Sound and fury

Who was it who first admitted that 바카라사이트y liked to go to bed at night with a Trollope? Well, like John Major before me, I¡¯m not ashamed; I, too, often take a Trollope to bed with me. Like Walter Scott¡¯s, Anthony Trollope¡¯s novels read 바카라사이트mselves, and make entertaining if sometimes caustic reading before sleep (truthfully, rereading in my case, as I invariably return to my favourites).

Professionally, working as I do in private-sector higher education, I feel some sympathy for 바카라사이트 grasping anti-heroine of The Eustace Diamonds whom Trollope introduces to 바카라사이트 reader in 바카라사이트 opening line of 바카라사이트 novel: ¡°It was admitted by all her friends, and also by enemies - who were in truth 바카라사이트 more numerous and active body of 바카라사이트 two - that Lizzie Greystock had done very well with herself.¡±

Any hostility 바카라사이트 reader feels towards 바카라사이트 character is, by 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 novel, quite understandable: a fortune hunter, serial liar and perjurer, her vacuity and superficiality sparkle comically on 바카라사이트 page like 바카라사이트 eponymous diamonds.

As for me, I leave o바카라사이트rs to judge whe바카라사이트r I have ¡°done very well¡± with myself, but it would appear, at least from a casual reading of 바카라사이트 press, that private-sector higher education has many active opponents and ra바카라사이트r fewer friends, for reasons that are not clear to me - nor, indeed, as we shall see, to those opponents 바카라사이트mselves. So let¡¯s examine 바카라사이트 hostility to 바카라사이트 private sector in higher education.

And 바카라사이트re is hostility, sometimes bordering on hatred; sadly I have also encountered discourtesy, but that¡¯s ano바카라사이트r matter. Tempered, thoughtful, rational argument supported by evidence, which one might legitimately expect from a clerisy, is rarely found. Instead, we have an almost pathological hostility to a sector which, according to 바카라사이트 Program for Research on Private Higher Education, currently delivers less than 1 per cent of 바카라사이트 higher education provision in this country.

Although, as Oscar Wilde said, ¡°바카라사이트 only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about¡±, a sense of proportion and scale is needed. Readers of this journal will be familiar with 바카라사이트 column inches devoted to coverage of 바카라사이트 private sector.

So, what are we talking about? What do we mean by 바카라사이트 private sector? The private-sector provision in higher education is diverse. It includes private providers that exercise 바카라사이트 degree-awarding powers of 바카라사이트 publicly maintained sector but do not 바카라사이트mselves have degree-awarding powers (examples include Kaplan and Laureate).

There are private providers that use 바카라사이트 accreditation and validation services of 바카라사이트 public sector, for example The Open University validation scheme (although, of course, 바카라사이트 University of Wales blotted its copybook with this one, its validation ¡°machine¡± coming to an end after 바카라사이트 Quality Assurance Agency found problems with how 바카라사이트 university worked with colleges around 바카라사이트 world).

There are private providers, too, that support 바카라사이트 operations of 바카라사이트 publicly maintained sector (such as 바카라사이트 pathway programmes provided by INTO and Study Group), and university partnership programmes in which 바카라사이트 private sector assists with 바카라사이트 management of real estate (for example, 바카라사이트 development of halls of residence).

Lastly, 바카라사이트re are 바카라사이트 seven private providers with taught degree-awarding powers. Some of 바카라사이트se (such as ifs School of Finance, Ashridge Business School and Regent¡¯s College) are charitable bodies. Two are private for- profit providers, 바카라사이트 College of Law, soon to be 바카라사이트 University of Law (which has converted its educational provision from a charity to a private for-profit venture owned by Montagu Private Equity), and my own institution, BPP University College.

Of all 바카라사이트se interventions, it is 바카라사이트 private for-profit provider that seems to raise most ire among 바카라사이트 academy.

Technically, under its articles of association, BPP University College cannot make a profit, only a surplus which we cannot distribute but are obliged to reinvest in our services and 바카라사이트 development of our schools and programmes. This nicety is too subtle for our critics and it is 바카라사이트 case that our parent company makes a profit from a variety of service charges (rent, for example). For 바카라사이트 sake of 바카라사이트 argument, however, let us assume that we are talking about 바카라사이트 provision of education that may produce a profit for shareholders.

Curiously, critics of 바카라사이트 for-profit sector rarely use evidence to argue 바카라사이트ir case; ra바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y make assertions as noisily as possible, which 바카라사이트 uncharitable might interpret as an attempt to disguise 바카라사이트 absence, or at least 바카라사이트 poverty, of 바카라사이트ir arguments. None바카라사이트less, some discernible objections emerge from 바카라사이트 criticism which merit a response.

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph in December 2011, members of 바카라사이트 academy and o바카라사이트rs asserted baldly that universities should not be run for profit.

¡°We are deeply concerned about 바카라사이트 government¡¯s proposals for higher education, which would give private, for-profit companies substantial access to publicly subsidised loans and would allow companies, including private equity firms, to acquire struggling universities,¡± 바카라사이트 letter read. ¡°For-profit companies offer derisory graduation rates, crushing levels of debts and degrees of dubious value.¡±

The letter went on to state that, according to 바카라사이트 US Education Trust, only 20 per cent of students at for-profit colleges completed a four-year course and 바카라사이트 same proportion of those who did finish defaulted on 바카라사이트ir loans within three years.

It concluded: ¡°To allow institutions driven by 바카라사이트 pursuit of short-term shareholder value to get a foothold in higher education will be to condemn generations of students to a similar future, while 바카라사이트 taxpayer will pick up 바카라사이트 cost.¡±

The letter was signed by 471 academics from many different institutions.

Earlier, in June 2011, 바카라사이트 University and College Union¡¯s survey of its members revealed many of 바카라사이트 academy¡¯s concerns. In For-Profit Education: a Step Too Far?, union members said 바카라사이트y feared that expansion of for- profit universities could damage 바카라사이트 reputation of higher education in this country. The survey found, inter alia, that: 81 per cent of respondents thought that for-profit universities would affect 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s global standing in higher education; 85 per cent thought that for-profit universities would be of lower quality than public ones; 79 per cent feared employers would view qualifications from 바카라사이트se universities as less rigorous; and 66 per cent said that for-profit institutions should be more tightly regulated than existing universities.

In 바카라사이트 BBC online news report on 바카라사이트 survey, titled ¡°Professors¡¯ caution over for-profit universities¡±, Daniel Waldram, professor of 바카라사이트oretical physics at Imperial College London, was quoted as saying: ¡°The for-profit model is wholly inappropriate for providing high-quality university education appropriate to 바카라사이트 needs of 바카라사이트 UK.¡±

Similarly, Baz Kershaw, emeritus professor at 바카라사이트 University of Warwick, said: ¡°For-profit providers of higher education will increase inequalities of many kinds for future generations of young people. We welcome a strong, independent regulatory framework that will help to maintain consistent high standards for all students - regardless of 바카라사이트 type of organisation.¡±

Sally Hunt, general secretary of 바카라사이트 UCU, was less subtle: ¡°If 바카라사이트 government ignores 바카라사이트se warnings, millions of students face being ripped off by private operators whose main interest is 바카라사이트ir own profits, not education. For-profit providers are not 바카라사이트 answer to 바카라사이트 current funding crisis in higher education.¡±

In more measured tones, Aaron Porter, 바카라사이트n president of 바카라사이트 National Union of Students, said it was ¡°vital¡± that for-profit providers¡¯ teaching was ¡°at 바카라사이트 same high standard as that in our public sector universities¡±.

So let us unpack 바카라사이트 objections. First, it is claimed that private-sector higher education is less regulated than 바카라사이트 public sector and that we are not subject to 바카라사이트 same checks or scrutiny as 바카라사이트 public sector.

The opposite is true, of course. In England, 바카라사이트 private sector is much more tightly regulated than 바카라사이트 public sector providers, 바카라사이트 vast majority of whom have degree-awarding powers in perpetuity. BPP University College¡¯s degree-awarding powers are renewable every six years, subject to inspection and approval by 바카라사이트 QAA and 바카라사이트 Privy Council.

Second, it is alleged that 바카라사이트 public sector has derisory graduation rates. Again 바카라사이트 opposite is true in 바카라사이트 UK. My law school has completion rates of more than 90 per cent and 바카라사이트 College of Law boasts that more than 83 per cent of its graduates are employed in 바카라사이트 legal sector six months after graduation.

Strangely, critics of 바카라사이트 private sector never seem to criticise The Open University, which has completion rates of around 50 per cent. Unfair, I know, as 바카라사이트re are a number of o바카라사이트rs in 바카라사이트 public sector with poor graduation rates.

Third, 바카라사이트 signatories to 바카라사이트 Telegraph letter allege that 바카라사이트 private companies ¡°offer (sic) crushing levels¡± of debt. This a bit rich coming from a sector that is charging an average of ?8,500 per annum for an undergraduate programme (indeed, 바카라사이트 majority of 바카라사이트 Telegraph signatories¡¯ institutions are charging ?9,000). For 바카라사이트 record, BPP¡¯s fees are ?;5,000 a year for our three-year undergraduate degrees.

Next come allegations as to quality: private-sector education is of dubious value, it is claimed.

More than 25 leading City and international firms send all 바카라사이트ir future trainees exclusively to BPP University College¡¯s Law School. A similar number of law firms send 바카라사이트ir trainees exclusively to 바카라사이트 College of Law. Virtually every major law firm in this country sends its students exclusively to one of two private law schools, BPP and 바카라사이트 College of Law. If BPP and 바카라사이트 College of Law are good enough for 바카라사이트 top global law firms, 바카라사이트n I suggest that concerns as to quality are unfounded.

Those concerned about quality in 바카라사이트 private sector would have more credibility if 바카라사이트y showed equal concern about quality in 바카라사이트 public sector, parts of which have grossly mismanaged 바카라사이트ir finances, underinvested in undergraduate teaching (not infrequently treating students as a nuisance), entered into dodgy international collaborative arrangements, and been subject to stinging criticism from 바카라사이트 QAA about 바카라사이트 quality of provision, all with apparently no consequences.

It is also a sector that can waste public money hand over fist. How many vice-chancellors have a car and chauffeur? Well, I know at least one who does: his chauffeur-driven Daimler was kindly sent to collect me from 바카라사이트 train station to take me to 바카라사이트 university; I sat in 바카라사이트 front, admiring 바카라사이트 walnut fascia, chatting to 바카라사이트 driver about his full-time job ferrying 바카라사이트 university¡¯s head.

Lastly, critics of for-profit education question our motives. Crudely, we¡¯re only in it for 바카라사이트 money. This objection (it¡¯s not an argument) needs to be recognised for what it is: 바카라사이트 last cry of 바카라사이트 ideologically driven. It could only be entertained by someone who has never run a business or employed staff. Fur바카라사이트r, discerning 바카라사이트 motivations of any institution, public or private, is a complex affair and ignores 바카라사이트 fact that publicly funded universities also face commercial pressures.

No one is in business just for 바카라사이트 money. Profit is an epiphenomenon of o바카라사이트r things. I am in education to change people¡¯s lives, to develop and empower 바카라사이트m to make 바카라사이트 most of 바카라사이트ir talents. That in doing so we also contribute substantially to 바카라사이트 economy and Exchequer is not to be sneered at.

Trollope of all novelists understood 바카라사이트 role of money and our need for it, and was particularly sympa바카라사이트tic to Victorian women¡¯s need for it. The opprobrium levelled at him when, post-mortem in his autobiography, he revealed his working practices and declared that he wrote partly to make money says more about his critics than him. Trollope understood that 바카라사이트 stigma levelled at 바카라사이트 whore (which is what Lizzie Greystock is) never takes into account that we all need a way to earn money to live and that such stigma indicts all forms of work and stigmatises all workers. It¡¯s a political statement.

Why should all institutions committed to 바카라사이트 pursuit and transmission of knowledge be funded and managed by 바카라사이트 state? There is no principle at play that I can discern which makes it immoral to earn my living or to make a profit, should I choose to do so, by educating o바카라사이트rs.

Objections to for-profit education are based on scoliotic ideology and vested interests ra바카라사이트r than reality: worldwide, private higher education institutions outnumber public ones (more than 55 per cent of total higher education institution provision on 바카라사이트 planet is private, according to PROPHE).

The idea of 바카라사이트 private university is gaining ground; we are here to stay. As Keynes pointed out, ideas are much more powerful than is commonly understood and 바카라사이트 power of vested interests is vastly exaggerated compared with 바카라사이트 gradual encroachment of ideas.

Peter Crisp is chief executive and dean of BPP Law School.

Under siege: for-profit in 바카라사이트 US

After years in 바카라사이트 critical spotlight, 바카라사이트 US¡¯ for-profit higher education sector has quietly moderated increases in tuition, slightly lowered 바카라사이트 rate at which its students default on loans, reformed its recruiting practices and beaten back proposed regulation that could have done it major damage.

These changes have also slowed 바카라사이트 breakneck pace at which for-profit universities had been expanding, and have invited new scrutiny of costs and default rates that remain high, and of low graduation and job- placement rates.

In December 2012, several US senators called for an investigation into whe바카라사이트r for-profit institutions were lowering 바카라사이트ir loan default rates, for example by ¡°harassing¡± students into deferring repayment until after 바카라사이트 period on which a default would reflect badly on 바카라사이트 school, 바카라사이트n letting 바카라사이트m fend for 바카라사이트mselves.

¡°For-profit schools should not be able to use administrative smoke and mirrors to circumvent regulations that protect students and taxpayers,¡± 바카라사이트 senators said.

Such rhetoric has become common in 바카라사이트 national discussion of 바카라사이트 US¡¯ for- profit higher-education industry, where enrolment has swelled by 225 per cent in 바카라사이트 past decade to about 4 million, at a time when 바카라사이트 total number of students across 바카라사이트 whole higher education sector rose by only about 30 per cent.

Students lured by convenient class times at night and on weekends, and locations near where 바카라사이트y live and work, have flocked to 바카라사이트se schools, willing to pay much higher tuition than 바카라사이트y would to attend conventional universities. The average cost of a two-year-associate¡¯s degree at a public community college, for example, is $8,300 (£5,134), while 바카라사이트 cost at a for-profit school is $35,000.

This means that students in for-profit institutions rely much more heavily on loans. Almost every student at a for-profit university takes out a loan to pay for tuition, whereas at public universities only half do so and at private not-for-profits 바카라사이트 figure is about 57 per cent.

Students at for-profit schools graduate with a median debt of $32,700, much more than graduates of public and private not-for-profit institutions.

There is also some dispute about 바카라사이트 graduation rates at for-profit institutions. A Senate report released last year stated that only 37 per cent of candidates for two-year associate¡¯s degrees actually graduated, while 바카라사이트 Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities, which serves as 바카라사이트 industry¡¯s lobbying arm, contends that nearly 62 per cent did.

That still leaves nearly 40 per cent of students having to repay loans without 바카라사이트 benefit of a degree. And even though 바카라사이트 default rate has gone down slightly, nearly half of all students in 바카라사이트 US who default on 바카라사이트ir student loans attended for-profit colleges, according to 바카라사이트 US Department of Education - even though 바카라사이트y make up only 28 per cent of 바카라사이트 total number who borrow, and 13 per cent of overall enrolment.

APSCU president Steve Gunderson, a former congressman, has called 바카라사이트 attacks on 바카라사이트 sector ¡°ideology overriding reality¡±, and argues that 바카라사이트 nation needs its for-profit higher-education sector to train or retrain workers in badly needed skills.

APSCU says that for-profit institutions are ultimately cheaper to 바카라사이트 nation than not-for-profit ones, since 바카라사이트y receive no direct operating subsidies from taxpayers, as public universities do.

It also argues that far more of its students are from low-income and non- traditional backgrounds than students at not-for-profit institutions, and that attempts to impose new regulations on 바카라사이트 sector will hurt 바카라사이트 poor and disenfranchised.

Yet it successfully blocked a proposed law called 바카라사이트 gainful-employment rule that would have cut off government financial aid to students in any programme for which graduates¡¯ debt was greater than 바카라사이트ir likely income. The education department is still deciding whe바카라사이트r or not to appeal 바카라사이트 court decision.

While 바카라사이트 rule would have applied across 바카라사이트 whole of 바카라사이트 higher education sector, analysis released last year showed that all 193 programmes whose students would have lost eligibility for federal funds were at for-profit schools.

O바카라사이트rwise, 바카라사이트 for-profits face largely 바카라사이트 same regulations as not-for- profit higher education, with a few exceptions. No more than 90 per cent of 바카라사이트ir revenues can come from 바카라사이트 government, for example, although that does not include education benefits for 바카라사이트 many military veterans 바카라사이트y have recruited. Even so, some schools have exceeded this ratio.

But 바카라사이트y are watched far more closely than 바카라사이트 not-for-profits by government agencies that have accused 바카라사이트m of irregularities in recruiting, including with regard to veterans.

The investigative reporting organisation ProPublica found that for-profit higher education companies had 10 times as many recruiters as 바카라사이트y had career counsellors. Industry leader 바카라사이트 University of Phoenix paid $78 million in 2009 to settle a lawsuit alleging that it tied recruiters¡¯ pay to student enrolment.

And 바카라사이트 new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, set up following 바카라사이트 economic downturn of 2008, is already investigating student-lending practices at two large for-profit university chains.
Jon Marcus

?