COLLEGE for profit -- what could possibly go wrong? In recent years, for-profit universities have sprung up across the nation and even on the Internet, adding the fun of profit to the joy of learning. Derided as "diploma mills," these universities are notorious for cutting corners and even resorting to fraud just to compete in a rapidly growing industry. Nonprofit universities are hesitant to accept transfer credit from these schools, but the U.S. Congress might soon force universities to stop discriminating between the University of Virginia and Bob's Diploma Shop.
New legislation proposed by Republicans for the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act would mandate that nonprofit colleges, such as our own University, accept transfer credit from for-profit colleges without considering the school's accreditation status. Currently, a number of universities will only accept transfer credit from regionally accredited universities. Since most for-profit universities opt for a less demanding form of national accreditation, students who transfer from these schools are frequently denied transfer credit at their new universities.
Almost every college and university in the country has some form of accreditation; without it, students cannot receive federal aid. But accreditation procedures are conducted by over 60 private organizations, creating a wide variety of standards. Most colleges and universities are accredited by one of six regional agencies that are recognized by the National Board of Education; other forms of accreditation are more easily attainable, and are therefore considered less respectable.
Under the new legislation, universities would be forced to abandon policies that discriminate based on accreditation. House Republicans such as Rep. Howard P. McKeon (Calif.) claim that the new provisions were added out of sympathy to transfer students who must take on additional debt to make up the credits that were not accepted. But if Republicans are so concerned about college students and debt, perhaps they should not have rejected the Democrats' proposals to expand Pell Grants to low income students.
In reality, this legislation was added at the request of for-profit groups, including the Career College Association, who suffer from the stigma of lacking regional accreditation. These schools could rectify this problem simply by seeking regional accreditation, which some for-profit schools have successfully obtained. But apparently it was easier to lobby Congress for new legislation than to submit to the regional accreditation process. For-profit universities claim that they can truly match the standards of nonprofit universities; they should prove it by submitting to the same accreditation process as prestigious nonprofit schools. Conforming to the standards required for regional education might hurt these schools' bottom line, but students can only benefit from the adoption of higher standards.
If the Higher Education Act passes in its present form, nonprofit colleges will lose a crucial part of their autonomy in deciding how to grant transfer credit. Without the freedom to use accreditation as a guideline, universities will be forced to come up with new standards on the spot, which could involve the arduous process of reviewing the material from every individual course, an enormous task that few departments have time to take on. Additionally, for-profit universities will have little incentive to strive for regional accreditation, something that we should encourage especially among schools that operate for profit.
One aspect of the new legislation that would benefit students without constraining nonprofit universities is the mandated disclosure of transfer policies. According to House Republicans, students who transfer from for-profit universities have complained that they have been misled by recruiters into thinking that their credits would be transferred, only to be disappointed after switching schools. Nonprofit universities should be upfront with potential transfer students about their policies, perhaps by providing a list of all of the institutions that meet their standards for transfer credit.
At the same time, for-profit universities should be upfront with their own students about their accreditation status. Universities that are not regionally accredited should warn their students that they may have problems transferring credit to regionally accredited schools; advance notice would encourage students to transfer as soon as possible, and students who want to transfer to dream schools might choose a regionally accredited school. Of course, publicizing the fact that some universities lack regional accreditation might hurt these schools' enrollment numbers, or worse, their profits.
Cari Lynn Hennessy's column appears Tuesdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at chennessy@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | YesterdayThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | April 18, 2024Our independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
