Guild Education Board Member Johny C. Taylor Jr. Short-Listed for Secretary of Labor

Johny C. Taylor Jr, President of the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), has been short-listed for the position of US Secretary of Labor. 

HEI is covering this story because Mr. Taylor is also a board member of Guild, an edtech company we have been covering since 2021. Moving forward, we are also interested in following any decisions he could make affecting labor in higher education. American labor itself is under attack as Amazon and SpaceX are challenging the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Board.

According to his bio at SHRM, Johny C. Taylor Jr. has held senior and chief executive roles at IAC/InteractiveCorp, Viacom's Paramount Pictures, Blockbuster Entertainment Group, the McGuireWoods law firm, and Compass Group USA. Most recently, Mr. Taylor was President and Chief Executive Officer of the Thurgood Marshall College Fund. He previously served on the White House American Workforce Policy Advisory Board and as chairman of the President's Advisory Board on Historically Black Colleges and Universities during the Trump Administration.

An African American man whose salary at SHRM is greater than $1.3 million a year, Taylor has been a proponent of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the workplace. But as the chief executive of SHRM, he would be an opponent of unions.

Guild, formerly known as Guild Education, works for Fortune 500 companies like Walmart, Disney, JP Morgan Chase, and Chipotle to train and retrain workers as the workforce is systematically reduced through technology. Guild has been in financial decline after being lauded by Forbes and other business media.

If he is selected for the Department of Labor or any other government post, we'll have to see if Mr. Taylor's work at SHRM, Guild, or his other board seats affects management decisions, especially if the organization he manages is forced to downsize.  

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. 

College Mania!, College Meltdown, and the other "C" Words

What are we seeing in US higher education and American society today?  Lower college enrollments (for some colleges), high student loan debt (for some consumers) and upward mobility and increasing wealth for others. Many of us hope to be the fortunate ones, through hard work and persistence.

Culture and society (including myths, marketing and advertising, and media) tell folks that higher education is essential and elite education is necessary for upward social mobility. Others see higher education, especially borrowing money to go to school, as a road to nowhere: of untold debt and unhappiness. What people are seeing would seem to be confusing, but it shouldn't be if we understand our system and how it works.  

 

Capitalism (also known as neoliberalism) is the underlying program or structure that guides behavior in the US. We are immersed in it. It also guides other values that we may hold about family, religion, government, and the economy. Under this system, the differences between the rich and poor have been increasing for more than a half century and life expectancy and fertility rates are stagnant.

Consumers are bombarded with stories that reflect how we should perceive higher education. The stories that we see and hear may vary and may appear contradictory if we are willing to look at all sides. Some of the stories are myths, others are downright lies. Targeted marketing means that we may not get the same messages as others. 

Class is how the program of capitalism works, with elites at the top, small business owners and managers in the middle, and workers who do the labor necessary to keep society running.  These distinctions may be small in some places and enormous in others, and there may even be overlap in wealth and income.  Social mobility is possible, but in the US social mobility is stagnant for many non-immigrants. Workers are sometimes appreciated but often unappreciated and even scapegoated. 

Communities are diverse and cut across class boundaries and even geography. Groups seen as homogeneous are rarely that. And stereotypes are used (and misused) as a short hand for understanding other people or even ourselves. 

Civics is a formal understanding how the program/system works and typically how to be a good citizen. The idea of what makes a good citizen varies. Civics can be used as a tool of social control or a tool of reform and innovation. 

Conflict consists of opposing thoughts and actions. It can exist inside of us as well as outside, causing cognitive dissonance for those who are mindful. Some degree of conflict is necessary for society to be healthy. Too much conflict can destroy the fabric of society. 

Chancellor Martin: Public Means Public (Neil Kraus)

Recently, Chancellor Mike Martin laid out his views on UWRF (the University of Wisconsin River Falls) and higher education in the Student Voice.  I’d like to offer a very different perspective on public higher education.  But given his stated belief in the importance of making the case that higher education is a public good, I believe that Chancellor Martin would agree with my argument.

Chancellor Martin correctly stated that: “In an attempt to appeal to students, we told students, if you get a degree, here’s what your lifelong income is going to be. We made it a private good. When it’s a private good, and then asking the public to pay for it, you’ve got to disconnect, right?”  He then went on to say that: “And I think we need to return not just in Wisconsin, but across public higher education, to the argument that what we have is also a very powerful public good.”

I agree completely.  For many decades, higher education has been made into a private good.  This resulted from the unquestioned dominance of human capital theory, which, as an economist, Chancellor Martin is certainly well-versed in.  In brief, human capital theory promulgates the notion that one’s income is – and should be – tied to one’s education and training levels.

Politically, of course, this framing set up education to fail, which explains our current predicament.  The education system cannot change the jobs that exist or wage levels.  The education system educates.

Yet education is very intentionally and incorrectly held responsible for a predominately low wage, low education labor market.  As a result, decades ago it became politically acceptable to cut public higher education spending perpetually, even during the current period of fiscal prosperity.

This is just politics.  Business and the wealthy want to talk solely about education as the path to economic opportunity because it is in their self-interests to do so.  Because when we’re talking about education, we’re not talking about an economy that has been intentionally constructed for owners and shareholders while it leaves a significant majority of workers behind.

Yet Chancellor Martin inadequately addressed the role that the legislature plays in our public institution when he states: “But if the legislature isn’t going to solve it for you, you better damn well solve it for yourself….But the bottom line, it comes back to what can this institution do innovatively.”

When Chancellor Martin refers to “change in the wind,” he fails to mention who’s in charge of the wind machine.  He seems to be arguing in favor of a fully privatized UWRF, a campus funded by donors, corporations, and foundations, which will necessarily reflect their narrow economic interests.  Private funders have no interest in training students for the larger labor market let alone to be well informed, democratic citizens.

Chancellor Martin’s analysis implies our defunded public institution will never receive any funding increases in the future, which would effectively make it a public institution in name only.  This is the narrative we’ve been hearing from all our administrators since last school year, and it appears to be coming directly from the UW System.

But it is a hopeless narrative, and particularly demoralizing and utterly incomprehensible at a time when the state is drowning in money and the UW System continues to spend tens of millions on software and consultants as our campuses shed faculty, staff, and academic programs.

Is this even real?

The word “public” means something very specific: if a good is public, it means it is paid for with tax dollars, not with private dollars.  The military, the local police department, city park, and school district are public institutions.  Public higher education, on the other hand, has been largely privatized because of decisions made by elected officials.

But we can’t be public and rely on private funds.  That’s not what public means.

Private funders – which represent a miniscule slice of the population -- have their own interests.  They’re primarily interested in getting workers for their narrow industries.

And the question of priorities hangs over the Chancellor’s interview.  The UW System has made its priorities clear – we will continue to purchase, without question, more and more expensive software (most of which we don’t need), as we get rid of faculty, staff, and academic programs.

For all the talk of budget cuts on campus, I’ve yet to hear anyone in front of the room say: “You know, I’m sorry, but we just can’t afford [fill in expensive tech product here] anymore.”  Our leaders only tell us they can’t afford employees.

And Chancellor Martin asserts, yet provides no evidence for, the claim that the campus has surplus capacity. I’ve been at UWRF since 2005, and it’s common knowledge that we have far fewer tenured and tenure track faculty positions now in the College of Arts and Sciences than we had several years ago.

But I’m all for data analysis, so let’s make data-informed decisions.

I’ll say again that Chancellor Martin is correct when he states that public higher education is “a very powerful public good.”  But making this case while moving full steam ahead for a privatized UWRF is a massive contradiction in terms.

The public wants affordable, quality, comprehensive, in-person, public higher education.  And in this state, the only way to get this is by attending a UW institution.  Corporate interests want the opposite of all these things.  They want to not pay taxes and make as much money as possible.  This isn’t complicated.

If we go further down the path of privatization – which is clearly the path sought by the UW System -- we directly undermine the notion that higher education is a public good.  More importantly, we will be providing our students with an inferior, expensive, tech-heavy, narrowed educational experience.  We will be walking away entirely from the Wisconsin Idea.

Public means public.  I ask Chancellor Martin to stand with AFT-Wisconsin for comprehensive, in-person, public higher education that prioritizes students and the public over corporations and the wealthy.


Neil Kraus is a Professor of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin, River Falls since 2005, President of United Falcons, the local chapter of AFT-Wisconsin, and author of three books, including The Fantasy Economy: Neoliberalism, Inequality, and the Education Reform Movement (Temple University Press, 2023).

This article first appeared in the UWRF Student Voice. 

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. 

Can the newly formed PA Board of Higher Education do much for the People?

In 2024, Pennsylvania has formed a state Board of Higher Education. Can the organization create value for all its citizens and improve the Quality of Life for Pennsylvanians, or is it just another layer of bureaucracy whose major role is to maintain the status quo? 

The Pennsylvania Board of Higher Education is composed of 21 members, representing postsecondary education, government, business, labor and students. Some schools like Penn State, Pitt, and Temple each have a representative. Other institutions, like the state's 15 community colleges and 10 PASSHE schools are represented by one person.

The University of Pennsylvania ($20.9 billion endowment and 1,085 acres of urban property), Carnegie-Mellon University ($2.7 billion and 157 acres of urban property), and other elite private schools are not represented and stand apart from the oversight.

What's the Mission?

There is no mention about how this new Board can make a difference. No progressive ideas or policies have been introduced other than that the organization seeks to ensure that there is no undue competition among the schools. 

Wealth and Want in PA Higher Education 

Pennsylvania has more than 150 colleges, universities, and technical schools. They are all connected by a harsh economic system that promotes increasing wealth and want. Pennsylvania's immense wealth is illustrated in a handful of elite and brand name colleges and universities primarily in and around its two major urban areas: Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. And wealth is demonstrated in their endowments and real estate holdings. 

University of Pennsylvania: $20.9 billion and 1,085 acres of urban property

Pennsylvania State University: $4.44 billion and 22,484 acres of property statewide

Carnegie-Mellon: $2.7 billion and 157 acres of urban property

Thomas Jefferson University: $2.3 billion and 100 acres of urban property

Swarthmore: $2.2 billion and 425 acres of suburban property

Lehigh University: $1.8 billion and 2350 acres of suburban property

Bryn Mawr College: $1.6 billion and 135 acres of suburban property

Villanova University $1.5 billion and 408 acres of suburban property

University of Pittsburgh: $1.1 billion and 132 acres of suburban property

Drexel University: $1.1 billion and 96 acres of urban property

Lafayette College: $1 billion and 340 acres of suburban property

Bucknell: $1 billion and 450 acres of suburban property

Duquesne University: $1 billion and 50 acres of urban property

Temple University: $750 million and 115 acres of urban property

Haverford University: $643 million and 216 acres of suburban property. 

Washington and Jefferson: $380 million and 60 acres of small-town property

Widener University: $90 million and 216 acres of urban property

The differences between life outside of Penn, Temple, and Drexel and other parts of Philadelphia (North and West Philly) are stark.  And the Philadelphia suburbs that include some of the elite schools are reflective of wealth, power, and prestige. Scenes of wealth and want are also apparent in and around Pittsburgh. 

State universities outside of these urban and suburban areas, aside from College Park, have been declining for more than a decade. The Community College of Philadelphia, a career lifeline for the working class, has one of the lowest graduation rates in the US. The same goes for Harrisburg Area Community College. Pennsylvania also has Lincoln University and Cheyney University of Pennsylvania: two Historically Black Colleges and Universities that have been historically underfunded and serve as lasting symbols of resistance against white supremacy, an ideology still deeply embedded in Pennsylvania's society and economy.

PA Economy: Growing Inequality and Rural Decline 

Pennsylvania's economy is diverse yet unsustainable. It consists of traditional industries such as manufacturing and agriculture as well as healthcare, energy, technology, and education. Healthcare (reactive medicine) and energy (fossil fuels), in particular, are expensive for the state and expensive the planet. 

The problems in Pennsylvania's higher education system extend beyond the schools represented in the new Board. These economic and social problems are persistent and worsening for the working class. Pennsylvania's population is stagnant, increasing slightly in urban areas and declining in rural areas. 

There is also a demographic cliff with Baby Boomers reaching their 80s (and greater disability) and fewer children being born in the Commonwealth. Children living with Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed (ALICE) families is 41 percent.  

Savage Inequalities in K-12 Education

Pennsylvania has some of the widest education gaps in the country. A national study found Pennsylvania at the bottom of all states in school funding fairness. Among the 50 states, Pennsylvania ranked 49th in the Black-white opportunity gap, 50th in the Hispanic-white opportunity gap, and 49th in the gap between students from low-income families and their wealthier peers. 

Unequal Wealth Distribution 

Pennsylvania is one of the most unequal states in the country, with the top 1% of earners making 21.7 times more than the bottom 99%. 

The richest people in Pennsylvania are Jeff Yass ($29B), Michael Rubin ($11.5B), Victoria Mars ($9.7B), Arthur Dantchik ($7.3B), Thomas Hagen ($5.2B), Jeff Lurie ($4.9B), Maggie Hardy ($4.1B), Mary Alice Dorrance Malone ($3.7B), John Middleton ($3.7B), and Thomas Tull ($2.9B). 

The average income of the top 1% is $1,100,962, compared to $50,830 for the rest of the state. Income inequality in Pennsylvania has been worsening since the 1970s. The richest 5% of households have incomes that are 11.7 times larger than the bottom 20%. 

Over half of Pennsylvania's wealth is concentrated in six counties: Montgomery, Allegheny, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Philadelphia. The wealthiest county is Chester, with a median household income of $104,161 in 2020. 

Regressive Tax Structure 

Pennsylvania has a flat tax rate of 3 percent, and its corporate tax rate is a flat 8.49 percent and falling. The combined state personal income tax and local earned income tax led to Pennsylvania having the 18th highest income tax burden. Pennsylvania ranked 25th for its total per capita property tax burden. New Jersey, New York, and Maryland had a higher tax burden in both comparisons.  

Mass Incarceration for Social Control, Deaths of Despair

Pennsylvania has the highest incarceration rate in the Northeast and the second highest rate in the country when including people on probation or parole. And its correctional system spends nearly $3 billion annually. Black adults make up 46% of Pennsylvania's prison population, even though they only make up 11% of the state's population. The flip side of the coin, deaths of despair (suicide, drug overdoses) are common among the working class in rural and urban areas.  

Related links:

"20-20": Many US States Have Seen Enrollment Drops of More Than 20 Percent 

College Meltdown: NY, IL, MI, PA, VA hardest hit

How College Destroyed the Labor Market (Damon Cassidy)

Underemployment, low wage jobs, and bullsh*t jobs are an important part of the US economy. And the higher education system does not appear to have done much to change this depressing reality. While this video may represent a distortion of US history and society, it should not be ignored. Skepticism about higher education is real, and for good reason, especially for the working class. There are also good points made in this video, including the federal and corporate de-funding of vocational education and crushing student loan debt. 

To understand what can be done, the US needs to look at what more progressive nations have done with education at all levels, and how education is tied to the larger economy and to Quality Of Life. Being able to reform the American system is a challenge, however, when vested interests (corporations and their government surrogates) work to keep the existing system of inequality and injustice in place.

Related links: 

The College Dream is Over (Gary Roth) 

A People's History of Higher Education in the US 

Student Loan Debt

Wealth and Want

Why the Higher Education Inquirer Continues to Gain Popularity

The Higher Education Inquirer (HEI) continues to grow, with no revenues, no advertising, and no SEO help. And for good reason. HEI fills a niche for student/consumers and workers and their allies. It provides valuable information about how the US higher education system works and what folks can do to navigate that system. 

We cover layoffs and union organizing and strikes in higher education, and we expose predators with some degree of risk-risk that other outlets often won't take. We take a stand on holding big business accountable and we side with struggling student debtors and their families. We question and interrogate higher ducation technology and credentials.  And we dispel myths, disinformation, and hype. 

We research documents of all sorts, including information from the US Department of Education, Securities and Exchange Commission, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Defense, Department of Labor, and Federal Election Commission. 

The Higher Education Inquirer provides trustworthy information and expert opinions and analysis. Our list of authors is diverse and impressive, for many reasons. HEI treats our readers with respect. It gives students and workers a voice, accepting information and evidence from whistleblowers. And it allows for comments (including anonymous comments), comments that we value. 

When others do accept our research, we appreciate it. HEI has been a background source for the NY Times, Bloomberg, Chronicle of Higher Education, ProPublica, Forbes, Military Times, the American Prospect, and several other outlets. We strive to be ahead of the learned herd.  

Seven of Higher Education's Biggest Myths (Glen McGhee)

Several cultural myths and assumptions are deeply embedded in discussions about higher education and colleges as social institutions:

The Myth of Meritocracy
This pervasive myth assumes that higher education is a level playing field where students succeed purely based on their individual merit and hard work. However, this overlooks how socioeconomic background, cultural capital, and systemic inequalities significantly impact educational outcomes.

The Access Myth
This is the belief that simply increasing access to higher education will solve social inequality and lack of economic mobility. While education can create opportunities, it is not a silver bullet for addressing broader structural issues of poverty and labor conditions. Access for the rich is absolutely there, through legacy admissions.  The Varsity Blues (aka College Admissions Scandal) also showed how people could get into elite colleges if they were willing to pay for it.

The Myth of Neutral Education
There's an assumption that education can be politically and ideologically neutral. However, all educational systems reflect certain values, power structures and cultural assumptions. The idea of a purely objective curriculum is itself a myth.

The Myth of Free Speech and Assembly

Universities are not bastions of free speech, and student protesters this year learned that the hard way, being detained, arrested, and expelled for their efforts. Universities like UCLA have done even more to constrain protests, limiting assembly to tiny free speech zones. Presidents are afraid to challenge trustees, and with some notable exceptions, teachers and staff are unwilling to speak truth to power. Students, too, are afraid that their grades may be affected if they challenge their professors.   

The Myth of the University as a Benevolent University

Often, universities are portrayed as benevolent institutions solely focused on the betterment of society.  In reality, higher education institutions are deeply embedded in and influenced by broader societal forces and economic pressures, including pressure from university trustees and major donors. Also, elite universities have for centuries used their power and resources to take land from those with less power.  

 

 

The Myth of the Rational Student: The assumption that students are rational actors who make informed decisions about their education often ignores the impact of social, economic, and cultural factors. In addition to marketing and advertising, many students are influenced by family expectations, peer pressure, and societal norms, which can shape their choices.

The Economic Imperative Myth

This is the belief that the sole purpose of higher education is to prepare students for the job market and increase their earning potential.  This myth is understandable given the vast number of underemployed college graduates.  

This myth prioritizes economic outcomes over other valuable benefits of a college education, such as personal growth, critical thinking skills, and civic engagement.And it can lead to a decline in the quality of education, as colleges prioritize marketable programs, even if they don't align with students' skills, abilities, or interests.

 

Overemphasizing economic outcomes can exacerbate existing inequalities. Students from low-income backgrounds may feel pressured to choose majors perceived to be financially lucrative, even if they are not their first choice. This can limit their educational and career opportunities in the long run. 

 

Advocates for a broader view of higher education argue that colleges should prioritize a well-rounded education that prepares students for a variety of life paths. This includes developing critical thinking skills, fostering creativity, and promoting social justice.

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)