President Donald Trump on Wednesday ordered a review of the federal government’s control over education policies and regulations. It is the president’s latest attempt to grant more flexibility over education policy to the states, a position his Education Secretary, Betsy DeVos, shares.

Wednesday’s executive action instructs DeVos–an advocate for school choice–to conduct a review of the Department of Education’s regulations and guidance documents. Within 300 days, her findings will be published in a public report.

“For too long, the federal government has imposed its will on state and local governments,” Trump, whose 100th day in office is on Saturday, said at a press conference on Wednesday. “The result has been education that spends more, and achieves far, far, far less.”

The purpose of the order is “to protect and preserve State and local control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, and personnel of educational institutions, schools, and school systems, consistent with applicable law.” According to an Education Department official, the review will concentrate on K-12 institutions.

DeVos is a staunch backer of school vouchers, charter schools, and private education institutions. Her critics worry she will funnel resources away from public schools–many of which already suffer from a lack of funding–to vouchers and other avenues for boosting school choice.

In an interview with The New York Times, DeVos, who also opposes the Common Core curriculum, called Trump’s executive action a “welcomed opportunity.” The order, she said, is “a clear mandate to take that real hard look at what we’ve been doing at the department level that we shouldn’t be doing, and what ways we have overreached.” She added: “And when it comes to education, decisions made at local levels and at state levels are the best ones.”

But not everyone thinks diminishing the federal government’s role in education is for the best. In a statement, Wade Henderson, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, called the order “dangerous and wrongheaded.” Henderson added: “State and local primacy without federal oversight in America’s schools has never worked for all children and will not work now.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Orders Betsy DeVos to Review DOE Regulations appeared first on Law Street.

Charlotte School of Law has had a rough couple of months. Last November, the school was placed on probation by the American Bar Association for low test scores and lax admissions policies. A few months later, the federal government withdrew its financial aid to the school’s students, as part of an Obama Administration crackdown on for-profit schools.

Now, the state of North Carolina is opening an investigation into the school, POLITICO has reported. According to a spokeswoman for Attorney General Josh Stein, state officials are “investigating the school under the state’s civil consumer protection laws.”

Whether or not the school will remain open is still uncertain. During the fall semester, there were 716 students enrolled at the school, a number that has dropped to about 220 since the government announce it would stop granting loans to students.

President Barack Obama’s administration began targeting for-profit higher education in 2015, in an effort to make sure colleges and universities don’t attract students by misleading them about how much money they will earn after graduation, only to leave them in debt from steep tuition prices. In one of its earlier measures, the Department of Education required colleges to start monitoring their graduates’ debt, earnings, and jobs.

Charlotte is now looking to President Donald Trump’s administration in hopes that it will be able to reclaim the money it lost. The Department of Education recently urged the school to re-apply for funding, in spite of criticism from Stein. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos has a reputation for supporting for-profit educational organizations.

The school landed on the ABA’s probation list in the fall after receiving criticism for low bar exam passage rates and a pattern of admitting students that were unqualified or unlikely to succeed. In January, the DOE announced that current and future students at the school would no longer be eligible for federal aid, after the school’s leaders and education department officials failed to agree on a plan to address its issues. Charlotte refused to implement a “teach out” plan that would allow students to continue their studies at a different accredited institution. Such a system would have required the school to close permanently.

In late January, more than 150 students filed lawsuits against Charlotte in an effort to win back the money they had spent on tuition and recover damages for the shortage of job prospects they faced.

Charlotte is the first accredited school to lose its access to federal aid. InfiLaw, the corporation that owns the school, also owns Arizona Summit Law School, which was placed on ABA probation for similar reasons in March.

Victoria Sheridan

Victoria is an editorial intern at Law Street. She is a senior journalism major and French minor at George Washington University. She’s also an editor at GW’s student newspaper, The Hatchet. In her free time, she is either traveling or planning her next trip abroad. Contact Victoria at VSheridan@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Charlotte School of Law Saga Continues: North Carolina AG Investigates the School appeared first on Law Street.

Princeton University–the prestigious Ivy League institution whose famous alumni include Woodrow Wilson, Michelle Obama, and Queen of Genovia Amelia Mignonette Thermopolis Renaldi–is suing the Department of Education in an attempt to block the release of its admissions data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), according to Buzzfeed News.

The lawsuit is an attempt to hinder the anti-affirmative action organization Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), a nonprofit whose mission is to remove race-based college admissions standards and is accusing Princeton of practicing anti-Asian bias in its admissions. The organization seeks to use a FOIA request to prove its accusations by releasing documents that Princeton gave to the DOE during a long investigation by the department’s Office for Civil Rights into anti-Asian discrimination that concluded in 2015. The investigation determined that this bias did not exist.

According to Buzzfeed, Princeton claims that it turned those admissions documents over to the department under the condition that sensitive data would be kept private, and that if the data were to be released, the department would be in violation of the Trades Secrets Act. SFFA perceives Princeton’s lawsuit as an inherent admission of guilt; however, the logic of that perception does not totally check out, for Princeton could not want to release the documents because it would reveal practices that are just bad PR, such as admission preferences for children of alumni or for celebrities.

Speaking to USA Today, Daniel Day, a spokesman for Princeton, said that the university filed the lawsuit “to honor the promise of confidentiality we make to all applicants and their families . . . [and] so future applicants will be willing to provide materials to [the university] knowing the confidentiality of their materials will be respected.”

This is not SFFA’s first attempt to reveal information about the admissions practices of Ivy League institutions, having also filed similar lawsuits against Harvard and UNC-Chapel Hill. SFFA filed a lawsuit in 2014 against Harvard, alleging that the university employed discriminatory practices in its undergraduate admissions process.

While progress has been slow–mainly due to the case being put on hold in anticipation of the Supreme Court ruling on Fisher vs. University of Texas at Austin–some action has been taken. In September, a district court judge ordered Harvard to release six years worth of “comprehensive data” on its undergraduate admissions process. This order came shortly after Harvard attempted to get the suit dismissed.

In December, two Asian American high school seniors and Harvard applicants, working in conjunction with Advancing Justice-Los Angeles, petitioned a federal judge to join the case as amici curiae (friends of the court). This  would allow them to file amicus briefs, participate in oral arguments, and submit evidence, according to a report from NBC News.

“We refuse to be used as a wedge by outside players stoking the insecurities of newer Asian immigrants, provoking them to lash out at the very programs that have helped communities of color gain access to higher education,” Nicole Ochi, supervising attorney for Advancing Justice-Los Angeles, said in a statement reported by NBC News.

The Harvard Crimson reported that 22.2 percent of those admitted into Harvard’s class of 2021 are Asian American students. While much has been said about Asians who oppose affirmative action–particularly in the Fisher vs. University of Texas at Austin ruling–polls show that a majority of the Asian American community still support the practice.

Last year, the Asian American Voter Survey found that, among respondents, 64 percent said that they favor affirmative action programs designed to help blacks, women, and other minorities gain better access to higher education. A mere 25 percent of respondents disagreed with the practice.

Austin Elias-De Jesus

Austin is an editorial intern at Law Street Media. He is a junior at The George Washington University majoring in Political Communication. You can usually find him reading somewhere. If you can’t find him reading, he’s probably taking a walk. Contact Austin at Staff@Lawstreetmedia.com.

The post Princeton Sues the Federal Government to Protect Admissions Data appeared first on Law Street.

Over the past couple of days, we have seen a few people who should be doing about 100,000 percent less. Among these people are Cee Lo Green at the Grammys, Stephen Miller, the Twenty One Pilots guys, and every person involved with the making of “Fifty Shades Darker.” Now we can add conservative cartoonist Glenn McCoy to those ranks.

On Monday, the Belleville News- Democrat, a newspaper based in southwest Illinois, published a McCoy cartoon in their Opinion section that drew parallels between the tough time our new Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos is having, and an iconic moment during the Civil Rights Movement, because that makes sense, right?

The reference: Norman Rockwell’s 1964 painting, ‘The Problem We Live With’ pic.twitter.com/D1wvtyIz5Z

— Philip Lewis (@Phil_Lewis_) February 14, 2017

If it has been a while since you’ve taken APUSH, let me remind you what’s going on in this cartoon. Norman Rockwell’s “The Problem We Live With” depicts Ruby Bridges who, during desegregation in New Orleans, was escorted by three U.S. Marshals to and from her all-white school to protect her from angry protesters.

McCoy’s cartoon seems to suggest that the public criticism that DeVos has faced before and since her nomination is the exact same thing, or, at the very least, similar to what Bridges endured. In the cartoon, McCoy replaces the N-word and “KKK,” which are written on the wall that Bridges is walking past in the original painting, with “Conservative” and “NEA” (National Education Association), respectively.

DeVos gained sympathy from Trump for the particularly rough confirmation process she faced. DeVos endured a bruising Senate confirmation hearing, where her lack of knowledge about public school education and fear of grizzly bears were exposed. Nonetheless, DeVos was confirmed as education secretary last Monday, but only after Vice President Mike Pence cast a historic vote that broke a 50-50 vote tie in the Senate. Since becoming education secretary, DeVos has been relentlessly mocked for her tweets and blocked by protestors from entering a D.C. public school.

Lets compare and contrast: Bridges was six years-old when she began to attend William Frantz Elementary school as its only African-American student, and had to endure the racist chants from protestors when she entered and exited the school doors. Bridges was also the only student in her classroom for awhile, because the parents of her white classmates withdrew their children from the school. All of the teachers except for one refused to teach Bridges. Her family endured backlash as well. This all happened simply because she was a black girl trying to go to school. So, as you can see, there are many parallels between DeVos and Bridges.

You can check out more of McCoy’s cartoons here.

Austin Elias-De Jesus

Austin is an editorial intern at Law Street Media. He is a junior at The George Washington University majoring in Political Communication. You can usually find him reading somewhere. If you can’t find him reading, he’s probably taking a walk. Contact Austin at Staff@Lawstreetmedia.com.

The post Betsy DeVos is Now “The Problem We All Live With” appeared first on Law Street.

At the end of last July, the Obama Administration selected 67 colleges to participate in an experimental pilot program through the Department of Education (DOE) to extend Pell Grants to certain incarcerated individuals. The experimental program will impact up to 12,000 inmates working to earn a post-secondary degree. 141 correctional institutions will take part in the Second Chance Pell Grant program. 

This monumental move in criminal justice policy marks the first time inmates will be eligible for Pell Grants in over 20 years, when the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 explicitly banned grants to any incarcerated individuals. Though that bill is still in place, the new pilot program is granted through experimentation under the Higher Education Act.

As for the grants, they function in the same way as grants for non-incarcerated students. Federal Pell Grants are available to students seeking a college degree with demonstrated financial need. The grant is proportional to the student’s income with a maximum amount of $5,815 for the 2016-2017 academic year.

The initiative follows a slew of research in recent years showing that educational rehabilitation for inmates sharply decreases recidivism, increases social capital, and aids re-entry into society. One such 2013 study found that individuals who participated in correctional education were 43 percent less likely to recidivate in the three years after release than individuals who didn’t participate in education. Further, the program serves individuals marked for release within the next five years, the demographic educational programming will benefit most.

But the program has been met with some public disapproval, largely because some believe that confronting the student debt epidemic in the U.S. and extending grant programs for traditional students should receive higher priority than funding education for incarcerated students.

Nevertheless, the DOE has made their priorities and intentions clear with regards to the intersection of criminal justice and education. In a report released this month, the DOE pointed out that in the last 25 years average spending on PK-12 education has increased around 100 percent, whereas correctional spending has increased around 300 percent. That figure is even higher in states like Texas, where correctional spending has increased by 850 percent during the same time period. 

Investing in education is a cost effective method for reducing crime. The DOE report points to a study which found that a 10 percent increase in high school graduation rates could result in an approximately nine percent decrease in arrest rates leading to drastically fewer inmates and prison costs.

As a snapshot example, it cost the city of New York an average $167,731 for each inmate held in a correctional institution in 2013. By reducing arrests and thus incarceration, correctional institutions can re-allocate greater funds towards rehabilitative services like vocational training and higher education aided by Pell Grants.

For now, the Pell Grant extension to inmates is experimental, but marks an important shift away toward rehabilitative approach to inmates within the U.S. criminal justice system. A grant program that was created to allow students to go to college who otherwise could not has a clear purpose in correctional institutions where inmates may have their only chance to pursue a college degree.

Ashlee Smith

Ashlee Smith is a Law Street Intern from San Antonio, TX. She is a sophomore at American University, pursuing a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and Journalism. Her passions include social policy, coffee, and watching West Wing. Contact Ashlee at ASmith@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Obama Administration to Extend Pell Grants to 12,000 Inmates appeared first on Law Street.

A new study confirms the fears of those who criticize the United States’ education system–we’re lagging behind. A Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) study by the Department of Education compares workers’ skills in various developed countries to the U.S., and discovered that Americans perform particularly poorly in basic reading, math, and technology skills. In fact, in some cases the results of our high school graduates were about on par with peer nations’ high school dropouts.

The PIACC tests adults’ skills over four areas. According to the report:

PIAAC defines four core competency domains of adult cognitive skills that are seen as key to facilitating the social and economic participation of adults in advanced economies: literacy, reading components, numeracy, and problem solving in technology-rich environments.

In the U.S., literacy skills overall were average, compared to other nations. But young people with a high school diploma or less scored well below average. Similar results held true on math tests–Americans who had high school diplomas were about on par with  high school dropouts in other nations. When technology skills were tested–things like using an email, naming a file on a computer, or buying and returning things online–Americans came in dead last.

Japan and Finland scored in the number one and number two spots in all three measures. Other nations consistently topping the charts included the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, and Belgium.

The fact that Americans who only had high school diplomas or less fared so poorly in comparison to individuals from other nations is particularly troubling given how expensive a college education is today. Students who aren’t able to afford college, or do not wish to go to college, should still be able to depend on their required 12 years of schooling to help them acquire the skills needed to be an active part of the American workforce. But according to the PIAAC, that simply does not appear to be the case. As Peggy Carr, the acting commissioner of the government’s National Center for Education Statistics, stated: “clearly, we have some work to do in this country.”

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Americans with High School Diplomas Don’t Have Same Level of Skills as International Peers appeared first on Law Street.

Things continue to get worse for the University of Phoenix. After the FTC began investigating the parent company of the for-profit string of schools–Apollo Education Group–more government agencies are either launching investigative probes or turning away from the company.

On Thursday the U.S. Department of Defense officially put the University of Phoenix on probation. Essentially that means that the for-profit schools will be barred from recruiting on military bases, and veterans won’t be able to use the money they receive from the department’s tuition assistant program for education at any of the University of Phoenix branches. However, any students that are currently using the DoD’s benefits and are enrolled in classes are allowed to continue their education.

The DoD didn’t necessarily disclose the exact reasons for its dismissal of the University of Phoenix. However, Military Times reported on a letter it obtained that was sent by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Defense to the University of Phoenix. Reasons it cited for putting the for-profit collection of schools on probation included the probes by the FTC and the state of California, as well as recruitment attempts that broke the DoD’s policies. One of those was the use of “challenge coins” According to the Wall Street Journal:

The coins—which are bigger than a silver dollar and often have unit insignia—are often given by those in the military to one another for a job well done or to commemorate an event. The University of Phoenix used trademarked seals and insignia on their coins without the consent of the military, according to the Defense Department. The university said it has since stopped using such coins.

However, the DoD isn’t the only government agency that’s not getting along with the University of Phoenix. On Friday, just a day after the DoD’s announcement, the Justice and Education Departments announced joint investigations into the University of Phoenix. They will be establishing an interagency task force to ensure that the company is held to proper accountability and oversight. These moves by the DoD, the Justice Department, and the Department of Education are consistent with the FTC probe, which is attempting to determine if the University of Phoenix used unfair or deceptive recruiting practices, particularly when it came to recruiting veterans.

In light of the DoD’s announcement, the University of Phoenix stock fell nine percent. The University of Phoenix is almost certainly on a downturn–this is just the latest bad news for the for-profit education giant.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The University of Phoenix Continues to Fall appeared first on Law Street.

For a while, it seemed like for-profit colleges were the newest, hottest frontier in higher education. But with current student debt problems, and many revelations about some of the predatory practices of for-profit colleges, the trend appears to have officially passed. Arguably the most well-known for-profit institution of higher learning–The University of Phoenix–may be the latest to find itself in hot water.

Late last week the parent company of the University of Phoenix, Apollo Education Group, released information that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was investigating the company. The investigation is attempting to determine if the University of Phoenix ran deceptive or unfair business practices. The investigation is particularly focused on its recruitment of veterans. The accusations claim that the company has left veterans with high levels of debt after collecting hundreds of millions in GI Bill money. It’s not just the GI Bill money that the University of Phoenix has collected, however, according to financial records the company has collected over $488 million in fees and tuition from veterans’ own money for its online programs, and additional sums at various physical locations.

The University of Phoenix has been declining slowly for a little while now. Five years ago, the school reported almost half a million students. That number has been essentially halved since then. In 2012, the University of Phoenix was forced to close 115 of its campuses. In addition, revenue has been declining, and there have been many accusations levied against the company in regards to the way that it treats its students and potential recruits.

The controversy over the University of Phoenix is borne out of concerns that the school required participants to take out expensive loans, which could have been fine had those participants had the ability to pay back those loans after they graduated. However, the education provided at the University of Phoenix doesn’t necessarily lead to employment, the credits usually don’t transfer to other schools, and the degrees aren’t always recognized by employers.

In order to cooperate with the investigation, as Apollo Education Group promised in its statement, the company will have to provide the federal investigators with documents such as financial information, marketing, billing, debt collection, accreditation, and military recruitment practices.

This investigation into the University of Phoenix is consistent with a theme of increased scrutiny on for-profit schools, many of which are struggling in the now seemingly turbulent educational environment. Last month, the Obama Administration began cracking down on for-profit schools. A new rule that took effect in July from the Department of Education is the “gainful employment rule” which “requires colleges to track their graduates’ performance in the workforce and eventually will cut off funding for career training programs that fall short.”

Equal opportunities for education are essential, but not if they hurt students more than they help. There’s now significant suspicion that many for-profit institutions fall into the latter camp–University of Phoenix may just be the latest to get in trouble as a result.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post University of Phoenix Under FTC Investigation appeared first on Law Street.

Students affected by one of the largest educational scams in modern years are finally getting some relief. The U.S. Department of Education (DOE) says it will forgive students’ federal student loans on the grounds that Corinthian Colleges Inc. defrauded them after the company’s bankruptcy earlier this year.

A string of reports and lawsuits, including one by California Attorney General Kamala Harris, led to Corinthian’s end. The for-profit school used tactics that enticed students, many with limited education and money, with promises of workplace skills ranging from video game design to nursing. Students left these colleges with nearly worthless degrees and very little knowledge in their fields.

Before its closure, the two decade-old company was one of the biggest for-profit education companies in the United States, operating more than 100 campuses at one point under various names, including Everest, Wyotech, and Heald. Corinthian had campuses throughout North America and Canada. It ceased operations this April, shutting down campuses and selling off others after the Department of Education cut off its loan lifeline and fined Corinthian $30 million for misrepresenting job placement rates. The ending was tragic for many–thousands of students were given a one-day notice when campuses closed, leaving them to wonder if their hard work and credits could be transferred to other institutions to complete their education.

This is a very sensible decision by the DOE that will help thousands of students who were struggling to pay back these loans. But although this may give many students a fresh start, consumer and education groups worry that this loan forgiveness process will be too tedious for most to complete. Students have to individually apply for the loan relief. This process requires legal savvy and documents–including transcripts–that could be difficult to obtain, especially considering that the schools are no longer operating. It is also important for those who apply to know that the relief is only applicable to federal student loans, not the private loans which countless students were reportedly lured into getting. Finance blogger, Alexis Goldstein, criticized the plan stating:

Instead of providing broad debt cancellation to former students of Corinthian Colleges, Inc. the Department decided to require students to jump through extensive loopholes in order to apply for relief.

Although this may give the impression that the Corinthian problem is solved, it is only the beginning. Because federal regulators let the operation run too long, the lost loans may total up to $3.5 billion in taxpayer money.

We’re going to do everything we can to help #CorinthianCollege students, while also protecting taxpayers. http://t.co/FhePt7hD6c

— Arne Duncan (@arneduncan) June 8, 2015

A Huffington Post analysis recently found that nearly half of the schools listed by the Department of Education as “Alternative Education Options” are for-profit institutions owned by corporations that are also under federal investigation for possibly misleading students. The Obama administration is already guaranteeing forgiveness to the 40,000 students who borrowed hundreds of millions in federal loans to enroll at Heald from 2010 on. Forgiving the loans is a great step for the thousands of hard-hit students, but it should also make the government much more watchful of the educational marketplace.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post For-Profit College Scam Victims Get Loan Forgiveness: Will it Be Enough? appeared first on Law Street.

It’s no secret that college education in this country has gotten extremely pricey. For more and more students, the only possible way to gain a higher education is to apply for student loans. Unfortunately, many of the students who take out loans then have a difficult time paying them back. The Department of Education used to employ debt collection companies to track down that money. However, the Department of Education just announced that it will be no longer contracting five of those companies, after they provided inaccurate information to borrowers.

The companies whose contracts are being terminated are Pioneer Credit Recovery, Coast Professional, Enterprise Recovery Systems, National Recoveries, and West Asset Management. According to Bloomberg the reasoning for the decision included findings that:

The companies gave borrowers misleading information about ‘the benefits to the borrowers’ credit report’ and about ‘the waiver of certain collection fees,’ the agency said.

It appears that the Department of Education isn’t going to cut its work off with these five companies overnight. Rather, its planning on “winding down” the contracts and transferring them to other companies.

This is a good public relations move for the Department of Education. The department has long been under fire for working with the debt collection companies. Various watchdogs have accused the Department of Education of turning a blind eye to the companies’ practices. For example, the Government Accountability Office, the part of the U.S. government which investigates and evaluates other departments’ practices, claims that the Department of Education found the debt collectors violated the federal law yet didn’t do anything about it.

However, the five debt collection companies are claiming that they were “blindsided” by the Department of Education’s decision. Pioneer Credit Recovery claimed that it had been told last April that it was complying with various regulations. Pioneer also claimed that the Department of Education had conducted 17 different reviews over the course of 2014, and never brought up any concerns or violations to Pioneer.

This decision comes during the middle of a nationwide discussion on student loans, and the viability of for-profit universities. Earlier this week, a letter written by 15 students who attended the for-profit Corinthian Colleges network was shared around the internet. The so called “Corinthian 15” are asking the Department of Education for loan forgiveness. The letter includes the following:

We trusted that education would lead to a better life. And we trusted you to ensure that the education system in this country would do so. But Corinthian took advantage of our dreams and targeted us to make a profit. You let it happen, and now you cash in.

Each month you force us to make payments into an immoral system that profits from our aspirations.

We paid dearly for degrees that have led to unemployment or to jobs that don’t pay a living wage. We can’t and won’t pay any longer.

It’s a powerful message to the Department of Education, and while the department’s move away from predatory debt collectors is a good thing, it’s just a very small step in the right direction.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Department of Education Dumping Misleading Debt Collectors appeared first on Law Street.

In the past six months, if you were to Google the keywords college rape scandal, a disturbing amount of articles would pop up. Whatever side people stand on for the debate on college rape, every can agree that system is virtually broken. Previous notions of college campuses being an oasis for intellectual development and personal growth have begun to crumble as concerns over the sexual victimization of students are heightened. So the next question is, what do we do about it? Should we address rape culture, universities’ policies on sexual assault, or place all the burden on the individual? So far, it has been a combination of the three–here are all the facts on the college rape epidemic.

UPDATE: July 17, 2014

Statistics

Multiple organizations and government agencies have conducted surveys to gather data on the staggering amount of rapes that occur on college campuses:

Rape

• According to a survey conducted by the National Institute of Justice, one in four college women have survived rape or attempted rape in their lifetime.
• Estimated a college with a population of 10,000 students could experience more than 350 rapes a year.
• Fewer than 5 percent of attempted and completed rape incidents were reported to law enforcement officials. Victims commonly do not want their family and friends to know about the assault. Additionally, victims who do not report their attack, commonly fear of being treated with hostility by the police, that officials will not believe their account of the incident, and retaliation from their assailant.
• 7 percent of college men admitted to attempting rape, and 63 percent of those men admitted to multiple offenses, averaging six rapes each.
• 58 percent of incapacitated rapes and 28 percent of forced rapes took place at a party.
• On average only 12 percent of student victims report the assault to law enforcement.

College Involvement

Schools are suppose to follow ordinances in providing information about sexual assaults that happen on their campus, however that is not always the case:

• Only 37 percent of colleges and universities nationwide reported crime statistics that fully complied with the requirements of the Clery Act.
• 64 percent of schools do not provide new students with sexual assault awareness education.
• Fewer than 2 in 5 schools train campus security personnel to handle sexual assault.
• Only 46 percent of schools provide the option of anonymous reporting.
• Less than 50 percent of schools tell students how they can file criminal charge.

Mishandling by Colleges and Universities

Case Study: Amherst College

In May 2011, an acquaintance and fellow Amherst student raped Angie Epifano. A year after her assault, she published in a school newspaper her account of the attack and the callous treatment she received by college administrators. She wrote that she was questioned if she was really raped, her requests to change dorms and study abroad were denied. Furthermore, she was discouraged from pressing charges, and eventually brought to a psychiatric ward. These events led her to withdraw from Amherst while her alleged attacker graduated with honors.

The schools counseling center told her that,

“We can report your rape as a statistic, you know for records, but I don’t recommend that you go through a disciplinary hearing.”

This is only one example of how the college incompetently treated her.

Her wrenching account prompted other Amherst students and alumni to come forward and announce they, too, had been sexually assaulted at Amherst.

Another incident at Amherst is Trey Malone, a student who committed suicide after he could no longer cope with the sexual assault he endured while at school. His family released his suicide note for publication, where he alludes to Amherst’s incapability to help him,

“What began as an earnest effort to help on the part of Amherst, became an emotionless hand washing. In those places I should’ve received help, I saw none.”

Since Epifano, Malone, and others have stepped forward with their accounts of assault, Amherst has employed new measures to assist students who undergo such traumatic incidents.

Case Study: Occidental College

Students and alumni of Occidental College filed a civil rights complaint with the U.S. Department of Education stating the school failed to protect women from sexual assaults in April 2013. In their complaint, it was stated that they were, “raped, sexually assaulted, battered, harassed or retaliated against for speaking out against sexual violence.”

After the complaint was filed, the college was accused of tracking down students who had used anonymous sexual assault reports. When a student who had used the anonymous report was brought in to the college’s Title IX coordinator to discuss her accusation, she was denied information on how the college had been able to track her down.

Also, Occidental admitted that they failed to report 19 sex crimes to the annual Clery report statistics in recent years.

While the college has implemented new measures to combat sexual misconduct, many find these changes to be superficial and an attempt to salvage their reputation.

Omitting the incidents at other schools does not trivialize the horrific events those victims endured; there regrettably has been too many to thoroughly cover. Schools such as Wesleyan University and Tufts University have also been in the news for sexual assault.

Government Involvement

Department of Education Investigation

On May 1, 2014 the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights released a list of 55 colleges and universities under investigation for potential violations of federal law over the handling of sexual violence and harassment complaints. The Office of Civil Rights compiled this list to create more public awareness and transparency to enforcement work.

The release of the list works to advance a key goal of President Obama’s White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. It is hoped that this will increase discussion among communities about the issue and the best ways to combat assaults.

By having a college or university on the list does not indicated that the institution has violated or is violating Title IX. The schools under investigation will be continuously updated and accessible to the public upon request.

White House Involvement: President Obama

President Obama has taken great measure to combat sexual assault compared to previous administrations. He has publicly spoken out against sexual crimes, bringing to the nation’s forefront how it is an attack to the basic humanity and decency. The president has signed a memorandum creating a task force to respond to campus rapes.

The White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault was created with the objectives of:

• Provide educational institutions with best practices for preventing and responding to rape and sexual assault.
• Build on the federal government’s enforcement efforts to ensure that educational institutions comply fully with their legal obligations.
• Improve transparency of the government’s enforcement activities.
• Increase the public’s awareness of an institution’s track record in addressing rape and sexual assault.
• Enhance coordination among federal agencies to hold schools accountable if they do not confront sexual violence on their campuses.

As of April 3 the task force has received 30 Title IX complaints, equal to the total number of complaints in all of fiscal 2013.

The government also made a website, NotAlone.gov, to track enforcement and provide victims with information.

White House Involvement: 1 is 2 Many Campaign

Developed by Vice President Biden, the 1 is 2 Many Campaign focuses on dating violence and sexual assault suffered by teens and young women. After seeking ideas from students on how to prevent violence on campuses, it was found that an abundant amount of respondents answer was to get men involved.

Biden and Health and Human Services started an “app challenge” that in turn created apps geared toward young people. An example is Circle of 6 that puts a group of friends instantly in touch with each other. This is incase someone is in trouble they are able to send a “come and get me” message, complete with a GPS map to show the exact location.

Legislation: Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013

The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 is federal law that was signed by President Clinton on September 13, 1994. It is a part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. President Obama signed on March 7, 2013 imposes new obligations on colleges and universities under its Campus Violence Elimination Act (SaVE Act) provision. The provision states that, “Most higher education institutions – including community colleges and vocational schools – must educate students, faculty, and staff on the prevention of rape, acquaintance rape, domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.” Under the new requirements, colleges and universities are required to:

1. Report stalking, domestic violence, and dating violence further than the Clery Act already has mandated
2. Accept certain student disciplinary measures
3. Enhance or adopt institutional policies that will address and prevent campus sexual violence

Legislation: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act

Commonly referred to as the Clery Act, the federal statute requires all colleges and universities that participate in federal financial aid programs to keep a daily public crime log provisions, maintain reporting obligations, and have extensive campus security-related provisions.

Legislation: Title IX

Signed into law in 1972 as part of the Education Amendments of 1972, Title IX prohibits schools receiving federal funding to discriminate based on gender. Under Title IX discrimination on the basis of sex can include sexual harassment, rape, and sexual assault.

Student Activism

Students Active for Ending Rape

Started in 2000 at Columbia University students, Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER) battles sexual violence and rape culture by empowering student-led campaigns to improve college sexual assault policies. The organization released a report in April 2013 examining how schools fail to completely address the problem, giving more than 80 percent of college policies a grade C or below, an F to nearly one-quarter, and said one-third don’t fully comply with the Clery Act.

Know Your IX

The mission of Know Your IX is to inform students in the United States of the rights guaranteed to them under Title IX. Survivors and activists who wish to share their expertise of their first-hand experience with violence, the law, and activism built the campaign. The ED ACT NOW campaign is a part of Know Your IX as an advocacy measure to better federal enforcement of Title

End Rape on Campus

Activists a part of End Rape on Campus (EROC) strive to assist individuals who are filling Title IX and Clery complaints. They want to hold schools accountable for the mishandling of sexual wrongdoing.

Of the 55 schools being investigated by the Department of Education, it cannot be ignored that some of the country’s highest ranked institutions make up a significant portion of the list. Why is that? Why are the schools that should be the pinnacle of our education system conducting themselves in such a lowly manner? Is it to preserve the good name of the school, even if that means endangering the very students that give it such a respected reputation? Thankfully students, organizations, and (some) government officials have taken measures towards reform. If the school administration will not mend their ways, then hopefully, newly enacted  legislation and courageous activists will led the charge.

UPDATE: July 17, 2014

Since this post was originally published, more stories have been reported about sexual assault taking place on colleges. In a particularly high-profile case, a freshman named Anna at Hobart and William Smith Colleges was reportedly raped by three football players during a fraternity party. Before this story broke, Hobart and William Smith Colleges was already one of the schools under investigation by the Department of Education.

Compared to the 60 days that are typical of a sexual-assault investigation, the Hobart and William Smith Colleges cleared the accused of all charges after only 12 days. The school’s disciplinary panel was ill equipped to handle this case, lacking tact and omitting evidence such as Anna’s rape kit and medical records. As with many individuals who are assaulted, Anna has been re-victimized by the community, receiving “physical threats and obscenities on her dormitory door, being pushed in the dining hall and asked to leave a fraternity party. Her roommate moved out with no explanation.”

Anna’s story has become all too common. It should not be a regular occurrence for these horrific acts to take place. Colleges need to reform their handling of sexual assaults, and fast.

 Resources

Primary

Amherst Student Newspaper: An Account of Sexual Assault at Amherst College 

Good Men Project: Lead a Good Life, Everyone: Trey Malone’s Suicide Note

U.S. Congress: Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013

U.S. Department of Education: List of Higher Education Institutions with Open Title IX Sexual Violence Investigations

Additional

One in Four USA: Sexual Assault Statistics 

Associated Press: Obama Targets College Sexual Assault Epidemic

National Institute of Justice: The Campus Sexual Assault (CSA) Study Final Report

Medical University of South Carolina: Drug-facilitated, Incapacitated, and Forcible Rape: A National Study 

National Institute of Justice: Sexual Assault on Campus: What Colleges and Universities Are Doing About It

Huffington Post: Occidental College Accused Of Secretly Tracking ‘Anonymous’ Sexual Assault Reports

Huffington Post: USC, Occidental Admit Underreporting Campus Sex Offenses 

Los Angeles Times: Occidental College Settles With Students in Sexual Assault Case

Los Angeles Times: Occidental College Fell Short In Rape Response, Victims Allege

Clery Center for Security on Campus: Summary Of the Jeanne Clery Act

ACLU: Title IX and Sexual Violence in Schools

Campus Save Act: The Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act of 2013

American Council on Education: New Requirements Imposed by the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act

White House Council on Women and Girls: Rape and Sexual Assault: A Renewed Call to Action

Students Active for Ending Rape: Moving Beyond Blue Lights and Buddy Systems: A National Study of Student Anti-Rape Activists

Alex Hill

Alex Hill studied at Virginia Tech majoring in English and Political Science. A native of the Washington, D.C. area, she blames her incessant need to debate and write about politics on her proximity to the nation’s capital.

The post College Rape Crisis: All the Facts on the Rape Epidemic appeared first on Law Street.