BeautyLink - Volume 6, Issue 3 - (Page 13)
"In one 24-hour
up on our call
to action, 867
311 members of
72 percent of the
U.S. House of
BY TOM E.
Gainful Employment 2.0-What's Next?
OK, SO WE all submitted our Gainful Employment
NPRM responses and now we're done with GE for
a while, right? Wrong! We have just entered several
new phases of the process.
Picking up on the summation of Rep. Bobby
Scott's remarks from the AACS Spring Operations
Conference, another very important portion of Rep.
Scott's speech focused on his personal view that
the GE regulations are not the right way to seek
to improve the quality of education. Halleluiah!
It gets better. Rep. Scott provided his own
anecdotes on some of the fallacies of the regulation, including an example he made between
two institutions, Institution A and Institution B.
Institution A would be serving a lower income,
at-risk population, and Institution B would be serving a more affluent population. Rep. Scott stated
that Institution A is going to have a harder time
complying with the GE metrics, but that doesn't
mean that Institution A is not providing students
with a quality program and education, nor does
it mean that Institution B is a better program or
doing a better job. He went on to discuss several
additional factors that could impact the potential
outcome based upon the debt-to-earnings metrics,
concluding that there may well be a better way-
and even intimated that in his view that may well
be accreditation. He gets it!
And Rep. Scott is not alone. On March 27, 2014
(the deadline for public comment on the NPRM), a
bipartisan group of 40 members of the U.S. House of
Representatives sent Secretary of Education Arne
Duncan a letter stating their belief that the regulation had the potential to "unduly affect students
enrolled at proprietary institutions and non-degree
programs at non-profit institutions, including community colleges."
The letter went on to suggest that, based upon
data provided by independent research conducted
by Charles River Associates, implementation of the
regulation could potentially "reduce postsecondary
education options for as many as 3.9 million students
by 2020, many of whom are minorities, veterans or
Based upon the analysis and their concerns for
students across the entire spectrum of higher education, the members questioned the merits of the
debt-to-earnings and programmatic CDR metrics
proposed to determine institutional program eligibility. They called upon the Department to withhold
the regulations and work with Congress on more
fair and equitable solutions during the upcoming
reauthorization of the HEA.
B E AUT YL I NK | C E L* E * BR AT E | 2 0 1 4 |
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of BeautyLink - Volume 6, Issue 3
Message From the Aacs President & CEA Chair
The Workings of Washington
The Art of the Consult
A Student’s Perspective
Celebrating Our Graduates
Access and Affordability
And Then There’s Compliance
Are You Ready to Thrive?
Navigating the Acquisition Path
Creating a Marketing Mixture
Culture Trumps Strategy
Beauty Changes Lives
20 Ways to Celebrate You
Battle of the Strands
Students Leaving the Beauty School “Nest''
Why Every Educator Needs to Be at CEA This Year
Step by Step
Voices From the Classroom
People & Places
Create a Recipe for the Future
New Products & Services
Associate Member Profiles: Furniture Manufacturers
New School Members
Upcoming 2014-15 Events
Index to Advertisers
BeautyLink - Volume 6, Issue 3
If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.