Students considering any of the at-risk programs will not immediately lose access to federal aid. While the accountability test will be implemented this month, its implementation will be phased in over the next two years.
Transcription:
JUANA VERANOS, PRESENTER:
The U.S. Department of Education is rolling out a new federal test, one that most colleges and universities will eventually have to pass. The test is known as Do No Harm and is quite simple. If graduates of a program don’t earn more than someone who never went to college, that program and its students could lose access to federal student loans. To better explain how this will all work and the impact it could have, I’m joined by NPR education correspondent Cory Turner. Hello.
CORY TURNER, BYLINE: Hi, Juana.
SUMMERS: So, Cory, losing access to federal student loans seems like a big deal. So tell us how exactly this Do No Harm test will work.
TURNER: Yeah. So this new test comes courtesy of the Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year. And I mean, really, as you said in the introduction, it’s pretty simple. For undergraduate programs, your students four years after graduating will need to earn more than working high school graduates who did not go to college. And it’s a pretty similar test for graduate schools, right? Therefore, graduates of a program need to earn more on average than those who finished college but did not pursue graduate school. If a program falls below this income threshold for 2 out of every 3 years, students will no longer be able to apply for federal loans to attend that program.
Earlier this week, Deputy Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said of this change, quote, “if a program cannot demonstrate that it leaves its graduates better off financially than if they had never enrolled, it should not be supported by federal taxpayers.”
However, I’ve also heard, Joan, a lot of people (actually a bipartisan group of higher education people) who say, look, this is a pretty reasonable expectation. Here’s Chris Madaio from the nonprofit Institute for College Access & Success.
CHRIS MADAIO: I mean, this is really a very low floor, right? I mean, high school revenue is not an overly high metric for a program to measure.
SUMMERS: And, Cory, what can you tell us about the types of programs that may not be able to pass this new test?
TURNER: Well, fortunately, earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Education released a ton of data that gives us a pretty good idea of where the hammer will fall. Overall, the data shows that more than 800,000 students attend a program that would likely fail this Do No Harm test. We also know that about half of them attend private, for-profit schools, which already have a reputation for defrauding students.
SUMMERS: Correct.
TURNER: Another big red flag in the department’s data: undergraduate certificate programs. You know, the kind that promotes itself as a short-term, fast track to a specific career. Well, a quarter of all students in those programs are in one that would likely fail. And the program with the highest predicted failure rate is a college certificate in cosmetology, and more than 90% of all such programs leave their students worse off.
VERANOS: Oh, interesting. However, I am very curious about more traditional bachelor’s and master’s programs. How will it go?
TURNER: Very good. According to the department’s data, only about 1% of bachelor’s programs would fail the test. And it’s a little higher for master’s degrees, around 4%, but still not bad. However, there are some interesting patterns in the types of programs that fail most frequently. At the master’s level, we talk about mental and social health services. And then at the four-year bachelor’s level, their programs focus on theater, fine arts, and music.
SUMMERS: I mean, I imagine some people might stop studying subjects like the ones you just mentioned because of this rule, as well as the lack of access to student loans, which, I mean, calls into question what higher education is supposed to be about.
TURNER: Totally. I… this is what I find so fascinating about this whole idea, Juana. Do these numbers mean these programs are bad? In some cases, yes. But in some cases, I think it also means that the American economy simply doesn’t value the arts. So let’s dig into this for a few more minutes with a colleague of mine. Her name is Tiffany Camhi. She’s an education reporter for Oregon Public Broadcasting, telling the story of a young teacher who graduated from a music program who probably wouldn’t pass the government’s new earnings test. Let’s take a look.
CINDY FLORES: Oh, one, two, three. One…
(SOUND OF MUSIC)
TIFFANY CAMHI, BYLINE: Cindy Flores loves teaching mariachi music to middle and high school students in Oregon’s Salem-Keizer School District.
FLORES: Your part says like this…
(SOUND OF MUSIC)
FLORES: …Two, three, time.
(SOUND OF MUSIC)
FLOWERS: Two, three.
(SOUND OF MUSIC)
CAMHI: To get your dream job, you first had to study music at Portland State University and then get a teaching license. He took out federal student loans to pay for it all.
FLORES: I don’t know. I feel like it has a good side and a really bad side. The good thing is that I was able to complete my degree. That was the only reason I wanted to go to college so I could get a degree in music.
CAMHI: The bad thing was that when he got his license, he had a debt of $55,000. Still, she says it was worth it.
FLORES: You know, if it weren’t for PSU and the loans I was able to get, I wouldn’t be a Mexican-American mariachi teacher for my Mexican-American students.
CAMHI: But prospective PSU music students may not have the same access to federal financial aid. This is because college music students often do not earn as much as high school graduates. Education Department data shows the college’s program likely wouldn’t pass the new federal earnings test. But do students really go to music school to earn money?
LEE ANN SCOTTO ADAMS: And profits are just a small piece of that puzzle.
CAMHI: Lee Ann Scotto Adams directs the National Arts Alumni Strategic Project. The nonprofit studies what happens to arts graduates. And Adams has a problem with this new federal income test. She says it’s a unique measure of student success.
SCOTTO ADAMS: Yes, you need to make money and make money to make a living and survive, but we see that our creative workers want to have a cultural impact. They want to have an impact on their community. And these are all metrics that fall outside of simple profit metrics.
CAMHI: Adams also takes issue with measuring income four years after graduation. She points to survey data showing that PhD graduates often have unpredictable incomes at first, but their salaries tend to stabilize and increase over time.
(SOUND OF MUSIC)
CAMHI: Back in Oregon, Cindy Flores feels lucky to have a full-time job teaching music.
FLORES: Do you understand?
UNIDENTIFIED STUDENT: I understand.
FLORES: It’s easy. This time we are going to play it…
CAMHI: That’s despite all his student loan debt.
FLORES: It’s never about money. I realized I wanted to have a career in music when I was in 8th grade because all the music teachers I had in the past were really good role models in my life and I want to be a part of that community.
CAMHI: And be that kind of role model for your own students.
For NPR News, I’m Tiffany Camhi in Salem, Oregon.
FLORES: Ah, one, two, three. One…
(SOUND OF MUSIC)
SUMMERS: And NPR’s Cory Turner is still with me here in the studio. And, Cory, as we just heard in that report, there is no simple formula for calculating the value of a career. And as you pointed out earlier, this Do No Harm provision isn’t a particularly high bar, but it doesn’t take into account what we heard from Cindy Flores, that she’s wanted to do this since she was in eighth grade, that she’s passionate about teaching music to kids. Is there anything else you think this new rule leaves out?
TURNER: Yeah. I think there’s a big wild card that’s not in the formula and that’s student loan debt. There was much debate about whether debt should be included in this new test. They decided not to do it. But, you know, there’s a big difference, using music as an example, between a struggling low-wage graduate who’s debt-free and a low-wage struggling graduate who’s also paying off $50 or $60,000 in debt. And I wonder if they had included this in the formula, you know, how many more programs out there (especially at more prestigious and expensive schools) would start to look like a bad deal?
SUMMERS: Cory Turner, NPR education correspondent. Thank you.
TURNER: You’re welcome.
(SOUNDBITE OF KAYTRANADA SONG, “SNAP MY FINGER (FEAT. PINKPANTHERESS)”)
