Tag: Inquirer

  • Higher Education Inquirer : HEI Investigation: Campus.edu

    Higher Education Inquirer : HEI Investigation: Campus.edu

    In a sector under constant strain, Campus.edu is being heralded by some as the future of community college—and by others as a slick repackaging of the troubled for-profit college model. What many don’t realize is that before it became Campus.edu, the company was known as MTI College, a private, for-profit trade school based in Sacramento, California.

    Campus.edu rebranded in 2020 under tech entrepreneur Tade Oyerinde, is backed by nearly $100 million in venture capital. Campus now markets itself as a tech-powered alternative to traditional community colleges—and a lifeline for students underserved by conventional higher ed.

    The rebranding, however, raises red flags. While Campus.edu pitches a student-first mission with attractive promises—zero-cost tuition, free laptops, elite educators—the model has echoes of the troubled for-profit sector, with privatization, outsourcing, and digital-first delivery taking precedence over public accountability and academic governance.

    The Promises: What Campus.edu Offers

    Campus.edu markets itself with a clean, six-step path to success. The pitch is aspirational, accessible, and designed to appeal to working-class students, first-generation college-goers, and those shut out of elite institutions. Here’s what the company promises:

    1. Straightforward Application – A simple application process, followed by matching with an admissions advisor who helps identify a student’s purpose and educational fit.

    2. Tech for Those Who Need It – A free laptop and Wi-Fi access for students who lack them, ensuring digital inclusion.

    3. Personal Success Coach – Each student is assigned a personal success coach, offering free tutoring, career advising, and 24/7 access to wellness services.

    4. Elite Educators – Courses are taught live via Zoom by faculty who also teach at top universities like Stanford and Columbia.

    5. Enduring Support – Whether transferring to a four-year college or entering the workforce, Campus promises help with building skills and networks.

    6. More Learning, Less Debt – For Pell Grant-eligible students, Campus markets its programs as costing nothing out-of-pocket, with some students completing degrees debt-free.

    It’s a compelling narrative—combining social mobility, digital access, and educational prestige into a neat online package.

    Behind the Curtain: MTI College and the For-Profit Legacy

    Campus.edu did not rise out of nowhere. It emerged from the bones of MTI College, a long-running, accredited for-profit vocational school. MTI offered hands-on training in legal, IT, cosmetology, and health fields—typical offerings in the for-profit world. The purchase and transformation of MTI into Campus.edu allowed Oyerinde to retain accreditation, avoiding the long and uncertain process of seeking approval for a brand-new college.

    This kind of maneuver—buying a for-profit and relaunching it under a new brand—is not new. We’ve seen similar strategies with Kaplan (now Purdue Global), Ashford (now the University of Arizona Global Campus), and Grand Canyon University. What makes Campus.edu unique is the degree to which it blends Silicon Valley aesthetics with the structural DNA of a for-profit college.

    Missing Data, Big Promises

    Campus.edu boasts high engagement and satisfaction, but as of now, no independent data on student completion, debt outcomes, or long-term career impact is publicly available. The company remains in its early stages, with aggressive growth goals and millions in investor backing—but little regulatory scrutiny.

    With investors like Sam Altman (OpenAI)Jason Citron (Discord), and Bloomberg Beta, the pressure to scale is intense. But scale can come at the expense of quality, especially when students are promised the moon.

    Marketing Meets Memory

    Campus.edu is savvy. Its marketing strikes all the right notes: digital equity, economic mobility, mental health, and student empowerment. It presents itself as the antidote to everything wrong with higher education.

    But as its past as MTI College shows, branding can obscure history. And as for-profit operators adapt to a new digital age, it’s essential to distinguish innovation from opportunism. Without transparency, regulation, and democratic oversight, models like Campus.edu could replicate the same old exploitation—with better user interfaces.

    The stakes are high. For students already at the margins, a false promise can be more damaging than no promise at all.

    Source link

  • Higher Education Inquirer : Rutger Bregman

    Higher Education Inquirer : Rutger Bregman







    Higher Education Inquirer : Rutger Bregman – “Moral Ambition” (The Daily Show)







    Rutger Bregman – “Moral Ambition” (The Daily Show)

    Historian and best-selling author Rutger Bregman joins Jon Stewart to unpack his latest book, “Moral Ambition,” which is a call to action for people, especially those with education and privilege, to devote their talent and resources to careers and causes that make the world a better place. He describes how the political left has often made the mistake of placing moral purity above political relevance, and what they can learn from conservatives about building small movements into a larger, results-oriented coalition. Bregman also addresses the problem of what he calls our “inverse welfare society,” in which most high-paying, high-status jobs are inessential, and how his organization, The School for Moral Ambition, aims to reverse that structure by helping people quit their corporate jobs and transition into careers of positive impact.

     


    Source link

  • Higher Education Inquirer : Maximus AidVantage

    Higher Education Inquirer : Maximus AidVantage

    [Image of AidVantage operations in Greenville, Texas. Note the barbed wire fence.]

    The recent decision to have the Small Business Administration (SBA) take over the federal student loan portfolio has sent shockwaves through the world of education finance. As the SBA — an agency traditionally focused on supporting small businesses — begins to manage a multi-billion dollar portfolio of student loans, borrowers, consumer protection advocates, and financial experts alike are left to question what this transition means for the future of loan servicing, borrower protections, and higher education financing.

    At the heart of this shift is the role of Maximus AidVantage, one of the major student loan servicers handling federal loans. Maximus has already come under scrutiny for its inefficiency, poor customer service, and mishandling of crucial borrower programs, such as Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) and Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) plans. The company’s track record has led to widespread frustration, with many borrowers reporting significant issues, including misinformation, lost paperwork, and mistakes that have placed them at risk of financial hardship.

    Yet, despite these concerns, Maximus has maintained its position at the helm of federal student loan servicing. Its CEO, Bruce Caswell, has been compensated handsomely for overseeing the company’s role in this controversial space. According to recent financial reports, Caswell’s total compensation has included a base salary of over $1.3 million, with total compensation often exceeding $8 million when accounting for bonuses, stock options, and other forms of remuneration. This high pay, especially in light of the company’s poor performance in customer service and loan servicing, raises questions about the priorities of both the company and the federal government, which continues to entrust Maximus with managing the finances of millions of borrowers.

    The Shift to the SBA: A Lack of Expertise

    The most immediate concern surrounding the SBA’s takeover of student loan management is its lack of expertise in this field. The SBA’s core mission has been to assist small businesses, offering loan guarantees and financial support to promote economic growth. While it is well-equipped to manage business loans, the agency has no experience dealing with the unique and complex needs of student loan borrowers. Federal student loans involve intricate repayment plans, borrower protections, and specialized programs like PSLF, all of which require a deep understanding of the educational sector and the financial struggles of students and graduates.

    Transferring such an important and complex responsibility to the SBA without a clear plan for adaptation could lead to mismanagement, inefficiencies, and disruptions for millions of borrowers. The SBA simply isn’t set up to handle issues like loan forgiveness, income-driven repayment plans, and the variety of special accommodations that are necessary for student borrowers. If the SBA isn’t adequately staffed or resourced to take on these new responsibilities, students could be left in the lurch, facing delays, confusion, and even errors in their loan servicing.

    A Confusing Transition for Borrowers

    For those already dealing with the intricacies of federal student loans, this transition to the SBA is likely to create a significant amount of confusion. Student loan borrowers rely on clear communication, accurate account management, and timely assistance when navigating repayment plans. The Department of Education has long been the agency responsible for ensuring that these programs are managed effectively, but with the SBA taking over, borrowers may face new systems, new contacts, and, potentially, a lack of clarity about their loan status.

    One of the biggest risks in this transition is the potential disruption of critical loan repayment programs, such as PSLF, which allows public service workers to have their loans forgiven after ten years of payments. These programs require careful management to ensure that borrowers meet the necessary qualifications. The SBA is not accustomed to handling such programs and may struggle to maintain the same level of efficiency and accuracy, especially if the agency does not prioritize dedicated support for student loan borrowers.

    Diminished Consumer Protections

    Perhaps the most concerning outcome of the SBA taking over student loans is the potential erosion of consumer protections. The Department of Education has a specific mandate to protect borrowers, which includes holding loan servicers accountable for mishandling accounts and ensuring transparency in loan servicing practices. The SBA, however, has never been tasked with such consumer-focused regulations, and its shift to managing student loans raises concerns that borrower rights might not be adequately enforced.

    For example, the SBA may not have the resources or inclination to monitor loan servicers like Maximus closely, allowing them to continue engaging in deceptive practices without fear of regulatory repercussions. The agency might also be less likely to step in when borrowers face issues such as misapplied payments, incorrect information about forgiveness programs, or poorly managed accounts. With the SBA’s focus on business rather than consumer welfare, student loan borrowers may find themselves facing more hurdles without the protections that the Department of Education once provided.

    The Impact on Repayment and Forgiveness Programs

    Another pressing issue is the potential disruption of repayment and forgiveness programs under SBA oversight. Programs like Income-Driven Repayment (IDR), designed to help borrowers pay off their loans based on their income, require careful management and regular updates. Similarly, the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program is highly specific and requires rigorous tracking of borrowers’ payments and work history to ensure they qualify for forgiveness after ten years.

    If the SBA is not adequately equipped to handle these specialized programs, borrowers might find themselves in a precarious position, especially if their loans are mismanaged or if they are denied forgiveness due to administrative errors. The confusion caused by the transition could delay or even derail borrowers’ efforts to achieve loan forgiveness, leaving them stuck with debt for longer than expected.

    The Role of Maximus: Financial Incentives Amidst Failure

    Amidst the uncertainty of this transition, Maximus continues to play a key role in servicing the federal student loan portfolio. Yet, despite its persistent failures in managing accounts and borrower relations, Maximus has remained highly profitable, with Bruce Caswell’s executive compensation reflecting this success in terms of revenue but not in terms of customer satisfaction.

    Maximus’s reported $8 million in total compensation for Caswell, despite the company’s history of customer complaints, raises serious questions about priorities. While Maximus rakes in millions from servicing federal loans, borrowers are left to deal with the consequences of mistakes, misinformation, and poor service. In a system where the stakes are incredibly high for borrowers, this disparity between executive pay and customer service is concerning, especially in light of the SBA’s takeover, which promises more uncertainty.

    Adding to the controversy, Maximus has also been involved in labor disputes with the Communications Workers of America (CWA), its workers’ union. These disputes, which have centered on issues such as wages, benefits, and working conditions, further complicate the company’s already tarnished reputation. Workers have accused Maximus of engaging in unfair labor practices and failing to adequately support employees who are tasked with assisting borrowers. If these labor disputes continue to affect employee morale and productivity, it could lead to even worse service for borrowers who are already dealing with a complicated and frustrating loan servicing process. The combination of poor customer service, labor unrest, and executive compensation that seems out of sync with the company’s performance paints a troubling picture for the future of student loan management under Maximus.

    The Threat of Reduced Loan Forgiveness and IDR Plans

    Adding to the turmoil surrounding the future of student loans is the growing effort by the U.S. government to reduce or even eliminate key student loan forgiveness programs like Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) and Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) plans. These programs were designed to provide crucial relief for borrowers working in public service or those struggling with debt relative to their income. However, recent reports suggest that the government may look to reduce eligibility for these programs, impose stricter requirements, or completely eliminate them altogether as part of broader fiscal policy adjustments.

    The removal of or reductions to these programs would leave borrowers with fewer avenues to manage their debt, potentially increasing default rates and extending the time it takes for borrowers to repay their loans. For individuals in public service jobs or those facing financial hardship, these changes would have a devastating impact on their ability to achieve financial stability and pay down their student loans. If the SBA, with its lack of focus on education finance, inherits this responsibility without reinforcing these programs, borrowers might find themselves in a far worse position than ever before.

    Furthermore, this reduction in borrower protections and streamlining of repayment options may also be part of a broader strategy to push more borrowers into private loan options, which could further exacerbate financial hardship for those who are already struggling. With private loans often carrying higher interest rates, less favorable repayment terms, and fewer options for deferral or forgiveness, such a shift would mark a significant pivot towards privatization, benefiting financial institutions while leaving borrowers with even fewer protections and much higher costs.

    A Plan to Push Consumers Toward Private Loans?

    Many experts are beginning to question whether the government’s plans for overhauling student loan servicing are part of a larger agenda to move borrowers toward private loans. By reducing or eliminating federal loan protections, forgiveness programs, and income-driven repayment options, the government may be attempting to create a vacuum in which private lenders can step in and offer alternative (and likely more expensive) financing options.

    This push toward privatization could significantly increase profits for private lenders while making it harder for borrowers to repay their loans. With private loans lacking many of the protections and flexible repayment options offered by federal loans, such a shift could result in higher default rates and greater financial instability for borrowers, particularly for those with already high debt levels.

    Conclusion: A New Era of Uncertainty

    The transition of student loan servicing to the Small Business Administration represents a significant shift in the federal student loan system, one that could lead to inefficiencies, confusion, and a reduction in protections for borrowers. With agencies like Maximus AidVantage continuing to profit from loan servicing despite failing borrowers, ongoing labor disputes, and a focus on executive compensation over customer service, and the SBA stepping into a complex arena with limited experience, the future of student loan servicing seems fraught with challenges.

    The push to reduce or eliminate key student loan forgiveness programs like PSLF and IDR only adds to the uncertainty, leaving millions of borrowers facing a potentially more difficult future. Moreover, the possibility of moving consumers toward private loans with fewer protections and harsher terms would deepen the financial struggles of many borrowers. This move underscores the importance of effective oversight and the need for federal agencies to prioritize the well-being of borrowers over financial interests. The student loan system should be about more than just revenue generation — it should be about supporting borrowers and ensuring that they can achieve financial freedom, not be left trapped in a cycle of debt and frustration. Without proper management, this new era of student loan servicing risks deepening the crisis for millions of Americans who are already struggling to keep up with their education-related debts.

    Source link

  • Higher Education Inquirer : MEDIA ADVISORY UPDATE: ‘Hands Off!’ March at San Diego Civic Center, April 5 Noon

    Higher Education Inquirer : MEDIA ADVISORY UPDATE: ‘Hands Off!’ March at San Diego Civic Center, April 5 Noon

    SAN DIEGO, CA — Community members will gather at the San Diego Civic Center Plaza for
    a “Hands Off!” march on April 5 to protest DOGE and the Trump
    administration’s attack on programs and services used by San Diego
    residents. The local march will coincide with a nationwide day of
    demonstrations expected to be attended by hundreds of thousands

    Organizers
    describe the event as a collective response to policies impacting our
    community. “San Diegans who are veterans, who are postal workers and
    teachers, who rely on Social Security, Medicaid or Medicare, and who are
    horrified at the Trump-Musk billionaire takeover of our government are
    coming together to protest the Trump Administration’s attacks on the
    rights and services they depend upon, many of them for survival” said
    Angela Benson, a member of the organizing coalition.

    Event Details:

    • What:
      Over 10,000 San Diegans expected to peacefully demand “HANDS OFF!”
      their rights and services in one of over 1,000 HANDS OFF! events
      scheduled nationwide on April 5

    • Who: Coalition of San Diego Pro-Democracy Groups

    • When: Saturday, April 5, noon, 1 mile march to leave approximately 12:15 PM

    • Where: March starts at Civic Center Plaza Fountain by 1200 Third St., ends at Hall of Justice at 330 W Broadway

    • Transportation: Participants are encouraged to take public transit to the event

    Planning group:

    • Change Begins With ME

    • CBFD Indivisible

    • Indivisible49

    • Indivisible North San Diego County

    • Democratic Club of Carlsbad and Oceanside

    • Encinitas and North Coast Democratic Club

    • SanDiego350

    • Swing Left/Take Action San Diego

    • Activist San Diego

    • 50501 San Diego

    Media Opportunities:

    • The following representatives will be available day-of the march for interviews.
      If interested, please coordinate with Richard (770-653-6138) prior to
      the event, and plan to arrive at the location marked below by 11:30 AM
      Pacific

      • Representatives

        • Sara Jacobs – House of Representatives, CA-51 district

        • Scott Peters – House of Representatives, CA-50 district

        • Chris Ward – California State Assemblymember, 78 district

        • Stephen Whitburn – San Diego Councilmember

        • Reverend Madison Shockley II – Pilgrim United Church of Christ

        • Yusef Miller – Executive Director of North County Equity & Justice Coalition

        • Brigette Browning – Executive Secretary San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council and President, Unite Here!

        • Crystal Irving – President, Service Employees International Union (SEIU)

        • Andy Kopp – Veteran

        • Patrick Saunders – Veteran

        • Phil Petrie – SanDiego350, Climate Activist

      • Recommended Schedule

        • 11:30 AM – 11:40 AM: Representative introductions – Group/cause they’re representing, why they’re marching

        • 11:40 AM – 12:05 PM: Representatives break off, available for interview by Press

        • 12:05 PM – 12:15 PM: Representatives move to beginning of march

        • 12:15 PM: March begins

        • 12:15 PM – 2:00 PM: March to Hall of Justice

        • 2:00 PM: March ends at Hall of Justice, participants may disperse or continue to federal plaza

    Source link

  • Higher Education Inquirer continues to generate an international audience

    Higher Education Inquirer continues to generate an international audience

    HEI continues to generate a strong international audience.  While a substantial portion of our viewers are from the US, we have people (and bots) from across the globe reading our articles and Youtube posts. Our coverage lately, on the revocation of student visas, and of deportations, is particularly important for international students, particularly those who are concerned about US intervention in the Middle East, Asia, and Latin America. For some unknown reasons, we have little traffic from folks in African countries or Latin America countries (other than Mexico). We also have fewer than expected numbers from Canada and India. If there is anything we can do to increase those viewership numbers, please let us know. 

    Source link

  • Higher Education Inquirer Asks State Department for List of Student Visa Revocations

    Higher Education Inquirer Asks State Department for List of Student Visa Revocations

    The Higher Education Inquirer (HEI) has requested a list of more than 300 students who have had their visas revoked.  The State Department has acknowledged receipt.  We hope other media outlets will follow suit.  At this point, we only know of a handful of these cases.  We will keep the public informed as this story develops. 

     

    Source link

  • Higher Education Inquirer continues to follow IPO/sale of University of Phoenix

    Higher Education Inquirer continues to follow IPO/sale of University of Phoenix

    On March 6, 2025, Apollo and Vistria publicly announced a possible IPO or sale of the University of Phoenix.  These companies have been trying to sell the University of Phoenix since 2021, but there have been no takers. The owners claim the school is worth $1.5M to $1.7M, but we (and experts we know) are skeptical, given the financials we have seen so far. The University of Phoenix was previously on sale for about $500M-$700M but the University of Arkansas System, the State of Idaho, and apparently other colleges declined the offers. 

    The University of Phoenix offers subprime education to folks,
    historically targeting servicemembers, veterans, and people of color. While some students may profit from these robocollege credentials, one wonders what
    these workers actually learn. The current student-teacher ratio at the
    University of Phoenix, according to the US Department of Education, is
    132 to 1.   

    In 2023 we made a Freedom of Action (FOIA) request to the US Department of Education (ED) to get Phoenix’s most recent audited financials. In March 2025, more than 20 months later, we were provided with a 35-page report, audited by Deloitte, with numbers from 2021 and 2022. 

    This month the Higher Education Inquirer followed up with a Freedom of Information request with the ED to obtain more up-to-date financial numbers for the University of Phoenix. We hope they will be responsive and timely enough to get the word out to the public.   

    Source link

  • Higher Education Inquirer : Rise to power of authoritarian states

    Higher Education Inquirer : Rise to power of authoritarian states

    Structural factors refer to the context that makes the rise to power of an authoritarian state more likely. Authoritarian regimes are unusual in countries that are rich, socially stable and that have a tradition of constitutionally limited, civilian government.  If they do emerge in these sorts of countries, it is usually the result of a crisis, brought about by external factors such as war or international economic crisis.   As usual with history, the history teachers favorite acronym PESC is a good way to go about organizing these structural factors – PESC = the political, economic, social, and cultural conditions that encourage authoritarian rule. 

     

    Source link