The Reality of Higher Ed Fraud in 2025

"Fraudsters are like cockroaches"--Anonymous higher education businessman

Fraudsters are like cockroaches: persistent, hard to eliminate, and always scurrying just beneath the surface. And like cockroaches, when you see one, you can assume many more are hidden from view. In the vast, sprawling ecosystem of US higher education—a multi-trillion-dollar industry built on trust, hope, and credentials—fraud has been a lurking presence for more than a century. From diploma mills to for-profit scams, grade inflation to financial aid abuse, deceit has found fertile ground wherever oversight is weak and incentives are perverse.

The Gilded Roots of Fraud

Fraud in American higher education didn’t begin with Trump University or Corinthian Colleges. The roots go back to the 19th century, when the proliferation of unregulated “colleges” allowed opportunists to sell degrees to anyone willing to pay. These early diploma mills, often run by religious organizations or independent operators, flourished in an era before accreditation, issuing worthless credentials that nevertheless offered the illusion of legitimacy.

By the early 20th century, regional accreditation and federal involvement began to tame the worst actors, but fraud adapted. Unethical schools learned how to mimic the symbols of respectability, while federal dollars—including GI Bill money and later Pell Grants and federal student loans—provided irresistible bait.

For-Profit Colleges and the Federal ATM

The rise of for-profit higher education in the post-WWII era, especially from the 1970s onward, signaled a new chapter in educational fraud. Companies like ITT Technical Institute, Corinthian Colleges, and Education Management Corporation were publicly traded entities or private equity darlings that mastered the art of siphoning billions in taxpayer dollars while leaving students with worthless credentials and mountains of debt.

The fraud wasn’t always overt—it often came wrapped in slick marketing, predatory recruiting, falsified job placement statistics, and pressure to enroll students regardless of academic readiness. These institutions gamed federal financial aid systems, manipulating default rates and exploiting regulatory loopholes.

Even when regulators like the GAO or the Department of Education uncovered misconduct, enforcement was sporadic and too often came after the damage was done. In many cases, executives walked away with millions, while students—often from low-income, Black, Latino, and veteran communities—were left in financial ruin.

Accreditation as a Shield

One of the most confounding aspects of US higher ed fraud is the role of accreditors. Supposed to act as gatekeepers, many regional and national accreditors have served more as enablers—either asleep at the wheel or financially incentivized to look the other way. When accreditors are funded by the very institutions they review, conflict of interest becomes systemic.

This has allowed weak or outright fraudulent institutions to hide behind the veneer of legitimacy. Some accreditors, like ACICS (Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools), became infamous for rubber-stamping schools that should have been shuttered. ACICS accredited both ITT Tech and Corinthian before its federal recognition was finally revoked in 2022.

The New Wave: Online and AI-Enabled Scams

The digital age has added new dimensions to academic fraud. Online colleges like University of Phoenix, Ashford University (now University of Arizona Global Campus), and Western Governors University have raised concerns about low faculty oversight, cookie-cutter instruction, and questions about academic rigor. While not all online institutions are fraudulent, the modality makes it easier to scale shady practices and reduce accountability.

Now, with generative AI entering the classroom and enrollment systems, new questions emerge: How do we ensure academic honesty in an age of algorithmic ghostwriting? How will fraud evolve as institutions increasingly rely on automated admissions, grading, and content delivery?

And it's not just schools. Consultants, influencers, and shady loan servicers feed off the system like parasites—promising student loan relief, admissions guarantees, or academic success for a fee. In this ecosystem, fraud doesn't just survive—it thrives.

When the Roaches Scatter

Occasionally, the light shines in. Whistleblowers, investigative journalists, and government agencies have at times forced fraudsters into the open. Lawsuits have led to settlements. Schools have closed. Presidents have resigned. But like cockroaches, the fraud rarely disappears—it relocates, rebrands, and reinvents itself.

Even with borrower defense to repayment, loan forgiveness programs, and federal oversight mechanisms, restitution often comes too late. And public memory is short. Fraudulent operators have learned how to outlast administrations, court cases, and media cycles.

A Call to Radical Transparency

The Higher Education Inquirer has long called for radical transparency in US higher education. That means open data on outcomes, federal aid, loan default rates, salaries of top administrators, and accreditor performance. It means holding college leaders and board members accountable for failures—not rewarding them with golden parachutes or public pensions.

Fraud may be a permanent feature of capitalist education systems, but its impact can be minimized with independent media scrutiny, better whistleblower protections, and public investment that prioritizes students—not shareholders.

Because fraudsters are like cockroaches. You may never kill them all, but you can make the kitchen a whole lot harder to live in.

Parent Plus Loan Caps Are New Reality (Jack Wang, Smart College Buyer)

Big changes are coming to how families pay for college — and some colleges will need to get creative. New Parent PLUS loan caps ($20K/year, $65K total) mean schools where parents used to borrow six figures, or 50%+ of families relied on these loans will need to rethink their financial strategies. That includes several art schools and HBCUs — institutions that have long opened doors for talented students. While the full impact is still unfolding, this could spark new conversations about affordability, access, and better support for families. Change is never easy — but it can lead to smarter, more sustainable solutions for students and schools alike.

Student Loan Thriller "The Payback" On Sale Today

STELLAR EARLY PRAISE FOR THE PAYBACK

“An exciting and hilarious heist novel that centers down-on-their-luck older millennials who are riddled with debt and decide to take matters into their own hands to dismantle the system. Timely and witty, Cauley's plotting, prose, and character development will keep you hooked from start to finish.”
—Morgan Jerkins, New York Times bestselling author of This Will Be Undoing

“In an Afrofuturist world of barbaric debt police and an absurd heist to bring it all down, The Payback is a delightfully dark comedy of three coworkers-turned-conspirators hell-bent on revenge. This trio of Robin Hoods taking matters into their own hands out of grief and desperation will have you alternating between raucous laughs and fear for their safety. California strip malls, 80s fashion, punk and hacker culture, all combine in a tenacious cocktail of sweet justice shared by all.”
—Xochitl Gonzalez, New York Times bestselling author of Olga Dies Dreaming and Anita de Monte Laughs Last

“Like Ocean's Eleven but no one's famous. The Payback is a love letter to the American mall, the revenge of the break room, and a laugh-cry of the gods of retail. The result is obsessive truth-telling fun, with zingers, dishy thrills, bodysuits, and a few wigs that have seen better days but are hoping to have the best one yet.”
—Alexander Chee, author of How to Write an Autobiographical Novel

The Payback

A Novel

Kashana Cauley

ON SALE JULY 15, 2025 FROM ATRIA BOOKS

_______________________________________________

In the second novel from television writer and author of the “lethally witty” (The New York Times Book Review) The Survivalists, a retail worker is relentlessly pursued by the Debt Police and forced to take down her student loan company with the help of two mall coworkers. The Payback is a razor-sharp and hilarious dissection of race and capitalism from one of the most original and exciting writers at work today.

 

Jada Williams is good at judging people by their looks. From across the mall, she can tell not only someone’s inseam and pants size, but exactly what style they need to transform their life. Too bad she’s no longer using this superpower as a wardrobe designer to Hollywood stars, but for minimum wage plus commission at the Glendale mall.

When Jada is fired yet again, she is forced to outrun the newly instated Debt Police who are out for blood. But Jada, like any great antihero, is not going to wait for the cops to come kick her around. With the help of two other debt-burdened mall coworkers, she hatches a plan for revenge. Together the three women plan a heist to erase their student loans forever and get back at the system that promised them everything and then tried to take it back.

About Kashana Cauley

Kashana Cauley is the author of The Payback and The Survivalists, which was named a best book of 2023 by the BBC, Today, Vogue, and more. Cauley is also a television writer, having worked on The Great North, Pod Save America on HBO, and The Daily Show with Trevor Noah. Her writing has also appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, Esquire, Rolling Stone, The New Yorker, and more. Find out more at KashanaCauley.com. 

 

MORE PRAISE FOR THE PAYBACK

“A stylish, blazingly original take on the heist novel, The Payback is both a whip-smart critique of contemporary capitalism and a moving character study of the workers most often caught in its clutches.”
—Grace D. Li, New York Times bestselling author of Portrait of a Thief

“A novel of great fun and unforgettable fury, The Payback sharply questions the punitive systems we live within, the contradiction between social wellbeing and individual wellness,
and what it means to work toward a decent life.”
—Megha Majumdar, bestselling author of A Burning

“Smart, socio-politically astute, and sidesplitting hilarious, The Payback's inventive wit solidifies Kashana Cauley's place among our most entertaining social critics and novelists.”
—Camille Perri, author of The Assistants and When Katie Met Cassidy

 

About the Book

The Payback
A Novel
by Kashana Cauley
on-sale: July 15, 2025
Atria Books
ISBN 9781668075531
Price: $27.99
eISBN 9781668075555
Price: $14.99

How bad actors maintain the silence

In early 2023, the Higher Education Inquirer received a letter from a prominent law firm representing a for-profit college with a significant online footprint. The letter, framed as a demand for the removal of an investigative article from our platform, accused us of defamation and threatened legal action. The article in question investigated financial and operational ties between several education-related entities, alleging that these connections may have harmed students and misused federal education funds.

The school in question—once part of a collapsed for-profit empire—has been at the center of public scrutiny and legal battles for more than a decade. With multiple ownership changes and continued reliance on federal student aid, its trajectory has mirrored that of other “subprime” colleges that critics argue profit from the desperation of working-class Americans seeking better lives through education.

HEI’s article followed up on prior reporting from established education watchdogs and included both public records and interviews with whistleblowers. It raised uncomfortable but critical questions about whether a nonprofit conversion was used as a façade for continued enrichment by private operators—via management contracts, lead generation, and opaque partnerships.

In response, the school's legal counsel sent a five-page cease-and-desist letter accusing HEI of publishing “verifiably false statements,” “misleading readers,” and violating the basic tenets of journalism. The letter denied all allegations, redefined industry terms like “online program manager,” and asserted that the school’s service provider—a company with ties to previous for-profit ventures—had not profited and had, in fact, saved the institution from collapse.

Beyond its immediate purpose, the letter serves as a clear example of how institutions with money and legal firepower can attempt to silence independent journalists and small outlets. The implication is not subtle: remove the story or risk expensive litigation.

This tactic—commonly known as a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)—relies not on prevailing in court but on intimidating reporters and shrinking the boundaries of public discourse. It’s especially effective against under-resourced outlets like HEI, which lack the legal teams and financial reserves of mainstream media companies.

In this case, by refusing to name the school or its legal representation in this article, we aim to highlight the broader dynamics rather than focus on personalities. The use of legal threats by online colleges to protect questionable business practices is not new. Over the last two decades, we’ve seen this pattern emerge repeatedly—from Corinthian Colleges to ITT Tech, and more recently, through institutions navigating the murky territory between nonprofit status and for-profit operations.

These threats don’t just chill speech—they freeze accountability. They make it harder for students, whistleblowers, and journalists to speak openly about abuses in a sector fueled by federal subsidies and student debt. They protect failing systems while vulnerable students are left to shoulder the consequences.

At HEI, we believe the public deserves transparency about where their tax dollars go and whether educational institutions are serving students or exploiting them. We believe that journalists must be free to raise difficult questions without fear of retribution. And we believe that schools receiving millions in federal funds—particularly those with a history of collapse, debt, and misrepresentation—should expect scrutiny, not silence.

If our reporting is wrong, we welcome good-faith corrections and open dialogue. But when a powerful institution threatens legal action to suppress investigation rather than engage with the facts, it raises the very questions they wish to bury.

---

Sources

• U.S. Department of Education records on school ownership transitions

• Interviews with former employees and students

• Public court documents (lead generation lawsuit and dismissal)

• David Halperin’s original reporting in the Republic Report 

Borrower Defense Story 3: Modern Indentured Servitude (Feral Woman)

[Editor's note:  This is the third story in our series on the social and philosophical dimensions of Borrower Defense to Repayment. We hope that by sharing these stories, more people will understand why Borrower Defense is morally essential.] 

I went to school so I could lift myself out of poverty. I went and learned a trade in healthcare that I was told would have an income that would be more than enough to pay my loans. I vetted current providers in the field and learned what would be needed to be successful. 

The school made a lot of promises, but they misrepresented information and, in some cases, completely lied about our profession and our income ability. My profession at the time was averaging 25k-35k/yr in income. They told us it was 100k-125k in order to justify taking out 100k to pay for the education. 

I lived simply and thought that as long as I made 100k I could easily pay my loans back within two years. No student loan should take more than 3 years to pay back, and I had a plan to do it in two.

 
I graduated in the height of the second financial crash of my lifetime - 2007/2008. Turns out there were no jobs available prior to this crash and certainly wasn't during the crash. Opening a practice was impossible and due to illness of both myself and my partner at the time, we were in deep poverty with only a roof over our head due to family. I was able to secure a part-time job at a grocery store. During this time, I also found out that my 4 year medical degree meant nothing outside of the field I was in - also another lie from the school. I couldn't transition to any other medical profession without starting over.

I made 12- 20k a year for several years in unrelated fields, meanwhile catastrophic interest was building. Congress had also passed a law to block bankruptcy and to add capitalized interest to student loans in 2005 - which is considered predatory lending in almost all types of lending, especially for large loans. My interest rate was averaging 8%. As a former business analyst, I knew this was going to have catastrophic impacts.

Since that time, I have tried to pass a student loan bill for the last 17 years that would solve this for 95% of borrowers from the past, current and future. 

I borrowed 108k, paid 85k and I owe close to 260k for this specific degree. I have tried leaving the profession for the last 15 years but have been stuck because of the loans and no one wanting to hire me outside of my profession. I've had a few part-time jobs, but those have also dried up.

I filed for Borrowers Defense, but don't have high hopes that this will be approved under this administration, despite my school being closed down. My education has been a lifetime sentence of indentured servitude. I've been in crisis since I graduated and have never known a moment of peace. I had started to feel some hope in 2019, but lost everything and more in the pandemic and have now declared bankruptcy and will attempt an "adversarial proceeding" to get relief from my student loans as well. It will cost between 6-12k to file for adversarial proceedings with no guarantee I'll win.

I also recently found out that my IBR should have been approved in Jan 2025 for full cancellation, but instead the administration INCREASED the number of years of repayment another 12 years.

If it weren't for my son, I would have fled this country 18 years ago and started over. As it is, I'm preparing to leave because of the fear of debtors' prisons for people like me. I absolutely can not afford any additional payment to my student loans. Despite hard work to change careers and well over 3k applications in the last 4 years, not including prior to that, I keep being told my education and credentials are not enough, even in the field I'm in.

This insanity is easy to fix. Yet, neither Democrats nor Republicans have been willing to pass basic laws to restore (yes restore) sanity to education and student loans.

FOIA Request Seeks Updated Borrower Defense Data from U.S. Department of Education

The Higher Education Inquirer has submitted a new Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the U.S. Department of Education seeking updated data on Borrower Defense to Repayment (BDR) claims.

Specifically, the request asks for the latest report generated from the Department’s Consumer Engagement Management System (CEMS)—the internal platform that tracks borrower complaints and federal discharge decisions related to school misconduct and misrepresentation. The request mirrors a prior release, FOIA Request No. 22-00011-F, which produced a 94-page report itemizing all institutions with BDR claims, the number of applications per school, and their adjudication status (approved, denied, pending, or closed).

This new request covers the period from July 15, 2024 through July 13, 2025, a timeframe that includes a volatile political year, further fallout from collapsed for-profit schools, ongoing litigation, and changes in regulatory enforcement under a fractured Department of Education.

The goal of this FOIA request is to provide the public with clear, updated, and comprehensive insight into which schools—across all sectors—continue to generate complaints from borrowers who claim they were misled or defrauded. These data are vital for researchers, journalists, legal advocates, and students trying to navigate an often opaque and treacherous higher education marketplace.

The original CEMS disclosure from 2022 helped illuminate systemic abuse, particularly among large for-profit college chains and online universities. It also revealed how some nonprofit and public institutions had quietly accumulated significant numbers of BDR claims, often with little media scrutiny or regulatory response.

The current FOIA request follows growing public concern over borrower protections, the fairness and efficiency of the BDR process, and the lack of institutional accountability. While the Department of Education has discharged billions in student debt under expanded BDR rules in recent years, critics argue that transparency has been lacking—especially as political and legal pressure intensifies.

In submitting this request, the Higher Education Inquirer reaffirms its commitment to independent, investigative journalism focused on the intersection of education, debt, and power. Once the data are released, HEI will analyze and publish key findings to expose patterns of harm, regulatory failure, and corporate influence—wherever they may lie.

Source:
FOIA Request No. 25-04397-F, U.S. Department of Education, July 13, 2025
Prior FOIA Disclosure: FOIA 22-00011-F, released 2022 (94-page CEMS report)

Genio Launches AI Policy Template as Student AI Usage Surges to 92% While Institutional Guidance Lags. Free template addresses critical gap as nine in 10 students worry about breaking AI rules due to unclear institutional policies

CLEARWATER, FLA, July 15 2025—Genio, a provider of learning tools that significantly improve student success, today announced the release of a comprehensive AI Policy Template to help higher education institutions develop clear, consistent guidelines for artificial intelligence use in academic settings. The launch comes as new data reveals that student AI adoption has surged to 92% in 2025, up dramatically from 66% in 2024, while 91% of learners remain concerned about inadvertently violating institutional rules due to ambiguous or inconsistent AI guidance.

The free template addresses a critical challenge facing higher education: the disconnect between rapidly increasing student AI usage and institutional preparedness. Despite nearly universal student adoption of AI tools, the vast majority of learners report that current guidance from their institutions is either lacking, unclear, or applied inconsistently across departments and courses.

The absence of clear, institution-wide AI policies leaves both educators and students uncertain about appropriate usage, creating potential for academic misconduct. Additionally, without standardized guidelines, different departments and instructors apply varying standards, creating confusion and potential unfairness. And, looking ahead, the lack of structured AI guidance fails to equip learners with the responsible AI skills increasingly essential in today's job market.

The AI Policy Template provides institutions with a document education professionals can download to create their own:

• Clear frameworks for defining appropriate AI tool usage across academic disciplines;

• Guidelines for maintaining academic integrity while embracing technological advancement;

• Strategies for reducing the digital divide rather than expanding it;

• Protections for both educators and learners through consistent policy application; and

• Structured approaches to teaching responsible AI usage as a critical workforce skill.

The template emphasizes what Genio calls "productive friction," a balanced approach that neither prohibits AI use nor allows unrestricted access, but instead creates structured guidelines that support learning while maintaining academic rigor. This approach recognizes that AI literacy is becoming as essential as traditional digital literacy skills.

For institutions facing the dual pressures of enrollment challenges and the need to prepare students for an AI-integrated workforce, the template offers a practical starting point for policy development. The resource is designed to be adapted to individual institutional needs, policies, and applicable legal requirements.

“AI has fundamentally changed how students approach their academic studies, but institutions have been caught off-guard by the speed of adoption,” said Josh Nesbitt, CTO at Genio. “Students want to use AI responsibly, but they need clear guidance on what this really means in practice. Our template provides institutions with a framework that maintains academic integrity while preparing students for an AI-driven workforce. The goal isn’t to prohibit AI use, but to create productive friction that ensures students develop critical thinking skills alongside AI fluency.”

The AI Policy Template is available for immediate download. The template is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Institutions should adapt the template in accordance with their own policies, protocols, and applicable laws.

About Genio

Genio (formerly Glean) creates beautifully simple learning tools that boost knowledge, skills, and confidence. Trusted by over 900 higher education institutions globally, our products support individuals of all abilities to learn more effectively. Best known for our lecture note taking tool, Genio now offers presentation rehearsal support, study skills courses, and more.

For more information on Genio, visit https://genio.co. 

FOIA Requests Are Foundational to HEI Research

The Higher Education Inquirer has filed 34 Freedom of Information requests with the US Department of Education over the last two years.  The documents that we receive have been essential ingredients in the legitimacy of our articles.  We also submit FOIA requests to the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Department of Defense, as well as media requests with the State Department and Securities and Exchange Commission.  As a public service, we also provide the documents, in digital form, at no cost to those who request them.  

 

Economic Update: Capitalism and Culture, Their Connection in Crisis Now (Richard Wolff with Henry Giroux)

On this week’s episode of Economic Update, Professor Wolff provides updates on Medicare advantage and "pre-authorization" as a way to reduce Medicare payments, liberals and radicals split over Mamdani, Trump's current budget further deepens the inequality of wealth across the US, and Mexico attends the BRICS meeting in Rio de Janeiro. In the second part of today’s show, Professor Wolff interviews Professor Henry Giroux from McMaster University, Canada, on capitalism, culture, and fascism in the U.S. today.

Who Rules Higher Education in Florida?

Florida has emerged as a bold experiment in the transformation of American education, a place where the traditional lines between public and private, church and state, learning and indoctrination have become increasingly blurred. The state’s sprawling educational apparatus—from taxpayer-funded religious K–12 schools to politically captured public universities and a booming for-profit college industry—has been reshaped by a tightly knit network of ideological, financial, and political interests. The central question now is no longer just what Florida’s students are learning, but who is deciding what gets taught, who profits, and who is left behind.

This transformation did not begin overnight. It accelerated sharply under the administration of Governor Ron DeSantis, who has leveraged Florida’s educational system as a tool of ideological warfare. But the system’s current shape reflects a deeper pattern of coordinated influence, in which political appointees, religious institutions, for-profit executives, and powerful donors have each claimed a stake in the state’s educational future.

At the K–12 level, Florida now operates the nation’s largest private school voucher program. House Bill 1, passed in 2023, dramatically expanded eligibility, allowing nearly every student in the state to access public funds to attend private schools. The vast majority of these schools are religious in nature, with many promoting evangelical or fundamentalist Christian ideologies. The curricula often reject mainstream science, promote historical revisionism, and enforce gender and sexual conformity. These schools are not subject to the same accreditation or teacher certification standards as public institutions. They are legally permitted to discriminate in admissions, reject LGBTQ+ students, and bypass standardized academic expectations, all while receiving millions in taxpayer subsidies.

The expansion of vouchers has created a shadow education system—one that is state-funded but privately controlled. Some schools operate out of church basements or repurposed office buildings, others are part of large religious networks tied to national political movements. While the promise of "school choice" is used to market these reforms, in practice the policy has enabled a rapid exodus of students from public schools and directed public funds into ideologically driven and poorly regulated institutions. Investigations have revealed schools with histories of fraud, abusive discipline, and woeful academic performance continuing to receive state dollars with little to no oversight.

As students age into adulthood, the ideological structure built in the K–12 years feeds directly into Florida’s remade higher education system. The state’s public universities, long regarded as rising stars in research and student access, have become targets of political intervention. The takeover of New College of Florida in 2023 marked a turning point. Once a small, progressive liberal arts college, New College was transformed into a conservative experiment through political appointments and ideological purges. Faculty were pushed out. Curriculum was rewritten. Leadership was handed to figures with close ties to right-wing think tanks.

This playbook has since been replicated across the State University System. Boards of trustees are now stacked with DeSantis allies. Presidents are chosen not for academic leadership, but for political loyalty. Diversity, equity, and inclusion programs have been banned. Faculty are monitored. Student protests are suppressed. The message is clear: Florida’s public colleges are no longer institutions for the free exchange of ideas—they are instruments of ideological alignment.

Private colleges, meanwhile, have flourished in this environment—especially those aligned with conservative religious values. The University of Miami, while officially nonsectarian, operates in close partnership with powerful biomedical and corporate interests. Rollins College, one of the most prestigious liberal arts schools in the state, remains publicly apolitical but thrives by catering to the children of Florida’s wealthy elite. Religious institutions like Ave Maria University and Palm Beach Atlantic University are more explicit in their missions. Founded with deep connections to conservative Catholic and evangelical movements, these schools are more than just educational spaces—they are ideological outposts for a political and religious project that seeks to reshape American life.

Ave Maria, established by Domino’s Pizza billionaire Tom Monaghan, operates under strict Catholic dogma and enforces a rigid moral code for students. Palm Beach Atlantic champions evangelical Christian values and produces graduates steeped in conservative social teachings. These colleges, along with others in their orbit, often serve as landing pads for students educated in the voucher-funded religious K–12 system. The ideological pipeline is seamless, and its impact is lasting.

Beneath the surface, Florida’s for-profit colleges and credential mills continue to expand, often flying under the radar. Keiser University, once for-profit and now nominally nonprofit, functions much like a for-profit entity, aggressively recruiting students and maximizing revenue through online expansion and federal aid capture. Everglades University, Full Sail University, and dozens of cosmetology, theology, and career schools target working-class Floridians, military veterans, and immigrants with promises of upward mobility. In reality, many of these institutions saddle students with unmanageable debt and provide degrees of questionable value. Oversight is weak. Accreditation standards are often minimal. The end result is a parallel higher education market that profits off desperation and systemic inequality.

Connecting these layers of Florida’s educational system is a network of donors, foundations, and political groups. Organizations like the Council for National Policy, the Heritage Foundation, and the Claremont Institute exert disproportionate influence. Billionaires like Rebekah Mercer, Ken Griffin, and the Uihlein family fund candidates, schools, and think tanks that support the dismantling of public education and the promotion of conservative Christian alternatives. Hillsdale College, though based in Michigan, has launched affiliated charter-style “classical academies” in Florida and supplies training and curriculum to school boards eager to erase what they call “woke indoctrination.”

These efforts are coordinated, strategic, and well-funded. They are not random or reactionary. They represent the construction of a new education regime—one rooted in privatization, obedience, religious orthodoxy, and political control. Academic freedom, democratic engagement, and equitable access are treated not as ideals to strive for, but as threats to be neutralized.

The result is a cradle-to-career system in which education serves power rather than challenging it. From kindergarten classrooms preaching Christian nationalism to public universities led by political appointees to debt traps disguised as colleges, Florida’s students are moving through a system designed not to liberate but to conform. The public is funding it. The powerful are steering it. And for millions of students and families, the promise of education as a ladder to opportunity is becoming another broken dream.

The question of who rules education in Florida has a chillingly clear answer. Those who profit from ignorance. Those who fear critical inquiry. Those who believe education should serve the powerful, not the people. Florida may be the future—but not one built on truth, justice, or enlightenment. It is a future built on control.

---

Sources

Florida House Bill 1 (2023), Florida Legislature
Orlando Sentinel, “Florida Private Voucher Schools Often Fail Students. The State Still Pays.”
U.S. Department of Education, College Scorecard and IPEDS Data
Florida Department of Education, Private School Directory
Inside Higher Ed, “DEI Ban Signed in Florida”
Chronicle of Higher Education, “The New College Coup”
New York Times, “Florida’s Education Overhaul Has National Implications”
Council for National Policy, internal documents and reporting via The Intercept
IRS Form 990 filings for Keiser University, Ave Maria University, University of Miami
National Student Legal Defense Network, Complaints and Lawsuits Involving Florida Institutions
ProPublica, “The Billionaire Behind Ave Maria’s Catholic Utopia”
Hillsdale College, Barney Charter School Initiative: Partner School Directory and Curriculum

Borrower Defense Story 2: Anxiety & Interest (KH)

[Editor's note: This is the second story in a series about student loan debt and the moral necessity of Borrower Defense to Repayment. The first post is here.] 

My name is KH and I'm from Florida. My student debt crisis is very personal. I attended Kaplan University Online in 2008 while on bed rest after an accident. My family and I were extremely poor and so the idea of a college education to support my growing family was something that was appealing to me. 

My boyfriend at the time was in the agricultural field and only worked 4 or 5 months out of the year. We were so poor that even unmarried with a child he qualified to be on my SNAP and Medicaid applications. 

Once I made the call to Kaplan I was told that a degree would take us out of poverty, and we could live happily ever after. I was promised job placement and training for my future job. None of these things happened. I signed documents that indicated I was low income which allowed Kaplan to request more funding from FAFSA. 

Then the housing market crash of 2008 happened, and I switched majors to clinical psychology (I was told I would be in the therapeutic field once complete). In 2010 I had a phone call that made me look up the difference between FOR profit and nonprofit schools. Realizing I made a mistake, I switched schools to Lynn University which is a private (expensive) nonprofit. They were the only school that would take all of my credits from Kaplan. 

Fast forward to today, I am currently waiting to attend Southeastern Oklahoma State University to complete a Master's degree in School Counseling. 

I have received two different notifications from Mohela, my student loan servicer. The first indicates that I'm in-school deferment but it ends two weeks after I start class. Then my payment plans. There are two plans, one is for 700.00+ dollars and the other for 800.00+ dollars. One of my paychecks is 1700.00. There is no way I can survive with 1/2 my pay. 

I'm in the Borrower's Defense program because of the mismanagement by Kaplan. I also currently have multiple documents with multiple dates for repayment. There is no correct document that indicates what, when, or how I'm supposed to navigate this. Let me also state, the compounding interest is what makes this incredibly hard. I will be paying over 350,000 dollars from 120,000 in loans. 

This is criminal. Period.

Wake Forest and Kaplan: Selling Prestige in a Predatory Credential Market

Wake Forest University, a private institution with a proud 185-year history, has long marketed itself as a place for ethical leadership and elite scholarship. But its recent partnership with Kaplan—an infamous name in for-profit education and test prep—raises serious questions about the erosion of academic integrity and the corporatization of American higher education.

Wake Forest’s online offerings, now delivered in collaboration with Kaplan, are dressed in glowing promotional language. Prospective students are promised access to “a global network of 80,000+ alumni,” “1-on-1 guidance from a dedicated Student Success Manager,” and a curriculum shaped by “a Program Advisory Board of diverse business leaders.” The university assures working professionals that they can “earn a 100% online master’s degree or graduate certificate” on their own terms, with a “streamlined admissions process” and “flexible courses.”

But strip away the buzzwords and what’s left is a degree-granting operation outsourced to a for-profit education company with a controversial legacy. Kaplan, now owned by Graham Holdings (formerly the parent company of The Washington Post), has been at the center of lawsuits, regulatory scrutiny, and allegations of exploitative practices in its higher ed ventures—including its role in managing Purdue Global, formerly Kaplan University. The company has a long history of targeting vulnerable populations—especially working-class adults—with high-cost, low-value credentials that often don’t lead to the promised career outcomes.

So why is Wake Forest—an elite university with a storied reputation—collaborating with Kaplan?

The answer is simple: profit and scale.

In an era when even wealthy private universities are looking to expand their revenue streams, online education has become a lucrative frontier. But building and managing online degree programs in-house requires serious investment, time, and expertise. Enter Kaplan, which provides the infrastructure, marketing, enrollment management, and student support—all in exchange for a share of the revenue.

What does this mean for students?

It means that Wake Forest’s name is now being used to sell online degrees to mid-career professionals under the promise of prestige, convenience, and upward mobility—without the full intellectual, cultural, or communal experience that Wake Forest once symbolized. The degrees may bear the Wake Forest seal, but they are increasingly indistinguishable from the mass-produced credentials churned out by dozens of other universities that have sold access to their brands through partnerships with Online Program Managers (OPMs) like Kaplan, 2U, Wiley, and Coursera.

The “1-on-1 Student Success Manager” may sound supportive, but in practice these positions are often little more than call center roles staffed by Kaplan employees trained to ensure retention and upsell future courses—not to engage in meaningful academic mentorship.

The curriculum may be “developed and led by recognized faculty and industry experts,” but in many cases these are adjunct instructors or contract workers who have limited interaction with students and little say in the structure or pedagogy of the courses. This model contributes to the broader exploitation of contingent academic labor—an issue Wake Forest, like many elite universities, prefers not to discuss.

And the promise of becoming a leader “from anywhere” with a Wake Forest SPS degree? That too should be questioned. These degrees exist in an increasingly saturated credential market where employers are skeptical, return on investment is uncertain, and students often find themselves saddled with debt and disappointment.

If Wake Forest were truly committed to ethical leadership, it would take a hard look at the implications of commodifying its brand through a partnership with a company like Kaplan. Instead, it has chosen to chase market share and tuition revenue at the expense of its academic credibility—and at the risk of misleading students who believe they’re buying into the full Wake Forest experience.

The truth is this: Wake Forest is selling the illusion of prestige, wrapped in a glossy brochure of online convenience and corporate optimism. In reality, it’s another cog in a profit-driven machine that markets higher education as a product rather than a public good. And that’s not transformative change. That’s business as usual in the credential economy.

When Technology Can’t Outrun Environmental Collapse: The High Cost of Crypto and Other Energy-Hungry Innovations

There is a persistent narrative that technology will save humanity from the mounting environmental crises—climate change, resource depletion, and pollution—that threaten the planet. From clean energy breakthroughs to smart agriculture, the promise is that innovation will outpace destruction. But this optimism overlooks a harsh reality: many of today’s most advanced technologies, especially those that consume vast amounts of energy like cryptocurrencies, exacerbate environmental harm instead of reducing it. The earth’s ecological limits are too strict and immediate for technology alone to fix.

A key factor missing from many discussions is the concept of externalities—costs or damages that are not reflected in the market price of goods or services. Both economic and environmental externalities mean that the true price of technologies is often hidden from consumers, producers, and policymakers alike. When a technology harms the environment but doesn’t pay for that damage, the costs are effectively “externalized” to society and future generations.

Cryptocurrency Mining: An Externality Nightmare

Take cryptocurrency mining, especially Bitcoin, as a striking example. Bitcoin’s “proof of work” system demands enormous computing power, consuming electricity on the scale of entire countries such as Argentina or the Netherlands. However, the market price of Bitcoin does not include the environmental cost of that energy use—carbon emissions, air pollution, and water resource depletion are externalities borne by the planet, not the miners or investors.

Many crypto mining operations cluster in regions with cheap, carbon-intensive electricity. The associated greenhouse gas emissions accelerate climate change, but these environmental costs remain unaccounted for in economic transactions. Similarly, the rapid turnover of specialized mining hardware produces vast amounts of electronic waste that is seldom recycled properly, leaking toxins into ecosystems. These negative externalities are seldom reflected in the price of cryptocurrencies or factored into regulatory frameworks.

Other Technologies and Their Hidden Costs

It’s not only crypto. Artificial intelligence training requires massive computational resources that consume significant electricity, often generated by fossil fuels. Streaming services, cloud data centers, and the explosion of connected devices—collectively the “Internet of Things”—demand continuous power, driving emissions that are not typically included in consumer bills or corporate balance sheets.

The production of smartphones, laptops, and other electronics relies on mining scarce and environmentally damaging materials like lithium, cobalt, and rare earth elements. The social and ecological externalities here include habitat destruction, water pollution, and labor exploitation in vulnerable communities.

Even as companies promote efficiency gains, the rebound effect—where increased efficiency lowers costs and leads to increased consumption—means that total resource use continues to grow, magnifying external environmental harm.

Why Externalities Matter

Externalities are a core reason why technological innovation alone cannot save the environment. Without mechanisms to internalize these costs—through regulations, taxes, or market reforms—businesses and consumers have little incentive to change behavior. Technologies that appear profitable on paper may, in reality, impose devastating costs on ecosystems, human health, and climate stability.

Economic externalities can also distort investment priorities, leading to overinvestment in high-energy, resource-intensive technologies while underfunding sustainable alternatives that carry less hidden damage.

Toward a Holistic Solution

Addressing environmental destruction demands recognizing and correcting these externalities. Policies that tax carbon emissions, regulate electronic waste, and require transparency in supply chains can help internalize the true costs of technologies. Public awareness and ethical consumer choices also play a role in pressuring companies and governments.

Higher education institutions must contribute by researching externalities associated with emerging technologies and educating future leaders about sustainability challenges. Only by confronting the real costs behind innovation can society make wiser choices.

The Tech Future 

Technology is neither a guaranteed savior nor an inherent villain. It reflects the values and systems that shape its creation and deployment. Without reckoning with economic and environmental externalities, technological advances risk deepening rather than alleviating ecological crises. A sustainable future requires systemic change that prioritizes ecological limits and social justice—not just faster chips and smarter algorithms.

---

Sources:

• University of Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index (2025)

• Strubell, Emma, et al. “Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP.” ACL 2019

• Carlson, Shawn. “Bitcoin’s Energy Consumption Is a Problem—But It’s Not the Whole Problem.” Scientific American, 2022

• International Energy Agency (IEA). “Data Centres and Data Transmission Networks,” 2023

• Ghisellini, Patrizia, et al. “Environmental Sustainability of Rare Earth Elements: A Review.” Journal of Cleaner Production, 2024

• The Shift Project. “Lean ICT: Towards Digital Sobriety,” 2019

• Pigou, Arthur C. The Economics of Welfare (1920) — foundational theory on externalities

HEI Files FOIA to Expose Delays and Disparities in Borrower Defense Discharges

The Higher Education Inquirer has submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the U.S. Department of Education, seeking critical data on Borrower Defense to Repayment claims tied to some of the most notorious for-profit and career college chains in the United States. Filed on July 13, 2025, and formally acknowledged by the Department on July 14, this request seeks to uncover how many borrowers have received student debt relief, how many remain in limbo, and how many have been left in the dark despite being eligible.

The FOIA request includes a list of institutions with long histories of documented fraud, federal investigations, lawsuits, and closures. These include Corinthian Colleges (which operated Everest, Heald, and WyoTech), ITT Technical Institute, Westwood College, Marinello Schools of Beauty, the Art Institutes, Argosy University, American National University, Charlotte School of Law, DeVry University, Globe University/Minnesota School of Business, Independence University, Kaplan College/Kaplan University, Le Cordon Bleu, Missouri College, Mount Washington College, University of Phoenix, Virginia College, and Vatterott College.

For each institution, the Inquirer is requesting the number of borrowers identified for group discharge under the Borrower Defense authority. Of those, we are asking how many have had their loans discharged, how many cases remain pending, how many borrowers have been approved for discharge but not yet notified, and how many claims overlap with the class-action lawsuit Sweet v. McMahon (formerly Sweet v. Cardona and Sweet v. DeVos). For Corinthian Colleges specifically, the request also asks for the number of discharged borrowers under previous Department announcements and how many were also part of the Manriquez v. McMahon or Sweet settlements.

This data request covers the one-year period from July 13, 2024, to July 13, 2025, and asks for results in a structured, electronic format, preferably Excel.

The significance of this request cannot be overstated. Despite multiple well-publicized borrower defense settlements and mass discharge announcements, many defrauded students still have no clear idea whether they qualify for relief or when it might arrive. While the Department has made headlines for forgiving billions in student debt, especially for borrowers from predatory for-profit schools, those announcements often lack transparency and specificity. The FOIA request aims to fill those gaps and provide an accurate picture of the Department’s implementation of debt relief and justice for defrauded borrowers.

The Department of Education’s FOIA Service Center responded that the request has been received and is in queue. No further clarification is needed at this time, and no fees have been assessed. The Department did note that the current average processing time is 185 business days—over nine months. This timeline means that meaningful public disclosure may not happen until spring 2026, even as policymakers, advocates, and student debtors continue to push for faster relief and more accountability.

This FOIA request is part of the Higher Education Inquirer's ongoing efforts to investigate the afterlife of failed for-profit colleges, the bureaucratic delays in loan discharges, and the long shadow these schools have cast over the lives of working-class students. In many cases, these students were the first in their families to attend college and were aggressively targeted by institutions that promised fast-track careers and delivered financial ruin instead.

We will continue to monitor the Department’s response and will publish any findings we receive. If you are a former student of one of these schools and have filed a Borrower Defense claim—or have questions about whether you qualify—we invite you to share your experience. Your voice matters, and transparency is key to understanding how widespread the damage remains.

Contact the Higher Education Inquirer at gmcghee@aya.yale.edu.

Sources
U.S. Department of Education FOIA Acknowledgment Letter, July 14, 2025
FOIA Request No. 25-04397-F
Sweet v. Cardona (formerly Sweet v. DeVos), Case No. 19-cv-03674, N.D. Cal.
Manriquez v. DeVos, Case No. 3:17-cv-07210, N.D. Cal.
U.S. Department of Education Borrower Defense Updates – studentaid.gov

Did Higher Education Ever Have a Soul? A Response to Frank Bruni

In his New York Times opinion piece, “I’m Watching the Sacrifice of College’s Soul,” Frank Bruni laments the erosion of academic rigor and the rise of artificial intelligence in the college classroom. He worries that students read less, care more about networking, and rely too much on AI to write their papers. And he ties this perceived moral decay to the broader culture war era under a second Trump administration.

But if we are truly asking whether college has lost its soul, the answer lies not just in classroom etiquette, grade inflation, or even AI. These are surface symptoms. The deeper rot goes back much further—and runs much deeper.

In 2025, as student debt surpasses $2 trillion, adjuncts live paycheck to paycheck, and billion-dollar university endowments sit idle amid growing social crises, the question lingers like a ghost in the lecture hall: Did higher education ever have a soul?

Bruni suggests that something noble has been lost. But to mourn a fall from grace assumes there was grace to begin with. It assumes the soul of higher education was once intact—whole, ethical, virtuous. That assumption demands interrogation.

A Soul in Theory
From the founding of Harvard in 1636 to the post-WWII GI Bill expansion, there have always been idealistic threads: Socratic dialogue, liberal education, shared governance, land-grant missions to uplift the working class. Thinkers like John Dewey and W.E.B. Du Bois believed that education could be democratic and emancipatory, a crucible for ethical development and social justice.

But for every Du Bois, there was a Booker T. Washington being positioned to serve capitalism. For every land-grant university, there were extractive relationships with Indigenous lands and communities. For every golden age of college access, there were doors closed to women, Black Americans, and the working poor.

The soul, it seems, has always lived uneasily beside the dollar.

The Neoliberal Turn
In the last half-century, the contradictions have only grown starker. Beginning in the late 1970s and accelerating in the Reagan era, higher education became increasingly privatized, commodified, and financialized. Universities morphed into entrepreneurial corporations, presidents became CEOs, students became customers, and faculty became precarious gig workers. The soul of higher education—if ever there was one—was sold off in pieces. Not in a single transaction, but through thousands of small decisions: outsourcing food services, patenting research, expanding sports empires, launching predatory online programs, partnering with Wall Street, and calling it “innovation.”

Today, we see the results:

For-profit colleges and edtech firms exploiting vulnerable populations.

Public universities chasing out-of-state tuition while abandoning their mission to serve local and working-class communities.

DEI initiatives used as branding while workers on campus remain underpaid, underinsured, and over-policed.

Boards of trustees stacked with bankers, developers, and tech executives more loyal to markets than to mission.

And beyond the classrooms that Bruni mourns, darker truths persist—truths rarely explored in glossy alumni magazines or New York Times op-eds:

Fraternities continue to operate as quasi-criminal enterprises, protected by wealthy alumni and timid administrations. Hazing deaths, sexual assault, racial abuse, and alcohol-fueled violence are treated as unfortunate exceptions, rather than the predictable outcomes of a toxic culture of entitlement and silence.

NCAA football, the crown jewel of many flagship universities, thrives on the unpaid labor of student-athletes whose bodies are sacrificed for weekend entertainment and television contracts. Behind the pageantry lie lifelong injuries, untreated concussions, and a trail of lawsuits over traumatic brain damage—while coaches and athletic directors rake in seven-figure salaries.

These are not footnotes to the story of higher education’s moral decline. They are the story—central to understanding what kind of “soul” has actually animated American higher education for decades.

A Soul in Struggle
Yet to say higher education never had a soul would be to erase the people who have fought—and still fight—for it to matter.

The soul has lived in the pushback: in student protests for civil rights and against apartheid; in hunger strikes for living wages and union recognition; in the quiet resilience of community college faculty who refuse to give up on their students despite impossible workloads and poverty wages. It’s found in the Black campus movements of the 1960s and today, in the labor organizing of adjuncts and graduate students, and in underfunded tribal colleges and HBCUs resisting systemic neglect.

And the soul is alive in critique itself—in those willing to ask not only what students are learning, but why the university exists, who it serves, and who it exploits.

Where Do We Go from Here?
Frank Bruni mourns the death of something noble. But perhaps what’s dying isn’t the soul of higher education—it’s the illusion that the soul was ever fully alive within institutions so deeply enmeshed in money, hierarchy, and exclusion.

If higher education once had a soul, it now lies fragmented—compromised by institutional betrayal, bureaucratic inertia, and a corporate logic that values prestige over people. But to ask whether it ever had a soul is to ask whether the soul resides in institutions at all, or in the people struggling within and against them.

Perhaps we shouldn’t romanticize the past, but neither should we resign ourselves to the present.

The soul of higher education may never have been whole. But it has always been contested. And in that contest—between commerce and conscience, exclusion and liberation, silence and speech—we may yet find the spark to reimagine what education could be.

Because if the university is to be saved, its soul must be fought for—not assumed, and certainly not bought.

---

Sources:

• Bruni, Frank. “I’m Watching the Sacrifice of College’s Soul.” New York Times, July 14, 2025.

• U.S. Department of Education. Federal Student Aid Portfolio Summary. https://studentaid.gov/data-center

• The Century Foundation. “The Adjunct Crisis.”

• Flanagan, Caitlin. “Death at a Penn State Fraternity.” The Atlantic, November 2017.

• NPR. “Inside the Secret World of College Fraternities.”

• ESPN. “Concussion Lawsuits and the NCAA.”

• The Chronicle of Higher Education. “How Billion-Dollar Endowments Avoid Spending.”

• The Guardian. “Inside America’s College Debt Machine.”

• American Association of University Professors (AAUP). “Trends in Faculty Employment Status.”

• The Intercept. “EdTech and the Exploitation of Students.”

• Washington Post. “DEI for PR, Not for Pay.”

• Inside Higher Ed. “Boards of Trustees: Who They Really Represent.”

• NLRB Rulings and Union Filings, 2010–2025.