i'm a student at art institute san diego and heard three girls in hallway talk about worker marco? being difficult and stupid in meeting for not following orders from management about what to say to students. they stay open cause they train employees to lie. yup employee drinkin ai kool-aid alright or they get fired.
16 replies (most recent on top)
I worked at Ai for almost 12 years! That's quite a lot of time. I worked in financial aid for about 2.5 of those, admissions for the remainder. I hated my job. I hated Ai. I hated the management. But I never left. I never left (until layoffs in 2012) because I liked my paycheck. In hindsight, though, I was no better than the management I was hating. I didn't care about doing a good job; I cared about looking like I was doing a good job so I could keep my check. I never lied to students, and I know many (most, in fact) ADAs who had never lied to students. But I lied to my boss all the time. We all did. Acting like we were working when we were complaining. I now have my own small (SMALL!) business and I see it from the other side. You want your employees lying to you? Getting full pay for half work? I don't. I should have quit. And because I hadn't, I was no better than the management. If you hate your job, fill your day with complaining to your coworkers, then quit! You want your check, then earn it. Pretty simple. You can't get down with the directives of your management, you can't get on board with students spending a LOT of money to attend school there? Then quit. Simple.
A lie by omission of fact is still a lie
The truth.
What should be required for a college to tell a student?
I know people who work in admissions now. You don't want to admit it's still happening because you have created a narritive that makes it possible to continue getting paid. There are enrollment targets. You are expected to recruit unqualified candidates, you don't have enough leads to do otherwise. You are expected to make 100, 200, 300 dials per day, you have a misleading job title and you are not providing candidates with all the information they need to make an informed decision about their education. People stay on the phone because of what you don't say, like most people who enroll don't graduate, default rates are through the roof, the bulk of the faculty are adjuncts, very irritated adjuncts, several campuses are in teachout, several more are at risk of losing accredidation and the majority of majors fail gainful employment standards. C'mon. Who do you think you're fooling?
What's the bad behavior that's going on in back rooms? We're so regulated right now you can't approach things like you're talking about. This b---s--- narrative that the students don't make the choice is ridiculous. We can't force anyone to stay on the phone, they donut because they want to. Don't delude yourself into anything else at this point. In the past yes, now no.
Bottom line I worked for profit admissions pre and post settlement, back in the day cash was used as an incentive, after that, fear was used to get people to recruit students. This will always go on in for profits, they are for profits, numbers must be hit by each producer and team. The only difference between now and then is this isn't done out in the open where federal regulators can see but it's happening. There are very few things I'm sure about in this lifetime, but I'm sure about this. I worked in the field for too many years to believe anything different. Also if you're in it and still buying the story about student choice and success you are delusional, justifying bad behavior and rationalizing to keep getting paid. And not that much anymore.
That's correct. Something similar would be majoring in history or English lit at a state school. No jobs or career outlook but people are adults and do what they want to.
From the read of this threads it sounds like both management at all level and employees are speaking their mind about this. From the original thread I can assume that the employees are from AISD. As a member of the EC committee and upper management, from the past, I can honestly say that some recent practices has been against DOE requirements and some has been. The facts that professors has to complain about a list that was published back in 2016 to be announced to students during their evening classes, that's not following DOE rules and it shows that EDMC was in fact trying to save students for their own personal gains.
Regarding the whole Marco situation, it reads to me like he felt he was doing the right thing. Not the wrong. How many ADAs still go into the break room or go to lunch together and bad mouth their management? I'm sure it still goes on how managers don't know what they are doing and it could've been handle this way instead of that way. Blah, blah blah.
The ADA can not talk someone out of going into a program like Media arts even if there are no jobs. The students going into that program do not live in reality. They don't go into the program for jobs and they stay in because they can hangout with like minded game nerds. I don't think the majority would even read something sent to them about GE.
At one time they were absolouey trained like that. EDMC and the industry was punished and changed what they can say. If the step out of line from a legal standpoint they are fired.
The court ruling did in fact prove that EDMC used predatory recruiting tactics, EDMC settled rather than that be the tale of the tape. To say that they are not trained like that is not entirely true because of the past and what still is trained to in a round about way. However things are much different now than in the past.
Marco, probably got fired for a legit reason, not for not lying as breaking a settlement with the DOE and DOJ would be counter intuitive.
That's spot on. You guys were asking about training. Once on the floor some people do the wrong things and eventually get fired for compliance.
@LNFQPhG-1lho - I'm assuming you drink about 5-6 glasses a day of that Kool Aid but in fact it's more than that. The court can say one thing and then the company comes up with new ways to, so call, "encourage" employees. The good employees recruits there right students while the employees who just wants to collect a paycheck recruits anyone who can see and walk.
Excuse me? That's not how ADA's are trained and you know it. This has also been proven in court so save your alternative facts. We're not listening.
So what did they say about being trained? We are trained to have a conversation that builds a relationship while uncovering why a student wants to go to school. If they don't want to we are trained to let them go, if they do want to we are trained to help them enroll.
The weird narrative of forcing someone to do something over the phone is confusing to say the least.
sweeeeeet Kool-aide!