The Monroe College grad wants the $70,000 she spent on tuition because she hasn't found gainful employment since earning her bachelor's degree in April, according to a suit filed in Bronx Supreme Court on July 24.
If I'm reading the article correctly (and the journalist got the facts correct), Trina Thompson is suing Monroe College because they did not provide employment assistance as advertised.
Two issues make this troublesome:
- Suing is generally a bad idea. We've become all too quick to go to the courts to settle our differences. It is not clear if Miss Thompson attempted to reconcile the problem on her own. Miss Thompson may be labeled "sue happy" and if she is, she's doomed her future success (justifiably).
- The article's title (and the comments) make it appear that Miss Thompson is suing because she didn't feel her education was up to snuff, but that doesn't appear to be the issue on which she is basing her lawsuit. Her issue seems to be that Monroe College made promises regarding employment assistance:
The information-technology student blames Monroe's Office of Career Advancement for not providing her with the leads and career advice it promised.
At the conclusion of the article we find the basis of Miss Thompson's claim:
The college's Office of Career Advancement advertises lifetime free service for graduates, and boasts on the school's Web site: "We have many resources available for students at any stage of their college career, and even after graduation."
This is an interesting situation. If a company enters into a contract to deliver services and those services are not delivered, then a person has a right to get their money back (or sue, if the company refuses to refund the money). What makes this different, but I don't think it should, is that it is a college. Miss Thompson received an education and was awarded a degree, but it doesn't appear that Miss Thompson attended college (specifically Monroe College) with that goal in mind. She seems to believe that the education and degree were superfluous. What she was after was a guarantee of job placement and believed that Monroe College made that commitment as part of her enrollment.
It will be up to the courts to decide if Monroe College made false claims or failed to deliver a service. Further, it will be determined if the claims of providing job placement services were part of the contract Monroe College committed to as part of their enrollment agreement with Miss Thompson.
This case doesn't appear to be about the quality of education Miss Thompson received, nor does it appear to be about how qualified Miss Thompson might be as a job applicant (or how well she interviews). What is interesting is that Monroe College granted Miss Thompson a degree and it would be reasonable to conclude that the degree meant something (especially given that Miss Thompson received a technical degree in Information Technology).
If students attend college in a major that is job-training specific (as opposed to more lofty pursuits) then it seems reasonable that the degree should mean something. If it doesn't, if having the degree is not transferable to getting a job (keeping the job is another matter and up to Miss Thompson), then what value does the degree have? If it means nothing, if it doesn't translate to job offers, then the degree isn't worth the paper on which it is printed, nor should Miss Thompson have to have paid for it.
That seems reasonable to me. Colleges (and universities) have chosen to become job training centers, as opposed to educational institutions, and engage in a type of collusion with employers to require degrees for employment. Schools could have remained bastions of knowledge of Western Civilization, providing students with an education, rather than job training. But they didn't choose that. They chose to be placement centers, with large fees for their services. They should be held accountable for what they claim and what they promise, as any other business would.
As to Prof. Reynolds question: I do not think it is a dangerous precedent. It think it is an about damned time precedent. Schools have been charging ridiculous fees for sub-standard educations (often for sub par students). It's time they're put on notice.
Miss Thompson appears to have learned something of value (whether she learned it at Monroe College or not): that when you pay for something advertised, the company must deliver those services or refund your money. I applaud Miss Thompson's actions. Perhaps this will put the fear of God in these mostly useless institutions, and be the basis of true educational reform in this country.
Posts
