Homeland Security,  Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Defense, Department of Labor, the Federal Trade Commission, and other agencies related to higher education and employment. 

We are also interested in those involved in higher education administration and finance, particularly at elite universities and state flagship universities. With a few exceptions, we expect university presidents at elite universities to stay quiet, clamp down further on dissent and fall in line with any new policies, as the threat to tax them at higher rates becomes a concern. 

In the past we have relied heavily on Freedom of Information Act requests, which often take months, and multiple efforts, to obtain important data. Sometimes the information is delayed for years or never comes. And right now, we can't afford to wait.  

Since 2016, HEI has recruited a number of courageous people for inside information about for-profit colleges.  This has included informants from the University of Phoenix, Ashford University (aka University of Arizona Global), and Kaplan University (aka Purdue University Global) and the lead generators they schools have hired. 

We have also communicated with people associated with online program managers, such as 2U and Academic Partnerships.  

All of this information has been helpful in exposing the back rooms of the higher education business. 

Now, more than ever, we need information that folks won't find anytime soon in other news outlets.  News that workers, consumers, and their families can use to make better decisions about their life choices. 

What a Second Trump Administration May Mean for Higher Education (Robert Kelchen)

For the last two presidential transitions, I have written pieces about what the new president (Trump in 2016 and Biden in 2020) may mean for higher education. My expectations back in 2016 were the following:

• He would not repeal the Department of Education. (He never seriously tried.)
• Tuition-free public college was dead. (True at the federal level, but state-level programs grew following Tennessee’s lead.)
• He talked about income-driven repayment changes and going back to having private banks guarantee loans. (Neither happened, although he did pause payments during the pandemic.)
• There would be fewer regulations and an accountability reprieve for the for-profit college sector. (True.)

After four years of President Trump in power, the higher education community has a better sense of what is coming than we did back in 2016. Here are some of the key things that I am watching over the next several months and years.

(1) The subtitle for my piece on the incoming Biden administration was, “If the Democrat wins, he will have to govern by executive order, much as his predecessor did.” That is not going to be as easy this time around. One of conservatives' biggest Supreme Court wins recently was the overturning of the Chevron precedent that will result in less authority for federal agencies to enact regulations. For at least the next four years, this is going to bite the Trump administration right in the behind. Unless…

(2) Political appointees try acting through issuing directives that are implemented before courts can step in, hoping that they will be unwilling to unwind something that is already being done. It hearkens back to the alleged quote from Andrew Jackson: The Chief Justice “has made his decision; now let him enforce it.” A frequent refrain among progressives over the last few years has been that the Biden administration should immediately cancel student debt, making it difficult for the debt to be reinstated later upon court order. It would not be surprising to see Trump appointees trying to score a policy win (or at least some political points with their base) in that manner. Two likely areas are around federal financial aid to so-called “woke” colleges and international student visas.

(3) While Republicans retook the Senate with at least three votes to spare, House control is still too early to tell as of this writing and is likely to be razor-thin. House Republicans had more than a few challenges in the current Congress with a slim majority, and it is going to be difficult to pass a lot of legislation when hardliners and moderates within the GOP disagree on so many things. Conservatives detest omnibus budget bills and have been pushing for 12 separate budget bills for years. But the result is usually one large bill passed in mid-December, which creates incentives for compromise. Trump has not been particularly concerned about deficits, so conservatives are unlikely to get major budget cuts.

(4) The Higher Education Act was last reauthorized in 2008. I still might retire before it happens again, and I don’t plan on going anywhere for a while. While the Department of Education is not going away anytime soon, there are enough Republicans who would rather throw out the entire department than make substantive reforms. Democrats likely prefer the status quo to any new major legislation, so we can keep waiting on reauthorization for a long time. This does not mean that some policy changes cannot happen; the major changes to the FAFSA last year came through an omnibus budget bill in 2020. But any changes will be piecemeal in the grand scheme of things.

(5) President Trump and Congressional leaders will use the bully pulpit to go after selective colleges and their leaders. Last year's House hearings were very effective for Republicans, as they led to several presidents resigning. If something works in Washington, expect to see it again—especially as both Trump and Vance are products of those institutions. Community colleges and regionally-focused public and private institutions are likely to fly under the radar, as going after them will not generate media attention. But I would not want to be a president of a blue-state flagship university or an elite private college right now, and any leader who is not a white man is likely to face additional scrutiny if last year’s hearings were a guide.

(6) Keep a close eye on who ends up at the Department of Education. Most of the commentary out there about potential Cabinet secretaries barely even mentions ED, but he still needs to identify someone to run the agency on an acting basis. Betsy DeVos is off the table for a second term because she resigned in the aftermath of January 6, and this is a job that many conservatives do not aspire to reach. A name that I am watching is Oklahoma’s state superintendent of education, Ryan Walters, as he tried to get Trump-branded Bibles into public school classrooms and supports the elimination of the Department of Education. Will K-12 or higher education be the focus? I have long contended that higher ed is the area of greatest importance for a Secretary of Education, but a focus on social issues may change that.

Higher education was in for a challenging period regardless of who was elected, thanks to growing skepticism over the value of a college education, increasing political polarization by educational attainment, and the state of federal student loans. This week’s election just magnified all of those concerns. Buckle up, folks…it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

[Editor's note: This article first appeared at the Kelchen on Education blog.] 

Questioning the Higher Education Establishment

"So that's how it is," sighed Yakov. "Behind the world lies another world." Bernard Malamud

The Higher Education Inquirer has published a number of articles about how US higher education works and the institutions, organizations, and individuals it serves. 

We have written about US higher education in a number of ways, discussing the history, economics, and underlying ideologies (e.g. neoliberalism, white supremacy) and theories making it what it is--an industry that reinforces a larger (and environmentally unsustainable) economic system and an industry that produces too many unneeded credentials--and soul crushing student loan debt. 

We have listed the myths that US higher education perpetuates and the methods it uses to disseminate them. We have examined a number of higher education institutions and their categories (including university hospitals, state universities, private colleges, community colleges, and online robocolleges). We have investigated several businesses associated with higher education, some nefarious, many profit driven, and a few (like TuitionFit and College Viability App) driven by integrity and values. And we have followed the struggle of labor and consumers. HEI has even created an outline for a People's History of US Higher Education.

But we haven't examined higher education as part of the establishment. Like the establishment that students of the 1960s talked about as something not to trust. The trustees, endowment managers, trustees, foundation presidents, accreditors, bankers, bond raters, CEOs and CFOs who make the decisions that affect how higher ed operates and who at the same time work to make consumers, workers, and activists invisible. 

To say we cannot trust US higher education administrators and business leaders may sound passe, or something that only extremists of the Left or Right might say, but it isn't, and more folks are seeing that. 

Examining US higher education needs to be assessed more deeply (like Craig Steven Wilder, Davarian Baldwin, and Gary Roth have done) and more comprehensively (like Marc Bousquet), and it needs to be explained to the People. It's something few have endeavored, because it isn't profitable, not even for tenure in some cases. 

Without our own sustainable business model, the Higher Education Inquirer will continue writing (and prompt others to write) stories significant to workers and consumers, the folks who deserve to be enlightened and who deserve to tell their stories. 

And as long as we can, the Higher Education Inquirer will ask the Establishment for answers that only they know, something few others are willing to do. 

Carl Barney, Ex-Owner of Deceptive For-Profit Colleges, Donates Big to Trump (David Halperin)

Carl Barney, the ultra-wealthy former owner of a chain of collapsed for-profit colleges, is the third biggest California-based donor to efforts to elect Donald Trump in 2024, the Los Angeles Times reports today.

Barney has donated $924,600 to the Trump 47 Committee, according to federal records.

Like Donald Trump, who in 2016 paid $25 million to settle civil charges by New York’s attorney general that his unaccredited real estate school, Trump University, defrauded its students, Barney saw his schools shut down after law enforcement agencies and former students went to court over claims of deceptive practices.

Barney explained his reasons for supporting Trump in a fascinating post last month on his personal website.

According to Barney, Trump “approaches the job of President as a businessman, not a politician,” which Barney sees as “mostly a major strength.”

“I’m aware of President Trump’s shortcomings,” Barney acknowledges, “but I won’t criticize him here. (If you want criticism, you’ll find all you need in the popular ‘news’ media.)”

Barney evaluates Trump’s term in office and concludes that the ex-president “significantly improved the individual freedom of Americans to pursue their goals with less government hindrance.”

While Barney concedes that he does not like Trump’s “proposed tariffs and some of his economics,” he likes that Trump “wants to work with Elon Musk to reduce spending, regulations, waste, and fraud in the federal government.

What doesn’t Barney like about Kamala Harris? A number of things, but he zeroes in on this: “Kamala Harris is an avowed enemy of private career colleges and boasts about closing them. Her boasts reveal her disregard for the schools’ students and teachers, as well as the entrepreneurs and investors who created the schools.” Harris, Barney concludes, “holds the anti-freedom values common to radical leftists.” He warns, “These people hate profit, business, and businessmen.”

Barney prepares his audience for the attacks he will face for his endorsement. “Since my contribution to President Trump will be public,” he writes, “I know that I will become more of a political target than I’ve been over the last 10 years. I’ve been a target of trolls, lawfare, and political operatives who finally destroyed my beautiful colleges. I know they will now target me with renewed force and energy. That’s something I will have to confront.”

Barney concludes his post with this unifying message, “If anyone sees something wrong with Making America Great Again (MAGA), then they’re not friends of mine, nor of yours.”

While Barney’s focus on Harris’s role in taking on abusive for-profit colleges is no surprise, his identification of fighting government waste, fraud, and abuse as a key policy priority for him is particularly rich, given his role in running a college operation, the Center for Excellence in Higher Education (CEHE), that received billions in federal taxpayer dollars and ultimately was found liable for deceiving students — and given his schools’ troubling conversion to tax-free non-profit status in a deal that increased his staggering wealth.

In August 2020, following an extensive trial, a Colorado state court sided with that state’s attorney general and found CEHE, its CollegeAmerica school, Carl Barney, and CEHE CEO Eric Juhlin liable for deceptive practices and awarded a $3 million judgment.

The Colorado court found that Barney’s schools used a detailed playbook to manipulate vulnerable students into enrolling in high-priced, low-quality programs; that the schools directed admissions representatives to “enroll every student,” regardless of whether the student would likely graduate; that the schools’ recruiters and advertisements greatly overstated starting salaries that graduates could earn; and that the schools falsely inflated graduation rates.

In April 2021, Independence’s accreditor, ACCSC, ended its approval of Independence University, which by then was CEHE’s main school, effectively repealing its eligibility for federal student grants and loans. Soon after, the U.S. Department of Education restricted the flow of such aid. In the wake of those developments, CEHE shut down classes and laid off most staff.

CEHE and the Colorado attorney general’s office were back in the state trial court in Denver this week, after high-priced lawyers for Barney pursued an appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court that resulted in an order requiring the trial judge to make some additional findings.

Barney also used clever lawyers and accountants to keep making big money off the CEHE schools even after he converted them to non-profit status. When for-profit operations are converted to non-profit in such a manner, U.S. taxpayers can pay a big price.

Although its schools are shuttered, CEHE still faces additional legal challenges. The U.S. Justice Department is moving ahead with a long-pending lawsuit in which it has joined whistleblowers in pursuing False Claims Act fraud charges against the schools. The federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has pursued a separate investigation into CEHE’s private loan practices.

CEHE, despite the probes, bad publicity, and collapse of its schools, has continued trying to collect the high-interest private loan debt it created for its broke former students.

And CEHE has portrayed itself as a victim of a political conspiracy against it, with ongoing vitriol on Twitter from former CEO Eric Juhlin, whom the Department of Education took the rare step of suspending from federal contracting. More attacks on CEHE critics, and the Colorado attorney general office and court, have come from Barney.

Barney has charged on his grievance-heavy blog that the case brought by the Colorado AG against his schools is a “horror story of government corruption,” and “a multi-agency collusion to put schools out of business” — a supposed plot that involved not only a senior assistant Colorado attorney general, but also the executive director of accreditor ACCSC, officials of the U.S. Department of Eduction, and “the cabal of progressive haters of private colleges (David Halperin, Robert Shireman, entities funded by Arnold Ventures, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and Sen. Richard Durbin).”

In December 2022, CEHE took its grievance campaign to a new low by suing the United States government for $500 million in the U.S. Court of Claims, asserting, as a press release statement by Juhlin contended, that the Department of Education “in coordination with ideological confederates… has been on a campaign to cripple and close as many private career colleges as possible” and that CEHE’s schools were “a victim of this campaign.”

As we reported yesterday, billionaire Betsy DeVos, who helped Barney and other predatory college operators as Donald Trump’s secretary of education but resigned over Trump’s incitement of the deadly January 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol, recently donated $250,000 to America PAC, the pro-Trump super PAC created by Musk.

[Editor's note: This article originally appeared on Republic Report.] 

DeVos Funnels $250k to Musk’s Pro-Trump Super PAC (David Halperin)

Billionaire Betsy DeVos, who resigned from her job as Donald Trump’s secretary of education over Trump’s incitement of the deadly January 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol, has donated $250,000 to America PAC, the pro-Trump super PAC created by the world’s richest man, industrialist Elon Musk.

The Independent first reported the contribution, disclosed in a Federal Election Commission filing that covers the period October 1 to 16.

DeVos sent Trump a letter of resignation dated January 7, 2021, telling the then-president, “There is no mistaking the impact your rhetoric had on the situation, and it is the inflection point for me. Impressionable children are watching all of this, and they are learning from us.”

DeVos told Trump her decision to resign was “in support of the oath I took to our Constitution, our people, and our freedoms.”

On January 6, after Trump encouraged his supporters to march to the Capitol to fight the counting of electoral votes that would declare Joe Biden the winner of the 2020 presidential election, he sat and watched television as an armed mob violently attacked police officers and threatened the lives of Members of Congress and Trump’s own vice president, Mike Pence — who, like DeVos, has grounded his conservatism in a deep Christian faith. For hours, Trump repeatedly ignored the pleas of his staff to call off the rioters.

Now, while Pence has refused to support Trump’s 2024 election bid, DeVos has sent cash to help Trump become president again.

And it’s not as if Trump subsequently was revealed to be a Sunday school teacher.

Since leaving office, Trump has been impeached and indicted for encouraging the January 6 attack on our democracy and Constitution, for other efforts to cheat in the 2020 election, and for stealing classified documents from the White House. He was convicted in New York over the summer of 34 felonies for falsifying business records to hide his misconduct from voters in the 2016 election.

Trump’s central business enterprise, the Trump Organization, was in January 2023 fined $1.6 million by a New York state court after the company was convicted by a jury of 17 criminal felonies, including tax fraud and falsifying business records. Trump himself was found liable in February 2024 by a New York state judge for civil fraud and was ordered to pay a $355 million penalty.

And in May 2023, a New York federal jury in a civil case ordered Trump to pay E. Jean Carroll $5 million for battery and defamation after it found that Trump sexually abused Carroll in a department store dressing room in 1996.

But DeVos’s own version of morality makes her conversion back to Trumpism less than surprising.

As Trump’s Secretary of Education, DeVos hired as her top higher education advisors former executives of predatory for-profit colleges, and she trashed almost all the work done by the Obama administration to protect students against deceptive, over-priced schools. Instead of holding predatory colleges accountable, DeVos mocked broke students ripped off by these schools as people demanding “free money.”

DeVos as secretary also repeatedly attacked and demeaned public schools and criticized her own cabinet Department.

In August, DeVos appeared to revisit her view of Donald Trump, telling The Detroit News she was willing to join a new Trump administration “if it was with the goal of phasing out the Department of Education….”

DeVos and her husband’s wealthy family, which made its fortune through the troubling multi-level marketing company Amway, have been major donors to Republican candidates and right wing causes for decades. Two of DeVos’s brothers-in-law, and their two wives, gave $250,000 each to the Musk PAC.

[Editor's note: This article originally appeared on Republic Report.] 

New higher education enrollment numbers: a mixed bag (Bryan Alexander)

How is higher education enrollment changing?

Today the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center published its first analysis of student numbers for fall 2024.  This is important data, as ever, and I’ll dig into it with this post.

It’s a mixed bag. Total enrollment rose, but a key indicator fell.

 

One caution: this is the first such report for the semester, representing just over one half of the Center’s respondents’ data. They’ll revise this over the next few months.

The good news: total post-secondary enrollment rose 2.9% compared to fall 2023, with undergrad numbers rising 3% and grad school up 2.1%.   The heart of this growth is to be found in community colleges, who are using dual enrollment (teaching high school students) to rebuild their classes for the third year in a row.  For-profit colleges are also doing very well, seeing their numbers up 5%.

The main degree growth is not from graduate or undergrad degrees (not the BA, BS, MA, PhD, and so on), but from undergrad certificate seekers (a 7.3% rise).

There are other positive findings.  The sophomore retention rate (the proportion of first-year students who return for their second year) did better, as the drop out rate decreased.  Returning student numbers were higher.  In terms of race, all non-white populations enjoyed increased numbers: “Undergraduate and graduate enrollments for Hispanic, Black, Asian, and Multiracial students are seeing strong growth this fall.”  Historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs) all saw increases. In terms of economic class, there were more students from the lowest economic quintile.

In terms of gender, there were no meaningful differences, as both male and female numbers rose at roughly the same amount.

Geographically, nearly all states enjoyed an increased in overall enrollment at the undergrad level:

At the graduate level things were still rosy, although more mixed:

Primarily online institutions (think Arizona State, Southern New Hampshire, Western Governors, etc.) saw enrollment rise by more than 6%.

Yet with all of these bright spots, the Clearinghouse shared some bad news.  First-year student enrollment dropped 5% overall.  This decline reversed gains made in 2023, taking things back to 2022 levels, and was especially pronounced in public and private four year institutions (-8.5% and -6.5%):

In terms of age, “an almost 6% drop in the number of 18-year-old freshmen (a proxy for those enrolling immediately after high school graduation) accounts for most of the decline.”  In terms of economic class, this decline was especially true of state schools serving more Pell-eligible students, which saw drops of 10% and more.

Further, one negative sign of race and enrollment involves the caucasian population: “Undergraduate White students, on the other hand, continue to see enrollment declines (-0.6%).“  The Chronicle of Higher Ed generated this helpful and contrasting graphic:

I and others who attended a briefing asked Clearinghouse staff to speculate on the decline.  Vice president for research Doug Shapiro thought multiple factors were in play: the FAFSA chaos, the attraction of the job market (unemployment being low), fear of student debt.  The Supreme Court ruling against academic affirmative action might have discouraged some minority students from applying, at least to elite institutions.

What might we take away from this report?

I need to preface my remarks by reminding readers that enrollment matters for two vital reasons.  To the extent that the United States wants more people to have more college study, the number of students who actually pursue higher education indicates how successful we are in reaching that goal.  And since we’ve effectively privatized most of higher education economics, student enrollment means essential revenue for keeping college and university doors open.

First, the Clearinghouse report is very good news for community colleges, who are enjoying growth after years of losses.  Their strategy of reaching into high schools is making up for their losses in the rest of their communities. It’s also good for for-profits, who saw their sector flattened during the Obama administration.

Second, certificates are in the lead.  The Center’s director told me that this sounds like a short-term trend, as the number of students pursuing shorter-term credentials is continuing to grow.  How many campuses will be inspired to expand their own certificate offerings as a result, sensing a growing market?

Third, there aren’t any clear signs of students responding to abortion policies.  That is, we might expect younger people (who tend to be more liberal) and especially younger women to avoid states with strict abortion bans, but the geographic data does not bear this out.

Fourth, in terms of how we think about higher education, the major developments here focus on the parts of academia which don’t normally get much attention or media buzz: for-profits, community colleges, certificates, online learning.  I don’t know if most academics in public and non-profit higher ed, and most Democrats, will be happy to see for-profits strengthen.

Fifth, this decline in first-year students could depress enrollments for years to come.  It might mean fewer sophomores next year, fewer juniors the year after, and so on.  Colleges will have to do heroic feats to boost retention, and high schools ditto to expand graduation and application, to nullify this issue.

Sixth, institutions which teach mostly online continue to grow. This is a long-running trend and feels likely (to me) to keep building up.

Seventh, it’s good to see higher ed actually grow after more than a decade of decline.  We’re still nowhere near the numbers we enrolled in 2012’s peak and have a long way to go before reaching that.  Meanwhile, America’s total population has grown, thanks to immigration, so we have farther still to go in reaching our peak proportion.

One last note: keep an eye out for updates to this data, as the Clearinghouse gets more evidence from its affiliated institutions.

This article first appeared at BryanAlexander.org

College Inc. Redux is Overdue

We desperately need a PBS Frontline updating of College Inc. This 2010 documentary by Martin Smith and Rain Media took us behind the curtains, into the big business of US for-profit higher education. At the time, College Inc. made an important statement: that for-profit higher education had become a racket, funded by greedy Wall Street investors, and that government oversight was necessary to rein in the worst abuses at schools like Corinthian Colleges and Ashford University.

 

 

From 2010 to 2012, the Senate Harkin Commission researched and exposed the systemic abuses of the largest for-profit colleges. And under President Obama, some of these abuses were addressed through policy changes at the US Department of Education, Department of Veterans Affairs, and Department of Defense. 

 

Times Have Changed, Not In a Good Way

 

Much has happened in the last decade and a half since College Inc. was produced. US higher education did not become less predatory, even as a number of for-profit colleges (Corinthian Colleges, ITT Tech, Art Institutes, Le Cordon Bleu, and Virginia College) were shuttered. Republicans worked to ensure that meaningful policy changes, like gainful employment safeguards, were blocked. And some of the worst predators (Kaplan and Ashford) morphed into businesses owned by state universities (Purdue and University of Arizona).

 

Online education has become pervasive despite concerns about its effectiveness. Content creators and facilitators have replaced instructors at large robocolleges like Southern New Hampshire University, Grand Canyon University, Liberty University Online, and the University of Phoenix. 

 

The for-profit (aka neoliberal) mentality has spread. Online Program Managers (OPMs) have brought for-profit education to non-profit institutions, carrying with it an enormous cost to consumers. Advertising and marketing has become out of control, helping fuel a manufactured College Mania of anxious parents and their children. 

 

Despite the College Mania, folks have become more skeptical of higher education, and for good reason. Student loan debt has further crippled the lives of millions of Americans as Republicans have stepped in to block debt forgiveness. Community colleges and some state universities have gone through significant enrollment declines. Small colleges have closed. And elite colleges have become more wealthy and powerful and controversial. Something not on the radar in the 2010 documentary or in popular culture at the time. 

Academia Insider (Andy Stapleton)

Andy Stapleton of Academia Insider provides a great public service to consumers by exposing the social realities of graduate school education. These YouTube videos should serve as an antidote to the College Mania! that persists in our society and pervades our popular culture--helping higher education consumers become more conscious of their most significant (and costly) life choices.

This YouTube video shows the bottom of the barrel, fake PhD's from diploma mills.  It's not something that has gotten much media attention, but it looks like a problem, especially for employers doing their due diligence in hiring. 

Stapleton provides many other videos that cover a variety of topics: from grad school applications to finding work after graduate school.  

 

Related links:

 

Academia Insider website 

 

Andy Stapleton's YouTube Channel

For-Profit College Owners Charged for Selling Fake Nursing Diplomas (David Halperin, Republic Report)

Zombie colleges roam the internet, here's how to spot a legitimate, living university (Chris Quintana, USA Today)

How You Pick Your College Could Cost You Lots (Mark Salisbury)

Is Your Private College Financially Healthy? (Gary Stocker)

Guild (Education) No Longer Glitters: Layoffs, Toxic Work Environment, Questionable Acquisition

Here's our latest analysis of Guild (formerly Guild Education) based on a limited amount of publicly available data. Guild is a third-party provider of adult education, connecting big corporations like Walmart, JP Morgan, Tesla, and Disney with online schools like Purdue University Global (Purdue University's robocollege) and e-Cornell (Cornell's online school). 

For years, Guild Education received a substantial amount of positive press, which put them on our radar in 2021. We and others in the education world were wary of all the hype. Forbes was a big contributor to Guild's rise, along with its supporters: Silicon Valley Bank, ASU+GSV, Steph Curry, Oprah,  Johny C. Taylor Jr., Michael Horn, and Kenneth Chenault. And Guild had political ties with Mae Podesta, a daughter of Democratic Party powerbroker John Podesta.

In 2023, Guild was again on the radar as the edtech meltdown was occurring and investor money was drying up, especially in Silicon Valley.

Since Guild is a private, for-profit company, this limits our ability to fully assess the company, including its value. It appears Guild has not received a capital infusion since the summer of 2022, and there is no indication that it has ever been profitable. Valuations.fyi reports that Guild's value has dropped from a peak of $4.4B in 2022 to $1.3B in 2024.

The last two years Guild has suffered significant layoffs, and its charismatic CEO Rachel Romer, who suffered a stroke, was replaced by a less popular Bijal Shah (who only has a 37 percent favorability rating on Glassdoor). The edtech company has gone through major transitions, including a rebranding, while downsizing its core business. In early 2024, Guild announced that it was offering AI training. More recently, it has acquired Nomadic Learning, a platform for educating corporate leadership.

Glassdoor reviews have provided more information that are summarized here:

1. Toxic Work Environment/Hostile leadership: The behavior of senior leadership, particularly the CMO, is described as hostile, manipulative, and discriminatory. 

Lack of empathy: A lack of empathy from leadership towards employees is a recurring theme.

Discrimination: Instances of discrimination, both overt and subtle, are alleged, especially against women and employees of color.
 

2. Unfair Treatment and Inequity/Favoritism: Friends of leadership seem to be favored, regardless of merit or performance.

Unequal treatment: Women and employees of color appear to be disproportionately affected by negative actions, such as layoffs and discrimination.

Limited opportunities for advancement: The focus on "allies" in ERG spaces may limit opportunities for marginalized employees.
 

3. Erosion of Employee Benefits/Reduced holiday time: The removal of holiday time off and restrictions on PTO use have negatively impacted employees' ability to balance work and personal life.

Decreased support for employees: The company's focus on reducing costs has led to a decline in benefits and support for employees.
 

4. Misalignment with Mission/Prioritizing profits over people: The company's actions seem to prioritize financial gain over its stated mission of unlocking opportunity.

Disregard for employee needs: The company's failure to address the needs of its employees, particularly women and caregivers, contradicts its mission.
 

5. Loss of Talent/High turnover: The toxic work environment and declining benefits are likely contributing to a high turnover rate among talented employees.

Loss of marketing talent: The company's reputation is suffering due to the loss of its best marketing talent.

These issues raise serious concerns about Guild Education's culture, leadership, and commitment to its employees and mission. Addressing these problems will be crucial for the company's long-term success.

Why Acquire Nomadic Learning?

There could be several reasons why a company with a toxic work environment and declining employee morale would continue to acquire other businesses:

Diversification: Acquisitions can be seen as a way to diversify the company's revenue streams and reduce its reliance on a single product or service.

Market expansion: Acquiring other companies can help a company expand into new markets or geographic regions.

Synergies: The acquisition of complementary businesses can create synergies that lead to cost savings or increased revenue.

Talent acquisition: Acquisitions can be a way to acquire talented employees or intellectual property.

Short-term financial gains: Acquisitions can sometimes provide short-term financial gains, such as increased revenue or stock price appreciation.

However, it's important to note that these reasons may not be sufficient to justify the acquisition of other businesses if the company's internal problems are not addressed. A toxic work environment and declining employee morale can negatively impact a company's ability to retain talent, attract customers, and innovate.

It's possible that the company's leadership believes that acquisitions can help to mask or distract from the underlying problems. However, this is a short-term solution that is unlikely to be sustainable in the long run.

To truly improve its situation, Guild Education will need to address the root causes of its problems, including the toxic work environment, declining employee morale, and misalignment with its mission.

Rehumanization in Higher Education: An Alternative to Maximizing Panic and Profit

It's questionable whether the Earth's tech bros (e.g. Gates, Musk, Bezos, Thiel, Zuckerberg) really believe in democracy, but they do believe in enriching themselves, like the robber barons of the 19th century, or going back even further, to myths of flawed rulers and gods of ancient times. A few of these bros, believing mostly in themselves, have suggested that democracy is incompatible with progress. There are probably more of these elites (and their backers) who agree, but on the back stage. 

Today, there are apps for just about everything, and there are some good ones. But there are few signs that the most recent technological innovations have improved the overall existence of humans, the planet we live on, or the many other species with share the planet with. Life is great for some, good for many, and not as happy for many more. Folks feel anxious, alienated, and dehumanized and for good reason.

Rehumanization: An Alternative to Maximizing Panic and Profit 

Despite all this new technology, climate change is an existential threat and its consequences are looming. Wars and conflicts are raging around the world and there are threats of more war. Stock prices have risen, but American Quality of Life (QOL) has not improved significantly. Information for the masses is laced with toxic propaganda. Mental illness is rising. US life expectancy has plateaued. Debt is a normal part of middle class life. People are more sedentary and obese. 

For many in this new tech world, sh*t jobs are plentiful and good jobs are hard to find. Bitcoin is an alternative (and speculative) currency used for illegal and predatory activity. Online teachers and content creators are throwaway items. You can have prepared food, of varying quality, delivered to your door. Pornography is omnipresent. Mass surveillance is accepted and normalized. Brutality and genocide can be watched like entertainment, to be played over and over or swept away at the touch of a finger. Online robocollege education is available 24/7/365 and cheating is rampant, but for many a degree is just a ticket to be punched in a world of hypercredentialism.   

Some of us are half-conscious of the algorithms of oppression and those who dictate the code, but we have enough faith in technology and the tech bros that it will be ok if we accept certain social realities--and don't fight it or challenge it. If we just go along. However sick, pathological, or evil it is, no matter how greedy these tech bros and their enablers are, "it is what it is." 

How is this progress? And does it have to be this way? We don't think so. There are even models to bring light into the approaching darkness.

That's why we want to highlight the bright spots in higher education in a series called the Rehumanization of Higher Ed. Stay tuned. 

University of Phoenix: Training Folks For Robowork

The Higher Education Inquirer has published a number of articles on robocolleges, robostudents, and robowork, noting that the University of Phoenix has been a pioneer in the evolution of making humans more machine-like (or in science fiction terms, cyborgs). This is an evolution that spans more than a century, with Frederick Taylor and his Scientific Management of Work and Clayton Christensen's Theory of Disruptive Innovation.

More recently, we have posted articles on artificial intelligence and the dehumanization of society, including futuristic work by renowned sociologist Randall Collins. 

The University of Phoenix, in the present, has taken another step in this profit-making dehumanization process, formal online customer service training for the international workforce. According to the University of Phoenix, customer service is in high demand globally, and UoPX offers a convenient series of professional development trainings for making human skills more efficient. It's not known how many humans are involved in teaching or content creation. What we do know is that the University of Phoenix relies on little human labor, with an average student-teacher ratio of 110 to one. 

What are your thoughts on this training program? And how does type of online education and tech work bode for humans and humanity?  

Related links:

Wealth and Want Part 4: Robocolleges and Roboworkers (2024)

Robocollege Update (2024)

New Data Show Nearly a Million University of Phoenix Debtors Owe $21.6 Billion Dollars (2024)

University of Phoenix and the Ash Heap of Higher Ed History (2023)

How University of Phoenix Failed. It's a Long Story. But It's Important for the Future of Higher Education (2022) 

Robocolleges, Artificial Intelligence, and the Dehumanization of Higher Education (2023)

AI-ROBOT CAPITALISTS WILL DESTROY THE HUMAN ECONOMY (Randall Collins, 2023)

Guild Education: Enablers of Anti-Union Corporations and Subprime College Programs (2021)

The Growth of "RoboColleges" and "Robostudents" (2019)

The Higher Education Assembly Line (2019)