The Us public has seen again and again how higher education institutions’ administrators manage their respective institution. The following article from Newsobserver.com is another example that shows the interest of college administrators does not necessary in line with students’ interest. Rather on her or his own agenda. This is another reason, why the regulator needs to put more regulations to control such behaviors, especially policy and practices which mismanage public money.

More regulations are coming in 2014 and beyond which will make higher education in the US as one of the most regulated industries.  This regulation is a clear answer and is the response to public outcry of reckless college administrators’ pricing/tuition policies.  AAEA has published many research results which pointed to the need of putting the brakes on these try-and-error practices as well as from colleges’ spending sprees, operational inefficiency and reckless decisions.

Karen Weise of BloombergBusinessWeek reported on her January 2, 2014 article that “On Dec. 19, Senators Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced the Protect Student Borrowers Act of 2013, which puts colleges on the hook when students can’t keep up with their loans”.

Our most recent CAR published book shows and discusses the source of college inefficiencies and how these source can be minimized.

Dear AAEA members, friends and other interested parties:  The Association has finally completed and published the CAR book.  Please click here to read the table of contents.  The Association will mail the book for free (retail price almost $40.00) to the first ten members that request the book.  What you need to do is (1) Be a member and (2). Write an email request to harry.djunaidi@IRIntelligence.org.

Potentially the College Affordability Rating will be added as one of the re-accreditation conditions that need to be met by US colleges. Looking ahead what is coming in 2014, AAEA has seen the potential applications of the CAR among other measures in college accreditation process. If this is the case, some colleges especially those with triple Bs rating will have difficult time to survive. For those who are currently have at least two As on any of the first three components of the CAR might be able to survive. Private-small colleges such as Liberal Arts with a B rating on their graduation rate might suffer significant consequences from the implementation of the newly proposed CAR regulation.

Please write us what do you guys think the impacts would have on the US macroeconomics?

As you guys may be aware Yahoo! News has recently written an article that on December 11, 2013 the administrator will hold a day-long submits at the White House. The meeting is called College Submit and stated that “President Barack Obama is summoning college presidents and business leaders to a daylong Dec. 11 summit at the White House to discuss specific ways to make higher education more accessible to low-income students”. The report continues announcing that “The Dec. 11 summit is being run by the National Economic Council, the Domestic Policy Council, and the Department of Education, and will serve as the launching pad for a college affordability drive that will likely run for months — potentially right up to the November 2014 elections. First lady Michelle Obama is expected to play a role in next week’s kickoff event and going forward”.

The College Submit indicates that the newly proposed College Affordability Rating (CAR) will be promoted, campaigned and will become the law of the land in the future.  It will have big financial impacts and may affect the existence of some colleges if the CAR becomes the law.  AAEA has published the ‘PROXY RATINGS” to help US colleges to anticipate the impacts that it may have on them.

Please let us know what you guys think?

During a conference call between the US Secretary of Education and reporters as published in an article in Chronicle Journal of Higher Education on November 5, 2013 (please click here to read the whole article). Basically there are three points raised by the reporters on the application of CAR.

1. Data aren’t good enough to calculate the rating.
2. Ratings will penalize colleges that serve the neediest students; and
3. Ratings will punish colleges and students for factors they cannot control.

In this page, we are going to discuss the third point.  The statement itself is not correct:  CAR will not punish anybody including the students.  In fact, the regulation is introduced to protect students’ and the colleges’ interests.  There is no punishment and no one will be harmed by the CAR.  The regulation itself is geared to encourage and to protect both students’ and colleges’ long-run interests.  Students are encouraged to work harder, smarter and tactful toward learning and finishing their study as it supposed to in term of the completion time.  Colleges as service providers are expected to deliver the best quality of instructions at the best values.  That is all.  If there is any factor beyond one’s control, then it will be handled case by case.  However, ill motivations will not be part in the equation.  Both US colleges and students have to stop with all the excuses, whining and blaming games.   Take charge of your future in responsible ways.  In order to keep everyone in line, the US needs a compliance agency to ensure that every players in the education industry to comply with the rule of the game.  The current accreditation agencies have failed to accomplish their job.  The US needs Education Standard and Compliance Commissions (ESCC).  Does the CAR reflect the accreditation agencies such as those listed below have not achieved their objective optimally?

1. Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools – Educational institutions in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands, as well as schools for American children in Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East.
2. New England Association of Schools and Colleges – Educational institutions in the six New England states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont).
3. North Central Association of Colleges and Schools – Educational institutions in Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
4. Northwest Accreditation Commission for primary and secondary schools and Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities for postsecondary institutions in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington.
5. Southern Association of Colleges and Schools – Educational institutions in Virginia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee and Texas.
6. Western Association of Schools and Colleges – Educational institutions in California, Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Micronesia, Palau, and Northern Marianas Islands, as well as schools for American children in Asia.

Please tell us do you guys think, the US needs another watch dog such as ESCC?