2 ms·

Couldn't you start a small for-profit uni that uses all the tactics described in the article to recruit students, but then pay teachers to deliver a high qualit

Couldn't you start a small for-profit uni that uses all the tactics described in the article to recruit students, but then pay teachers to deliver a high quality, practical education? You'd get all the benefits of the loan lock-in. Your grads would have a higher likelihood of getting a decent paying job that would pay back the loan in a shorter time. Then you could aim your collections aholes at your dropouts and use the loan lock-in as leverage-- either they keep getting their part-time wage garnished or they finish the program so they can get a higher paying job.

rleigh 8y ago
The main problem as I see it is the dynamic that "if you pay, you pass". I've seen first hand the unwillingness to fail students who have done no work and have zero aptitude or willingness to learn. And that's just the lazy ones. I'm not even including the students who tried but will do poorly. They all get passed! I've only seen one person be failed, and it took several months of investigation before it happened. They didn't attend any sessions or lab project work for months, but they didn't want to kick them out because they were a rich foreign student. This clearly devalues a university education for those who do work hard and succeed. And it also devalues the institution for its lack of intellectual rigour and enforcement of strict standards. I would be more than happy for paying students to be held to strict and high standards, but having money be a big part of the equation seems to have corrupted even well regarded universities. (My perspective is from the UK universities; when the courses were completely funded by the government through local education authorities, they didn't have a problem with giving mediocre or bad students the boot, but today it's nearly impossible.)

2 ms·

Couldn't you start a small for-profit uni that uses all the tactics described in the article to recruit students, but then pay teachers to deliver a high qualit

by jancsika 8y ago

rleigh 8y ago
The main problem as I see it is the dynamic that "if you pay, you pass". I've seen first hand the unwillingness to fail students who have done no work and have zero aptitude or willingness to learn. And that's just the lazy ones. I'm not even including the students who tried but will do poorly. They all get passed! I've only seen one person be failed, and it took several months of investigation before it happened. They didn't attend any sessions or lab project work for months, but they didn't want to kick them out because they were a rich foreign student. This clearly devalues a university education for those who do work hard and succeed. And it also devalues the institution for its lack of intellectual rigour and enforcement of strict standards. I would be more than happy for paying students to be held to strict and high standards, but having money be a big part of the equation seems to have corrupted even well regarded universities. (My perspective is from the UK universities; when the courses were completely funded by the government through local education authorities, they didn't have a problem with giving mediocre or bad students the boot, but today it's nearly impossible.)