America’s Education ‘Deserts' Show Limits of Relaxing Regulations on Colleges

DeVos should be fired for harming students and causing families greater debt. She is not fit for her position any more than the fake president she bribed to get her job. Comments about students not belonging or being ready for college scapegoat students who are making a lifetime investment similar to taking out a mortgage for a house. Not all mortgages work out as any one who can remember the past decade should recall. Yes, you should do due diligence, but 18 year olds and even older students often don't know what they want or can change their minds. That's actually growth. Moreover, the solution is not for every student unsure of their major to become a plumber or IT bot operator. If the goal is to give our children the same opportunities past generations enjoyed, then we should limit the corruption of for-profit schools through legal means as the Obama Administration did. It seems a distant dream when we had a real president instead of a swamp full of crocodiles in suits.

The situation may be worse than the article states. When I was teaching at a two year college, one of the main reasons students dropped out was “car trouble”. And that was in an urban area with public transportation. In rural areas in winter, on bad roads in an unreliable car, 60 minutes may be dangerous and undoable. Online courses seem to have promise for some, but not if run by the owners of for profit “schools” who shovel our tax dollars into their pockets while leaving students in debt and unemployed. More attention should be paid to vocational education in high school. Programs that allow high school students to ride school busses to local junior colleges for trade/tech classes have proved very successful, even if there is no profit for DeVos’ friends in it.

DeVos derived significant wealth from two enterprises— Amway which is complete scam that preys people to purchase over priced and poor quality goods with the idea they can ‘sell’ them which never happens— it so sleazy it is outlawed in several countries and Blackwater - the private army company that has very deep and corrupt ties to the USA and other militaries — many military dictatorships—they do the ‘unsightly’ work — paid murders and the like. She is only secretary of ed who needs even needed ‘high security’, lacks any formal education in education, no degree in the subject and when she testified to Congress she almost no concept of what Public Education is and material understanding of an average elementary school class. She is shrill for private education for profit education which sees a honey pot of money they stick their hand into and realize profit by taking advantage of people. This is all very typical and expected in Trumpville—lie, cheat and steal— when caught blame -some else and make a villain to feed to the Fox News crowd—by dividing the middle class and poor they win — it has going on for decade but under trump it is just on the first page

One of the most brilliant statements I ever heard was from a high school student decades ago in a small town: The problem with small towns is that the people have small minds.

As a holder of an advanced degree paid for in large part by government programs, I can honestly say that much of what I was able to accomplish in life was directly related to the generosity of programs like the National Defense Student Loan Program, without which my 95th-plus percentile scores on standardized testing would not have meant much. My parents had neither the money nor the willingness to put me through college or (heaven forbid!) graduate school. Nor were the many jobs that I worked during my college years sufficient in themselves to pay for school fees that were several orders of magnitude lesser than they are today. At the height of my success as an entrepreneur, I employed more than 30 full-time professionals making as much as $100,000 a year. They did good work for our customers while paying taxes & raising families so that American prosperity could continue. The point here is not that I did well. The point is that the country did well by investing in a resource (me) that could _only_ contribute to its full potential because of the investment made by enlightened government programs. America is blessed with many clever people, and whatever we can do to be sure that they get all the education they can use will benefit the country far more than it costs. Yes, smart people will very likely do well whether they get educated or not. So we can have clever auto mechanics, or clever engineers. The choice shouldn't be difficult, even if one isn't educated.

These education deserts basically exist in rural areas AKA Trump country. I used to be all for providing these areas with the fruits of civilization like education, post offices, medical care, internet, etc. But I am done with that. These people want the benefits of liberal generousity, but then saddle us with a horrible human being as president. They have exhausted my sympathy for them. I know there are good people in these areas that do not support the current occupant. For those people I quote another commenter and Paul Simon. "Get on the bus, Gus."

Free, high quality public education for all. NOT what ill-educated Betsy and donnie are proposing.

For-profit schools are businesses. Their main focus is making money for the owners of the business, not the students. Basically they are a scam to get federal financial-aid dollars. There are a couple of exceptions, notably SVA and SCAD.

??? “if students drop out of college — or earn credentials that are not valued in the labor market — their grant dollars have yielded little return for society” Like teachers, scientist, artists and professors???

Most of DeVos ideas are to dismantle anything Mr Obama did. I know it is motivated by meaness and is intended to make poor people poorer but i cant visualize how the educational score card might work and why it cant be improved to meet the needs of prospective students.

This is the 21st century. Oddly, there's no discussion here of online classes, perhaps supplemented by occasional in-person weekend seminars, for those who are stuck in remote areas by family or job responsibilities, can't afford to pay living costs elsewhere, or just aren't yet ready to live away from home. (Unfortunately, however, high-speed internet access remains an issue in many of these areas.) I think we're beginning to question the whole paradigm of how college education is conducted in this country, given the high costs and uneven results of the traditional ways of doing things.

College is not for everyone, and yes, that is a fact. Often the people who college was not meant for attend the institutions which plague our higher education system -- mainly for-profit and failing public colleges. They take out loans, do not complete the degree, cannot find unemployment, and leave wasting their time and money. The necessity of higher education must become less stigmatized if we wish to correct this trend. The college degree allows someone to enter the professional world, but not everyone is, or can be, a professional. Our country needs plumbers, electricians, welders, and all the other blue-collar jobs that the American elite stigmatizes. Not every student is capable of attending and completing a degree program; these jobs are for them. We must give more attention to students in those circumstances. Instead of making college seem like the end-all-be-all of a successful life, we must make clear that there are acceptable alternatives. For-profit schools and failing public colleges are not the answer, the answer is the return of meaningful education for those not cut-out for a four-year degree.

Both Pres Obama and Trump are both clueless about education and they appointed unqualified education secretaries who think schools should be run like businesses.

This column is laughable. If most students attend college within fifteen miles of home, the author should have used the adjective "mediocre." Those who apply themselves in high school make their way to the best public university in their home state. Selective private schools love students who come from more rural areas. Helps them with their "geographical diversity" scores. Is choosing a college all about looking up figures on income? Whatever happened to studying what you love, and knowing that such passion will probably translate into a fulfilling career? Are high school students helpless morons? Do they not know that doctors earn more than teachers? An engineering degree probably means a better salary than majoring in social work? Do they not know how to use a computer to look things up? Zero teachers and adult mentors to guide them? Those opting to stay home for college probably didn't qualify for anything better than the local community college. Which are two year schools with guidance counselors who can advise students on their options for transferring to a college to earn their 4 year degrees. Or they've chosen to stay home to help take care of a family member with medical issues, or are afraid to be living on their own hundreds of miles from their family and friends.

This is not complicated. We don't allow everyone who once watched Marcus Welby M.D. to practice medicine and then expect that publishing outcome statistics is enough to protect the public from quacks. For profit schools are under more pressure than public universities to cut costs and enroll students in programs that will leave them with large debts that their skills are not sufficient to repay. Therefore for profit schools need more oversight.

Once upon a time, secondary schools had guidance staff to help students find their academic path and help find suitable ways to obtain further education. Of course these positions have been eliminated as educational funding has plummeted. Community colleges once had diverse majors including vocational and academic training. Again budget cuts have eliminated many career learning options or restricted enrollment. The child of a friend can not get into an RN or LPN program at any local community college because enrollment is capped. Private non-profit schools also have restricted enrollment. Only a private for-profit school is an option. Lets not be stupid and realize that constant cuts to education budgets demanded by the GOP at the state and local level have forced students to go to for profit schools. This is not an accident. We once had many accessible vocational and community college career programs. Try getting into a CADD program, dental hygienist, nursing, vet assistant, mortician program all are been eliminated or restricted. The for-profit education lobby has won. The American public lost.

There is a recent antidote to this affliction; take a look at “The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money” by Bryan Caplan. Is our massive college system mostly a waste of time, money and national productivity? Sure ‘nuff.

Thanks to the efforts of the Secretary of Education, I foresee a quantum leap in employment in the yachting industry. Colleges would be well advised to offer extensive curricula in Large Pleasure Craft Design and Manufacture, Maintenance, Crewing, Stewarding and Deck Swabbing. After all, the unparalleled success of the Trump administration's policies toward for-profit colleges will undoubtedly create a class of fabulously wealthy Job Creators, and a class of the Poorly Educated to serve them.

How about trade schools? No one needs another 20 something Art Major that shows up in NYC and sits in on 8th Ave with a sign 'Broadway dreams shot, spare some change?' But we all need plumbers, electricians, contractors, roofers, etc. Right now the place where I leave has a leaky roof, a shower that needs grouting and a laundromat leaking pipe. But the landlord cannot afford the cost of repair from one of the very few people willing and licensed to do the job. The work is there, we just need more people certified to do them, and less Greek Poetry MBA's elbowing people off jobs at McD or Starbucks who really could use those jobs.

For-profit colleges are not going locate themselves in these so-called education deserts. Maine has a sparse population, but the for-profits are in the bigger cities, already well-served with state and private colleges, because that's where the students are. The state university system has campuses spread throughout the state to reach the sparse population, but those smaller campuses in areas without much population can't offer a wide range of courses, except through tele-learning. In my stats class, all the distance students at the other university campuses either dropped out or started to drive an hour or more to come to class. They needed the direct interaction with the professor to learn. In class, it was easy to raise your hand, ask a question and learn what had escaped you before the lecture moved on, although the distance students were watching live and could have asked questions,too, it was just logistically hard enough that they didn't. In short, I don't see distance learning or for-profits solving the 'educational desert' problem, which by my calculations affects 2% of college-age Americans, who probably don't live in areas where the jobs require college degrees. It's probably a better plan to help them with the cost of living in a dorm than to bring college to them.

11 million of the 325 million people in the US live more than an hour from college, so essentially 97 percent live near a college. The map is dramatic, but mostly show the location of real deserts such as the Mojave or wilderness such as the Aroostock in Maine. Of the 11 million in those areas, only a tiny fraction are college age and many of them would be accustomed to driving long distances for basic services. Education desert is a provocative term, but the real problem is people who live near high quality educational institutions, but lack the money or skills to attend. There are far more people in the Bronx who are shut out of college than in the Adirondack.

"Approximately 11 million Americans live ... more than an hour’s drive from a public college..... And millions more have sparse options, such as a single community college." It used to be that you could go to your local state college and expect a wide array of majors. However, in an effort to contain costs, many states are now looking to reduce the number of majors at each school, often designating one or two schools in their system as THE place to pursue a particular discipline, and excluding such programs at the other schools. It's bad enough that a student may live more than an hour away from a four-year state school, but even worse when (s)he is told that their particular major - sometimes common ones - are offered only at a school much further away.

The key to quality education below college is getting the parent involved. The key to quality education beyond that is to make it affordable.

1/3 of jobs require any college at all, much less a bachelor's degree or higher. Every day at school, I see packs of zombies wandering from class to class, spending money they don't have and wasting their precious early career years doing … what? Of those who do graduate (perhaps 60%), very few have any life skills, frame of reference, or willingness to become fully functional adults. Half of the people in college should not be there.

Rural areas may be "education deserts" but they are often also "employment deserts", with few career expanding options. Songwriter Paul Simon has some advice: Make a new plan, Stan Hop on the bus, Gus Getting away from home, even an hour or two away, can provide new perspectives. Towns with colleges usually have part time work opportunities as well, another growth opportunity. The best "score" in the College Scorecard developed by the Obama Dept of Education, is the graduation rate. Most of the "for profit" colleges have graduation rates in the teens and lower, because they are designed more to harvest college loan money than graduate students with marketable skills.

A while back a few of us were talking about this topic at the local coffee shop and I started making a joke about how there were two new Pre-Schools opening and one was going to be Pre-Med, the other Pre-Law focused. Not knowing that I was making a joke one woman leaned into our conversation and seriously wanted to know where these schools were. She was really disappointed. Ad Ed commented, most people don't have a clue as to what they want to do with the rest of their life when in their late teens and early 20's. Yet, they pursue college as a though it is a trade school and frankly, trade school might be better for a lot of people. We Americans seem to have a single measure of success and that income that is above everyone else as well as the gateway to celebrity. Yes, all schools need to do a better job of marketing their product as well as not over-selling their programs. I went to college as a Viet-Nam Vet majored in Business and my actual career went in a direction I never imagined and I only succeeded through continuous and often autodidactic education. I cannot imagine the crushing debt of education today along with waking up and discovering that what you studied isn't what you want to do for the rest of your life. There is no simplistic solution to this problem but that is all that is being offered - simplistic solutions to complex problems.

College is a valuable asset for those who will use it but since only about 30% of jobs truly require college level skills, a large part of education spending is both only unnecessary but a wasteful use of resources as well. An effort needs to be made to find a way to accurately match aptitude, business needs now and in the future and educational and training resources with the ability to efficiently move workers to where they are needed. The military does this quite well with the ASVAB. From midway through elementary school, we need to regularly assess students with an eye toward placing them in tracks that align with eventual business needs. There shouldn’t be any education outside that track and beyond what is determined to be required by future employers unless one is able to fund that themselves.

I get the feeling that too many college-bound students haven’t the slightest idea of what they want or expect of a college education.

That map looks very similar to other NY Times maps on population distribution in the political arena. I wonder what % of the population actually lives in a “desert”. I would guess it is under 5%. College is an important choice. If you cannot grasp the need to check out a web site on your probability of graduating and getting a job in your desired field, it is likely you are not ready to make that choice. Grow up and return to the table when you are ready to make a significant, adult decision.

The bad news is that serving the people in education deserts would be expensive. The good news is that once the super wealthy start to pay their fair share there would be more than enough funds to go around.

This administration is taking a practical, helpful approach with their plans to provide data on all programs at all institutions. It is only then, that we can truly identify outlier programs and consider sanctions. This data will also be very effective in motivating institutions to improve or abandon programs to be competitive.

@deedubs I agree that there is an ulterior motive here and it's clear what it is from this penultimate paragraph: "The current gainful employment rules are by no means perfect. For example, they do little to address poor performance at public and nonprofit colleges. A recent analysis of federal data by Jason Delisle of the American Enterprise Institute found that students from the University of Maryland’s online division had more trouble repaying their loans than students at many major for-profit chains." AEI is the dominant conservative think tank (read its history), but even that is beside the point. What is useful in Delisle's comparison of a single online division of a major university and "many major for-profit chains"? Nothing. I can think of several reasons why online students would have more trouble repaying their loans than any number of other demographics. They are more likely studying part-time for one, and more likely only able to afford a less-expensive tuition that even then they can't pay or make successful because they hold down two jobs that can barely pay the bills. I say the writer of this article is not very subtly promoting the legitimacy of for-profit colleges, which the Obama administration, along with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Securities and Exchange Commission rightly scrutinized and regulated after extreme financial exploitation of students went on at those institutions for years.

Gainful employment regulation is a great idea but should be applied to non-profit schools as well.

This article gets to the root of a debate about should government protect people against themselves. Those that say "yes" favor proactive governmental regulation aimed at protecting students from making poor decisions regarding attending college. Those that say "no" favor giving students additional information and letting them decide for themselves. On both the philosophical side and practical side, I have to agree with the "no" camp here. While I rarely agree with Ms. DeVoss and in fact am concerned that there is an ulterior motive at work here (that benefits her personally), in this case, I think her move is correct. Let's not have government protect us from our selves on every life cycle decision.