So when one of your classmates brought up the email she
received from the Art Institute of Indianapolis President, Michael Morphew on
new student loan rules being proposed by the Department of Education, I thought
it was worth a new post.
The “gainful employment” rule which many of you have
already heard about could significantly impact you. According to the Department of Education, “far
too many students are taking on unstainable debt for degrees that fail to help
them get jobs”. The new regulations
would stop financial aid for programs unless they can demonstrate they lead to
gainful employment for their students. To determine if a program would lead to
gainful employment, schools must meet one of the following three metrics:
·
35% of former students are re-paying their
loans
·
The estimated annual loan payment of a
typical graduate doesn’t exceed 30% of their discretionary income
·
The estimated annual loan payment for a
typical graduate doesn’t exceed 12% of their total earnings
According to Michael Morphew, these new regulations could
mean, “students who count on this aid to attend the college of their choice,
may be denied the opportunity to get the education they choose”.
This is a big issue, that affects many of you. So, my question to you this week is, “What do
you think about the ‘gainful employment’ rule?
Do you think it helps or hurts America’s students?” Answers are due no later than Sunday,
February 16th, 2014. To
contact your Senator or Representative, please go here: http://www.contactingthecongress.org/ Regardless of which side of the fence you
sit on, I urge you to let your voices be heard.
Don’t let someone else make the choice for you!
I feel like this rule could be a good thing. At first I didn't realize really how little this bill is asking for. I feel like at least 35% of graduates really should be able to pay back their loans with the degrees they receive. If I'm getting a degree that's going to be useless and cost me tons of money then maybe I would want somebody to step in. I feel like the intentions of this bill aren't all that bad, but at the same time I would hate to have spent all this money and time at the Art Institute for no reason because I know that without financial aid I would not be able to continue.
ReplyDelete-Morgan Fenstermaker
I believe that the 'gainful employment' rule is somewhat unfair. In my opinion, students don't have a good record as far as paying bills to begin with...Most graduates worry about paying rent, car note, groceries, necessities, and insurances. Paying back a student loan is not high on their priority list, and there lies the problem. 35% of students doesn't sound like a lot, but it depends on the school you attend. Now a days graduates are coming out of school and praying that they get a job in their field of study but because life goes on they will take a job until one in their field comes available. The bill means well but it is out of touch with the real world, at least that's how I feel.
ReplyDeleteThis might be an ok thing. To think about students, after they graduate. They would be worry at first on, paying the bills for many things. Find a job that is around their major field. Of course 35% doesn't seem very good, but for some students it can help out for the rest of their lives. I might be nervous about this, yet I'll know that it can help in the near future.
ReplyDeleteI think the school should provide employment after we graduate. I have a cousin that went to Kaplan College and when she graduated, she thought that she could get a job immediately after. By her surprise, the job she applied for said that she wasn't qualified enough because she didn't have any experience. I am a fashion student and never worked in retail. It is hard for me to find a job in retail because I don't have that kind of experience yet. I think that the government should fund jobs that will hire us after college. There are so many people that work minimum wage, have children to feed, or possibly don't work at all to provide a better standing for their families.
ReplyDeleteI think this would be not good thing for students. They already charge a lot with the college tuition but stopping financial aid will be a big issue students are already having a hard time paying student loans with financial aid. Also all the colleges that say they will get you a job after you graduate is not always true and then you have to pay your loans back within 6 months, and what if you dont have a job in your career.I think it will be heard for me to find a job in my field because some employers want you to have experience but i think you have the experience from school. The government needs to step up and take action that college students have a heard time finding a job after college.
ReplyDeletestopping financial aid will only hurt students and make school even harder to pay for which is not fair because most students depend on financial aid to help pay for their schooling so why take it away.
ReplyDeleteI think the concept of this rule is extremely logical, and helpful, it discourages going to college for the heck of it and it encourages students to study in a field they will actually succeed in.
ReplyDeleteHowever I don't think this is practical to apply to students who are already IN college. They've already started and many (myself included) are close to finishing. To invoke this 'gainful employment rule" at this point in many peoples college career would do more harm than good.
So IF they do decide to do this they should make it for all FUTURE enrolling students not for CURRENTLY attending students.
Again I think the concept of this is practical and responsible however, not fur currently enrolled students and especially not here at Ai.
“Gainful employment rules” seems like a good identification tool to detain qualifying students in the multiple educational organizations formed to assist them further as they learn until the point that they can honor those handouts. I, however, see the biggest concern is: How, when higher education has become so much of a social advertising tool to get older and coming adults into higher wage and benefitting jobs, would you begin restricting the only aid that secures them based on what is valued to the community as a career? Understandably, I see the concern some state governments may have with the job degrees as an inflation of students’ young and older return to studying, especially in a creative major. Creative fields are more ideological, forcing on a cause and not a need, than traditional school that study by the book and by the public. While watching the local news, I heard of the story of a women who previously went to the Art Institute- Indianapolis, but now finds herself in unrealistic debt and without the career promised by the school. But the school made no promises to us, we did all the promising and they only assisted in boosting our moral and creative confidence. I too ask myself what the benefits will later be as I continue through paying a school payment that even a public college would find skeptic. As always, I believe the school has and does boost my moral as I find a job with experience in crafting skills. Additionally, I have learned there is no one job with a certain title that I need to pursue. So to that I say that the gainful employment rule is looking out for students they can see growing into residents of the city and boosting the gross income of the community. Looking out for its own citizen, that I can honor, but exiling permissions to give that aid to all students is immoral and mostly likely unethical in the constitution. No matter how great the need Is lower grant budgeting, it is not fair to say to two students with similar standing in the system but one decides to go to a more adventurous school, that you will put your money on the one followed the new rule and kept with traditional schools. As an incoming freshman and out coming senior, I knew taking the Art Institutes acceptance was risking because of the outlandish cost charged to student’s accounts. But I hustled my butt off trying for as many scholarships as I could obtain, making sure every year of middle school, high school, and even elementary to make sure I was no absent of what was happening. Even with doing my best, I couldn’t grab the aid of other benefactors to my future education. However, I still had one scholarship that was in debt to my attentiveness in middle school. There I applied and qualified to become a 21st Century Scholar. Although many have this scholarship, it is important to be for its merit. 21st Century scholarships just gave hope to a lot of kids who knew they would be left out because of disadvantages they faced even when applying their best. Someone with more mastery always had a best that was better than what I gave; that’s what I faced whenever scholarships denied me. So without 21st Century Scholars, I was able to continue toward a degree that is going toward a dream. Along with that chance, I qualify for more scholarships and awards letter as I do better progressively. Financial aid gives you a boost of anything you are lacking as you go. Whether it be finances, resources, material or even time. Taking that away, it would be devastating to the few who really do have what it takes to be masters of their dreams. But if you took away mine now, I’d dedicate my time to finding a new way because it is the most helpful tool anyone can have. Though, some people do misuse it, there are the few that make it worthwhile.
ReplyDeletei personally think there should be a basic test before loans are given out so you can show the money will be put to good use and not wasted,I find that is a big problem in schools today they just let anyone in they rack up debt and fail out and they have no drive to pay it back because they didnt get what they wanted.
ReplyDeleteI'm finding that I agree with all or parts of every comment on this post so far. On the one hand, the bill has good intentions. On the other hand, yes, student loans get pushed to the back burner when other bills are due, so that's not helping the cause.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if this bill could be specific about the types of schools that loans are given for. For example, the Art Institutes are a FOR PROFIT type of college. Had I known that and really understood what it meant, I'm not sure if I would do this again. (I probably would, because everyone not related that is dear to me at this point in my life, I met here at school.) I also feel like some of our majors are screwed in the jobs-after-graduation department. There are many, many, many students that have to move out of state to find jobs in their fields that pay enough that they could pay student loans back on top of normal bills. Photography, for example, is kind of becoming more obsolete because cameras are getting better and many people can find tutorials and the family portrait side of the business has quickly become overrun with momtographers who have the jobs grads need or want. Also more graphic designers can shoot and design (not a bad thing!) so there is less need for just a photographer. Also, with design software apparently it's cheaper and faster (which blows my mind) to just have someone render a cgi image of something a photographer would be hired to shoot, like a beer bottle for a magazine ad.
My little sister wanted to go to college for photography and I told her not to waste her money. Four years ago, no one would have thought movies could be made on iPhones and you could basically learn college courses hacked from the internet.
If they put this bill into action, then yeah you can't get a loan to get the degree you want, but really, you may be dodging a bullet because in the few years you're at school, the degree is obsolete. In the long run, cutting aid for some programs may be in the best interest for students.
I dont think it helps students becasue alot of students dont have much money and wont for a very long time. Students depend on financial aid and if we take that away the students and the schools will be further in the hole. I think the system with out it is better off cause financial aid is a better help and gives more time to the students who don't have the money at the right time.
ReplyDeleteI can't help but be on the fence about this. When you are living paycheck to paycheck it's hard to get certain things done, like pay off loans. I do agree that the graduates need to pay back as much as they can as soon as they can. Even if that's just $5 a month. But, getting settled into a new area, like most of us are going to do out of state, is hard to accomplish while also paying out the rear for loans. Granted, you knew how much they would be, but it's still tough if you can't land that super awesome job right out of school. I do think they should be more specific with this before it becomes a thing.
ReplyDeleteI think that this thing is all wrong and it's not helping college students at all not everyone has the opportunity to be able to repeat college any time they want because it's so expensive I do agree with the fact they want you to pay back your student loans as soon as you cAn so it doesn't effect you later in life but majority of students depend of financial aide and probably couldn't attend school without and I honesty think they should try and help us a little more than they are.
ReplyDeleteI do not like the "Gainful Employment rule" and this is why. How they have the rule set up is that every student tries there hardest to get good grades. Now they would have to take in consideration that the people that are going to be denied are getting done so based on other peoples efforts in getting good grades as well as after they leave paying their loans off. so in return there's no way for someone to get the job they want by putting in countless hour's of hard work, but by counting on the people that come before them to do their best, and if they don't then your screwed. you no longer have a dream or aspiration you now have to just find some type of work to make ends meat, and sadly this will be this persons life. working at a job that you don't like making less money then you could be making. this is not living. this to me would ultimately be now a wasted existence
ReplyDeleteI agree with the statements that this "Gainful Employment rule", unhelpful. Students do not walk through any college ready to pay without debt when it is over. We all need help from the government to pay off our school payments for now until we are in our career. With out help with payments student may never get a career in their field. The government and their plans with this is to make all fields of study harder to get into and make a higher demand in them.
ReplyDeleteTo me I do not think this would be a good thing. A lot of students depend on that financial aid for school. College students do not have a lot of money the way it is and I really think it would be a bad idea. I think everybody deserves to get a good education.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it is fair to shut down our student aid just because of our profession. I feel like it is a form of possible prejudice against students and could potentially cause a huge revolt or strike in which particular individuals may take even worse measures. Such professions are used in advertising especially and could ruin not only the artistic aspect of the world but the business aspect as well.
ReplyDeleteI can see where the government concern lies in their gainful employment act, however it will only have a scyclacle effect. if people are not able to go to school and study to further their career because the job market is to crowded the eventually there will be no one new to fill the position and more people will have to go to school and so on and so forth. people should not be discouraged from going to school in general but more so should be encouraged to go for what they are truly passionate about. the waste of student loans is a result of people rushing into the education system without the proper personal drive to succeed. Without that drive people will fail out of school and end up with debt they cant pay, and thus this act is a result to fix it. However this also punishes people who could thrive in their chosen industry but are denied the chance because others have tried and failed. I believe this problem falls to the people and cant be fixed by regulations and red tape, but only by proper preparation of the individual.
ReplyDeleteI dont agree that its fair to not give a student aid for their race or for their smarts we are all equal and we all should be given the same rights and aids as another.
ReplyDeleteThe Gainful Employment Rule hurts students more than helps them. Most students cannot pay back students loans while in school. I understand eventually we must pay our loans back. But, in my opinion this is creating an unfair gap between students who can afford to go to college because they are upper class and students who cannot afford to go to college because they were born into a family that makes less money. It is unfair. It is just creating a larger gap between the rich and the poor and unfair opportunities the lower class receive.
ReplyDelete