We started here, at the very bottom — diploma mills — and argued that these represent really the only form of efficiency pricing in higher education, since the desired endpoint of the transaction is completely obvious to both parties: an official-looking piece of paper testifying to a particular advanced degree, plus the provision of extremely minimal institutional support in the off-chance it will be needed (I have in mind things like plausible-sounding accreditation, and people at the other end of the line who know what to say if phone calls about the degree are placed). Since no collegiate experience of any kind is intended — since, indeed, money is changing hands precisely so that the purchaser can avoid even a whiff of collegiate experience — we do not have to worry about defining and then evaluating the university education for which we are charging the student.
Let’s kick it up a notch now, to very expensive online for-profit universities, objects of a good deal of tut-tutting lately. Here the desired endpoint is equally obvious: certification of a vocational skill for which people will employ you pretty much as soon as you get the degree.
Among the many scandalous features of the online for-profits is that although they do almost exactly what many community colleges do (provide certification for employers that the person holding their degree is able to do a particular job), they do it at a far, far higher price. Not only that, but community colleges have plenty of face to face courses, which are far superior to online.
Online is supposed to be all about cost savings, but the for-profits pretty much use only online and still soak you.
Plus they have insanely high dropout and loan repayment failure rates. And the whole gainful-employment-within-a-reasonable-period-of-time thing doesn’t look too good either.
I mean, think about it. For-profits desperately, sordidly, pounce on any enrollee with a pulse; once they’re got ’em, they’re gonna give everyone A’s to keep ’em. So employers have no idea, based on transcripts, whether people from for-profit schools can do a particular job.
At costs comparable to private liberal arts colleges, for-profit schools are – as you know if you’ve watched the news lately – a national disgrace.
September 13th, 2010 at 9:32AM
College administrators are pushing to turn most schools into online for profits. What they care about is enrollment numbers that can be translated into more money. Of course, more money is needed not to raise professor’s salaries (God forbid) or provide scholarships to deserving students. It obviously isn’t going to be used to pay for better facilities or to put chalk in all classrooms. No, what this money is needed for is to give our administrators the kind of salaries that CEOs of big companies receive. Who cares that the type of course that I teach cannot possibly be taught online? Who cares that, as you say, our diplomas lose all value as a result. As long as our administrators can keep giving themselves huge raises every 15 minutes, to hell with education.
This makes me too angry for words.
September 13th, 2010 at 12:29PM
At the community college we are pushing for more enrollment because the state keeps underfunding us. Tuition is the only place to make up the decrease in funding. There aren’t enough classrooms for the math department. We have to have some of the classes online. The state is not going to build more classroom space for us. Online is our only option right now.
The for-profits can charge so much because of who their target audience is. It’s people who don’t understand anything about money, who aren’t qualified to go to a real college, and who only have to sign a few forms to get their federally subsidized loan. The process is streamlined and they know that in 3 years or so they’ll have their piece of paper. The fact that they’ll never be able to pay off their loans is of no concern to the for-profits and doesn’t really enter the thought process of the dupes who go to these schools.
September 14th, 2010 at 9:21AM
Are for-profit online “universities” really just diploma mills? Granted that they are to some (perhaps considerable) extent rip-offs of students and the U.S. Treasury, is their attraction simply that they promise something for nothing — a credential based on little or no work? Or are they actually doing better than their less expensive “legitimate” competitors in terms of convenience (asynchronous distributed learning) and access to financial aid? Maybe these are things for which many students are prepared to pay a large premium.
To my mind, the University of California online initiative is a whole lot more dangerous than anything the University of Phoenix has done, because it really threatens to erode academic standards. But each institution has to reach its own balance of standards and access.