Understanding Governmental Scrutiny of For-Profit Colleges

Sticking on the topic of for-profit colleges for another week. There may have been some disagreement over the positive outlook on these schools in last week's blog, but they do seem to be holding up, even in a slow economy. At least the one where I work doesn't appear to be short on prospective students. Anyhow, I'd like to dig back into some older articles over the next couple of weeks. In the meantime, I'll be tackling the usefulness of teacher tenure, as well as the idea of running schools like businesses -- good or bad idea?

By Jim McGrath

Because of its business model, some may question the reason for governmental scrutiny being placed on for-profit colleges. To fully understand the breadth of the argument from either side, there are several topics to take into consideration.

Scope of the Market

Without question, the for-profit, or proprietary, college industry is a growing business. According to an October 2010 Washington Post article, one of every 10 postsecondary students is now served by this sector of the education market. The report states that roughly 25 percent of federal Pell grant funds go to for-profit school students. In terms of the amount of federal financial aid being dispensed, a December 2010 article from the Lexington (KY) Herald-Leader notes that the share of money received has increased from $4.6 billion in 2000 to $26.5 billion last year.

Another number to consider is 225. This represents the percentage growth of enrollment at 14 publicly traded for-profit college chains between 1998 and 2008, according to a study conducted by the St. Petersburg Times last December. Since 1998, the number of students in these proprietary schools has now reached 1.4 million.

Need for Government Income

According to the same Times study, the for-profit college industry depends on public money, much of it financed from the federal government. In fact, 80 percent of the income collected by these schools is in the form of student loan aid. While representing 25 percent of student borrowers, for-profit students also account for approximately the same percentage of funds borrowed. In short, one-quarter of federal funding goes to students enrolled in proprietary schools. This may explain the concern from the government as to how useful this money is being spent.

Because much of the federal government student aid money is going to for-profit college students, lawmakers at the local and national levels have started to emerge with questions about the usefulness of this type of spending. On the other side, proponents of proprietary education have stepped up their efforts to deflect these criticisms, through the use of advertising campaigns, hiring of lobbyists or position pieces in educational journals and newspapers.

Response from the Obama Administration

Over the past several years, states have put more restrictions on for-profit schools, including acts which make them adhere to the same accreditation standards as non-profit colleges. For example, in Virginia, all non-profit and for-profit colleges are now required to adhere to the standards set by SCHEV (Schools and Colleges of Higher Education in Virginia). This upgrade of accreditation standards, which became required in the late 2000’s forced several for-profit schools to close its doors. Others chose to change their business model, changing their brand name and offering only two and four year degree majors, while dropping its certificate programs. Many adjusted their curriculum to emulate the semester model used by public institutions, thereby allowing for an easier transfer of credits for students who wished to pursue higher education at a four-year school after graduating from the proprietary school.

However, lawmakers in a number of states have noted the higher loan default rate of for-profit school students when compared to their non-profit brethren. Federal data acquired for the Washington Post article show that 11.6 percent of for-profit borrowers default within their first two years, as opposed to six percent from public colleges and four percent from private, non-profit institutions.

Because of this new concern, the Obama administration has taken notice. While continuing to recognize for-profit schools as a way of educating American students and achieving the goal of having the highest percentage (by country) of graduates by 2020, Arne Duncan, the Secretary of Education, has agreed to meet with for-profit school owners on a number of issues. According to the Post, among the issues to be discussed will be the plan to implement several rules requiring more disclosure from the schools, especially on topics such as graduation rate, issuing federal aid based on job placements among graduates and prohibiting recruiter payment based solely on the number of students enrolled. Duncan promises flexibility, but says that his department wants to “get it right.”

Conclusion

The for-profit education sector is rapidly growing, but can be expected to face more governmental regulations in the coming months. These new mandates will primarily address the issue of federal financial aid being tied to a school’s job placement rate and requiring for-profit schools to disclose graduation rates. Also, according to a Washington Post article from December 2010, there may be reinforcement of a federal law which prohibits school recruiters from being paid solely based on the number of students they enroll.

Evaluating the Future of For-Profit Colleges

In spite of several concerns, including a taxed status and lack of state funding, the future of for-profit, or proprietary, schools looks bright for the foreseeable future.

There are a number of reasons for optimism. Topping the list is demand. President Obama has set a goal of making the United States the largest producing nation of college graduates by 2020. In a May 2010 speech, Education Secretary Arne Duncan echoed Obama’s wish at a policy forum sponsored by a for-profit college, noting the “vital role” that such schools play in training students for jobs. With a tight economy forcing job seekers to acquire new skills, the availability of for-profit colleges remains an appealing option.

One of the reasons for the appeal is the flexibility offered by for-profit institutions. Many of the students who enroll in proprietary schools are adults who work full-time jobs while maintaining families and raising children. The for-profit schools have found success by catering to the needs of the working adult, offering options such as flexible scheduling and online courses. In many cases, an associates or bachelors degree can be earned in less than the two or four years proposed by non-profit colleges. Students can attend school without sacrificing job income or time away from their families.

Another advantage which the for-profit school holds over its non-profit competitors is its status as a business entity. Unlike a public non-profit school, which is largely funded by state supported income, the proprietary school is in direct competition with other schools and must function in a businesslike manner to maintain success. Schools that fail to progress are destined to lose potential students to competitors, similar to any other business. Because of this, for-profit schools are forced to bring a more innovative approach to the educational arena. By introducing new degree programs and course offerings, the for-profit school remains on the “cutting edge” of education.

Because of its business model, for-profit colleges should also remain successful in the future because of their ability to properly utilize funds. Most of the for-profit schools are not required to channel money into athletic programs, student life activities and other non-academic interests. The money received by a proprietary institution is budgeted with a higher percentage geared toward servicing the educational needs of its students.

For-profit schools have gained success and acceptability because of their commitment to vocational training. While adhering to their state educational standards, which have become more stringent, the proprietary school serves its students best by offering specific vocational programs in fields such as paralegal training, medical assistance, and aviation maintenance, which allow a student to train for a specific career rather than a general field. This degree track allows students to complete the requirements in a shorter amount of time, but ready to enter the job market with the skills necessary for their chosen career. This trend should continue in the near future as there are still many students looking for the specific training offered by for-profit schools.

For-profit schools will face challenges in the future. Some of these challenges will come from within as proprietary schools directly compete against each other for students. Other threats will develop as non-profit colleges, facing their own budget cuts, begin to emulate some of the educational models which have been successful with the for-profit schools. However, with more Americans seeking educational alternatives, coupled with an executive administration committed to helping more adults earn college degrees, the future of for-profit schools looks optimistic.

York Upsets Tabb in 61-59 OT Thriller

Big boys basketball game in the Bay Rivers District last week. Working on a couple of articles on for-profit schools for next week.

By Jim McGrath Thursday, January 13, 2011

When York and Tabb square off in sports, the rules are like that with any other great athletic rivalry. Throw away the records and let them have it at.

The Falcons entered the sports complex of the “Big Orange” in a precarious position within the Bay Rivers District. Several recent losses had left the team mired in eighth place, battling a 3-5 district mark.

On the other hand, Tabb was soaring among the elite AA teams in Virginia, opening the season with a 10-1 record. Even a pair of close losses to Bishop Sullivan and Walsingham had barely affected the Tigers' ranking, with the team maintaining a third place statewide status in the most recent VirginiaPreps.com Division 4 poll.

But within the first few minutes of last night’s matchup on Big Bethel, it was obvious that Tabb was ready to bring a heaping load of intensity and York was ready to match it.

With the Falcons down 5-2 early, York’s sophomore sensation Brandon Harvell stole an errant pass and rushed down the court en route to what would have been an easy layup. Except he was fouled by Tabb’s Patrick Corbett. Hard. As the vocal York crowd roared its disapproval, the equally vocal Tabb crowd cheered a strong and decisive defensive play from Corbett. In the meantime, Harvell calmly sank both free throw attempts and the teams resumed business.

In the end, intensity was the word of the day. Both teams missed many open jumpers, but followed after the potential rebounds with abandon and vigor with four, sometimes five, players jumping simultaneously after the bouncing ball.

Throughout the game, the lead changed hands. Twice before the end of the first quarter. Five more times before the end of the half. As the teams went into the locker room, underdog York was clinging to a 26-25 lead.

Then it got interesting.

Two free throws early in the third quarter by Chase Gibson bumped the cushion to 32-28, but neither team would lead by more than six for the rest of the game. Each thrust by one team resulted in a parry from the other. As Tabb’s Quinlin McCormick drove to his left for a layup with 15 seconds remaining in the quarter, the margin had been cut back to one, 36-35.

Harvell opened the fourth with a steal and layup, hoping to set the tone for his team. However, Tabb clawed back, making one of two free throws on successive possessions to make the score 38-37. After a York miss, 6’3” senior Cy Cole buried a three-point jumper from the left corner, giving Tabb a 40-38 lead. Another Cole bank shot upped the lead to 42-39. With 3:24 remaining in the game, Will Baggett drained two free throws after a Harvell foul to make the score 46-41, Tabb. After Quinton Martinez made one of two from the charity stripe, junior Joseph Nelson responded with a basket and with 2:36 to go, the Tigers had opened a 48-42 spread.

But the Falcons fought back. Branson Tew buried a three-pointer from the left corner, halving the deficit. Tabb looked to take their time to set up a good shot, but Shaq Rodney was fouled and made one of two. 49-45. A Martinez drive and basket cut the lead to two. Then, Tew stole a pass and drove for a layup to tie the game at 49. Each team exchanged a pair of baskets and the game headed into overtime, tied at 53.

The teams exchanged the lead a couple of times in the first three minutes of overtime, but the outcome was almost decided with 44.7 seconds remaining. Clinging to a 56-54 advantage, Falcon guard Taylor Kinney was fouled by Joseph Nelson, his fifth.

Despite the vocal pressure from the boisterous crowd, Kinney swished both free throws and the four point lead looked to hold.

Tabb’s Baggett disagreed with that assessment and responded with a three-point basket to make the score 58-57 with thirty ticks left on the clock.

York hoped to hold the ball for one last possession, but Rodney fouled Martinez with 17.4 seconds left. The junior made the first shot, but his second attempt bounced off the front of the rim, giving the Tigers one last chance.

Tabb passed around the perimeter, looking for one good shot as time ran out. With six seconds left, Baggett gave his best effort from the top of the key, but fell short and a timeout was called with York in possession.

Immediately off the inbound pass, Rodney fouled Martinez again. But this time, Martinez made the first shot and watched the second roll in from the front of the rim to give the Falcons a four point lead. Tabb scored at the buzzer, but it wasn't enough to grab the win.

When asked about the importance of the win, Falcon coach Jeff Slade noted the importance of the local rivalry and added, “anytime you win against a (Tabb coach) Doug Baggett team, it’s huge.” Reflecting on his team’s possible resurgence, Slade added, “we have five losses within the district. Even though we’re in eighth place, there are some teams with four losses that we're looking up at.”

With the win, York improves to 6-6 (4-5 in the BRD), while Tabb has now lost three straight and drops to 10-4 (8-2 in the BRD). Martinez led the Falcons with 16 points, while Cole paced the Tigers effort with 15.

York (6-6, 4-5 BRD)   16   10   10   17    8   -  61
Tabb (10-4, 8-2 BRD)  14   11   10   18    6   -  59

Profiles in Leadership - Joe Gibbs

Our great leaders come from every walk of life. Football season is about to end, and with the Redskins out of the playoff picture, us diehards like to watch the John Riggins show on cable and yearn for yesteryears. Here is a profile I wrote on Joe Gibbs - Hall of Famer and arguably the Skins greatest coach ever.

       It is difficult to compile a list of the greatest leaders in sports without giving serious consideration to Joe Gibbs. Gibbs is unique among his peers. As a football coach in the 1980’s and 90’s, he won three Super Bowls as the coach of the Washington Redskins. Only Pittsburgh’s Chuck Noll has won more (4) NFL titles. New England’s Bill Belichick and the late Bill Walsh of the San Francisco 49ers also won three. But Gibbs had the unique accomplishment of winning each Super Bowl with a different quarterback (Joe Theismann -1983, Doug Williams - 1988, and Mark Rypien - 1992).

       After the 1992 season, Gibbs retired. Like many ex-coaches, Gibbs made a move toward broadcasting, but there was a surprise behind his story. While most coaches retire from the burnout of 16-18 hour days, Gibbs had other ideas. In 1993, to the surprise of many sports fans, he announced the formation of Joe Gibbs racing, a venture into the competitive, and increasing lucrative, NASCAR auto racing series. Unlike the NFL, the Winston (now Nextel) Cup series begins its season with its most important race, the Daytona 500. In their first major race as a team, Gibbs Racing and its driver, Dale Jarrett captured the Daytona race, an amazing accomplishment for any racing team. For a brand new team without a first tier driver, this was a phenomenal feat.

       Although Gibbs made another unsuccessful foray into the NFL, his record as a football coach and racecar owner is unparalleled. He is one of a very select group to have led a team to a championship in two separate endeavors. He has also accomplished this while leading a diverse group of personalities, as bold and brash as Joe Theismann or Tony Stewart, to the low-key and cerebral, such as Jarrett. Along the way, he has shown the capacity to change strategies to help his team’s situation. In football, his Redskin teams were known as a run first, pass later offensive attack during his early years, but may be best known for a Super Bowl record 35 point outburst during the second quarter of Super Bowl XXII against Denver. This barrage of points was due to a heavy passing attack, which was considered to be very unlike Coach Gibbs.

       When deciding on a subject, it seemed more sensible to focus on a more traditional type of leader, like a CEO or a general. However, Coach Gibbs has always fascinated me because of his demeanor as a leader in two sports best known for their speed, fast pace and violence. Race drivers have died from accidents and even Theismann’s career ended on a gruesome  note, as Giant linebacker Harry Carson  landed on his leg during a sack, causing one of the most disgusting breaks ever seen on live television, illuminated by the slow motion replays.

       In spite of his environment, Gibbs is a very quiet, low-key individual. He is not a man of few words, but unlike many of his coaching colleagues, all of them could be repeated on television during the family hour. Gibbs is notorious for his religious upbringing, his devotion to Christ and his squeaky clean language. In an  interview from the early 1990’s, one Redskin noted that the worst word he ever heard out of Gibbs’ mouth was “buns,” uttered during a halftime pep talk.

       Fortunately, Gibbs has been generous in offering his views about leadership and life success. His book, “Game Plan for Life” begins with a large dose of humility from its principal author. Says Gibbs,

·         “But despite what a few sportswriters and a kind business associate or two have said along the way, I'm about as far from being an intellectual as you can get. I was a P.E. major. You know, physical education: ballroom dancing and handball!”

       He goes on to note that it should be no surprise that his name is Joe, as he is as average as any other man, and aside from three Super Bowl wins and three NASCAR championships, he is really not much different from anybody else.

       Gibbs’ two greatest leadership traits are determination and integrity. As a coach, his nights at Redskins Park were long and legendary. The story of the coach sleeping in his office three nights a week are true as is the story of Gibbs taking a nap on the locker room floor right before a crucial playoff game. His integrity is based on Christian-centered beliefs.

       In terms of leadership theory, Gibbs adheres to two main focal points. He emphasizes the importance of having a game plan. In his model, the coach contrasts his former position as the guy on the sideline with the white pad in hand to one of his crew chiefs on the NASCAR circuit, also noted by a headset and white drawing board. He believes in making the plan and most importantly, sticking to it.

       However, Gibbs’ leadership theory also is contingent on working with the best people available. He notes the importance of finding the best man for the job. While not a gender friendly term, he is quick to note that he is known for his work with men on the football field and the racetrack. He believes in giving the man a plan and allowing him the opportunity to see it to completion.

       This ability to lean on others has worked best with the skills model. Gibbs’ teams have been well known for their ability to adjust on the “fly,” whether it was during halftime of a football game, or in the pits at Darlington. One theory behind the Redskins to reach the Super Bowl during Gibbs’ second stint suggested that the shortening of halftime from 15 to 12 teams affected his team’s ability to make adjustments. The art of  making a quick adjustment is problem solving at its best. Because it involves everyone’s input, the style would best resemble Team Management on Blake and Mouton’s Leadership Grid.

       The personal qualities that attribute to Gibbs’ success are rooted in his religious convictions, but his loyalty to colleagues and devotion to family cannot be overlooked. Looking at the old Redskin coaching staff from the first and second Gibbs eras, there were a lot of the same coaches, even though Gibbs went 12 years between jobs.

       Coach Gibbs was assisted in his quest to become a successful leader with the help of some quality mentors. His best-known assistantship came with the St. Louis Cardinals, where he became a disciple of the offensive system used by head coach Don Coryell. Coryell’s system, nicknamed “Air Coryell,” was the precursor to today’s West Coast offense. Although Gibbs added a pounding running game to the system, he could adjust and alter his system to pass first, when the circumstances and personnel allowed. Gibbs was also surrounded by great by a great football team owner in Jack Kent Cooke, and a quality general manger with Bobby Beathard. Although Beathard and Gibbs often had differences in which personnel to draft or trade for, they agreed often enough to develop and maintain a strong team, one that went 140-65 over a 12-year period. In fact, during the players’ strike of 1987, the free agents drafted by the two allowed the Redskins to win all three of their games without their regular players, including a stunning upset of the Dallas Cowboys, who had seven of their players come back to the team for the game. The Redskins success during the strike was the basis for the movie “The Replacements” starring Keanu Reeves.

       It is easy to determine the rewards that Gibbs has earned from his success as a leader. Three Super Bowl wins have translated into three Super Bowl rings and a lucrative coaching salary. After his first retirement, Gibbs signed on as an analyst for CBS Sports and earned five figure sums to speak to groups of businessmen. His net wealth is not known, but the cost of starting a NASCAR team is known to cost $10-15 million dollars. It is known that when Gibbs returned to the Redskins in 2002, his contract as for five years and $25 million.

       Yet, like most great leaders, Gibbs had to make great sacrifices. In his case, the main sacrifice was family, but only for the first part of his career. Between July and January, Gibbs was known to sleep in his office three nights a week, and was notorious for his response to a question about Oliver North during the 1988 Iran-Contra hearings. Gibbs had no idea who Lt. Col. North was. His wife Pat had to accept the role of both parents, lugging sons J.D and Coy to football practices and other activities.

       In later life Gibbs evened the score. When he formed Joe Gibbs Racing, he was determined to make it a family affair. In doing so, he made one son the president of the company, and the other took charge of the racing division. Gibbs still serves as CEO of Joe Gibbs Racing, but defers all business decisions to his sons. It was his inactivity with his own company that allowed him the time to come back and coach the Redskins for four years recently.

       In 2009, Gibbs had retired from football again and decided to collaborate with his fellow leaders in football and business to brainstorm ideas on what makes for a successful life. This meeting of the minds turned into the book “Game Plan” and was published earlier this year.

A Super Bowl for the Kids

Summary from the recent championship games from a local pee-wee footbll league. From wydaily.com and 92.3 Tide Radio

By Jim McGrath

            The future of high school football on the Peninsula was on proud display last Saturday as the Peninsula Youth Football Association (PYFA) hosted its annual Super Bowl at Wanner Stadium in James City County.

            The league, now in its 51^st year, has expanded from a four-team York County league to an organization with 61 teams representing 14 leagues from around the Peninsula, as well as Gloucester. In all, over 1,600 athletes and nearly 800 cheerleaders participate in what the league likes to call the “Best Game in Town.”

            As evidenced by Saturday’s action, the product is a success. Over 1,000 fans were in attendance at the final game in the junior division between the Back River Patriots and Gloucester White Knights. From the enthusiastic supporters of Back River banging thunder sticks together to the phenomenal rendition of the National Anthem and halftime cheerleading shows, the game had all the energy of a Bay Rivers playoff contest. And the level of football was surprisingly high from a team of 12-14 year olds, featuring high school sets on offense, flea flickers and precision passing rarely even seen at high school games.

            In that final game, Back River rallied behind a rugged defense to withstand a late White Knight rally and defeat the Gloucester squad 12-0. Cole Walker and Ethan Bryce scored for the Panthers who finished the season undefeated at 12-0. With the loss, Gloucester finished its season with an 11-2 mark.

            In other action, the 10-11 midgets age group saw a mild upset as the Williamsburg Green Hornets (12-1) defeated a previously undefeated Patriots team from Yorktown 14-6. The Hornets took an early 6-0 lead, but just before halftime, the Hornets Malcom Lee followed a wall of blockers to break away for a 63 yard touchdown run. An early second half Patriot fumble was recovered by Caden Darber at the Yorktown 11. Three plays later Rashaun Jones plowed in for the touchdown. The Patriots finished the season 11-1.

            Other champions included the Back River Panthers, who defeated the Williamsburg Hornets 20-0 to capture the Mite (6-7) division, while the Poquoson Bulls won the Mighty Mites (8-9) crown with a hard fought 13-6 win over Yorktown.

           

Chasing Their Own History

A track article from a couple of years ago that was written for Virginia's Milestat.com website, but got picked up my milesplit.com, the national site. Couldn't attach the accompanying pictures.

Chasing Their Own History

By: Jim McGrath - jfmcgrath65@yahoo.com

Published on Milesplit.com  2008-05-20 11:00:00

     As the Virginia track teams head into championship season, it is worth noting that one of the most successful stories from our state so far has been the remarkable showings from the Bethel boys 4x400 relay, most notably, their 3:14.71 clocking at the Penn Relays.  The time, which was actually run in the preliminaries, launched the Bruins foursome of Austin Cuffee, Earl House, Sherrard Marrow, and indoor 400 national champion Ja-Vell Bullard into the finals where they placed second overall, but first among American teams. The sign in front of the school on Big Bethel Road states it all – Congratulations Cuffee, House, Marrow, Bullard - #2 in World.

     The Bruins and Lady Bruins are favorites to claim titles at the Peninsula District meet, which begins tomorrow at Todd Stadium in Newport News. The latest Milestat.com informal point tally also shows the boys team ranked first among the state teams. Perhaps the most interesting scenario of the outdoor post-season becomes obvious after looking at the top state all-time performances. While Bethel’s 3:14 is a top notch time, the best Virginia performance ever came from the quartet of Curtis Ponton, Demont Vann, Rodney Revels and Michael Wooden, who ran a 3:11.76 in 1985 for --- Bethel!

     Can the Bruins win the state title? Is the 1985 record in jeopardy? Are the key athletes even aware of their potential place in history? Several key members of the Bethel squad addressed these questions recently during a practice at the high school.

     As it turned out, House wasn’t available to meet that day, but short sprint specialist, senior Eric Williams (headed for the University of Mississippi) was, along with the other three 4x400 relay members. While Bullard is the national champion and most decorated of the group, the closeness among the four athletes provided a keen insight to the togetherness of the Bethel squad. Long days and out of town weekend meets have tightened this group. While remaining focused and serious, the question of any member being a “joker” brings laughter from all four. Somebody has “gotten” it! The young men speak of their team as a family, and note that part of their success comes from their bond on and off the track. Says Williams, “When you’re having fun, times drop.” There does not appear to be a “star” system in place on this team, probably because of the Bruins’ long tradition of success, noted by Coach Eddie Williams’ 12 AAA state title wins between the boys and girls teams. Each team member is friendly, accessible, surprisingly low-key, and one might say – a bit shy.

     Norfolk State-bound Marrow made it clear that they are well aware of the 1985 team. “We are reminded every time we step on the track.” When asked if any alumni show up to practice at Bethel or Darling Stadium to critique this year’s team, Bullard, who will be continuing his track career at George Mason, added an interesting note. “Nobody has come to practice,” says Bullard, “but there were some alumni who stopped by at Penn to talk to us.”

     The relay members remain confident in their ability to break the state record, but they may have to wait until after the state meet for a true run for the record because of Bethel’s state title goal. In order to break the record, junior Cuffee notes that everybody will have to do their part, and run personal bests.

     When the question turns to another state champion trophy in the case, the members seem to understand what it will take to overtake the challenges of schools such as indoor champion Western Branch. A look at the district performance list notes that the team has developed several field athletes who could score at the region, and possibly state level. This will help. However, Bullard’s last words put everything in perspective. “We realize that God is our biggest foundation, and because of that, we believe that we can win this.”

The effect of student loan debt on your credit report

A little something I wrote a couple of years ago for the University of Phoenix website:

For many students, a student loan will be the largest debt that they have incurred to date. In some cases, it may also be the first large loan that has been undertaken. Just like a car loan or credit card, the way that one maintains a student loan will have a direct effect on his credit score. Since the credit score is a determinant of future buying power for larger purchases such as a house, it is important to know how to manage a student loan so that it will not have a negative effect on one’s credit score.

            There are several things which are beneficial for the borrowing student to know. Being aware of these facts can make the difference between the student loan making a positive or negative effect on a credit report.

Fact 1 – The student loan begins immediately

            There is a misconception that the student loan does not appear on a credit report until the payments are due. The payments usually begin after the completion of school, followed by a 6-12 month grade period.

            However, the student loan may appear on a credit report soon after the initial papers are signed. Usually it is listed as being in “deferred” status.

Fact 2 – The repayment of student loans can begin at any time

            As mentioned, most lenders do not require the initial payment on a loan until the student has completed studies. However, interest will continue to accrue during this time.  A student is allowed to begin making payments at any time. One recommendation to keeping a credit score moving up is to work at paying the interest on the loan while in school. This will accomplish two things which are beneficial to maintaining good credit. First, it helps to keep the loan balance lower than if the payments were not made. Second, making timely payments is beneficial to one’s credit score, particularly for a student with a brief credit history.

Fact 3 – Paying off early can save thousands of dollars, but may not benefit your credit score

            Many student loans are set with a 10-year repayment plan. The student borrower can save a great deal of money by paying more than the monthly payment. Adding an extra $50 or $100 to each payment can shorten the length of the loan.

            However, there is no guarantee that engaging in this practice will be a great benefit to one’s credit score. The best way to improve a credit score is to make regular, timely payments.

Fact 4 – Defaulting on a student loan can cause multiple negative entries on your credit report

            There is never a benefit to defaulting on a student loan. In fact, defaulting can cause more than one negative entry on a credit report. The first negative entry will be for the original loan, while other entries can be added for failing to pay any collection agencies which have been hired to service the debt. Failing to pay or allowing the loan to fall into default status can result in severe consequences including, but not limited to, wage garnishment, state or federal payment offset, and additional collection fees.

            In the event of potential default, the best recommendation for a borrower is to maintain contact with the lender. In some cases, there may be options available, such as a deferment.

            The best way to stay on top of student loan status is to regularly check one’s credit report. By law, each consumer is allowed to request one free credit report per year.

Applying Qualitative Research Methodologies in Educational Settings

While many graduate students think of a formal research study as an exercise in quantitative analysis, there is a growing movement inspired by a new generation of scholars which is causing researchers to consider the option of conducting a study using qualitative analysis to gather and examine the data generated from their findings.

In some collegial learning communities, the idea of conducting measurement without disaggregating numerical data seems absurd. However, more academicians have found confidence in the data which can be gathered through activities such as interviews, observations and artifact gathering. Concurrently, more professors and research journal editors are taking greater notice of the findings which have derived from qualitative research, and have given the approach a newfound credibility.

What exactly is qualitative research? In its simplest form, it represents a general framework in which most of the data for a study is gathered in a non-numeric fashion. In other words, most of the findings come from deep within numerous interviews and observations, as opposed to adding and dividing the results of a survey given to a group of participants.

But this only scratches the surface of the differences between qualitative and quantitative research. Qualitative research is sometimes described as ethnographic, interpretive, critical or postmodern research (Creswell, 1997). On the other hand, quantitative research has been called empirical, positivist, postpositivist, or objectivist (Henrickson & McKelvey, 2002). Within these groups of terms lie specific nuances. However, in spite of the differences, most of these frameworks can be characterized as having a set of family resemblances (Wittgenstein, 1973). Each family has unique qualities, but there are enough commonalities to form a group. In a sense, both the qualitative and quantitative research paradigms define a certain way of approaching the process of researching.

Granted, there are a number of occasions when quantitative research should be the preferred method, and in actuality, most researchers will employ both forms of research to conduct a mixed-methods study. However, there are some instances when it is best to examine the qualitative world view to gather information.

One example of this is found in Basics of Qualitative Research, considered to be the foremost publication used to describe the grounded theory process, a popular form of qualitative study. Authored by Juliet Corbin and the late Anselm Strauss, the book is thorough in its step-by-step approach of how to perform a grounded theory study. As a change to the third edition, which was published in 2008, 12 years after Strauss’ passing, Corbin rewrites the second half of the book to give an example of a study which could be used. Although the study has not been completed, the data is worthy of attention.

For her “study,” Corbin chose to examine a group of Vietnam veterans to gain a sense of their collective war experience. Throughout her study, the keys to analysis become evident. Her preparation for the study is noted by literature immersion, or reading as much available information about her subject(s) as possible, before beginning the interview process. She then works through each phase of the analysis. In her first interview, the subject says that being in the Vietnam War was “not a big deal.” Surprised, Corbin filed the information away and went on to her next subject. His experience was much more harrowing, and she learned that it was because Subject #2 was a combatant, while Subject #1 spent most of his time in a hospital and was not required to perform as many life-risking duties.

Through her series of interviews, she notes the importance of the process, through methods such as coding information to help develop the similarities among the veterans, member checking for accuracy, and using the constant comparative method to allow for ongoing comparisons. But her means of acquiring information reflect the best methods for the qualitative researcher to use – the interviews, structured, semi-structured and emergent, observations, and the use of artifacts. All of these will be used to help Corbin develop the data needed to finish the study when she chooses to.

There are several books to help better explain the benefits of qualitative research methodologies in educational settings. Along with Corbin and Strauss, Foundations of Qualitative Research by Jerry Willis does a credible job at explaining the basics, while Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, from M.Q. Patton is also useful.

References

Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3^rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3^rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Willis, J.W. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Today's WYDaily.com/TideRadio (92.3) Story

By Jim McGrath

The York boys basketball team took advantage of numerous turnovers from a visiting Warhill team to race past the Lions 85-54 in a Bay Rivers matchup on Wednesday night.

Warhill’s Sam Buscher scored the opening points of the game on a three point shot, but then watched with his teammates as the Falcons rattled off 21 unanswered points. In one sequence, sophomore guard Brandon Harvell stole the ball on three straight possessions, each resulting with him scoring at the other end. The Lions suffered from poor passing and sloppy dribbling, committing at least a dozen turnovers in the first half alone.

Down 25-7 entering the second quarter, the visitors showed some signs of life. An Andrew Berkley three point shot cut the gap to 29-15 midway through the second quarter. Joseph Moreno scored on a lay-in and jumper from the left corner on successive possessions to narrow the lead to 31-21 with 2:20 left in the half. But a pair of buckets from York’s Tre’ Thomas, the second coming off yet another steal, opened the lead to 14 and helped the hosts carry a 37-22 advantage into the halftime break.

York (1-3, 1-3 in BRD) got the jump in the second half, with Taylor Kinney burying a three-pointer followed by another steal ending with a Harvell lay-up to open the lead to 20 at 42-22. Another mini-burst occurred in the middle of the third quarter with a Branson Tow three-point shot and Harvell steal and lay-up putting the score at 51-30. On the next Lion possession, Sean Southard recorded a blocked shot setting off the Falcon transition game which ended in a Quintin Martinez lay-in and foul. Martinez missed the free throw, but earned another opportunity as the ball was stolen on the next possession and Martinez scored off the break. This time, he connected on the foul shot. On the next trip, it was Martinez who stole the ball, passing to Trey Wintz for the layup and a 58-30 lead with 3:24 remaining in the third quarter. After a Warhill timeout, the game started to resemble a playground contest, but both teams seized the opportunity to get a look at all of their players over the final 11 minutes.

Harvell, who led the team with 17 points, feels that his team “got off to a rough start this season, but is now starting to play together.”  Tow and Martinez chipped in 14 and 12 respectively for the Falcons.

Jermaine Poindexter-Johnson led the scoring for Warhill (0-5, 0-5 BRD) with nine points, all in the final quarter.

YORK (1-3)         25    12    27    21    -  85

WARHILL (0-5)    7    15    19    13    - 54

Focus Statement and Study design Redux

After meeting with Dr. Harris last week, the recommendations are now in place for the rewrites of both the focus statement and study design.

The most significant change is going to be the transfer of five pages from my focus statement to the study design. Aptly enough, the section to be transferred will be the study design elements. After reading this sentence again, the move seems even more obvious and I am not sure why this wasn’t changed earlier. Anyhow, the elements of the study design will now be in the study design.

Another significant change will be in the number of observations and interviews. There will still be four coaches and two athletes from each team included in this study. However, for the sake of time and sanity, I will slightly scale back. Instead of interviewing each athlete twice for 30 minutes, the new plan is for one interview of 30-45 minutes, with the realistic expectation being 30. The athlete will be asked to bring the artifact to the interview or will be asked about it in a question formulated similar to, “If you could bring a memento or example of something from your team that shows cultural competence, what would you bring and why?”

Also, there will now be only one observation of each team instead of two. This will give me the opportunity to observe and interview on the same day, which will save a great deal of time.  Now, I will need to conduct and transcribe 16 interviews instead of 24. This should still allow for enough substance in the findings while avoiding possible repetition or saturation.

Today, I met one of our reference librarians, Mary Molineux, to help me obtain more materials which should help give more background detail to my cultural competence study, but specifically in dealing with high school coaches. There was one book on the library. I have just finished reading the chapter relating to coaches and have to figure out how to incorporate its findings. The writing is focused on the African-American athlete and includes qualitative data gathered from interviews which shows that the athlete feels special for being on the team, but also worries that grades are “given” to him by teachers who want to see him play. One concern of the African-American high school athlete is that academics are not being taken as seriously as they should. Recommendations are given to teachers, administrators and coaches. Perhaps I can use this to explain my topic, and perhaps even draw a few interview questions from this reading. Example – In terms of cultural competence, how often does your coach stress academics?  Another possible question - Is he concerned with your academic progress and how is this shown?

We also found two other materials which may be of great help to me and they have been ordered through ILL (Interlibrary Loan).

A couple of years ago, I found a website called Helium.com, a site dedicated to helping aspiring writers find a foruim to publish their work. I started out contirbuting articles which were rated against articles of similar topics and all of the writers shard in the advertising revenue. Although the funds dribbled in, it was nice when my total finally reached $25 (after almost two years) and I qualified for a payment into my Paypal account. Hey, now I'm a paid writer. Yet. things got better. Because of my involvement with WYDaily.com and Tide radio, I qualified to receive status as a professional journalist. With this affiliation in hand, coupled with my newfound obligation for educational papers as part of my Ph.D. studies, I now qualify for the Helium marketplace and am now given assignments every month. My first was a piece on qualitative research, and I beleive it was published on an online college website. Granted, I'm not paying bills with these funds, but it was nice to only have to wait three months for my second deposit. The assignments should be regular on a monthly basis for a while.

Anyhow, here is the link to my home Helium.com page

<a title="View my Biography at Helium.com" href="http://www.helium.com/users/249459"> <img border="0" src="http://corp.helium.com/images/af/234x60_wrote.gif"> </a>