For-Profit Education - Quality and Reputation: Raquel Anderson

The ever-increasing rate of for-profit schools and universities these days can be a polemic matter. This is because these institutions are generally more geared in earning profit rather than giving a higher quality educational service for a state’s citizens. According to Frayter (2011), for-profit schools and universities are already planning to take their “businesses” to the next level. That is, they will be focusing more in finding growth opportunities in the international market rather than focus their attention in the United States, where enrollment rates are continuing to decrease.

As a quick overview, for-profit education generally refers to institutions in the academe operating privately in a profit-seeking manner. There are currently many issues and controversies about these institutions’ operational motives although they have been thought to increase efficiency (Kozol, 2005). The issue about Kaplan University’s service to the students will be explored. Does being a for-profit educational institution really affect the quality and efficiency of learning? Are there ways to change the slightly damaged reputation of for-profit educational institutions? These questions show that although there are advantages and disadvantages in being a for-profit educational institution, the advantages surpass the disadvantages.

Perhaps the reason why for-profit educational institutions continue to multiply is because there are a couple of benefits that could come along with it. Some of these institutions are even optimized to serve people living in poverty (Alemu, 2010). In some states and countries, there are over 20 percent of the overall students who are enrolled in for-profit universities (World Bank, 2003). This could be considered as a significant ratio between for-profit and public higher education institutions already.

One of the most formidable advantages that a for-profit education may offer is its education quality. Although continuous expansion of these institutions is inevitable, there are governing bodies in each state that regulates every institution’s standard.

            This could have significant effects in the reputation and quality of education. These two should never be compromised by provisions for expansion and vice versa (Alemu, 2010). There are also economic and educational policies that facilitate the current expansions and quality of education of for-profit educations. Even though for-profit educational institutions can be considered as a major part of the private sector, there are still checks and balances operations conducted by the government to facilitate standardizations.

Also according to Altbach, Berdahl, & Gumport (2005), “our nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, which is of transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned. That freedom is therefore a special concern of the First Amendment, which does not tolerate laws that cast a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom” (p. 92).  So, every policy and law will definitely have an impact in the US’ goal for a highly regulated education system.

Kaplan’s edge as a for-profit educational institution is its use of social media tools and technology in teaching their students (Blumenstyk, 2009). This could be considered as a good form of reinforcement for students. The involvement of the government with these for-profit institutions should however be done in moderation because excessive government involvement especially in higher education activities can potentially discourage their standardized functioning (Mwiria, 2003).

Perhaps the most discouraging thing about for-profit educational institutions is the fact that they are mainly motivated by monetary returns. Because of this, the probability that for-profit education institutions will make their way in rural and slum areas is unlikely. It is obvious that they cannot get the same amount of money from rural and slum areas than in urban and elite areas.

Fortunately, despite these disadvantages, the government authorities still try to encourage the establishment of these institutions even if the returns for them will not be so promising at all. Some of the possible interventions that could be done by the government include the provision of specific assistances like free land and tax exemptions. One of the most compelling things that Kaplan University failed to address is their traditional teaching methods that aired negative reputation ratings among their students.

Yes, they are making use of advanced technologies and social media as a reinforcement method for teaching but they are still using some of the oldest principles in teaching. Also, their implementation of certain policies that are beneficial only for older students may also have a negative impact on their other students especially the ones who are still in their freshman year (Blumenstyk, 2009).

In Kaplan University’s case, there are still possible ways by which they could regain their reputation as an institution that prioritizes students rather than profit. This could be done by focusing a larger portion of their attention in things like grants and most importantly, quality of education. In fact, these two things could prove as the best ways they could help their students reach success without having to intervene on their private and personal lives. Another good recommendation for Kaplan University may be to make their services available to the poor. This would break the common assumption that private for-profit educational institutions only serve rich and elite citizens and not the poor (Blumenstyk, 2009).

The proliferation of for-profit educational institutions is not a negative thing, as this paper discussed. One may worry about the fact that for-profit educational institutions can be mainly motivated by monetary returns, in detriment of quality learning. Nevertheless, the advantages surpass that, as this blog shows. Further research about this topic suggests that several for-profit institutions are more capable of providing a higher level of education than government regulated institutions.

 References

Frayter, K. (2011). For-Profit Schools Look Abroad for Growth. CNBC. Accessed October 2011.

            Retrived fromhttp://www.cnbc.com/id/45063844.

Kozol, J. (2005). The Shame of the Nation. Preparing Minds for Markets and others. Three    

Rivers Press.

Alemu, D. (2010). Expansion vs, Quality: Emerging Issues of For-profit Private Higher

Education Institutions in Ethiopia. International Review of Education. Springer.

World Bank. 2003. Higher Education Development for Ethiopia: Pursuing the Vision.

Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Mwiria, K. 2003. University Governance and University-State Relations. In: African Higher

Education: An International Reference Handbook, ed. by Damtew Teferra and Philip Altbach. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Tooley, J. (2007). Could for-profit private education benefit the poor? Some a priori

considerations arising from case study research. UK: Journal of Education Policy..

Blumenstyk, G. (2009). Kaplan Univerity’s Question: Do Colleges Serve Today’s Students. The

Chronicle of Higher Education. Accessed October 2011.Retrieved fromhttp://chronicle.com/article/Kaplan-Us-Question-Do/46956/.

Altbach, P.G., Berdahl, R.O., &Gumport, P.J. (Eds.). (2005). American higher education in the

Twenty-first centuries: Social, political, and economic challenges. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.