Lower ed The troubling rise of for-profit colleges in the new economy

IN THE REVELATORY "Lower Ed: The Troubling Rise of For-Profit Colleges in the New Economy," the sociologist Tressie McMillan Cottom introduces us to London, a 48-year-old widow and single mother of three children. London lives in rural North Carolina, and has watched as decent working-class jobs in the textile industry disappeared from her region. She hopes to land an office job with benefits, and knows she needs additional training. But she fears she would be turned away from the oversubscribed local community college because of her lack of academic preparation. So London has gone deep into debt enrolling in five for-profit college programs, only one of which she has completed. At various times she trained to be a child care provider, a medical biller, a computer technician and, most recently, a medical assistant. Cottom asked London what she would do if she could not find the middle-class health care administration job she desired - a type of position that often requires training in a medical specialty like cardiology. London's program at a branch of for-profit Everest College does not provide such specialized training. She smiled and told Cottom, "Jesus is my backup plan." Some two million Americans are enrolled in for-profit colleges, up from 400,000 in 2000. Those students, most of them working adults getting short-term certificates, are disproportionately nonwhite and female. They graduate with more debt than students who have attended public and nonprofit institutions, and are more likely to default on their loans. It is taxpayers who are financing the expensive and often academically inferior education that for-profit colleges provide. Ninety-four percent of for-profit students pay tuition with federal student loans. The Obama administration worked doggedly to regulate this sector. Its "gainful employment" rule led to the collapse of hundreds of for-profit colleges whose graduates performed poorly on the job market. In response, the industry complained that it was being punished for attempting to educate so-called low-status students: single mothers on welfare, high school dropouts with G.E.D.s and graduates of underperforming public schools who lack basic math and reading skills. Now for-profit colleges may find an ally in President Donald Trump, founder of Trump University. The incoming Department of Education could easily overturn Obama's regulations. There are other books, like "Degrees of Inequality," by the political scientist Suzanne Mettler, that better explain the lobbying and legislating that empowered this industry and allowed it to expand far beyond its humble roots as a provider of certificates in fields like hairdressing and auto mechanics. But Cottom has written the best book yet on the complex lives and choices of for-profit students, who, she shows, are often quite savvy about the trade-off they're making by attending a low-prestige, high-cost institution. Unlike many traditional colleges, for-profits seek to accommodate the needs of busy working parents like London. Enrollment officers are available by phone and in person virtually around the clock. Classes begin throughout the year and meet at night. Part of Cottom's wisdom comes from personal experience. Before she earned her Ph.D., she worked for two for-profit colleges. Some of the most disturbing parts of "Lower Ed" concern her training to become an enrollment officer at a technical school, where she was taught how to "close" students, meaning sign them up at any cost. Officers were encouraged to isolate potential students from loved ones, like parents, who might urge caution before taking on debt. They presented recruits with misleading data on the number of jobs available in fields like cosmetology or tech support. Cottom also conducted fascinating field research. She interviewed for-profit college executives and over 100 students who enrolled in degree programs. She argues persuasively that the growth of the for-profit sector is a rational response to a service economy in which there are fewer living-wage jobs, and employers invest less and less in training their work forces. Panicked workers, having absorbed America's "educational gospel," believe the only way to ascend into the middle class is to engage in "credentialing," returning again and again to school in an often fruitless quest to find stable work. What these students really need, Cottom believes, are public supports like affordable child care. She writes, "given the character of the new economy, one that by definition is risky and highly variable," for millions of people there simply isn't a good educational choice to be made. Even President Obama's efforts to rein in the industry amounted to little more than regulatory theater, she argues. "What is interesting to me is how much disdain is spread among students and schools and how little disdain there is for labor markets." With great compassion and analytical rigor, Cottom questions the fundamental narrative of American education policy: that a postsecondary degree always guarantees a better life. Panicked workers believe the way to reach the middle class is to engage in 'credentialing.' DANA GOLDSTEIN, a national correspondent for The Times, is the author of "The Teacher Wars: A History of America's Most Embattled Profession."

Cottom (sociology, Virginia Commonwealth Univ.) previously worked in enrollment at for-profit colleges in the South. Her experiences there shook her faith in the "education gospel"-college as the sole ticket to social mobility-and inspired her doctoral research on this fast-growing sector of higher education. Her book stands out for seeking to explain the appeal of schools that promise heavy student debt burdens with few of the perks-such as libraries-available at traditional institutions. This explanatory focus demonstrates how the for-profit sector's boom coincided with the rise of the "new economy" during the 2000s. Most helpful is a chapter exploring the differences in "customer service" between for-profit and traditional institutions-chief among them, that the former gets students in classes as quickly as possible, while the latter forces them to navigate complex bureaucracies. Despite recent scandals involving for-profit titans such as ITT Technical Institute and Corinthian Colleges, this book effectively shows why prevailing U.S. social and economic conditions will guarantee a steady market for such enterprises. VERDICT Some readers will quibble that the author's epilog discussing "solutions" ignores practical, public policy-oriented suggestions on how to better rein in this shady sector of the higher-education landscape. Aside from this minor point, however, this is a valuable study recommended for all public and academic libraries.-Seth Kershner, Northwestern -Connecticut Community Coll. Lib., Winsted © Copyright 2017. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.