Or is the word “intentional”?
The Department of Education has acknowledged using flawed data in a study on the impact of race on student loan repayment rates, having omitted black students from its calculation. The analysis was conducted during the debate over gainful employment regulations, in response to complaints that the rules would hurt colleges that enroll relatively high percentages of minority students.
[…]
The Obama administration designed the federal rules in an attempt to ensure that most programs at for-profit colleges and certificate and vocational programs at nonprofit institutions prepare students for “gainful employment.” For programs to be eligible for federal financial aid, they must adhere to benchmarks related to student loan repayment and debt-to-income ratios.
The original analysis was included in the introduction section of the final rules, which were issued last June. It asserted that the “percentage of the students that are members of a minority group explains 1 percent of the total variance in repayment rates” at for-profit institutions. The low figure, the department concluded at the time, meant the racial composition of students was not a statistically significant contributor to how an institution stacks up on loan repayments. The percentage of lower-income students an institution enrolled was a better measure.
But by failing to count black students, the study understated the impact of race: the actual variance at for-profits is 20 percent over all, and 31 percent for four-year institutions, the department said in the December filing.
Via Instapundit
Convenient truth.
The most important thing I learned in Statistics class is that if you don’t like the results change the parameters to get the required results. Looks like Obama learned this lesson well.
It has been statistically proven that statistics don’t prove a thing.
Related: UBC to add “life experience” (read “race”) to its undergrad entrance “criteria”. What could possibly go wrong?
@nick
I read the article and I’m not seeing anything about “race”, but it is relevant to a lot of American colleges and universities who are trying to get more home schooled students. They are even sending out scouts to find more home schooled students.
Knacker@1:36:
No; but you would not expect an instrument designed to meet racial quotas to be identified as such, would you? In case that sounds too much like a conspiracy theory, ask what else could they mean by “life experience” when the new criterion is aimed at increased diversity (Hark, the Herald Angels sing!) in the student body? Are they looking to take in more plumbers; left-handed dwarves; anorexics?
Obamam re-writes the script for “An Inconvenient Truth”
The first thing I learned the first night in my first statistics class was that statistics can be manipulated to prove anything the presenter wants to prove. We have had a lot of evidence of this manipulation in many areas of our lives for decades now.
Obviously,the Dept. of Education thought that everyone had been educated by them and this litle ‘mistake’ would not be noticed.
How can you possibly justify this nonsense? It’s like doing a study on inner-city crime but not counting theft as a crime. Someone should join the unemployed.
This is not about manipulation of statistics. It is fraud.
Someone paid for a study,and they did not receive that study based on the information that was available.
The question that needs to be answered is ” Is there one guilty party,or are there two?”
Hardly any change at all(sarcasm).
From, “It asserted that the “percentage of the students that are members of a minority group explains 1 percent of the total variance in repayment rates” at for-profit institutions.”
To, “the actual variance at for-profits is 20 percent over all.”
Just by including black students, imagine that.
HEY. I am a black student,and I have not,nor will not pay back any loans from the honkies to further my edjumakation!!! You owe me,whitie.Rev Jackson,etal say so!! (Damn…channeling a leftard again).
When you have to leave somebody out of your count to “prove” your point,you should know your point is screwed!!So maybe I am hoping for to much.
“But by failing to count black students, the study understated the impact of race: the actual variance at for-profits is 20 percent over all, and 31 percent for four-year institutions, the department said in the December filing.”
I am not sure what the message is, but is this something to do with that black students don’t pay back their loans?
I ams entitled to ma entitlements
Using the data for all other races(as deemed to be minorities within the study), in comparison to whatever yardstick they are using, the variance on “minorities” paying back student loans is about 1%, but, when you add black students to the equation, the variance for “minorities” changes to 20%.
Want to bet that Asians(by % of student population) are holding up the high end of the repayment curve?
The old saying goes “There are lies, damn lies, and statistics”. That being said, I am sorry for the students who have been suckered into serious student loans to finance college programs that have no real hope of leading to jobs. It’s a vulnerable age, that, coming out of high school or even a few years down the line having done the dead-end jobs and searching for a future. You’re all to easily led by an ‘expert’ who assures you that, yes, the diploma or degree of your dreams will lead you to a mega-bucks job down the line.
Our family has been fortunate: most did not require outside loans, and those student loans which were required have led to decent jobs. However, the paying-back isn’t fun; there are so much ‘better’ ways to spend one’s wages. That being said, we went through the ‘I think I’d like acting’ with the simple response ‘and how do you plan to feed yourself’.
A major issue is the emphasis on one getting a ‘degree’ rather than a ‘diploma’. Too many kids with the potential for doing really good hands-on work are suckered into going the degree route. Better a tradesperson, licensed practical nurse, etc., than an overeducated kid with a degree in nothing much.
“The Department of Education has acknowledged using flawed data in a study on the impact of race on student loan repayment rates, having omitted black students from its calculation. The analysis was conducted during the debate over gainful employment regulations, in response to complaints that the rules would hurt colleges that enroll relatively high percentages of minority students.”
If I may hazard a guess, the DoE arranged this statistical farce to avoid revealing how harshly the American Education Establishment has RIPPED OFF black kids and their parents. When you see a variance that large, it indicates a systemic failure of truly mammoth proportions. Also systemic racism, albeit of a reverse nature. Passing grades but unable to get and keep a job indicates the -grades- are wrong, not the entire rest of society.
Either that or you have to assume that black kids are 20% more unemployable than all others based on race alone, which I flat out don’t believe. For one thing it contradicts employment numbers from other sources as recent as 2007. Admittedly kids aren’t doing well since 2008, but that’s true of all races.
At some point we are all going to admit the average degree isn’t worth the paper its printed on, and corrective action will follow. As in, Mum and Dad ain’t going to spring for college no matter what the high school guidance counselor says.