ITT Technical Institute

[CAA Flagship]

....is no more.

The company that operates the for-profit chain, one of the country’s largest, announced that it was permanently closing all its campuses nationwide. It blamed the shutdown on the recent move by the U.S. Education Department to ban ITT from enrolling new students who use federal financial aid.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-i ... story.html

[YoUDeeMan]

'“Both Corinthian and ITT made the same bad decision, which was to guarantee third-party private loans” while pushing out more students into a weak jobs market after the Great Recession, said Trace Urdan, a Credit Suisse research analyst who follows the for-profit education sector"

No problem...Hillary wants to pump out millions more students into a weak job market...with free education.

[Pwns]

Great. Are we going to scrutinize departments of multicultural comparative literature the same way?

[89Hen]

kalm's military enrollment just got a boost.

[Skjellyfetti]

Great. Are we going to scrutinize departments of multicultural comparative literature the same way?

Not really comparable, imo.

A multicultural comparative literature degree from a brick and mortar, accredited school is exactly what it says it is.

A computer science degree from ITT Tech ain't.

[GannonFan]

Great. Are we going to scrutinize departments of multicultural comparative literature the same way?

Not really comparable, imo.

A multicultural comparative literature degree from a brick and mortar, accredited school is exactly what it says it is.

A computer science degree from ITT Tech ain't.

Eh, it's not as far off as you think it is, as ITT was accredited.

Good little article from Forbes here about the downside of the lack of privately originated loans in the market. Someone should've been watching the shop a little more diligently as federally-sourced student loan money was pumped into a failing school like ITT Tech. Someone watching the till could've raised the warning on ITT much earlier. Just this one school going under is likely to cost taxpayers a good $1B in payouts.

It kinda mirrors the housing debacle from 2008 - the political push here is to have everyone get a degree (then it was to get everyone to own a house), where the financial reality is that it ignored that some schools, like ITT, or other schools offering questionable majors that don't result in employable degrees, are bad bets.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncoop ... 9341f815e1

[Skjellyfetti]

Eh, it's not as far off as you think it is, as ITT was accredited.

....



By an accrediting agency with no reputation whatsoever, is currently under investigation, and is pretty fucking likely to end up in the same place as ITT Tech.

No legit accrediting agency would touch ITT Tech with a 10 foot pole.

[Ivytalk]

And to think I could have had a marketable degree from ITT Tech! Shit!

[GannonFan]

Eh, it's not as far off as you think it is, as ITT was accredited.

....



By an accrediting agency with no reputation whatsoever, is currently under investigation, and is pretty **** likely to end up in the same place as ITT Tech.

No legit accrediting agency would touch ITT Tech with a 10 foot pole.

That's the point, we were apparently okay with a shady accreditation company telling us everything was fine. Just like we're apparently fine with spending billions of dollars subsidizing questionably useful degrees from the "not-for-profit" colleges that seemingly make a lot in profit.

[Skjellyfetti]

That's the point, we were apparently okay with a shady accreditation company telling us everything was fine.

Naw. I'm pretty sure it's just you.

You're the only one I know of with an extensive history on here defending these "universities." (And, defending one of them in this thread by an accreditation company you admit is shady ).

Just like we're apparently fine with spending billions of dollars subsidizing questionably useful degrees from the "not-for-profit" colleges that seemingly make a lot in profit.

So, what's your solution here? Have a government panel to determine what majors will be useful this year and only allow federal loans, Pell grants, GI Bills, etc. for that government sanctioned list of majors? Sounds like a great path toward a planned economy, StalinFan. Or, just revoke all federal money? Or what... what do you suggest?

[Ibanez]

The Art Institute is going through similar woes. My wife used to work for them until January and good thing, they announced they are graduating the students they have and closing their Chs location. That school should be shut down it's the epitome of coddling, grade inflation and not preparing children for the real world.



I would've said adults but having seen and witnessed the people that attended, about 95% of them don't resemble adults.

[HI54UNI]

That's the point, we were apparently okay with a shady accreditation company telling us everything was fine.

Naw. I'm pretty sure it's just you.

You're the only one I know of with an extensive history on here defending these "universities." (And, defending one of them in this thread by an accreditation company you admit is shady ).

Just like we're apparently fine with spending billions of dollars subsidizing questionably useful degrees from the "not-for-profit" colleges that seemingly make a lot in profit.

So, what's your solution here? Have a government panel to determine what majors will be useful this year and only allow federal loans, Pell grants, GI Bills, etc. for that government sanctioned list of majors? Sounds like a great path toward a planned economy, StalinFan. Or, just revoke all federal money? Or what... what do you suggest?

If they are loans they should be subject to underwriting standards just like a house loan or car loan. You want to borrow $200,000 to attend medical school? OK. You want to borrow $200,000 to attend Brown University to major in cello? No.

[GannonFan]

That's the point, we were apparently okay with a shady accreditation company telling us everything was fine.

Naw. I'm pretty sure it's just you.

You're the only one I know of with an extensive history on here defending these "universities." (And, defending one of them in this thread by an accreditation company you admit is shady ).

Just like we're apparently fine with spending billions of dollars subsidizing questionably useful degrees from the "not-for-profit" colleges that seemingly make a lot in profit.

So, what's your solution here? Have a government panel to determine what majors will be useful this year and only allow federal loans, Pell grants, GI Bills, etc. for that government sanctioned list of majors? Sounds like a great path toward a planned economy, StalinFan. Or, just revoke all federal money? Or what... what do you suggest?

Show me where I am defending these universities. I've never done that and I won't. What I do attack, and what you do constantly defend, is the so called "not for profit" universities that basically do the same thing in the pursuit of profit.

What I would do is get the federal government out of being the primary source of student loans in this country. We have a politically motivated goal to get as many kids through college now, no matter the cost, and that's a problem. Especially when the same government has already floated the idea of potentially forgiving these student loans. There is an absolute connection between the cost of college and the rise in the availability and magnitude of student loans. The "not for profit" colleges, sensing a great deal of easy money (which is odd considering they don't want a profit) just raised their costs to go along with the raise in student loans. It would've been more efficient to just show these colleges where we keep the money and just have them go there and get it. The "for profit" schools did the same thing, and that's why they should all be in the same pot - they all, profit and non profit, decided to go for the money.

We shouldn't have specific majors that are allowed - again, I've never said that nor supported that so again, that's something you're just creating. But getting stricter on lending, i.e. less total amount to be lended in the first place, and then reaffirming that these loans need to be paid back, or make the abandonment of paying them back so severe that people don't just skip out on them, would go a long way to reigning in the costs of secondary education and would remind people applying for these loans that they need to have a plan to pay it back. I'm in favor of capping how much student loan money a specific institution could take at one time, but that would need to be thought out as well.

[GannonFan]

Naw. I'm pretty sure it's just you.

You're the only one I know of with an extensive history on here defending these "universities." (And, defending one of them in this thread by an accreditation company you admit is shady ).




So, what's your solution here? Have a government panel to determine what majors will be useful this year and only allow federal loans, Pell grants, GI Bills, etc. for that government sanctioned list of majors? Sounds like a great path toward a planned economy, StalinFan. Or, just revoke all federal money? Or what... what do you suggest?

If they are loans they should be subject to underwriting standards just like a house loan or car loan. You want to borrow $200,000 to attend medical school? OK. You want to borrow $200,000 to attend Brown University to major in cello? No.

That works too, and would help to educate the borrower that they are over-extending themselves versus what they would be getting.

[Pwns]

I don't think we will ever agree on how to evaluate credit-worthiness of certain brick-and-mortar college programs. If it were just university faculty who would complain and gnash their teeth over it it would be okay, but it won't just be them.

You know there will be cries of "____ism" whenever "______ Studies" is inevitably given poor credit-worthiness.

A nice idea, but much like the idea of corralling high school students on college tracks versus vocational/tech school tracks, there are political and legal minefields that will keep it from happening.