Talk:Issues in higher education in the United States

Article partially written as a personal essay?
Hi! It seems like parts of this article are written like a personal opinion essay; for example, I found this sentence in the Current Situation section at the bottom of the page:


 * This is an ideal strategy in my viewpoint because it not only solves the financial problem for students with poor background, but also allows students to practice university teaching in a professional manner.

This isn't presented as a quote or an expert opinion. A few sentences later, the article states:


 * It is obvious that the strategies are quite effective.

While this part does have a citation, these two issues as well as the repeated use of transitional adverbs ("Additionally", "However", "Moreover", etc.) suggest to me that this part of the article at least has been written more in the style of a personal persuasive essay rather than a neutral article.

Apologies if this isn't a reasonable issue to point out. I'm not familiar enough with the subject matter or the standards of Wikipedia to say if or how this should be changed, but it did strike me as relatively unprofessional and worthy of comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.178.40.49 (talk) 18:24, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Bias response team into Issues in higher education in the United States
"Bias response team" can be compressed into a few lines and merged into "Issues in higher education in the United States" under the subsection #Student_welfare as "Bias" or "Bias reporting". FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 05:44, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Sweet v. Cardona
I was planning on editing Hallmark Institute of Photography to reference the Sweet v. Cardona case (litigated in part by the Project on Predatory Student Lending), given that it seems rather notable for an organization to be listed as a predatory university in a court case where the approved settlement was confirmed and involved restoring money to those who attended. (See here.) I went looking to see if the case was referenced anywhere else, and found it only briefly referenced on the page of one of the institutions involved. It seems notable enough of a case that it might deserve its own page, in addition to references on the page of each involved university. However, I only see it here, as a single sentence and a footnote. As there's already been at least one page merged into this one, thought I'd post here before going to the effort of splitting that bit off and adding details. Is a separate article (and notes on each involved organization's page) reasonable? Cdrch (talk) 15:23, 25 August 2022 (UTC)