Thread regarding Corinthian Colleges Inc. layoffs

Yes, that's right. Everest University and Heald College are almost always the fall-back options for students who apply to Harvard but are rejected for lack of maturity. Harvard accepted 5.9% of its applicants for the Class of 2018. All the rest are going to end up at Everest or Heald, except for those who are mechanically inclined. They will end up at Wyotech.

So when Harvard turns one down, and that student goes to CCi, suddenly such student is less mature?

Anon 7788, the main difference between Harvard and CCI is that Harvard's admission committees select the ones they want to admit. CCI chases leads to get them admitted. A Harvard grad is much more marketable for employment than a CCI grad. Your comparison doesn't make any sense.

So some 18 year old signs up for Harvard, including loans, and there is no problem. If an 18 year old goes to a CCi school, then that 18 year old is not mature enough. lol

The problem always has been in admissions. Being sales-driven, and lacking ethics, sales reps enroll students who are not ready for college. Once the students have signed their contracts, it's a slow spiral downhill, through classes where they should fail (professors are pressured to pass them along) until they either drop out or graduate. When they graduate, they find that the reasons that made them unemployable before they started classes still make them unemployable.

These neutralization techniques are used at the campus level to justify the encouragement of admission and discouragement of withdrawal for students who don't read and write well enough for college, students without the appropriate command of the English language and disabled students. Nothing wrong in recruiting these students if CCI provides the services that this student population needs. Rather than telling the student who doesn't know how to read/write well that the instructors will "work" with them, they should be told that they need to attend tutoring (which isn't offered anymore since the tutors were laid off) along with basic reading and writing courses, not offered at CCI but at community colleges. Instead the student starts attending, then stops due to being overwhelmed and either withdraws voluntarily or maxes out of the program due to too many F grades (After a certain amount of F/W grades there is no more title IV funding so they get dismissed from the program and still owe the money.) For the students who don't speak enough English, they are told not to listen to anyone telling them that they can't do it. They need to get to class and the instructor will "work" with them and together they will get through the program so they can work in a Spanish environment. If they make it through because an instructor speaks Spanish, then they realize that they are not marketable (except perhaps Miami) and do not secure employment and now have huge debt. They needed to take ESL classes, not offered at CCI except for a few campuses. The third example of a CCI student is the disabled 50 something going into Med Asst and cannot administer any type of needed less due to tremors. Again, the instructor will "work" with them. Bottom line is these students do not secure employment but have debt to pay. This is the issue facing CCI. Of course there are people who graduate and secure employment but there are many who do not. If the recruiters don't meet their enrollment numbers, they are fired so that motivates them to encourage the admission of students even if they will not benefit. Typical CCI regional and corporate justification of their own positions; turn a blind eye then blame the little people if someone blows the whistle.

These pro-CCi comments are red herrings (another use of "techniques of neutralization" for unethical and perhaps criminal behavior). From my research, I have found that CCi preys upon vulnerable people, targeting veterans, people of color, women, the disabled, and the underemployed. Many of these consumers are unwary about their choices, and are influenced by the aggressive marketing and recruitment that CCi and other FPEs employ. For those who are manually or clerically inclined, for-profit schools are rarely a good value. Community colleges and trade unions offer vocational and trade programs that are much better values.

1 many students come to CCI after failed attempts at traditional school. 2 Who get's to decide who is mature enough to enroll in school?

There are young people who are not mature nor prepared to go to college. If they get recruited to go to college they go, but are not sure why they are there.

Regardless recruiters have goals to meet AND the government doesn't have the balls to say "no loan".

So the recruiters recruit and the government hands out the money and blames the recruiters.

Six years ago Mrs. Obama gave a great speech telling young people they might be better off establishing a good work record before running up a untenable debt.

It was a very good presentation but the rest of her family wasn't listening.

The loans go on and the default numbers get higher.

CCI costs the students much more and for anyone who has been through Admissions or worked in Admissions or Academcs/Education will know that CCI prides itself with more individualized services than the community colleges or state schools provide. However, CCI does not provide the students with these services, such as one-on-one tutoring, smaller class sizes or counseling services. How can they with all of the layoffs that have been going on since 2011. You are right in that CCI student pop differs from the comm college pop. The bottom line is that they end up defaulting because many or them didn't get what they paid for so they are not marketable upon dropping out or graduation.

"Certainly, someone is more likely to default at a CCi school than at a community college, because the costs are much higher at CCi schools. Credits also don't transfer to other colleges."

Yes, there are a bunch of transfer students at the community college that CCi doesn't serve. Thus the two populations are different. It has nothing to do with "much higher costs," but rather the difference in student population.

Maybe Camden Kid could do a complete market analysis of Massage Therapy Schools in the markets where CCi offers Massage Therapy. Compared to Harvard, and most state schools, the total cost at CCi is much less. Likely I'm asking too much.

Emily graduated from Harvard. One thing they teach at Harvard is how to ask relevant questions. Emily asked a relevant question, several times, but she received no answer. Can the KY AG or anyone else prove that those students who chose CCi brands and dropped out or defaulted on student loans wouldn't have done exactly the same thing at their local community colleges? That's an important question. What is the answer?

Did you look where Chang went? Not a cheap school.

The "typical Everest student" has already failed in traditional educational settings. To compare Everest's students with those at the University of Kentucky or even at a community college in Kentucky is simply not realistic or meaningful.

Certainly, someone is more likely to default at a CCi school than at a community college, because the costs are much higher at CCi schools. Credits also don't transfer to other colleges. If you look at the AG complaints, they are long and thorough. Yes, there is fraud at CCi. The recruiting literature and commercials are full of it. As a sociologist, I could show how CCi uses these commercials and literature to target the most vulnerable populations, including veterans, people of color, women, and the underemployed. The California AG's report explains this fraud in detail.

Emily Chang graduated from a private school, both at the k-12 level and college level. I suspect that she might have had a different experience than the typical Everest student.

Emily Chang keeps asking a key question: how do we know that students at a for-profit school would succeed at a non-profit? Her colleague wasn't able to answer it, and the Kentucky AG ducked that question entirely.

Note the KY AG keeps talking about the competition issue. That's really what his actions are about.