Because We Call Them For-Profit Colleges, Duh!

Gerald Lappay

RWS 100

Professor Werry

October 2, 2014

“Because We Call Them For-Profit Colleges, Duh!”

What seems to be Carey’s overall argument?

I believe Carey’s overall argument is that while for-profit colleges, from a moral standpoint, are wrong, they fill the gaps of what traditional education leave behind. I don’t believe many traditional universities offer what the degrees for-profits do, mainly in the freelancing, arts, and technology fields; and while for-profits are outrageously overpriced, you can’t beat them when it comes to accessibility. Accessibility would be the key word to differentiate between for-profits and traditional institutes of higher education, and Carey highlights how accessible for-profits can be; with several of them littering highway exits and professors being available online.

List three major claims and the evidence Carey uses to support these claims.

Claim #1: For-profits and their investors make a lot of money. The first ten paragraphs identify the morally bad yet financially brilliant concept of for-profit colleges. Carey recycles the statistics frequently pulled by the media, so the reader understands the sheer amount of money for-profits are taking from the federal reserve. “[The University of] Phoenix alone is on pace to reap $1-billion from Pell Grants this year, along with $4-billion from federal loans. A quarter of all federal aid goes to for-profits, while they enroll only 10 percent of students” (Paragraph 4).

Claim #2: Michael Clifford, one of the leaders in the for-profit industry, concedes that the for-profit industry is being abused. Carey states this in the very beginning of paragraph 8. “Clifford will concede, in the abstract, to abuses in the for-profit industry” (8). I would imagine Clifford means that too many people are milking money from the for-profit industry, but Carey isn’t specific enough in what kind of abuse for-profits are taking.

Claim #3: For-profits are more accessible compared to traditional institutions.  Like all traditional institutions, most for-profits also have regional accreditation. An accredited institution a few miles away from a highway exit near your home is more convenient to attend, in comparison to an institution like San Diego State University. I doubt you would have to pay any kind of housing or service fees. One can still learn from the comfort of his or her home using the internet; and obtain attractive degrees for-profits offer such as design and computer fields -- which I doubt San Diego State offers.

Do any parts of his text seem particularly persuasive? Do any claims seem unsupported?

Carey is persuasive when he first pulls in the reader with how “wrong” for-profits can be. He’s also persuasive when he uses figurative language, like in paragraph 16. “For profits fill a void left by traditional institutions that once believed their world was constant” (16). Some of his claims, such as the Wal-Mart deal in paragraph 13 and the abuse of the for-profit industry go unexplained, which leaves me wondering with the typical how and why questions.