Jo Zakarin
President
Advanced Training
A Boston College graduate, Jo Zakarin is the owner of a small career college. She also is a commissioner of the accreditor Council on Occupational Education. She shares some of her experiences as a profit-maker in higher education. She adds some reasonableness to the political hysteria surrounding ED's regulation of 'gainful employment.'
What academic offerings does Advanced Training provide, and who are your students?
We offer short-term career courses as well as associates degrees in a dozen topics like fiber optics technology, FCC regulations, electronics, allied health, and IT. Our 200 present students span an age range from 18 to 55. About 65 percent of them are males, mostly married. Many of our students are career changers. About 140 are transitioning out of the armed forces.
How long has the school been in business and how did you come to own it?
The school was founded in 1996. When I married, it involved a move to San Diego from Los Angeles where I was employed as a school director. I was able to negotiate two deals successfully. First, I gained the use of the Los Angeles curriculum with which I was already familiar. Second, in 2003 I used savings to purchase Advanced Training, which had been listed for sale for about a year in San Diego.
What interesting accreditation facts did you learn as you assumed operation of the school?
Though I had previously worked with numerous accreditors, I had never heard of the Council for Occupational Education, which was Advanced Training's accreditor. As I got to know COE, which was a spinoff of the Southern Assn. of Colleges and Schools (SACS), I appreciated the diversity of their clientele. I made myself available for site evaluation teamwork, visiting community colleges, Job Corps facilities, for-profit and non-profit colleges. Now a commissioner of COE, I especially admire and appreciate the differences among the variopus types of American campuses. I also realize that typecasting schools or segregating their personnel into homogeneous associations is a bad practice.
Were you able to operate successfully while awaiting eligibility for Title IV financial aid?
Yes. I expected to have to eliminate the non-degree courses in favor of degree offerings. However, I discovered that our curriculum had value for nearby defense contractors like Northrop Grumman and Raytheon. I was able to provide contract training for their employees. Advanced Training is also a Department of Defense contractor in good standing. That enabled me to conduct our shorter offerings in person at U.S. military facilities throughout the U.S. and in various foreign countries, and that continues.
The intense political activity surrounding the 'gainful employment' rules has obscured another significant event that resulted from ED's takeover of student lending. What's that?
By October first, every higher education institution in the US will be a 'government contractor.' It's a brand new requirement. Participation in Title IV financial aid has always required a 'Participation Agreement.' Now financial aid participation requires registry as a federal government contractor. It's a situation in which the government's hand was quicker than our educator's eye. I believe there is a significant change underway here. For one thing, this development will likely terminate the need for commentary on proposed rules and even negotiated rulemaking. Time will tell if I'm correct.
What bad business practices are the 'gainful employment' rules likely to correct?
None, I'm afraid. First, a little background. In order for the government to be able to take over student lending, they chose a political tactic that publicized the banks and other lenders as "bad" or "greedy" or both. Now the Department of Education and certain politicians are following a similar course with for-profit schools. However, a visit to ED's Inspector General's website will show that fraud and abuse, though limited in volume, occurs in most sectors of higher education. Student loan defaults are up nationwide. For-profit career school students often represent higher risks, and yes they default in higher percentages. However, the proposed rules will reduce those defaults by shutting off student access to loans.
So perhaps the problems associated with student loans are more associated with risk than with access?
Surely. For example, a first-time full-time freshman can be a risky student loan customer no matter what school he is attending. A senior getting ready to graduate with a degree in philosophy may have real difficulty finding gainful employment. Any student who was misled by staff in the admissions office is a potential default as well.
[To be continued]