Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

America's worst colleges

The Washington Monthly, a tiny bastion of high-grade journalism in the nation's capital, tries every year to kill the celebratory buzz greeting the latest "America's Best Colleges" list from U.S. News & World Report. This time, the monthly has outdone itself with what might be called the anti-U.S. News list, 50 carefully ranked colleges that have to be worst nightmare of any student who aspires to deep learning and careful career preparation.

Here are the bottom 10, ranked by their six-year graduation rates, including one school not far from my home:

  1. Southern University at New Orleans, La. 4.98 perercent
  2. .
  3. Allen University, S.C. 6.09
  4. Martin University, Ind. 6.67
  5. Bellevue University, Neb. 6.99
  6. Calumet College of Saint Joseph, Ind. 7.14
  7. Baker College of Auburn Hills, Mich. 7.14
  8. Visible School--Music and Worships Arts College, Ind. 7.50
  9. University of the District of Columbia, D.C. 7.94
  10. Saint Augustine's College, N.C. 8.24
  11. Nyack College, N.Y. 7.94

The article accompanying the list, by Education Sector policy analyst Ben Miller and my former Washington Post colleague Phuong Ly, focuses on the 23rd ranked college on the list, Chicago State University (12.79 percent graduation rate) and a dissatisfied former student, Nestor Curiel:

"With its tree-lined campus and gleaming new steel and glass convocation center, Chicago State certainly looked impressive. But within his first month there, Nestor wanted to leave. Advisers in the engineering department seemed clueless about guiding him to the right courses, insisting that if he wanted to take programming he first needed to enroll in a computer class that showed students how to turn on a monitor and operate a mouse. (Nestor required no such training.) The library boasted a robot that retrieved books, but Nestor would have preferred that it simply stay open past eight p.m., since class sometimes ended at nine p.m. or later, leaving him without a useful place to study or do research before going home. Trash littered the classrooms and grounds, and during class, many of the students would simply carry on conversations among themselves and ignore the instructors — or even talk back to them. Nestor was appalled. 'It was like high school, but I was paying for it,' he says."

Many people reading that will say: What do they expect? Such colleges admit mostly low-income students who lack the preparation to get into well-run colleges. It is hard to teach them. A low graduation rate comes with the territory.

Gotcha, says the monthly. Its springs a trap for such pessimists with a second list of eight colleges that have demographic characteristics nearly identical to Chicago State's, but graduation rates three or four times higher.

Chicago State has 5,211 students. Of them, 92.3 percent are black or Hispanic and 66.7 percent receive federal Pell Grants given to low-income students. They enter the college with an average high school grade point average of 2.83 and an average SAT of 850 on a 1600 point scale. Among the colleges with similar students but much better graduation rates are Albany State, Clark Atlanta and Savannah State in Georgia, North Carolina Central and Winston-Salem State in North Carolina, Jackson State and Alcorn State in Mississippi and Virginia State in Virginia.

North Carolina Central University, for instance, has 5,978 students, 87 percent of them black or Hispanic and 63.6 percent receiving Pell grants. In high school they had an average GPA of 2.85 and an average SAT of 845. But NCCU's six-year graduation rate is 47.9 percent. The difference, Miller and Ly say, is an administration devoted to helping, not frustrating, the students, particularly those newly arrived.

"Students entering NCCU are told from the start that they are expected to have a goal of graduating in four years. The University College keeps students together in groups and assigns them advisers who must approve all major academic decisions and meet with students frequently. NCCU students even sign a contract upon arriving, a document that lays out the goals of what they are going to accomplish. If they start to struggle, they sign an additional contract that commits them to even closer monitoring. Above all, what drives places like NCCU is a culture of experimentation and data collection. The administrators track students, and they track results. If something works, they keep doing it. If it doesn’t, they try something else."

The writers have interesting explanations for why the failings of colleges such as Chicago State, as well as the successes of colleges like NCCU, are so little known in our college-crazy country. Most of the people who run the country, as well as those of us who write articles about colleges, never got near such schools. Our high school counselors, if they knew anything about such schools, would be unwilling to mention them except to a few low-income kids who couldn't get in anywhere else.

This is in contrast to the attention we pay to K-12 schools with many low-income students. I visit and write about urban schools, particularly high schools, quite frequently. Yet even though I often drive past the University of the District of Columbia, I can't recall ever going inside. The Post's higher education reporters do a much better job covering that school, but those stories still don't get a lot of attention.

"The public’s blindness to mass failure in higher education is bolstered by chronological happenstance: students move from high school to college at the same time that they reach the legal age of majority," Miller and Ly say. "As a result, without much thought, we’ve applied a binary mindset to education: elementary and secondary students are children; if they fail, it’s the fault of the schools. College students are adults; if they fail, it’s the fault of the students. Of course, this makes little sense."

Changing a college such as UDC into a college like NCCU is likely to be even more difficult than raising the level of the urban high schools. But I am glad the monthly took the time and trouble to show that such institutions of higher education exist. Their futures are not as hopeless as their rock-bottom graduation rates might suggest.

Read Jay's blog every day, and follow all of The Post's Education coverage on Twitter, Facebook and our Education Web page.

By Jay Mathews  | August 27, 2010; 5:30 AM ET
Categories:  Trends  | Tags:  50 colleges with the lowest graduation rates, Chicago State same demographics as NCCU, Washington Monthly list, but much worse results  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Please Mr. President, don't speak on school time
Next: Forget about the achievement gap


What a sad commentary. Other schools such as Harvard also have a trash problem. It centers on the continual leftist doctrine taught to the students.

Posted by: richard36 | August 27, 2010 8:33 AM | Report abuse

Richard, that comment made little sense.

Posted by: Cavan9 | August 27, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

Hey, Rico36, mon.

Why don't you question your own rightist doctrine for a while? Who is making money off the movement? Why is Fox a foreign-owned media entity? Who died and made Glenn Beck God?

Posted by: bs2004 | August 27, 2010 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Graduation rates seem an odd way to rank schools. Isn't it possible that the difference in graduation rates between two equally lousy schools is that one of them is simply less demanding in grading -- and graduating -- its students?

For a contrary example, the Navy Seals training program is notoriously rigorous PRECISELY BECAUSE the success rate is so low.

The real measure of these schools is the educational attainment level of its students upon graduation. It would be interesting if all college graduates were required to take standardized tests to graduate -- or to make the transition from their second to third years.

Until that happens, graduation rates are nearly meaningless as a measure of quality.

Posted by: Meridian1 | August 27, 2010 9:24 AM | Report abuse

It's interesting that Nyack College, which is on this list, is making a big push in to the DC area. They have posters up all over the Metro.

Posted by: hoos3014 | August 27, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

Using graduation rates is a limited, but meaningful metric. I really don't expect these schools to graduate most of their students in four years because the students face many challenges. He does make the valid point that other schools (NCCU) achieve much higher graduation rates by really working hard.

Posted by: dunnhomer | August 27, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Saint Augustine’s College is incorrectly listed in The Washington Monthly report, “2010 College Dropout Factories,” as having an 8 percent graduation rate. This is a direct result of incorrect IPEDS (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System) data submitted for the 2003 graduation cohort. As you will see in the link to our IPEDS data, the six-year graduation rate is 48 percent.

Posted by: Saint_Augustines_College | August 27, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

The list is certainly a good start of schools for students to stay away from. I know that here are many private high schools with high rates of 'graduation' that are often used as alternatives to regular and special education placements. However these schools have very low standards, grade inflation and do a lot of warm fuzzy stuff to make the parents feel good about spending big bucks and snapping a few pictures as their kids can walk across a stage wearing a cap and gown,but have very little in the way of education. I bet there are lots of colleges and universities that ,in this economy ,are willing to take $$$$ and not really do much in the way of real education.

Posted by: 10bestfan | August 27, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Where does this front for the Kaplan Education scam get the nerve to criticize other schools? How many of the schools discussed in the article are on the Senate's top violators list as is the WPO owned Kaplan schools? How many were turned down by California because their courses sucked? How many are currently being investigated by the Ed. Department and the DOJ? What a self serving trash news generator the Washington Post has tuned out to be. The older generations of Graham's must be spinning in their graves!

Posted by: Youhavegottobekidding1 | August 27, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

For a contrary example, the Navy Seals training program is notoriously rigorous PRECISELY BECAUSE the success rate is so low.

Posted by: Meridian1 | August 27, 2010 9:24 AM
Meridian1, your sentence made me ROFLOL. I think what you meant to write is: "For a contrary example, the Navy Seals's success rate with their training program is so low PRECISELY BECAUSE it is notoriously rigorous." You had it reversed!! Did you attend (but not graduate) Bellevue University?

Posted by: rpcv84 | August 27, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Measuring success of an institution by a six-year graduation rate is biased in favor of institutions with traditional student populations. The University of the District of Columbia has a largely part-time adult working population. The important statistic should be - not how many of these individuals finish in six years, but instead how many do successful finish.

Posted by: asflowers | August 27, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

First, I'd rather know where Chicago State ranks in the distribution of colleges with similar student characteristics than know that somewhere in this country there are a few colleges that do better.

More it really a good use of societal resources to be having people who, judging by their SAT score, are of below-average IQ spending 4-7 years of their young adulthood trying to get a 4-year degree?

Posted by: qaz1231 | August 27, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Comrades: This article is SO racist. Such pap is intolerable.

Posted by: rep15 | August 27, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

What I want to know is how nearly every column in every newspaper is answered first, and within about 5 minutes by some right-wing nutcase?

Even something that's not particularly political, like bad colleges, or puppies, becomes a soapbox to rail against the bi-coastal elitist whatevers.

It's like back in the day when people calling them Trotskyites or neo-Marxists made going to the dentist an issue of class struggle.

Are these guys on somebody's payroll? For real, what explains this?

Myself, I imagine legions of hairy older guys in their white t-shirts and underwear sitting at the kitchen table in front of a laptop, black coffee and prune juice. Not a very anti-establishment insurgent image. Just an angry, constipated one.

Are they unemployed? On disability? Recently mugged by a hippie? Multitasking slick silicon valley business mavens? Who are you people?!

Posted by: itstrue | August 27, 2010 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Maybe UDC poor ranking is a reflection of the ineffective DC government.

Posted by: trumeau | August 27, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

The funny thing is, places like Bellevue University acknowledge and know what they are, that are a university geared toward non-traditional students, and have no ambition about competition with a traditional school, let alone a comprehensive state research university. The one on this list that should be red faced by this is UDC. The Land Grant flag-bearing university for the District.

Posted by: NovaMike | August 27, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

UDC's problems are legion, but it's a commuter school unlike NCCU, and enrolls non-traditional students, who often have jobs, kids, etc. I've seen this argument used with other, academically more solid universities like Wayne State that mostly enroll commuters and get many non-traditional students. It's just stupid, but typical of WaPo's education reporting which seems to suffer from an inability to make the simplest conclusions about data, much like all the hysteria about the tiniest change in test scores--although that may be a refelection of WaPo's Kaplan cash cow.

Posted by: thebuckguy | August 27, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Sweet Jesus, you didn't bury the lede, you omitted it altogether. The list of ten worst colleges consists of nine non-entities and one publicly funded state university: U.D.C. Is this another example of WaPo whistling past the graveyard? Nothing to see here, folks, just move along.

Posted by: Rob_ | August 27, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

As with the LA Times piece earlier this week, this article demonstrates absolutely horrid research technique, making the conclusions meaningless. To take the simplest example, comparing Chicago State to NCCU is only a "trap" if one is as ignorant authors. The comparison of ONLY race and SAT scores as a comparison appears to be intentionally deceitful.
NCCU is a HBCU that serves a traditional college-age population at a largely residential campus in a college town, Durham, NC. They even play Duke in football. Over 90% of freshmen live in campus housing, and 40% of all students (one can guess that many upper-classmen move to technically “off-campus” housing, but remain full-time residential students). Like most residential colleges, one should assume that at least 75-80% of its students are full-time, meaning their 6-year graduation rate should be high, since most students are expected to graduate in 4 years.
Chicago State, on the other hand, is a commuter school in a large urban area. Over 50% of its students are over 25 and it provides dorm space for only 340 of its more than 7,000 students. It is unlikely this student population is taking a full course load that would be necessary to graduate in 4 years. In fact, it is likely that many if not most of its students go there with the specific intent to either graduate in more than 6 years, or they are using Chicago State as a local community college, hoping to transfer their credits to another, more traditional University.
I don’t think the authors intended to compare apples to oranges. They where comparing apples to red and green bell peppers; hoping that the similarity in color would distract us from noticing that they are very different below the surface.

By the way, why not more coverage of the federal investigaion of proprietary "colleges" like Kaplan? That's where the real rip-off is.

Posted by: mcstowy | August 27, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

University of Houston-Downtown is mostly commuter students who are part time. A lot of students might take a course here or there to fulfill a particular need, but without intending to use it towards a degree. Some take a few courses because it is convenient and transfer the credits elsewhere. Many take a few courses and then transfer to the larger University of Houston campus. Some are U of H students who take a course or two at the downtown campus because they want to study with a specific professor, and there are some excellent ones downtown.

It makes me wonder if the same lame reasoning was used to compile the entire list.

Posted by: aed3 | August 27, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Like Meridian1 and other wise posters here, I considered the possibility that some colleges dumbed their grad requirements. If anyone finds any proof of this, let us know. My thought was--these are all accredited institutions, and that is a very big difference in graduation rates, so hard to see it is the result of different standards.

FYI, the monthly has told Saint Augustines College that it stands by its data. If it finds it has erred on any of this, I will post a correction. If both sides say they are right, i will post that too. The nature of grad rate figures, as many of you have said, is complicated and worth further discussion.

Posted by: Jay Mathews | August 27, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

"For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, clean, and wrong."                                                          --H. L. Mencken

Posted by: mcstowy | August 27, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Add University of Maryland at College Park to the list of worst schools. The instructor to student ratio is very low. Teaching assistants often speak English as a second language and are difficult to understand. Instuctors have little sympathy for older working adults who need more flexibility. Some departments such as Physics are old and lack modernization. Meanwhile, the business department is modern and well equipped. A battalion of parasitic parking enforcement clerks constantly patrol the student parking lots doling out tickets - ensuring that the University pulls in a millions per year in parking fines. I graduated despite these things but I will NEVER send my children there.

Posted by: spam1test | August 27, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

It seems to me that there are two important infrastructures that make a college "good" or "not-so-good"
One structure is the strength and unity of the faculty; their "charism to teach". The next infrastructure is the strength of the knowledge and wisdom imparted in the classrooms. If either of these two infrastructures are soft or missing, then the college itself will never be top notch no matter how many grants or money is poured into it.

Posted by: elizabethtebo | August 27, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Meridian1: while your assumption is logical (it would seem that colleges with higher graduation rates might simply be easier schools from which to graduate), you'll soon find that schools with higher academic reputations (I mean no elitism here) just about always have the highest graduation rates. Take the Ivy league--I'm pretty sure all of those schools have graduation rates above 90%.

Posted by: KBurchfiel | August 27, 2010 11:57 PM | Report abuse

Collegiate graduation rates based on IPEDS data are deeply flawed. Transfer students do not count, which means that the majority of undergraduates who transfer at least once are considered to be dropouts even though most do graduate, often in four years. I have written several articles on this topic, see:



The latter is a brief commentary on the challenges that many young women from low income backgrounds face in starting college. At Trinity we certainly do everything possible to ensure student success. Three years ago we completely revamped our first year experience program and general education curriculum to focus on skills-building in critical reading, writing and math. These are the basic skills that our urban schools have failed to teach. The revamping of our programs cost in excess of $1 million --- it's expensive to remediate the failures of lower education. We have hired many more reading and math specialists. We have 'intrusive advising' which means we seek students out who are failing or not going to class. We now track required attendance. It's hugely labor intensive and expensive, but we are now beginning to see tremendous success with a 90% return rate from last spring to this fall and significantly better performance in upper division classes.

Posted by: TrinityPresident | August 28, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Good article, Jay.

Posted by: lacy41 | August 28, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

A number of issues are raised by this article. I think it would be appropriate for the Post or other news group to do an indepth investigation of the many issues raised. It is sad to see that UDC has such a low graduation rate, but there could be logical explanations. Why not track down some students, graduates, dropouts and see what they think and have done. The comments by the student from Chicago State were very interesting. Talking to faculty and students could be very interesting.

Posted by: FranJane | August 28, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

There is an aspect of District of Columbia law that makes if very difficult for UDC to develop into a better institution. The District allows District residents to attend any state school in the country and to pay in-state tuition rates while they are there. The District pays the difference between the in-state and out-of-state rates for those students.

The high school grads who are most likely to succeed in college often choose to go elsewhere. I worked with two people, both lawyers, who took advantage of this law. One sent one of his children to the University of Michigan and the other to the University of Colorado. The other person sent his child to the University of Charleston. For each of these students, the parents paid the in-state tuition rate, and the District picked up the difference between that and the out-of-state rate.

District law drastically impacts on the students who go to UDC, encouraging many of the most likely to succeed to go elsewhere. It may reduce to financial resources available to UDC and it negatively impacts on District resident demands for improvements at UDC. Why demand a better UDC when you can send your children to college in Michigan, Colorado, South Carolina, or any other state in the country?

Posted by: esch | August 28, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

My thanks to Trinity President Pat for that very helpful analysis of IPEDS, and thanks also to lacy41.

Posted by: jaymathews | August 28, 2010 3:44 PM | Report abuse

As a College Counselor, I find this information very valuable. College Navigator has all of the retention data broken out in an easy-to-read format, but it would be extremely helpful to consolidate this into a customizable report.

Does anyone know how to pull a report of retention rates for schools in a certain geographical region? The only reports I have found are the general averages.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Posted by: toandthrough | August 30, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Your recent article, “Class Struggle,” reporting on our nation’s 10 “worst” colleges contains unfortunate misinformation about Nyack College. Data seems to have been extracted from DC’s Washington Monthly, which also circulated erroneous “facts.”

I’m taking the liberty of stating some corrections in hope that the courtesy of a retraction will be extended to us as it was for another institution of higher education.

• The IPEDS data on the Nyack College graduation rate for the 2002 cohort indicates an overall graduation rate of 47%. This graduation rate is commendable given that over 55% of Nyack’s students are PELL-eligible, indicating that a majority of Nyack’s students are in the lower rung of the nation’s socio-economic ladder.

• College graduation rates are directly tied to family income, as you may be aware. Nyack College, with pride and intention advocates for educational access. We are one of a few colleges in the nation that accepts low-income students and graduates them at remarkable rates. Additionally, we invest more than $2 million annually to help students with educational deficits that resulted from them being in an underserved educational environment.

• Because low-income students are the emerging demographic of our nation’s college-bound student population, it would seem imperative that more colleges would commit to graduating an empowered and equipped American workforce. As a part of our educational access strategy, we keep our tuition below $20,000 a year so that students can actually afford a college education.

• Nyack’s story is a unique one. We are one of the most diverse colleges in the nation: 67% of our student body is black, Hispanic, or Asian-American. In addition, Nyack College has one of the most diverse faculties anywhere in the nation with over 42% non-white faculty members with 72% of the faculty holding earned terminal degrees (as of fall 2010).

• Nyack’s degree programs have earned specialized, professional accreditations in several disciplines including the prestigious National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), the Council for Social Work Education (CSWE), and the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM).

It is because of our more than 128 years of academic excellence, global engagement, intentional diversity, personal transformation, and social relevance, that we currently serve more than 3,000 students on campuses in New York; Washington, DC; and San Juan, Puerto Rico and the 26,000 alumni employed in more than 74 nations.

In the interest of responsible and fair reporting, we look forward to hearing from you.


Deborah Walker
Director of Publications & Media Relations
Dr. David F. Turk
Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs
Nyack College

Posted by: DeborahWalker1 | August 30, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

My thanks to Trinity President Pat for that very helpful analysis of IPEDS, and thanks also to lacy41.

Posted by: jaymathews

So Jay, are you ready to walk back from this ill-informed article? Or are you just going to pretend it didn't happen.

Posted by: mcstowy | August 31, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

I'm sorry but I just read the Washington Post article and the author is ill informed. Comparing only race, grad rates and SAT scores makes these numbers useless. I am a NCCU 2008 graduate that works for the Feds in DC. UDC is a commuter school unlike NCCU. Most UDC students are not going to graduate in 4-6 years due to it being a commuter/part-time student school (just like Chicago State). NCCU is a traditional college in a college town where most students attend full-time.

AND this article seemed to underhandedly bash NCCU's accreditations which are on par with many other more "popular" HBCU's and non-HBCU's (i.e. the Business school = AACSB). ADDITIONALLY, the incoming freshman SAT and GPA stats for NCCU in the article were off a little. The incoming freshman class has an average GPA of 3.0 this year.

I could go on but I think you get my point.

Posted by: victhegenius | August 31, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

For more than 140 years, Chicago State University (CSU) has expanded access to higher education for students from traditionally underrepresented populations. We are proud of the role we play in their career and professional development.
CSU serves a unique and important demographic of students who do not reflect the traditional college student population. Seventy-four percent of our students are transfer students, part-time students, or those pursuing graduate studies. More than half of our undergraduates are over the age of 25. Nearly 70 percent of our students have children, and a large number have full time jobs. In 2008, CSU enrolled nearly one-third of all students of African descent attending Illinois public universities, and 10.5 percent of all degrees awarded to black males attending Illinois public universities were from CSU.

Many of our students start, and then stop their education to earn money or deal with a family issue, and then start back up again. To indicate that only 13 percent of CSU’s students graduate after six years without providing appropriate context is very misleading. The formula used to calculate this statistic is based ONLY on the number of first-time full-time freshmen – a segment that makes up around 10 percent of CSU’s fall-term undergraduate student population.
The former Chicago State student profiled in the Washington Monthly article about colleges who serve low-income and minority students is a perfect example of missing the context. He started at Chicago State in 2007 and left two years later, not “dropping out” but having completed our two-year pre-engineering program. The program structure would not have allowed him to stay longer than two years in this program, and he indeed transferred to complete his degree at UIC where many of our pre-engineering students transfer.

It is unfortunate that those reporters never visited our campus because they would have found, since our new president, Dr. Wayne Watson, arrived on campus last October, we have already begun a significant process redesign and change management effort and are determined to ensure that quality education and responsible, transparent fiscal stewardship are the foundation of everything we do. While Chicago State has had a challenging past, the very issues the student faced in this article are among the first where we have already implemented powerful change. Some of these changes include extending the hours in our library to midnight, adding hours to the student union and gym, streamlining our registration procedures and placing textbooks on reserve in our library for use by students who can’t afford book fees.

Today’s Chicago State University is about dedicated staff and faculty, committed to providing a supportive, student-focused environment. The success of our university should be judged by our graduates’ academic achievement and lifelong success, rather than outdated metrics.

Felicia Horton
CSU University Relations

Posted by: FeliciaHortonCSUUniversityRelations | September 1, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

I was, and am again, a student at Nyack College. I attended the school in the early 1980s but instead of graduating I co-founded a business in New York City with one of my classmates that generated over one hundred million dollars and employed hundreds of people over its twenty-year run. (Now, even if you had your facts straight, explain to me again the importance of those graduation rates?)

I created a second business in the late 1990s. And after another great run that was cut short by the events of 9/11 I have returned to Nyack College to finish my education. I could not have accomplished what I have without the learning I received at Nyack College back in the 1980s. And the school is proving to be a great place to spend a recession.

I am now part of a small but energized cohort at the college. All members of our group are determined to graduate even though we have, in many cases, started, are in the middle or, or have even concluded careers.

I am also personal friends with some of the officers of the school and they were as shocked as I was to see such a glaring error in the Washington Post. This is the Washington Post isn't it--where facts are checked? My friends at the college have accomplished great things at the school and have changed many lives for the better--mine included. They provide a truly great education and they are in a leadership position in graduation rates relative to their mission and the PELL-eligble group they attract. And they are much nicer people than I am. So I'll put it this way: WP, check yourself. Your lack of credibility is showing.

Posted by: monkhead | September 1, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company