Poll: Should taxpayers fund any and every choice in school and/or major?
This poll is closed.
Yes
20.00%
3 20.00%
No
80.00%
12 80.00%
Not sure
0%
0 0%
Total 15 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Should taxpayers fund any and every choice in school and/or major?
#11
(08-19-2021, 12:22 AM)sanantone Wrote: Unlike Hillsdale, Grove City College accepts state grants and even tells students to fill out the FAFSA if they want a state grant. They offer loans through PNC Bank, and the cap is $58,000. On average, Grove City College students have $40,600 in private loan debt upon graduation. That's more than the national average for all student loan debt. Over half of their students take out private loans. After the average amount of non-loan aid is applied, students have to pay around $17,740 per year for tuition and room and board. 

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/gro...269/paying
https://www.gcc.edu/Home/Admissions-Fina...Attendance

The colleges I've seen make the no debt thing work, such as Berea College, accept federal grants.

Then I guess it's a good thing that I didn't say, "Every institution should be like Grove City College."

My point was that the artificial ocean of money from Title IV leads to higher tuition rates, which at $2 trillion and counting is clearly not good for students, and that without it institutions will have to innovate to keep finances manageable for students.

The examples I gave were not meant to be the only ways that could ever happen, but simply to show that innovation in this area is possible.

Is that really so controversial?
BS, Information Systems concentration, Charter Oak State College
MA in Educational Technology Leadership, George Washington University
18 doctoral level semester-hours in Business Administration, Baker College
In progress: EdD in Educational Leadership, Manhattanville College

More at https://stevefoerster.com
Reply
#12
(08-19-2021, 01:39 AM)SteveFoerster Wrote:
(08-19-2021, 12:22 AM)sanantone Wrote: Unlike Hillsdale, Grove City College accepts state grants and even tells students to fill out the FAFSA if they want a state grant. They offer loans through PNC Bank, and the cap is $58,000. On average, Grove City College students have $40,600 in private loan debt upon graduation. That's more than the national average for all student loan debt. Over half of their students take out private loans. After the average amount of non-loan aid is applied, students have to pay around $17,740 per year for tuition and room and board. 

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/gro...269/paying
https://www.gcc.edu/Home/Admissions-Fina...Attendance

The colleges I've seen make the no debt thing work, such as Berea College, accept federal grants.

Then I guess it's a good thing that I didn't say, "Every institution should be like Grove City College."

My point was that the artificial ocean of money from Title IV leads to higher tuition rates, which at $2 trillion and counting is clearly not good for students, and that without it institutions will have to innovate to keep finances manageable for students.

The examples I gave were not meant to be the only ways that could ever happen, but simply to show that innovation in this area is possible.

Is that really so controversial?
I'm just a realist, so I look at practicality. Individual schools have been free to experiment with certain aid structures, and some structures are mostly failures that have worse outcomes than what we have at most schools. Therefore, those examples cannot be used for what is possible. If those methods failed at a small scale, they shouldn't be implemented at more schools. There's been innovation at colleges that participate in Title IV and those that don't. What ultimately matters is what works and what doesn't. Clearly, what Grove City College does works fine for the college but not for the students.
Graduate of Not VUL or ENEB
MS, MSS and Graduate Cert
AAS, AS, BA, and BS
CLEP
Intro Psych 70, US His I 64, Intro Soc 63, Intro Edu Psych 70, A&I Lit 64, Bio 68, Prin Man 69, Prin Mar 68
DSST
Life Dev Psych 62, Fund Coun 68, Intro Comp 469, Intro Astr 56, Env & Hum 70, HTYH 456, MIS 451, Prin Sup 453, HRM 62, Bus Eth 458
ALEKS
Int Alg, Coll Alg
TEEX
4 credits
TECEP
Fed Inc Tax, Sci of Nutr, Micro, Strat Man, Med Term, Pub Relations
CSU
Sys Analysis & Design, Programming, Cyber
SL
Intro to Comm, Microbio, Acc I
Uexcel
A&P
Davar
Macro, Intro to Fin, Man Acc
Reply
#13
(08-18-2021, 07:52 PM)SteveFoerster Wrote:
(08-18-2021, 02:02 PM)sanantone Wrote:
(08-18-2021, 01:33 PM)SteveFoerster Wrote:
(08-14-2021, 06:17 PM)sanantone Wrote: Some have proposed that we end government-backed loans because it'll force colleges to lower their tuition.

I'm one of them. Plus I'd replace Pell grants with a dollar for dollar refundable tax credit, killing Title IV altogether and ending the feds' incentive to subvert accreditors into being financial aid gatekeepers.

A few things that come to mind.

1. Poor, young students wouldn't have money upfront. Sure, Walmart and Target will pay for your tuition, but we can't expect millions of college students to work at a handful of companies. Not to mention that getting a job at these companies isn't guaranteed. Walmart and Target wouldn't even give me an interview. LOL. 

...

1. Schools that serve low income populations and are financially stable can make arrangements to get paid in arrears. Schools that aren't finally stable are circling the drain anyway. Note that this isn't a hypothetical, as Hillsdale and Grove City College actually have a system for this because they don't participate in Title IV on principle. A number of non-participating DEAC schools have figured this out too.

...

@SteveFoerster - What you're describing is a loan, so I don't see how that would be helpful. The difference is that the Student now owes the money at the end to the school, vs the government or a financial institution. Who is to determine who is worthy of this new loan system - the school? If so, we're back to limiting access to many deemed not credit worthy due to being poor to begin with.

On this topic, but not a direct response to this post quoted. Who is to determine what subjects are of value to study - at any given moment in time? What is in demand changes, often quicker than you'd think - but only realized in hindsight. Some fields that could be deemed very valuable today, could easily not exist a decade (or less) from now.  Math is not automatically more valuable than music, literature is not of less value than economics - they're all just different parts of the whole body of knowledge.   I'm not disagreeing with a need of reform, I'm saying the answers are not as simple as restricting AOS subjects or eliminating loans/grants for students.
Amberton University
- MS Human Relations and Business - 2022
Thomas Edison State University (TESU)
- BSBA General Management - 2018
- ASNSM Computer Science -2018

[-] The following 2 users Like allvia's post:
  • rachel83az, ss20ts
Reply
#14
(08-19-2021, 10:22 AM)sanantone Wrote: I'm just a realist, so I look at practicality. Individual schools have been free to experiment with certain aid structures, and some structures are mostly failures that have worse outcomes than what we have at most schools. Therefore, those examples cannot be used for what is possible. If those methods failed at a small scale, they shouldn't be implemented at more schools. There's been innovation at colleges that participate in Title IV and those that don't. What ultimately matters is what works and what doesn't. Clearly, what Grove City College does works fine for the college but not for the students.

If by worse outcomes you're including low cost DEAC schools, I'm not sure that's fair. Schools that cater to all comers tend to have lower graduation rates, whether that category, community colleges, RA for-profits, or California correspondence law schools. A lower graduation rate is the consequence to giving chances to people who don't get them from more selective institutions. I also wonder whether there's something happening there as happens with MOOCs, where completion rates look abysmal, but largely because the low/no cost attracts people who just want to learn a few things à la carte and then bail.

As for Grove City College, their repayment rate is something like 98%, so I'm not sure that's actually clear that it doesn't work for students. I share your opinion that it's a lot of debt, but I'm reluctant to speak for them, especially since, as you and freeloader pointed out, the school is something of a special case.
BS, Information Systems concentration, Charter Oak State College
MA in Educational Technology Leadership, George Washington University
18 doctoral level semester-hours in Business Administration, Baker College
In progress: EdD in Educational Leadership, Manhattanville College

More at https://stevefoerster.com
Reply
#15
(08-19-2021, 12:13 PM)allvia Wrote:
(08-18-2021, 07:52 PM)SteveFoerster Wrote:
(08-18-2021, 02:02 PM)sanantone Wrote:
(08-18-2021, 01:33 PM)SteveFoerster Wrote:
(08-14-2021, 06:17 PM)sanantone Wrote: Some have proposed that we end government-backed loans because it'll force colleges to lower their tuition.

I'm one of them. Plus I'd replace Pell grants with a dollar for dollar refundable tax credit, killing Title IV altogether and ending the feds' incentive to subvert accreditors into being financial aid gatekeepers.

A few things that come to mind.

1. Poor, young students wouldn't have money upfront. Sure, Walmart and Target will pay for your tuition, but we can't expect millions of college students to work at a handful of companies. Not to mention that getting a job at these companies isn't guaranteed. Walmart and Target wouldn't even give me an interview. LOL. 

...

1. Schools that serve low income populations and are financially stable can make arrangements to get paid in arrears. Schools that aren't finally stable are circling the drain anyway. Note that this isn't a hypothetical, as Hillsdale and Grove City College actually have a system for this because they don't participate in Title IV on principle. A number of non-participating DEAC schools have figured this out too.

...

@SteveFoerster - What you're describing is a loan, so I don't see how that would be helpful. The difference is that the Student now owes the money at the end to the school, vs the government or a financial institution. Who is to determine who is worthy of this new loan system - the school? If so, we're back to limiting access to many deemed not credit worthy due to being poor to begin with.

On this topic, but not a direct response to this post quoted. Who is to determine what subjects are of value to study - at any given moment in time? What is in demand changes, often quicker than you'd think - but only realized in hindsight. Some fields that could be deemed very valuable today, could easily not exist a decade (or less) from now.  Math is not automatically more valuable than music, literature is not of less value than economics - they're all just different parts of the whole body of knowledge.   I'm not disagreeing with a need of reform, I'm saying the answers are not as simple as restricting AOS subjects or eliminating loans/grants for students.


Yes, they would be loans owed to the school, and those don't come with deferment and forbearance protections, forgiveness options, or the ability to adjust payments based on income. ITT Tech loaned money directly to students in a predatory fashion, of course. 

Some subjects haven't ever been in demand, or they haven't been in demand for over 100 years. However, any program that requires labs is going to be more expensive to operate. Also, colleges and universities have to pay a lot more to attract professors for fields that pay a lot more outside of academia i.e. engineering and accounting. You also have to consider ability to pay. Looking at typical salaries, can literature graduates afford to repay as much as engineering graduates? 


(08-19-2021, 12:14 PM)SteveFoerster Wrote:
(08-19-2021, 10:22 AM)sanantone Wrote: I'm just a realist, so I look at practicality. Individual schools have been free to experiment with certain aid structures, and some structures are mostly failures that have worse outcomes than what we have at most schools. Therefore, those examples cannot be used for what is possible. If those methods failed at a small scale, they shouldn't be implemented at more schools. There's been innovation at colleges that participate in Title IV and those that don't. What ultimately matters is what works and what doesn't. Clearly, what Grove City College does works fine for the college but not for the students.

If by worse outcomes you're including low cost DEAC schools, I'm not sure that's fair. Schools that cater to all comers tend to have lower graduation rates, whether that category, community colleges, RA for-profits, or California correspondence law schools. A lower graduation rate is the consequence to giving chances to people who don't get them from more selective institutions. I also wonder whether there's something happening there as happens with MOOCs, where completion rates look abysmal, but largely because the low/no cost attracts people who just want to learn a few things à la carte and then bail.

As for Grove City College, their repayment rate is something like 98%, so I'm not sure that's actually clear that it doesn't work for students. I share your opinion that it's a lot of debt, but I'm reluctant to speak for them, especially since, as you and freeloader pointed out, the school is something of a special case.

In general, comparative public universities and private, non-profit universities that have near 100% acceptance rates and similar demographics to for-profits have higher graduation rates than for-profit colleges. A few days ago, I came across a study that controlled for demographics and still found that for-profits perform worse. I'll see if I can find it again because I didn't bookmark it or download the PDF, but the vast majority of studies indicate that for-profits perform worse than public and not-for-profit colleges. They leave a lot of poor students worse off than they would have been if they had never attended college. 

If it's fine for Grove City College students to have high student loan debt because they pay it off, then what is the issue with the $2 trillion in debt if the government is profiting from high payment rates? Half of it comes from graduate and professional school, and those students pay off their debt at a higher rate than those with only an undergraduate degree. We keep throwing around the $2 trillion figure without knowing where it comes from, and a lot of it comes from people going to medical school, law school, dental school, nurse practitioner programs, MBAs, etc. The amount of student loan debt undergraduate students have has been exaggerated by the media. The debt is not distributed evenly (average is often not a good measure of central tendency), and the student loan defaults come disproportionately from for-profit colleges. Honestly, if the government stopped giving financial aid to for-profit colleges, that would eliminate nearly half of the student loan defaults. Ending Title IV would hit the for-profit college sector harder than other sectors resulting almost all of the schools shutting down, so that would be an upside. 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/16/graduate...-debt.html
Graduate of Not VUL or ENEB
MS, MSS and Graduate Cert
AAS, AS, BA, and BS
CLEP
Intro Psych 70, US His I 64, Intro Soc 63, Intro Edu Psych 70, A&I Lit 64, Bio 68, Prin Man 69, Prin Mar 68
DSST
Life Dev Psych 62, Fund Coun 68, Intro Comp 469, Intro Astr 56, Env & Hum 70, HTYH 456, MIS 451, Prin Sup 453, HRM 62, Bus Eth 458
ALEKS
Int Alg, Coll Alg
TEEX
4 credits
TECEP
Fed Inc Tax, Sci of Nutr, Micro, Strat Man, Med Term, Pub Relations
CSU
Sys Analysis & Design, Programming, Cyber
SL
Intro to Comm, Microbio, Acc I
Uexcel
A&P
Davar
Macro, Intro to Fin, Man Acc
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Nicaragua seizes all assets from INCAE Business School elcastor21 0 297 09-26-2023, 04:55 PM
Last Post: elcastor21
  Found: $1,500 (TOTAL) At-own-pace Law School dcan 48 9,063 08-28-2023, 10:34 PM
Last Post: resistk
Question Poll: Just not sure what to major in for grad school and which direction to go! Randyb100 21 1,470 05-26-2023, 03:26 AM
Last Post: Randyb100
  Can I get a High School Diploma after getting my GED and Associates? IReallyNeedADegree 24 2,584 02-06-2023, 07:13 PM
Last Post: dfrecore
  School Psychologists?? Vle045 3 907 01-21-2022, 03:22 AM
Last Post: PrettyFlyforaChiGuy
  U of Michigan removes School President bjcheung77 0 557 01-15-2022, 09:51 PM
Last Post: bjcheung77
  Worst School Name Alpha 13 2,063 10-04-2021, 12:39 PM
Last Post: Marcus Aurelius
  Back 2 School - Buy Mac/iPad - get AirPods + 20% off AppleCare bjcheung77 0 672 06-23-2021, 04:59 PM
Last Post: bjcheung77
  For Sale: Virtual High School with AP bjcheung77 11 1,738 06-01-2021, 01:11 PM
Last Post: dfrecore
  Learning Care Group Acquires Young School bjcheung77 0 585 05-17-2021, 06:55 PM
Last Post: bjcheung77

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)