ED Blog is for people working in and around NZ tertiary education who care about policy, strategy and results.
May 20th 2010 at 11:00am, By Dave Guerin
Access to federal student loans by for-profit institutions is an ongoing issue of debate in the US. Their default rates tend to be higher because (a) fees, and therefore loans, are much higher without state/federal subsidies (b) the target market is older and has lower completion rates than your average high school graduate (c) some of the institutions are rubbish and target people with no chance of succeeding. There are more issues, but that gives you an idea of some of the key issues.
Now, the Higher Education Act of 1965 states that degree courses must have ”an eligible program of training to prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation.” Gainful employment hasn’t been well-defined in the past, but it is being worked on right now. I’m drawing on a Chronicle of Higher Education story for this post and they wrote that:
“…officials are considering requiring that a program’s students do not take on loan payments that exceed 8 percent of graduates’ expected earnings based on a 10-year repayment plan and Bureau of Labor Statistics earnings data…programs that exceed the 8-percent limit could still be eligible for federal financial aid by showing that their graduates’ true earnings were higher than the government averages or that 90 percent of all graduates repaid their loans; by documenting that students have at least a 75-percent repayment rate on federal loans; or by demonstrating a program-completion rate of at least 70 percent and a 70-percent job-placement rate.
The Chronicle article has much more discussion, but I’d like to pick up on the implications for NZ. What if our tertiary education organisations (TEOs) and programmes were judged on the basis of their students’ future success, and ability to pay back loans quickly? Paying back loans more quickly would reduce the cost of the interest-free writeoff, which is the main cost of loans right now. Since most people are actually studying in order to increase their future earnings, their future earnings might be quite a useful test of a TEO’s success. Anyway, it might be an idea for Steven Joyce to look at, since he seems to be announcing a reform every fortnight at the moment.
Education Directions Ltd (ED) improves tertiary education's impact on lifting workforce productivity. We do that by linking the key players in tertiary education through information, strategy and policy.
ED Blog covers New Zealand tertiary education news and views. Comments and guest posts are welcome. If you have a news tip, please contact us.
ED Insider provides strategic information and analysis for tertiary education professionals - it's the big brother of ED Blog. Check it out now!
5 Responses to An idea for student loans
Jeremy Baker
May 20th, 2010 at 11:20 am
Interesting Dave.
What about those parts of the system that don’t use loans at all?
And I believe the for-profit sector in the US is fighting this proposal quite hard.
Jeremy
Dave Guerin
May 20th, 2010 at 11:25 am
The sector is fighting it hard – there was a long follow-up story by the Chronicle overnight. I’m not too fussed about the specific definition, and don’t have the context to review it, but the idea interests me.
There has been some DOL research relatively recently on the earnings of industry training graduates and I think some return on investment work there is relevant too.
Dean Carroll
May 20th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
As per usual, Jeremy makes an excellent point. The key here is to ensure that the feedback mechanisms and incentives (and sanctions/consequences) across ALL funding ensures that the actors in the tert education ‘market’ meet the objectives. Which I think was actually Dave’s point: the neo-classical liberal assumption of the 1991 Student Loans Scheme was that it was an investment related to higher life-time earnings (ROL): ergo the rules and framework/structures of the SLS should reflect this and be imbedded in the operational delivery of the scheme. If you do not accept the assumptions of the SLS you come up with a fiscally responsible alternative (maybe the industry training model has something to offer here); but if you have loans it is incumbent to have a coherent and dynamic model (which we don’t) that works for its outcomes. Readers of this blog will recall that in December 09 the OECD released figures on economic rates for degree qualifications. New Zealand was bottom of the OECD; and there was daylight between us and the others. The current system isn’t working. The US has much to inform our debate.
Ron Scott
May 20th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
I like the general idea. The better an institution is at having graduates earn higher incomes then either a. They are selecting very well or b. Adding value at a superior rate.
If it is a. then there will be demand to be one of the selected few. Will this incentivise poor selection procedures? (in other countries it would be called corruption). Alternatively it might be a home truth to some potential students that they are not going to be top of the heap.
If it is b. then it makes sense to reward superior services.
John MacCormick
May 20th, 2010 at 2:43 pm
Hypothetically, this idea could be tied into performance-based funding for institutions. “Simply” require the institutions to buy a slice of the loans owed to Govt by their former students, at a price based on the book value of a loan with average repayment performance. TEIs with successful grads will profit as their grads will repay more, faster than average. Institutions with poor results will book a loss.
All we need to make this work in practice is robust, credible financial institutions that can accurately price complicated “collateralised debt obligations”….