Feb. 27, 2015 |
See complete forecast
Copy and paste the link:
Providing "good information" by no means assures that people make "wise decisions." Colleges (like car companies and political parties) spend fortunes on marketing to assure that prospective students will want what they are offering. And, of course, surveys show that the vast majority of graduates are satisfied or very satisfied with the colleges they attended.
Frankly, all we need is another government mandate imposing new costs and reporting responsibilities on state and private organizations. One reason for rising college tuition that never gets enough attention in the media is the accelerating cost of federal government regulations and the increasing intrusion of Washington into all aspects of higher education. Colleges are loathe to complain, given their perennial reliance on federal grants and student loan programs that support tuition.
Barack Obama chiding colleges about rising costs is ludicrous in any case. As CEO of the organization running more red ink than any other in the world, he is hardly in the position to be lecturing anyone about financial restraint and good management.
Ashmole, Your comments are so partisan, it's difficult to discern any logic. Universities are not forced to use federal dollars. Some schools do not. Of course, most graduates are satisfied with their schools. What about the students who did not graduate? The highest dropout rate is during the freshmen and sophomore years. That's a lot of Pell grant money and student loans down the drain. The student loans are debts that affect the overall economy. Universities are loathe to evaluate their programs based on effectiveness. . .
I have not read a hint of another government mandate. I have read that we need to consider changing our current criteria for distributing student aid.
"Everything Obama does has an agenda with one thing in mind, redistribution of wealth and outcome with no consideration of individual rights or merit."
Distributing student aid based solely on graduation rates sounds like a bad idea for a lot of reasons, but there is certainly no obvious way in which it involves "redistribution of wealth and outcome with no consideration of individual rights or merit." How can a plan based on rankings involve no consideration of merit? The consideration may be misplaced, but no consideration of merit? Really?
Also, please explain how the proposed College Scorecard that rates "institutions based on their access and affordability to students as well as student outcomes" involves "no consideration of individual rights."
"Open your eyes America" isn't an argument and it's about as short on details as any statement could be.
This story's online headline is "A look at how KU and its students would fare under President Obama’s higher education reforms."
Yet, the article provides almost zero information that is KU-specific.
By all means, Ben, adapt national news-service-fed stories on higher education for your Kansas and KU readers. But, if you're going to promise original reporting on KU then you'd better deliver. This time you didn't.
If you want to know why tuition is rising. You need look no further than Topeka (see link below).
As for how KU will fare-we will likely do fine. This initiative is being driven by the desire to shut off Pell Grant money to fly by night for profit "colleges" like Kaplan, and University of Phoenix and a lot of VoTech schools and beauty colleges. These "colleges" admit anyone with a pulse and then strive to keep unqualified students enrolled long enough to keep their Pell grant money. Students who do graduate often cannot get jobs because instructional quality is so poor and have much higher rates of students who default on their student loans than do reputable universities. KU is not perfect, but we are not the problem.
KU funding graphic
'Vitter said he was concerned that a focus on graduation rates could erode the quality of education should colleges start competing over graduation rates, maybe even “giving grades away." '
The irony from the Kansas provost, while probably not intentional, is hilarious. Because that certainly doesn't happen at Kansas.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
Find more businesses on Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment ·