In the online Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol 36 Issue 4, Cory Koedel, Stephanie Cellini, Gregory Gilpin and Christina Stoddard continue the conversation in Point / Counterpoint on the issue of limiting federal student aid to For-Profit colleges while Theodore Joyce asks Should For-Profit Colleges Receive Federal Student Aid? Cellini and Turner (2016) attribute part of the decline of FPCs to Title IV eligibility changes, higher tuition and debt burden, and conclude that while aid restrictions may reduce default rates, they also limit opportunities in higher education. Gilpin and Stoddard differ in their interpretation of the data, do not agree with many of the lending regulations proposed by Cellini and Koedel and agree that students from disadvantaged backgrounds do not receive adequate information on financing, costs and educational quality and support regulations that remedy this. The Gainful Employment Rule and risk sharing recommendations may thwart enrollment of disadvantaged and non-traditional students while attempting to control for better employment outcomes and lower default rates. Follow the debate…
Does Regulating For-Profit Colleges Improve Educational Outcomes? What We Know, What We Don’t Know, and What We Need to Find Out
The Case for Limiting Federal Student Aid to For-Profit Colleges
Should For-Profit Colleges Receive Federal Student Aid?
Response to Gilpin and Stoddard
Does Regulating For-Profit Colleges Improve Educational Outcomes? Response to Cellini and Koedel