Why do people go to for-profit schools?

[reylok]

People I've talked to about college seem to universally dismiss the value of degrees from for-profit schools. I imagine this carries over in to the workplace. I have heard Full Sail University is respected by people in the Entertainment industry, because some of their students have done well in that field. Other than FSU, I don't think I've ever heard one be praised. Are people going to them just to check the degree box so they can get government jobs, or are there some that have good reputations?

Sorry if this is a dumb question, I was trying to clarify in my mind if I should consider going to one. It would be hard to stay motivated if you thought people were going to dismiss your degree.

[ss20ts]

Some of them offers programs that are hard to find elsewhere. Marketing helps. People see XYZ school because they see ads all over when they're online so this school is in the front of their mind not Bob's university.

[Merlin]

People I've talked to about college seem to universally dismiss the value of degrees from for-profit schools. I imagine this carries over in to the workplace. I have heard Full Sail University is respected by people in the Entertainment industry, because some of their students have done well in that field. Other than FSU, I don't think I've ever heard one be praised. Are people going to them just to check the degree box so they can get government jobs, or are there some that have good reputations?

Sorry if this is a dumb question, I was trying to clarify in my mind if I should consider going to one. It would be hard to stay motivated if you thought people were going to dismiss your degree.

This is a common bias that originates from schools like the University of Phoenix which made a bad name for itself due to its predatory practices a couple of decades ago and that for-profit bias has extended to for-profit schools universally. I believe this bias may also be influenced by the break between regional and nationally accredited colleges. Many (though certainly not all) for-profit schools are also nationally accredited since they focus more on trades or teaching professional skills rather than purely academic degrees. So the RA schools will look down on them for that, and this may influence the perspective of their students as well. Lastly, I think many people hear "for-profit" and think that they are just in it for the money and don't care about the students or providing a good education. This may be true with some schools but isn't universally so.

FSU is a perfect example of a good for-profit school that fits into a specific niche providing professional skills. They turn out students that are well prepared for working in their field. I know several people who have taught or lectured at FSU and I have hired some of their students.

Ultimately, if the school you're looking at provides a better value or offers skills you want that are hard to find elsewhere, then it may be worthwhile for you to consider enrolling there. Obviously, there is a lot more that goes into it, particularly cost since many for-profit schools are on the pricey side, but the ROI may be good for you. Then again, just because a school is for-profit they are not all super expensive. A few are actually quite affordable.

[cerich67]

For profit online, distance learning schools have a history of being scams in one or many ways. Phoenix is a great example.

The scams aside, for most people that go to University out of high school, the education is only part of what they are buying, networks and brand being a HUGE part of it.

Online and adult learner colleges will never offer that part of the equation, and some that get large and well known for a while (like Phoenix) end up having a stigma of having students that are not in socio-economic strata of success, so while some may applaud the students for the effort to get the degree and their desire for upward mobility, for others when they see someone with a degree from there they in a way feel like the help is trying to come in the front door. IMHO that is really sad and wrong, but it is what it is.

Even here, we see people struggle with what value a top 3 degree will bring, and truthfully, it's a valid question. The top 3 however are legit and by them not marketing to beat the band, it actually helps the value of the degree. COSC and TESU also have the advantage of being "State" with TESU being a University. The University part doesn't matter as much in the states where everyone says "college" but it does matter internationally and yes, even here in the states.

Adult learning degrees, even from a local big university for anyone over 30, will always be viewed as different than the "typical" college degree, it just means the CV, experiences matter more with the degree filling a marker or check box or both depending.

The fact is, a degree, even a for-profit like Phoenix is better than no degree, but IMHO, finding a less known solution like the big 3, WGU, UMPI, Brandman etc is a better idea because while some employers may have preconceptions about online or distance degrees, they are less likely to have as negative an impression of one they haven't heard of. Plus the cost is lower and ROI much better.

The upside is that online degrees won't bear as much stigma much longer, and I truly think that in the near future, the brand of the degree will still, however, and that is often associated with cost. So when we see TESU being complained about as expensive for taking courses directly from them, that is not a bad thing for the schools perception of value. That they allow us to transfer in 114 credits is the way to attend less expensively, while TESU helps protect our investment by being a state university with nowhere near the least expensive courses.

[openair]

The University part doesn't matter as much in the states where everyone says "college" but it does matter internationally and yes, even here in the states.

That's true. I am also considering this issue as an international student. The 'college' label could be a problem. However, a lot of the board discussion about "for-profits" and "regional accreditation" is often irrelevant in an international context where you're presenting an American degree to employers. The regional accreditation issue might come up when you're dealing with a specific country's degree evaluating agency (UK, Germany, etc.), but plenty of first world countries accept degrees from U.S. nationally accredited institutions without the slightest issue. Around the world, a degree from the for-profit California Coast University might even be seen as "better" than a degree from Charter Oak State College simply due to the college name.  I think that it's something that one should consider.

[ss20ts]

Being labeled for profit is also a misnomer. ALL universities and colleges are allowed to make a profit even the non-profit ones. Most of the non-profit ones have massive endowments which is tax free money. They don't pay property taxes, but sure use local services such as police, fire, roads, etc. There's a non-profit college where I live that pays the city they're in $250,000 a year because they don't pay taxes and the police are constantly called to campus and their off campus buildings. This college owns 197 properties which they pay $0 in property taxes on. Meanwhile, they charge over $60,000 a year to attend this school. How is this any better than a for-profit college? At least, the for-profit college is upfront and admits they're making a profit.

[dfrecore]

I would say that if a college is for-profit, but has a good or unknown reputation, then I'd go there. If it has a bad reputation, I wouldn't. Most people can't differentiate between for-profit and non-profit anyway. What's the difference? Which school is which? Not many people will know what it means, and why it's good or bad.

[Sandlapper]

Why? Because it just isn't on most people's list of things to check or care about. Besides, outside of the truly notorious ones, 99% of the people out there couldn't tell the difference. "Bay State College", to use a random example off a list, wouldn't even ring people's for-profit detector even if they had the preconceived "Phoenix, Devry bad" notion...

[harrypotter]

A few for profit schools have subscription based programs (which are very hard to find in non-profit/ state schools) that can save a ton of money & some time..

[eLearner]

Being labeled for profit is also a misnomer. ALL universities and colleges are allowed to make a profit even the non-profit ones. Most of the non-profit ones have massive endowments which is tax free money. They don't pay property taxes, but sure use local services such as police, fire, roads, etc. There's a non-profit college where I live that pays the city they're in $250,000 a year because they don't pay taxes and the police are constantly called to campus and their off campus buildings. This college owns 197 properties which they pay $0 in property taxes on. Meanwhile, they charge over $60,000 a year to attend this school. How is this any better than a for-profit college? At least, the for-profit college is upfront and admits they're making a profit.

Great points.

Thank the mainstream media for a lot of the witch hunting of for-profit schools. They made it fashionable to do, and since most of the public can't think for itself or research for itself, they digest whatever the media tells them. But an ounce of critical thinking ability would lead people to go and find that pretty much all of the problems they claim are exclusive to for-profit schools can also be found at non-profit schools. Granted, for-profit schools produce higher student loan default rates and such, but that's also a product of being more open enrollment based and taking in many more students than the typical non-profit, but non-profits also have their fair share of scandals, exorbitant tuition rates, and poor outcomes. The question is, why doesn't the media ever report on that?

People complain about the revenue for-profit schools make, but they ignore what non-profit schools like Harvard bring in every year, FAR more than any for-profit brings in and that's before factoring in their tuition revenue. It's not like Harvard is cheap. I get it, it's Haaaa-vud, but money is money. If they're going to complain about what for-profits bring in they should complain the other way, too. Besides, what most don't really know is that a lot of these for-profit schools don't even bring in that much money. A lot of them bring in just enough to keep operating, and I can think of one situation where a for-profit was sued but let off the hook by the court once it was realized they didn't have the money to pay and were operating at the razor's edge.

What I see in many other countries that Americans haven't evolved to, is the ability to judge schools individually which is the most sensible thing to do. Putting all schools of a specific accreditation or profit status into the same basket is lazy thinking. Each school be it non-profit or for-profit is a business, and as such should be judged individually, because at the end of the day the quality of a school comes down to its administration. Having been to both non-profit and for-profit schools, and many of them, I know from experience that there are regionally accredited non-profit schools that operate like chickens with their heads cut off, and nationally accredited for-profit schools that operate like a well-oiled machine, and vice versa.