| > Are admissions requirements drastically different between the two types of schools? If not, why do people object to for-profit colleges? ITT's troubles have nothing to do with admissions requirements, and everything to do with fraud (securities and otherwise). Their accreditation problem stemmed from business-viability problems stemming from the fraud lawsuits, and their problems with DOE stemmed from their accreditation problems. Corinthian's problems similarly were rooted in fraud. In both cases, the frauds included misrepresenting placement statistics in the context of both seeking admissions and, more critically in many respects, nontraditional student loan programs operated by the schools. > It seems like there is little accountability in either community colleges or for-profit schools when it comes to accepting students. Community Colleges are generally chartered with the purpose of the broadest possible access and low, taxpayer-subsidized tuition. Students aren't wracking up tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt a year at CCs,
and CCs aren't conducting massive marketing campaigns directed specifically at drawing in more people who "unable to see and plan well for future" (as internal documents showed Corinthian was doing.) I don't know why you are focusing on admissions standards, when the difference in attention between for-profit institutions and public community colleges isn't focused around admissions stanadards. |