A comparative study of proprietary and nonproprietary vocational training graduates

Exploring the For-Profit Experience

“…Past data also indicate that proprietary schools have served relatively high proportions of minority students for some time. In 1977, 40% of proprietary students versus 33% of community college students were of color (Jung, 1980). From 2000 to 2008, the percentage of low-income students—between ages 18 and 26 and whose total household income is near or below the federal poverty level—enrolling at for-profit institutions increased from 13% to 19% while the percentage enrolling in public four-year institutions declined from 20% to 15% (Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2011).…”

Table of Contents

“…• Will find a training-related job. [Trivett, 1974, p. 31] Some of the tentative nature of Trivett's review (1974) was corrected by the research of William Hyde (1976) and Wellford Wilms (1974) and a study conducted by the American Institutes for Research (Jung, Campbell, and Wolman, 1976). All focused on the effectiveness of for-profit institutions compared with public sector vocational training institutions.…”

“…All focused on the effectiveness of for-profit institutions compared with public sector vocational training institutions. Depending on one's perspective, the two types of schools are equally effective (Jung, Campbell, and Wolman, 1976) or ineffective (Wilms, 1974) in meeting students' needs. Wilms (1974), however, goes into some detail about differences between students who attend for-profit versus public institutions, concluding that proprietary students tend to have their educational aspirations suppressed, even as they were more likely to graduate.…”

“…With so many critiques of the for-profit sector focused on the quality of the education provided to its students and the public policy rationale for providing student aid to the for-profit sector, it is perhaps surprising that so little data are available on student outcomes. Several authors tackled this question in the 1970s and 1980s (Jung, Campbell, and Wolman, 1976;Wilms and Hansell, 1983), generally concluding that the for-profit school provided weaker economic returns to graduates than did public sector institutions. A more recent analysis also finds that proprietary schools do not do a particularly good job of increasing the earnings of their graduates (Grubb, 1993).…”

“…A third reason for the lack of sustained research about the for-profit sector is that interest in these institutions has been episodic, typically tied to exposing some perceived disreputable behavior or refuting allegations of the same. The clearest example of this interest is the flurry of reports, books, and articles in the 1970s concerned with the ability of for-profit institutions to participate appropriately in federal student aid programs (see, for example, Erwin, 1975;Hyde, 1976;Jones, 1973;Jung, Campbell, and Wolman, 1976;Shoemaker, 1973;Trivett, 1974;Wilms, 1974). The research and commentary faded as for-profit participation became routine.…”