Thread regarding Education Management Corporation layoffs

I would say most, but not all of the instructors are safe. Only because they have been squeezed several times already to the breaking point. So I would say no teaching staff is the most vulnerable. It's a top heavy corporation (which is part of their problem) and I dont see that changing any time soon. Look for the jobs at the lowest end of the food chain to be cut first. Management last.

That the root of the problem right there. No one complains about 100,000 degree if its backed up with the same level of education, opportunities and reputation. What EDMC provides is closer to what should be in the 20,000 price range. That is why so many students are upset, they paid for a platinum ring, but turns out its really just plain silver.

One issue is the investors. They get in the way. An example of a private for profit family owned college would be SCAD. Fairly high entrance standards, portfolio required. And it's easily 100k. But no one complains since it's regarded highly and they have a high graduation rate.

Ironically, there is WAY more tax money flowing into EDMC then public universities. But like I said, I went to a private non-profit college, not a public one. The argument that other schools get more support for the government doesn't hold water. Its easy to say it's just the business model that EDMC uses but guess what? Their business model has failed them. Just ask their creditors.

Yeah , that's just not their business model. To pay the bills they rely upon high continuous enrollment. I don't condone their brand, but make no mistake public universities have similar interests. However they have the luxury of tax dollars. The university here stopped giving local cc students priority and started targeting out of state students.

My comparison to a small private non-profit was not a tenured university. Advertizing and admissions was not a huge department, maybe 1 or 2 people. $5,000 to recruiter a student is astronomical, try $500, if that. To be blunt, if its really a good school, you shouldn't have to advertise at all. You should be turning students away because you dont have enough space.

Advising and admissions? Can they be consolidated and can a live face to face person be replaced by an online support system? That'd be the question. As far as management overhead, we spend about, what, 5k to recruit one student? It's all documented on the web. I think running it like a business requires more customer support as well. Not to mention, many of these lower tier students are high maintenance and require student affairs, advising support etc. as far as fewer managers, in my area we have a dean who oversees a number of programs and opds report to her. The assistant program directors manage about 35 faculty and are responsible for day to day communications and issues. Also they work with faculty committees developing training and other initiatives that are outlined each year by the program director and approved by the dean. Remember there is a ton of quality control and micromanagement that ends up having to be done. There are huge numbers of courses running in staggered starts. This is not tenure track university environment. You can't compare.

What about the other side supporting the campuses? Advising,admissions,TOC....The Center?

You know I went to a private non-profit school around the same size as one Ai campus in a big city and it amazes me how much overhead and non-teaching staff they have. For instance, the finance department was just 2 people. That's right I said 2 people for about 2,000 students. The Marking was 1 with an assistant. There was 1 head of each department, but they were required to teach just as many classes as instructors. No one teaches 40 hours a week anyway. There was the President of the school and an ombudsman. That's it. No mangers of mangers. Multiple VPs, assistants VP or all that nonsense. In short, the teach staff was about 80% - 90% of the make up. The Art institutes is almost the opposite, at least 50% maybe 60% are non-teaching staff. In a business world, the teachers would be the billable staff. The rule of thumb is NON-billable staff should be less then 10%. So ironically, the non-profits had the better business model. But then, they relied on the fact that most students were young adults capable of applying for loans on their own and not hand holding them like helicopter parents doing all the work for them.

Art Institute? Foundations got the biggest hit last time. The only other way they could streamline that dept I think would be to merge it into a program, but they haven't wanted to do that Online. I think the number of FT faculty is down as low as it could go, but I can't be sure. They have to maintain a certain number of FT faculty. They already reduced the number of courses for the best adjuncts and brought in the poor performers to not pay health insurance. They could try and get rid of some Program Directors and merge programs like Graphic Design and Interior Design, but again, one has to think about accreditation and what they look like. Assistant Program Directors? They culled those last time. With so many faculty, they do need some people to manage issues and performance and I suppose they could continue to increase manager workload. Another thing they might continue with is to lay people off and rehire into another position that pays 10k less and has added teaching workload with no department responsibilities. But to answer your question one would have to see the program numbers. Does Kitchen and Bath and Interior Design really bring in the money like Photo does? How is Media Arts and Animation doing? Sometimes they try and cut across the board, other times they cut big pieces of fat, right? And in this case, they might be looking at some restructuring that creates a different playing field. Keep in mind that they are targeting high schoolers, and also offering non- degree mini courses, and also grants to cut costs - So popular programs would be safer than ones losing ground. Can they reduce the number of both FT and PT teachers by increasing course caps and course loads? Say, 3 courses a session instead of 2? I don't know. They just raised caps from 18 to 20. There is another initiative as well that could radically change the look of the classroom, and both 5 week and 12 week options are being looked at. I can tell you one thing, no one is sitting around waiting for things top happen with nothing to do. There is a lot going on in Online in terms of planning and implementation.