Big thinkin'

~ Monday, June 11 ~
Permalink Tags: sociology economics education for-profits for profit colleges online college conferences academia higher education highered
3 notes
~ Monday, March 19 ~
Permalink
thesocialmedianerd:

It’s official: public education is over. Graduation is a privilege for the rich.
Santa Monica College is proposing to charge $600 to $800 - over four times the standard price - for those high-population, core academic classes that are  required to graduate, transfer, or take higher-level courses.
This L.A. Op-Ed helps break it down:

 Creating a two-tier system of fees sets a serious precedent that could change the basic nature of the community college system. Once a handful of courses pay for themselves, the temptation to add more would be hard to resist, and the temptation for other campuses to join in would be overwhelming. 

Every student unable to pay the higher prices would be locked out from all access to higher education. 
Photo: Campus of Santa Monica College, which has 34,000 students and one of the highest transfer rates to four-year universities in California’s community college system. (Michael Robinson Chavez / Los Angeles Times / March 9, 2012)

It’s all moving so rapidly now that it is hard to keep up. We’ve seen dark days in higher education before but something about this feels like a structural shift. That’s likely because I believe the overall U.S. economy to be experiencing a fundamental structural shift and since one acts back on the other…
Yeah.
I hope, hope, hope people are paying attention even as my pragmatic nature knows that is highly unlikely.

thesocialmedianerd:

It’s official: public education is over. Graduation is a privilege for the rich.

Santa Monica College is proposing to charge $600 to $800 - over four times the standard price - for those high-population, core academic classes that are  required to graduate, transfer, or take higher-level courses.

This L.A. Op-Ed helps break it down:

 Creating a two-tier system of fees sets a serious precedent that could change the basic nature of the community college system. Once a handful of courses pay for themselves, the temptation to add more would be hard to resist, and the temptation for other campuses to join in would be overwhelming. 

Every student unable to pay the higher prices would be locked out from all access to higher education. 

Photo: Campus of Santa Monica College, which has 34,000 students and one of the highest transfer rates to four-year universities in California’s community college system. (Michael Robinson Chavez / Los Angeles Times / March 9, 2012)

It’s all moving so rapidly now that it is hard to keep up. We’ve seen dark days in higher education before but something about this feels like a structural shift. That’s likely because I believe the overall U.S. economy to be experiencing a fundamental structural shift and since one acts back on the other…

Yeah.

I hope, hope, hope people are paying attention even as my pragmatic nature knows that is highly unlikely.

Tags: education highered higher education
19 notes
reblogged via thesocialmedianerd
~ Friday, October 28 ~
Permalink Tags: academia highered sociology
105 notes
reblogged via politicalprof
~ Friday, July 1 ~
Permalink Tags: highered
22 notes
reblogged via futureofeducation
~ Monday, June 27 ~
Permalink

We know one particularly disturbing fact: For-profit colleges and universities educate 12% of the postsecondary population, but have huge attrition rates and account for account for half of the federal-loan defaults, measured in dollars. That ratio suggests that the for-profits are only interested in enrolling students—any students—but don’t particularly care if those students graduate, get well-paying jobs and are thus able to pay back their student loans.

But I want to go a step farther and ask, “Who exactly attends for-profit colleges”? More skeptically, I wonder what kind of prospective student the for-profits are targeting by way of their extensive recruiting machines.

The results, it turns out, are though-provoking. The Institute for Higher Education Policy issued a press release on June 14 bearing the headline “More Low-Income Students Begin at For-Profits.” The key statistic that they relate: “low-income students—between the ages of 18 and 26 and whose total household income is near or below the poverty level—are more likely to be overrepresented at for-profit institutions and are underrepresented at public and private four-year institutions.”

Moreover, these representation ratios are part of a trend. From “2000 to 2008, the percentage of low-income students enrolling in for-profits increased from 13 percent to 19 percent, while the percentage enrolling in public four-year institutions declined from 20 percent to 15 percent.”

Who Goes to For-Profit Colleges? - Innovations - The Chronicle of Higher Education

Ok, I’m not sure if I should be happy or despondent about the trend in recent popular literature bending towards my dissertation research.

This one comes closest yet to asking my question. However, like almost every other analysis it conflates SES with race which I think obscures valuable data.

In most aggregrate data on inequality the race variable operates above and beyond the combined effect of all other individual variables. That is to say that being poor, living in a high-crime, urban community and having the same generational poverty does not equal similar outcomes for blacks and whites. Blackness — or what blackness means societally — is greater than the sum total of all other parts. Being black is special. That we talk about it in this new post-racial way as if it is all just a matter of class says more about where we are politically than it does about any social science evidence.

So, yeah. Why are so many black kids choosing for-profits? That’s still the question.

Tags: academia highered 4profits
1 note