User:Mysteryquest/Sandbox

nationally accredited

=This is my sandbox, please do not play in it. Use Wikipedia's or make your own. Thank you. (and I want to do just because you asked not to)))=

AIC
University of Phoenix has had legal and regulatory controversies as a result of its student recruitment practices and abbreviated course schedule. There has also been concern that in its quest for higher profits the university has compromised academic quality.

A 2003 federal whistle-blower/false claims lawsuit alleges the university improperly obtained hundreds of millions of dollars in financial aid. The school counters that the lawsuit is a legal manipulation by two former university employees over a matter previously resolved with the U.S. Department of Education. However, that legal position was rejected by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in its 2006 opinion reversing the Eastern California U.S. District Court earlier 2004 decision to dismiss the lawsuit. The lawsuit is not set to begin trial on March 9, 2010.

In 2004, as a result of the false claims lawsuit, the Department of Education performed a program review and found UPX had violated Higher Education Act provisions that prohibit distributing financial incentives to admission representatives. The report detailed the pressure which were placed on university recruiters to enroll students. UPX disputed the findings but paid a record $9.8 million dollar fine as part of a settlement where it admitted no wrongdoing and did not have to return any financial aid funds.

In January 2008, the university’s parent company, Apollo Group, Inc. was found guilty of misleading stockholders when it withheld the results of the 2004 Program Review that criticized UPX's aggressive recruiting practices. A jury awarded $280 million to shareholders. However, U.S. District Judge James Teilborg overturned the verdict in August 2008, ruling that the evidence was insufficient.

In 2000, government auditors ruled that UPX's courses fell short of the minimum time required for federal aid programs, and the university paid a $6 million fine as part of a settlement wherein they admitted no wrongdoing. However, in 2002, the Department of Education relaxed its requirements, and the university’s abbreviated schedule is an attractive feature for many adults eager to obtain a university degree while working, though critics say it leaves courses with "little meat".

The U.S. Department of Education ordered the university to pay $650,000 for failing to promptly refund loans and grants for students who withdrew.

In December 2008, three former University of Phoenix students filed a class-action complaint. According to the lawsuit, when the students withdrew from UPX, UPX returned their loan money to the lender and then sought repayment from them. The alleged motivation was to "artificially deflate cohort default rates", which would make UPX ineligible to receive Title IV funding. Apollo asserts that the students claim is that Apollo "improperly returned the entire amount of the students' federal loan funds to the lender."

The university has had various labor and discrimination issues. It paid $3.5 million to settle alleged violation of overtime compensation provision with the Department of Labor. In November 2008 it agreed to pay $1.875 million to settle allegations by the EEOC for alleged religious discrimination favoring Mormon enrollment counselors. In settling these matters, University of Phoenix did not admit any liability or wrongdoing.



Proposals from Career Education Corporation

My name is Lynne Baker and I am the VP of Corporate Communication at Career Education Corporation. We are suggesting numerous edits to the American InterContinental University page to reflect recent information about the university, correct misinformation, and provide legal and regulatory updates. Per Wikipedia etiquette, we are posting our suggested changes in the Talk Pages for comment.

[edit] Description

We made a few tweaks in the description of the University to reflect its accreditation. The following is what we propose for the description (replacing the current description):

American InterContinental University, commonly called AIU, American InterContinental University (AIU) is a multi-campus, regionally accredited university. It is a for-profit post-secondary institution, owned by Career Education Corporation (NASDAQ:CECO). It was founded in 1977 as the American College of Applied Arts.

AIU is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to award Associate's, Bachelor's, and Master's degrees. Lmbaker1226 (talk) 18:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

The current lead mentions the SACS accreditation. The first sentence of your revised description is really awkward with the two repetitions of "American InterContinental University." With the exception of the awkward part, it sounds like marketing speak rather than an encyclopedia article, and I don't see that it adds any value. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 23:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the use of AIU twice was my mistake, as was the 1977 date. The rest of it is a completely factual description with no marketing-speak that I can see. Here is how it should read:

American InterContinental University, commonly called AIU, is a multi-campus, regionally accredited university. It is a for-profit post-secondary institution, owned by Career Education Corporation (NASDAQ:CECO). It was founded in 1970 as the American College of Applied Arts.

AIU is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to award Associate's, Bachelor's, and Master's degrees.

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 00:58, 11 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

Below is information taken directly from Wikipedia's Guidelines on University Articles.

"Lead — The article should start with a good lead section. This should include basic information like: the name(s) of the institution, location (city name; describe multiple campuses if present), founder and founding name, and affiliation with any larger university system or major local affiliate network, if applicable. Give other names for which the university may be known (e.g. Cal) and bold them, too. A thumbnail sketch of the dominant and distinguishing characteristics should be given in the lead, and expanded later. Attributes should include public/private, coeducational/single-sex, 2/4-year, religiously-affiliation if applicable, and type (liberal arts college, multi-school university, vocational school, research institution, community college, etc.) It should be mentioned whether it is an undergraduate-only institution, or if graduate programs are present (and if so, specific stand-alone programs like medical, law, and divinity schools should be mentioned). A thumbnail sketch should be painted in the lead which is expanded on later. This should include a flavor of the dominant or distinguishing academic or demographic characteristics. For example, "a downtown community college, which acts as a commuter campus for students in the __ area", or "a strong focus on science and engineering, with an international student body" or "a historically Black liberal arts college, famous for its literature and history programs"."

The above description does not include language any different from what is suggested by Wikipedia. Moreover, it suggests that demographic information is relevant, so I am including the diversity information here and pulling our proposal for separate diversity section. Thus, the proposed lead would read as follows:

American InterContinental University, commonly called AIU, is a multi-campus, regionally accredited university. It is a for-profit post-secondary institution, owned by Career Education Corporation (NASDAQ:CECO). It was founded in 1970 as the American College of Applied Arts. According to “Diverse Issues in Education,” AIU Online ranks among the nation’s top institutions bestowing associate, bachelor’s, and master’s degrees to minority students. [6] [7]

AIU is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to award Associate's, Bachelor's, and Master's degrees.

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 18:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

[edit] History

The history section is not quite accurate, so we are sourcing it and suggesting the current history section be deleted and replaced with the following:

American InterContinental University was originally founded in 1970 as the American College of Applied Arts in Lucerne Switzerland. Between 1977 and 1995, the College became known as the American College and opened 4 campuses, including a campus in London, England, Dubai, a campus in Atlanta, Georgia, and a campus in Los Angeles, CA. In 1996, EduTrek, Inc. acquired the American College and changed its name to American InterContinental University. Subsequently, campuses were opened in Atlanta (Dunwoody), Washington, D.C., and Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The Washington, D.C. campus has since been closed [8], the Los Angeles campus is teaching out its programs, [9] [10], and the University is no longer affiliated with the campus in Dubai. [11]

Career Education Corporation (CEC) acquired AIU in January 2000, and subsequently received approval from its accreditor, the Commission on Colleges for the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to offer fully online degree programs. In December 2002, AIU Online became a branch of the American InterContinental University system. [12] In 2003, an additional campus was added in Houston, Texas. Lmbaker1226 (talk) 19:05, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Lmbaker1226

First, in the lead you say it was founded in 1977, but here you say 1970. However, the larger problem with this is that it's a copyright violation from the IBHE document which you cite. Although this text may have provided by AIU to IBHE as part of your accreditation process, the fact that it's in an IBHE document means you don't have the ability to give us permission to use it. This edit can't be made as you request.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 00:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

................................................................................................................................. On the copyright issues, how then, are citations to newspaper articles that are online okay to use, but not other information that is published online and readily available to the public? Frankly, some of this information is on AIU's website, but our understanding was that it was better to cite to a third party source. What other documents would you suggest we cite to?

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 01:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

Think of the issue as plagiarism. Wikipedia cannot reproduce text that was copied verbatim from another source, except in rare cases involing copied material that is in the public domain. It is critically important to cite sources for the information in articles, but Wikipedia cannot copy from those sources. --Orlady (talk) 03:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Just to reinforce what Orlady said, the answer is that you can't copy and paste from other sources, but write new text. When you copy full sentences from a source published by someone else, that's a copyright violation. The IBHE source is a reliable source, but you can't plagiarize from it. You basically took the paragraph at the top of page 26, then added a few links and line breaks. That isn't rewriting it; that's still pretty much copying. If you write new content, as if you were writing a research paper in high school or college, combining information from multiple external sources, that isn't a copyright violation. If it wouldn't meet AIU's own academic integrity policy, it won't work here either.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 03:47, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Revised per your concerns about copyright:

Founded in 1970 in Lucern, Switzerland as the American College of Applied Arts, by 1995 the College had opened campuses in London, England; Dubai; Atlanta, Georgia; and Los Angeles, CA. The College became know as American InterContinental University (AIU)in 1996, when it was purchased by EduTrek, Inc. [13] In 1998, the Atlanta (Dunwoody) and Fort Lauderdale, Florida campuses opened. [14] The Los Angeles campus is currently teaching out its programs, [15] [16], and the University is no longer affiliated with the campus in Dubai. [17]

Career Education Corporation (CEC) acquired AIU in January 2001, [18] and AIU Online became a separate campus in 2002, offering fully online degree programs. AIU opened its Houston, Texas campus in 2003. [19]

Assuming this addresses your concerns, we would like to post it. [lmbaker1226] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmbaker1226 (talk • contribs) 2 December 2008

Per the Manual of Style, the first sentence should be "a straightforward, declarative sentence that, as briefly as possible, provides the reader who knows nothing at all about the article's subject with the answer to two questions: 'What (or who) is it?' and 'Why is this subject notable?'" I don't think your proposed first sentence does that; it doesn't even include the name of the university in the first sentence. What about using the current first sentence, followed by your proposed introduction? As noted previously, you will also need to wikify the text before it should be posted. I'd recommend probably adding links for the places mentioned, a link for online degrees, and maybe a few other phrases.

American InterContinental University, commonly called AIU, is an international for-profit university owned by Career Education Corporation. Founded in 1970 in Lucern, Switzerland as the American College of Applied Arts, by 1995 the College had opened campuses in London, England; Dubai; Atlanta, Georgia; and Los Angeles, CA. The College became know as American InterContinental University (AIU)in 1996, when it was purchased by EduTrek, Inc. [20] In 1998, the Atlanta (Dunwoody) and Fort Lauderdale, Florida campuses opened. [21] The Los Angeles campus is currently teaching out its programs, [22] [23], and the University is no longer affiliated with the campus in Dubai. [24] Career Education Corporation (CEC) acquired AIU in January 2001, [25] and AIU Online became a separate campus in 2002, offering fully online degree programs. AIU opened its Houston, Texas campus in 2003. [26]

If you post a wikified revision here and no one else objects, I think it could be added to the article. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 00:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

okay so it looks like you were combining the description with the history. That said, how's this? (I will "wikify" the text--or get someone to help me with that! :-))

American InterContinental University, commonly called AIU, is an international multi-campus for-profit university owned by Career Education Corporation. Founded in 1970 in Lucern, Switzerland as the American College of Applied Arts, by 1995 the College had opened campuses in London, England; Dubai; Atlanta, Georgia; and Los Angeles, CA. The College became know as American InterContinental University (AIU)in 1996, when it was purchased by EduTrek, Inc. [27] In 1998, the Atlanta (Dunwoody) and Fort Lauderdale, Florida campuses opened. [28] The Los Angeles campus is currently teaching out its programs, [29] [30], and the University is no longer affiliated with the campus in Dubai. [31]

Career Education Corporation (CEC) acquired AIU in January 2001, [32] and AIU Online became a separate campus in 2002, offering fully online degree programs. AIU opened its Houston, Texas campus in 2003. [33]

According to “Diverse Issues in Education,” AIU Online ranks among the nation’s top institutions bestowing associate, bachelor’s, and master’s degrees to minority students. [6] [7]

--Lmbaker1226 (talk) 23:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

My mistake; I did confuse the two. It's really hard to follow what you're doing when you choose not to indent your conversations and follow the style conventions of talk pages. Can you please clarify what you want for the lead paragraph (what you've been calling description) and what you want for history, and post your wikified versions with the full citations (names and authors plus links) for review? I think what you're proposing will be OK, but if you need help with wikifying, it's best for you to post a draft here first so you can get feedback. Please indent your new suggestions by placing two colons in front of each paragraph; that will put it one level below this reply and make it obvious what the newest content is.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 02:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry--I have been a bit confused on how to post here so I will try to follow all the right conventions. . . If we don't combine the Lead and the History sections, here is what I suggest--

Lead would be the following:

American InterContinental University, commonly called AIU, is an international multi-campus for-profit university owned by Career Education Corporation. AIU is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to award Associate's, Bachelor's, and Master's degrees.

“Diverse Issues in Education,” ranks AIU Online among the top institutions in the U.S. bestowing associate, bachelor’s, and master’s degrees to minority students. [34] [35]"

History would be the following:

"American InterContinental University was founded in 1970 in Lucern, Switzerland as the American College of Applied Arts. By 1995 the College had opened campuses in London, England; Dubai; Atlanta, Georgia; and Los Angeles, CA. The College became know as American InterContinental University (AIU)in 1996, when it was purchased by EduTrek, Inc. [36] In 1998, the Atlanta (Dunwoody) and Fort Lauderdale, Florida campuses opened. [37] The Los Angeles campus is currently teaching out its programs, [38] [39], and the University is no longer affiliated with the campus in Dubai. [40]

Career Education Corporation (CEC) acquired AIU in January 2001, [41] and AIU Online became a separate campus in 2002, offering fully online degree programs. AIU opened its Houston, Texas campus in 2003. [42] --Lmbaker1226 (talk) 21:26, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

If you wikify the text (add some internal links) and format the references with full information, I think this will be fine.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 23:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Admissions

My name is Lynne Baker and I am the VP of Corporate Communication at Career Education Corporation. We are suggesting numerous edits to the American InterContinental University page to reflect recent information about the university, correct misinformation, and provide legal and regulatory updates. Per Wikipedia etiquette, we are posting our suggested changes in the Talk Pages for comment.

We are suggesting a new section called Admissions. Here is the (sourced) content we suggest for the new section:

The undergraduate admissions process entails submission of a complete application, documentation of high school graduation or its equivalent, participation in an admissions interview, and, for non-native speakers of English, proof of English proficiency. For transfer students and/or adult learners, AIU may accept transfer credit from any United States institution accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. Courses accepted in transfer must be relevant to the student’s program of study and be equivalent in content and outcomes to those of the AIU degree program. [43]

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 19:08, 10 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

Once again, this is a copyright violation. Even if AIU wrote this text, it's housed on IBHE's site and you can't grant permission to use content someone else has published.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 00:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Since we are now suggesting deleting this section and have added two sentences on admissions to the academic profile section (below), which I believe address the issue with which you are concerned, please ignore the proposal with respect to this section and review the current proposal under Academic Profile. lmbaker1226 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmbaker1226 (talk • contribs) 2 December 2008

[edit] Academic profile

We are suggesting a new section entitled "Academic Profile" that would replace the "Programs" section currently on the page. The proposed section simply provides some more robust information, and would read as follows:

American InterContinental University is accredited in the U.S. by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) – one of six regional American accrediting organizations recognized throughout the world and by the United States Department of Education – to award Associate, Bachelor's, and Master's degrees [44]. The university is accredited in the U.K. by London South Bank University (LSBU) and is officially recognized by the United Kingdom’s Department for Education & Skills [45]. Academic programs offered vary by campus location and are offered in a variety of career-focused disciplines, many with a variety of different concentrations available. Some of the programs include:

Business Administration International Business Accounting and Finance Marketing Operations Management Organizational Psychology and Development Project Management Supply Chain Management Entertainment Management Entertainment and Sports Marketing Human Resources Management Information Technology Fashion Design Fashion Marketing Interior Design Graphic Design Visual Communications Media Production Audio and Sound Recording Game Design and Development Healthcare Management Education and Instructional Technology Criminal Justice Forensic Science

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 19:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

SACS info is provided elsewhere in the article, so I see no benefit to repeating it here. Also, common understanding of academic "programs" is that it means degrees. Several items on your list are concentrations, not degrees; I think it's misleading to claim them as programs. 3 courses in Forensic Science or Entertainment and Sports Marketing doesn't constitute a program in that area (and I would wager your own regulatory department would tell you the same thing if you asked them).WeisheitSuchen (talk) 03:47, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

........................................................................................................................... Per Wikipedia's guidelines on University articles, I am including two sentences on admissions within the academic profile section, and pulling our proposal for a separate admissions section. See Wikipedia guidelines on university articles:

"Academic profile — This section contains information related to the academic environment. It would be appropriate to mention the notable academic divisions (such as faculties/schools/colleges) of this university. If there is a special course system, grading scheme, or requisites for enrollment, mention them here, too. Many articles describe their academic rankings here. Also, it may be worth mentioning information about admissions in this section."

We added a citation to AIU's website re admissions. While we understand that generally it is better to cite to third party sources, in reality the best source of information on the University's admissions process is the University itself. Notably, the Wikipedia article on University of Phoenix and Ohio State University also cite each university's own websites on admissions. [46] [47]

In addition, we have edited the language to distinguish between programs and concentrations, so there is no potential confusion. The proposed section would now read as follows:

In addition to U.S. accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to award Associate, Bachelor's, and Master's degrees [48]. The university is accredited in the U.K. by London South Bank University (LSBU) and is officially recognized by the United Kingdom’s Department for Education & Skills [49]. Undergraduate admission requires documentation of high school graduation or its equivalent, participation in an admissions interview, and for prospective students whose native language is not English, proof of English proficiency (e.g., TOEFL or other English proficiency assessment) prior to admission or arrival. AIU may accept transfer credit from any United States institution accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. Courses accepted in transfer must be relevant to the student’s program of study and be equivalent in content and outcomes to those of the AIU degree program. [50] [51]

Academic programs offered vary by campus location and are offered in a variety of career-focused disciplines, many with a variety of different concentrations available. Some of the programs include:

Business Administration (concentrations include Marketing, Healthcare Management, Finance, Organizational Psychology, and more) Criminal Justice Education Education and Instructional Technology Information Technology International Business Fashion Design Fashion Marketing Interior Design Game Design and Development Media Production Visual Communication

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 19:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

Please review the latest entry above for Academic Profile. I believe it addresses all of the concerns you voiced. We would like to post it. lmbaker1226 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmbaker1226 (talk • contribs) 2 December 2008

As with other proposed contributions, the text must be wikified. SACS and other accrediting bodies should have internal links, for example, as should the programs which currently have internal links. The text needs to be integrated with the rest of Wikipedia. The sentence fragment at the beginning also should be combined with the second sentence like this "In addition to U.S. accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to award Associate, Bachelor's, and Master's degrees [52], the university is accredited in the U.K. by London South Bank University (LSBU) and is officially recognized by the United Kingdom’s Department for Education & Skills [53]." It's redundant to say "programs include" and then say "and more," so I recommend cutting the "and more."

Your proposed admissions information sounds too much like AIU's official "voice" and not like the general information for an encyclopedia, partly because you still have two entire sentences copied from the IBHE source that you didn't indicate as a direct quote. What about this instead, paraphrased to improve both the tone and avoid any copyright violation?

Undergraduate admission requires documentation of high school graduation or its equivalent and participation in an admissions interview. Prospective students whose native language is not English must demonstrate proof of English proficiency (e.g., TOEFL or other English proficiency assessment). Relevant, equivalent transfer credit may be accepted from accredited US institutions.[54] [55]WeisheitSuchen (talk) 00:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Your paraphrase looks fine to me. thanks [lmbaker1226]--Lmbaker1226 (talk) 22:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Student Satisfaction

We are suggesting a new section entitled Student Satisfaction, as we believe this is relevant information for interested parties and it is based on an independent, third-party survey. The section would read as follows:

According to the independent Noel-Levitz organization's Priorities Survey for Online Learners (PSOL), measuring responses from 57,250 individuals attending 93 different online institutions, American InterContinental University Online placed well above the average for satisfaction indicated by students from universities and colleges around the country [56]. In the study’s summary, the following student opinions were noted: • 91% of AIU students responded positively when asked if their college experience met or exceeded their expectations. • 90% of AIU students responded positively when asked to rate their satisfaction with their college experience thus far. • 85% of AIU students responded positively when asked if they would enroll in the same institution again, given the chance to do it all over.

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 19:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

This is a copyright violation, copied from the Business Wire source cited. The source is also a press release, reprinted at Findarticles.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 03:47, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

............................................................................................................................

Again, your copyright argument appears to be on questionable legal ground. I can point out to you several sections in the current article that lift language DIRECTLY from the source, yet you suggest that they are not copyright violations. Moreover, it's difficult to believe that Wikipedia would not allow one to quote from a reliable source (after all, your article already does so in quoting the Chronicle of Higher Education). Moreover, your current article cites press releases as well as articles, so if that is the criteria then I would assume other sources will have to be found to support information in the current article, or the information will have to be removed.

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 18:16, 11 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

If you'd like to discuss Wikipedia's copyright policy, here's the relevant discussion page. That's the place to ask for a change in policy or to argue that the current policy is "on questionable legal ground," rather than on the talk page for a specific article. If you've found places where third-party content is copied word-for-word, please note them here specifically so we can fix them. We take these copyright violations very seriously.

Press releases can be reliable sources, just don't pretend they are independent, external sources. I wanted to make it clear to any other editors that the "independent, third-party survey" was reported in a press release so they could make their own informed judgment. Neutral Point of View must still be adhered to, so it's important to look at where the sources are coming from so we're keeping that balance and showing evidence both from the company and from its critics.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 22:34, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

........................................................................................................................... Perhaps I was not clear. I am not suggesting that Wikipedia's copyright policy is on questionable legal ground. Rather, I am suggesting that your interpretation of it is questionable. I have pored through the copyright policy, and I cannot find where it supports your position. Can you point me to the SPECIFIC language in the policy that supports your position? Here is what I read in Wikipedia's Copyright policy: "Note that copyright law governs the creative expression of ideas, not the ideas or information themselves. Therefore, it is legal to read an encyclopedia article or other work, reformulate the concepts in your own words, and submit it to Wikipedia. However, it would still be unethical (but not illegal) to do so without citing the original as a reference."

I note that we have indeed cited everything we have proposed. However, if you believe that we have not done enough to "reformulate the concepts in [our] own words," then we will be happy to use quotations.

I also don't see anything Wikipedia's copyright policy that would prevent linking to copyrighted works. Here is another quote from the policy:

"Linking to copyrighted works Since most recently-created works are copyrighted, almost any Wikipedia article which cites its sources will link to copyrighted material. It is not necessary to obtain the permission of a copyright holder before linking to copyrighted material, just as an author of a book does not need permission to cite someone else's work in their bibliography. Likewise, Wikipedia is not restricted to linking only to GFDL-free or open-source content."

Here is a list of what, according to the standards you have set forth, are copyright violations that are in your current article. These all appear in the "Controversy" section 1. "misrepresented its programs and classes, made a practice of admitting students who had not graduated from high school, and included in its enrollment numbers students who had never attended class." This is almost verbatim from the article cited to support this. Here is the line in the article: "misled prospective students about the college's programs and classes, regularly admitted students who hadn't graduated from high school, and improperly counted in its enrollment numbers students who never showed up for class." 2. "CECO's Board has allowed management to lose sight of the Company's primary mission of providing quality education services; under these directors, CECO management has sacrificed the quality of student programs, resulting in the severe escalation of student attrition - all for the sake of a "top-line growth strategy" that cannot be sustained." This is a direct quote and is thus COPIED from the letter that you cite. According to you, copying, even with citation, is plagiarism. Moreover, this is hardly a "neutral" source--coming from a dissident shareholder who clearly had an axe to grind against the company). 3. One anonymous professor stated: "If you can breathe and walk, you can get into the school." Again, a direct quote from the article. ("If you can breathe and walk, you can get into the school," says a professor who wished to remain anonymous.") Plagiarism? 4. The article quotes directly from AIU and CEC's own press releases, e.g., “the impact of a two-year probation, coupled with the current market for AIU’s programs in Los Angeles, is such that the student population at the campus has decreased significantly, and likely will not reach the sustainable level necessary to support the addition of new programs and necessary resources.” Reliable and neutral sources only when you use them?

Press releases are certainly not independent sources. However, the current article uses them. In fact, we have not cited to any press release that the current article does not already use.

Many independent, third-party surveys are reported in press releases, and that does not make them any less independent, third-party surveys. What is your viewpoint on the surveys by US News and World Report that are cited by many universities in their own press releases? The press release itself is clearly not a neutral source, but US News and World Report would likely question your assertion that they are not independent because they were cited in someone's press release.

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 18:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

Neutral point of view doesn't mean that all sources must be neutral; that's why Steve Bostic's points can be in here as well as press releases. Neutral point of view means you include all major perspectives and let the readers decide for themselves. You as a representative of the company are hardly a neutral observer; your views must be balanced with those of the company's critics. It isn't black and white; NPOV is a judgment call, based on the consensus of editors.

As for the copyright violations, I'll fix #1. Good catch, and thanks for bringing that to our attention. #2, #3, & #4 are quotes and clearly marked as quotes with quotation marks. The lack of quotation marks is what made your suggestions not viable for us to use. It's not that you can't quote, it's that you have to be transparent about when you're doing so. If I put a link at the end of something but don't use quotes, then you assume it's my paraphrase based on that reference and not a quote, right? Review Glenn Poshard and the questions about his dissertation, specifically how it was hard to identify what was Poshard's words and what was from another source. It's a similar situation here. When you copy and paste something, it has to be inside of quotes or a blockquote, with nothing at all changed. When you rewrite the source, it should be clearly rewritten to your own words; no one should be able to find full sentences from another source unless they are in quotes. In your proposed changes, I can find full sentences and long phrases; a few things were tweaked from the original, but it wasn't paraphrased enough to avoid being a copyright violation.

I'm not sure who the "you" is when you say "Reliable and neutral sources only when you use them?" Do you mean the other editors of Wikipedia as a whole, or was that attack directed at me personally? Although I've made a number of small contributions to this article, no particular editor ever "owns" an article. It's a collaborative effort. You might want to review the five pillars to get a better understanding of how Wikipedia operates and how this great resource is developed.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 23:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Certainly not an attack on you personally--or anyone--like you, however, we do want to make sure that all major perspectives are included, and that includes the perspective of AIU. I have revised this to address the concerns you raise about lack of quotations. See below:

According to the independent Noel-Levitz organization's "Priorities Survey for Online Learners (PSOL)," which analyzed responses from 57,250 individuals attending 93 different online institutions, American InterContinental University Online scored above the satisfaction levels indicated by students from online institutions that included both traditional not-for-profit and private universities as well as other for-profit institutions. [57]. The survey revealed the following student opinions with respect to AIU: "• 91% of AIU students responded positively when asked if their college experience met or exceeded their expectations. • 90% of AIU students responded positively when asked to rate their satisfaction with their college experience thus far. • 85% of AIU students responded positively when asked if they would enroll in the same institution again, given the chance to do it all over." [lmbaker1226] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmbaker1226 (talk • contribs) 2 December 2008

Thank you for putting quotes around the content to make it clear what you wrote and what isn't original to you. Unfortunately, I don't see where in the university article guidelines this would fit. Once I saw the copyright violation, I didn't look any further. Without referencing any other university articles (which may need improvement to meet the guidelines themselves), how do you see this section fitting within Wikipedia's guidelines?WeisheitSuchen (talk) 00:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Diversity

AIU is proud of the diversity of its student body. We are suggesting the addition of a section entitled "Diversity," with content based on the third party, Diverse Issues in Higher Education report. We are suggesting the following content:

According to “Diverse Issues in Education,” AIU Online ranks among the nation’s top institutions bestowing associate, bachelor’s, and master’s degrees to minority students. [58] [59] AIU Online ranked within the top ten campuses in the following categories:

• First in master’s degrees in computer and information science to Hispanic-Americans • Second in associate degrees across all disciplines to African-Americans and all minorities • Third in bachelor’s and master’s degrees in computer and information sciences to African-Americans • Third in bachelor’s and master’s degrees in computer and information science to all minorities • Fifth in master’s degrees in education and across all disciplines to African-Americans • Sixth in master’s degrees in business to African-Americans • Sixth in master’s degrees across all disciplines to all minorities • Seventh in master’s degrees in business to all minorities • Seventh in bachelor’s degrees across all disciplines to African-Americans • Eighth in bachelor’s degrees in business to all minorities

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 21:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

I don't see where this fits within the guidelines for university article structure. I also don't think it meets the guidelines for not advertising in Wikipedia. The fact that this summary of this report is copied directly from a piece of AIU marketing is a strong argument against it belonging in an encyclopedia. If you could use the content as is, without editing it, in a marketing piece, then it isn't appropriate for Wikipedia. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 03:47, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

............................................................................................................................

We cite the report--a third party source that looks at diversity of many schools, not just ours. The fact that FACTS can be used in marketing does not make them any less of a fact. We also use the names of our programs in marketing pieces, as does every other school on Wikipedia, but that doesn't make the names of the programs inappropriate for Wikipedia because the same language is used in marketing materials.

The diversity of the student body is part of the academic profile of the school. If you are offended by the bullet points despite the fact that they are third party findings from an independent source, then we can remove those and leave the first sentence, which would go into the Academic Profile.

Notably, the Wikipedia article on Harvard cites US News and World Report for its ranking in the America's Best Colleges 2009" report (is that advertising?)[60], and the Wikipedia article on University of Illinois cites its own data on diversity. [61]

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 18:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

Per my points above about other schools using demographic data and rankings, and the language in Wikipedia's own guidelines regarding "demographic characteristics" in the Lead, we have included a sentence in the Description on diversity, and thus would propose deleting this separate section. (Please see the proposed Description for the sentence we added). [lmbaker1226] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmbaker1226 (talk • contribs) 2 December 2008

[edit] Technology

AIU Online uses advanced technology that we believe is of interest to various stakeholders. We propose a new section entitled "Technology," with the following proposed content:

AIU Online utilizes advanced technology for web-based learning, specifically its Virtual Campus (the portal through which all online students interface with their academic programs, instructors, and fellow students) and the Virtual Commons (a FaceBook-like extension of the Virtual Campus that helps online students communicate with their like-minded peers). It also recently launched AIU Mobile [62], a technology that allows students to access some of the university’s features via mobile devices such as iPhones, iPods, and other advanced wireless communication equipment.

In connection with AIU’s use of online technology for adult learners, Dr. Alan Drimmer, Chief Executive Officer of the University, has been invited to speak at academic forums for online learning and technology such as the Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning conducted by the University of Wisconsin in Madison, and the Sloan-C International Conference on Online Learning. [63] [64]

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 21:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

Again, where would this fit in the guidelines for university article structure? How is this not advertising?WeisheitSuchen (talk) 03:47, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alliances

In the last year, AIU has engaged in alliances with national organizations. We are suggesting a new section entitled Alliances, with the following content:

AIU partnered with Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) to award college scholarships at the discretion of BBBS to the most worthy of high school students in the Big Brothers Big Sisters program. [65]

AIU Online was one of the first universities to partner with the Project Working Mom scholarship program which has awarded dozens of full scholarships to deserving working mothers who seek to improve their lives and the lives of their families through education. [66]

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 21:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

Same as my response to the proposed technology section. It seems like advertising and it doesn't fit in the structure guidelines.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 03:47, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reaction to Career Education Corporation proposals

Some of your proposals sound to me like the kind of content one would find in the university viewbook or in an institutional marketing report, which is to say that they are not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. An encyclopedia article can and should tell about institutional accreditation, but results of student satisfaction studies and details about the admissions process are not normally part of an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia has some generic guidelines on the content and outline for university articles; see Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities/Article guidelines. Also see the featured articles listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities for ideas on article organization and content. --Orlady (talk) 20:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi--thanks for the link. I took a look at the generic guidelines and it seems that some of the sections we added would belong in the Academic profile--the generic guidelines do mention Admissions as part of the guidelines. I suspect we might put the diversity section in there as well. The Alliances section might also fit there, since it is relevant to scholarships for attending the University. I understand your comments about the student satisfaction studies; we are cognizant that this is not for marketing purposes and so we have tried to base our content only on third party fact. However, if the consensus is that the Student Satisfaction section needs to be left out, then so be it. I have seen many University postings on Wikipedia that discuss notable alumni, so I suggest that section be added, as we proposed.

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 23:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

[edit] Controversy

Below is a new Controversy section that we propose would replace the current controversy section. Please note that the section we propose contains much of the same content as in the current section, however we made some additions, some deletions, and reorganized it so it seemed easier to simply provide a re-draft of the section. Below this you will find some of our comments as to why we believe certain information in the current controversy section should be deleted. Our goal was not to remove "negative" information; in fact, we did not delete the information if it was accurate. However, our proposal includes updates and corrects misinfomation, as well providing additional relevant facts. All information is sourced. The following is our proposal for the Controversy section:

American InterContinental University is currently in good standing with its accreditor, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), but was on probationary status with SACS for two years. On December 6, 2005, SACS notified AIU that SACS had placed the school on probation status for one year. A formal letter from SACS dated January 5, 2006, notified AIU that it had 15 open recommendations that it needed to address regarding its compliance with a number of SACS Principles of Accreditation, including integrity, faculty, programs, and governance. [67] and [68] This set in motion extensive actions by the University to meet the accrediting agency’s concerns. AIU was continued on probation for another year in early 2006 in order to address unresolved recommendations of the Commission and demonstrate continuous improvement [69], In October 2007, after visiting several AIU campuses, the Special Committee of the Commission on Colleges of SACS informed University officials that its final report would contain no recommendations for further corrective action. [70]

At the SACS Annual Business Session held on December 10, 2007, SACS removed AIU from probation status and as a result AIU’s accreditation continues in good standing. [71]

Likewise, in June 2008, the Quality Assurance Agency closed an Audit (published in May on 2005 and based on an examination of the London Campus in 2004). This report had noted that at the date of the Agency’s review in 2004, there were “fundamental concerns regarding the academic standards being achieved." [72] Following successful efforts on the London campus to remedy deficiencies, the QAA noted that “Since the audit QAA has been provided with information that indicates that appropriate action has been taken by the American InterContinental University in response to the findings of this report. As a result the audit was signed off in June 2008.” [73] AIU's parent company, Career Education Corporation, has been the subject of controversies, most have which have been fully resolved with no action taken against the company. In June of 2005, the U.S. Department of Education notified the company that it would not approve applications from the company for domestic acquisitions or additional domestic campuses pending its review of financial statements, annual compliance audit opinions, and certain school program reviews. [74] In January, 2007, the U.S. Department of Education lifted all of those restrictions. [75] An investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission was resolved with no action taken against the company in January 2008. [76] In April 2007, the U.S. Department of Justice in Chicago notified CEC that it was declining prosecution and closing its investigations of the company, April 20, 2007 [77], and in August 2007, the company was informed by the Civil Division of the U. S. Department of Justice that it was closing its review with no action taken against the company or any of its schools. [78]

Some CEC schools have come under scrutiny for their student recruiting practices. AIU is an open-enrollment institution, a policy it says allows it to offer educational opportunities for low-income and minority students who might not otherwise be able to attend college. Others, including some current (as of 2005) former AIU employees, have countered that some students have been enrolled who lack adequate preparation and qualification, which does not actually help them. One anonymous professor stated: "If you can breathe and walk, you can get into the school."[4]

The former majority shareholder of Edu Trek, Inc., Steven Bostic, raised criticisms of CEC in preparation for and during a well-publicized proxy challenge he waged against the company in 2005-2006. During this period, Bostic stated that "CECO's Board has allowed management to lose sight of the Company's primary mission of providing quality education services; under these directors, CECO management has sacrificed the quality of student programs, resulting in the severe escalation of student attrition - all for the sake of a "top-line growth strategy" that cannot be sustained." [79] Bostic lost the proxy battle and his bid for directorships after allegations became public that he had seriously mismanaged the Edu Trek business and jeopardized the university’s Title IV eligibility under his leadership. [80]

In November 2006, Career Education Corporation announced plans for a strategic divestiture through a sale of selected schools and colleges in order to better align the company’s resources and focus. The company’s leadership worked to attract viable buyers through early February, 2008 and attempted to identify and structure a transaction that made sense for all parties. Despite the company’s best efforts, it could not find a suitable arrangement that would be acceptable to purchasers and protect the short and long-term interests of the schools’ students, faculty and staff. After a detailed review of alternatives, CEC decided to teach-out certain of the schools it had held for sale, and to seek permission to convert two Gibbs campus locations to Sanford-Brown campuses. [81]

AIU made a similar decision to “teach-out” its Los Angeles campus. According to Dr. George Miller, the CEO of American InterContinental University, “the impact of a two-year probation, coupled with the current market for AIU’s programs in Los Angeles, is such that the student population at the campus has decreased significantly, and likely will not reach the sustainable level necessary to support the addition of new programs and necessary resources.” [82]

AIU is a defendant in an individual and putative class action brought against it and CEC in March 2008 by former students. The plaintiffs in that case contend that AIU made a variety of oral and written misrepresentations to her during the admissions process. The alleged misrepresentations relate generally to the school’s reputation, the value of the education, the competitiveness of the admissions process, the students’ employment prospects upon graduation from AIU and AIU’s ability to arrange beneficial student loans. [83] and [84]

__________________________________________________________________________________

A note on specific deletions of current text from the Controversy section:

Proposed deletion: AIU's parent company has grown rapidly and had become increasingly controversial. CEC has been investigated by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Allegations specific to AIU include reports that the school misrepresented its programs and classes, made a practice of admitting students who had not graduated from high school, and included in its enrollment numbers students who had never attended class.[1]

Reason: The paragraph suggests that the federal investigations were based on the allegations it repeats regarding AIU. However, the citation for these allegations is to an article that cites yet another article, which article reported that some students had made the allegations regarding one campus of AIU. Neither that article nor any other reference suggests that the allegations were the subject of the federal investigations. Thus, the paragraph as written makes the inaccurate implication that the federal investigations were based on allegations made in one 2005 article.

Proposed deletion: Since writing these words in an open letter in 2005, CEC schools have indeed shown a drop in growth, retention issues, and regulatory problems.

Reason: This sentence is not in the source cited to support it, and is not true, since most regulatory issues have been resolved, as evidenced by the sources cited above.

Proposed deletion: SACS placed the university on probation in December 2005.[3] AIU had come under scrutiny for its student recruiting practices. AIU is an open-enrollment institution, where nearly everyone who applies is admitted. AIU argues that these open standards help create educational opportunities for low-income and minority students who might not otherwise be able to attend college. Others, including current and former AIU employees, have countered that enrolling students who lack adequate preparation and qualification does not actually help them. One anonymous professor stated: "If you can breathe and walk, you can get into the school."[4]

Reason: The implication here is that somehow the probation was related to the school's open enrollment policy. That is not the case. AIU's open enrollment policies were not at issue in the action taken by the accreditor. Moreover, citing an article that cites an anonymous source making a statement that is inaccurate as a matter of fact (based upon AIU's admissions policies) is inflammatory and does not add factual information to the article.

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 00:53, 11 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

Talking about the SACS probation without mentioning any of the reasons why it was placed on probation (or the warning prior to that) isn't appropriate. We can cite the SACS standards AIU failed to comply with if you'd prefer: "The Commission continued the following institutions on Probation: American InterContinental University, Atlanta, Georgia For twelve months for failure to comply with Prologue (Integrity), Core Requirement 2.7.2 (Program Content), Core Requirement 2.8 (Faculty), Comprehensive Standard 3.2.8 (Governance and Administration), Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 (Institutional Effectiveness), Comprehensive Standard 3.4.4 Educational Programs), Comprehensive Standard 3.4.5(Educational Programs), Comprehensive Standard 3.5.1 (Educational Programs, Undergraduate) of the Principles of Accreditation." So, for example, we could say something like "SACS renewed AIU's probation for continued failure to comply with a number of their Principles of Accreditation regarding integrity, faculty, programs, and governance."

Articles that cite anonymous sources are still recognized as reliable sources in Wikipedia when they are published in newspapers or journals. I don't think you can make a compelling argument that the Chronicle of Higher Education is not a reliable source, even if you disagree with the content of a particular article. In fact, I think all the current references meet Wikipedia's guidelines.

I could agree to moving the information about the controversies about student recruitment and enrollment away from the probation information, putting my proposed sentence about the specific principles violated there instead. But content with references reliable sources should remain in the article.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 04:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

...............................................................................................................................

There appears to be a double-standard at work here with respect to your explanation of "copyright" violations. First, the text as written DIRECTLY COPIES the language from the article. Yet somehow this is not a copyright violation but our citation to an IBHE document which does not directly copy language is somehow a copyright violation, in your view. It's difficult to understand how you can have it both ways. And by the way, it is not plagiarism if in fact you cite the source of the information.

Regardless of this issue, the language should be removed from that paragraph because it is not, in fact, the open enrollment policies it discusses were not related to the probation.

You may appropriately choose to cite the Principles of Accreditation, but then we of course would cite information indicating that AIU was taken off probation after it addressed the concerns of SACS and the Commission determined that it met the Principles of Accreditation.

Lmbaker1226 (talk) 18:05, 11 November 2008 (UTC)lmbaker1226

When you copy and paste from another source, you need to indicate what's a direct quote and what isn't. The usual way of doing so is with quotation marks, as I did above. (Blockquotes are another acceptable method of setting quotes apart from original text.) You didn't indicate that the text you copied was a quote; you claimed it as your own contribution. That's the difference between a quote and a copyright violation. If you want to use something as a reference without directly quoting it and clearly indicating that it's a quote, you have to significantly paraphrase it into your own words. My suggestion above includes both a quote and a paraphrase, for example.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 22:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Please see the revised version above that takes into account your comments. I included the paragraph that I had originally removed on open enrollment, but made certain changes for accuracy: --AIU is indeed an open enrollment institution, but that does not mean that "nearly everyone who applies gets in." There are criteria for admission, including attestation of high school diploma or equivalency and English proficiency. --the source cited for this paragraph is an article published in 2005. It may have discussed "current AIU employees," but the language as written is that there are still current employees saying such things. That may or may not be true, in 2008. In fact, it is likely not true, since the campus about which the article was written has been in the teach-out process for almost a year. We would like to get this posted with these revisions. [lmbaker1226] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmbaker1226 (talk • contribs) 2 December 2008

Cite me the part of Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources that you don't feel those articles meet. If you can justify it within the policy, the content could be removed. I don't see any argument above that uses Wikipedia's policy to justify cutting the content, just AIU's perspective. I did rearrange the current section to make it clear that the probation wasn't based on the open enrollment policy, as you recommended.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 00:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I am not saying the article isn't reliable, but the use of it is confusing. The article talks about "current employees," but they were current at the time of the article--they may not be current now. So I think the text would need to make that clear--eg "current as of 2005." It also should be made clear that the source article is saying that nearly everyone gets in. If you believe that phrase should stay, then I would propose that another sentence be added after that, indicating that "Criteria for admission at AIU include a high school diploma or equivalency and demonstrated English proficiency." (citing AIU's website). [Lmbaker 1226] --Lmbaker1226 (talk) 22:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

made a few changes to first and fourth paragraph to address your areas of concern.--216.49.214.3 (talk) 21:00, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Criticism
There have been concerns that the school does not properly balance value to students and profits to shareholders.[40] The university's 2008 Annual Academic Report asserts that various standardized tests have shown University of Phoenix students improving at a better rate on average in many testing areas than students at other institutions surveyed.[31] Additionally, according to the U.S. Department of Education's graduation standards, UPX is at 16%, which is significantly lower than the national average of 55%. The school and some education experts assert that the federal standard is antiquated because it only measures first-time students with no previous college credit,[41] and it uses measurements that skew against economically disadvantaged and minority students.[42] The university response claims that the federal standard only applies to 7% of the total UPX student community,[43] and that it publishes its own nonstandard graduation rate of 59% to account for its overwhelming population of non-traditional students.[16]

With regards to legal issues, the EEOC settled a second sexual harassment claim against the school for $225,000 in August 2007.[44] In September 2004, the university paid a settlement of $9.8 million to the U.S. Department of Education for alleged violations of Higher Education Act provisions that prohibit distributing financial incentives to admission representatives.[45][46][47][48][49] A 2003 federal whistle-blower/false claims lawsuit accuses the university of fraud in obtaining hundreds of millions of dollars in financial aid. It is set for trial in March 9, 2010.[50][40][16][51][52] The school counters that the lawsuit is a legal manipulation by two former university employees over a matter previously resolved with the U.S. Department of Education.[53]

The university has had various labor and government regulatory related issues. It paid $3.5 million to settle alleged violation of overtime compensation provision with the Department of Labor.[54][55] In November 2008 it agreed to pay $1.89 million to settle allegations by the EEOC for alleged religious discrimination favoring Mormon enrollment counselors.[56] It also settled allegations by the U.S. Department of Education for $6 million in March 2000 because government auditors noted that the teaching schedule fell short of the minimum time required to qualify for financial aid.[57][16][40] The U.S. Department of Education also ordered the university to pay $650,000 for failing to promptly refund loans and grants for students who withdrew.[40] In December 2008, three former UPX students filed a class-action complaint[58] alleging that UPX returns student loan money to "artificially deflate cohort default rates", which would make them ineligible to receive Title IV funding.[59] [60] Apollo asserts that the students claim is that Apollo "improperly returned the entire amount of the students' federal loan funds to the lender."[61] In January 2008, the university’s parent company, Apollo Group, Inc. was found guilty of fraud for misleading investors by a jury which awarded $280 million.[62] U.S. District Judge James Teilborg recently overturned the verdict, ruling that the evidence was insufficient.[63]

((references}}

ITT
ITT Technical Institute (often shortened to ITT Tech) is a private, for-profit, technical institute with more than 85 campuses in more than 30 states of the United States. It was founded in 1946 as Educational Services, Inc. and has been headquartered in Carmel, Indiana, since 1969. ITT Tech is owned and operated by ITT Educational Services Inc. (nyse: ESI), a publicly traded company.

Accreditation
ITT Tech is nationally accredited by the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools. It does not have regional accreditation; thus, most regionally accredited or traditional universities and colleges do not accept ITT Tech's credits for transfer and do not recognize its undergraduate degrees for entry into graduate programs.

Courses of study
ITT Tech offers programs specialized in information technology, electronics, drafting and design, criminal justice, health sciences, and business administration.

Students of ITT Tech may pursue Associates, Bachelors (all but health), or Masters (business-only) degrees. Graduates might be specialized in architectural design, visual communications, programming, engineering and information technology.

ITT, the business
From 1965 until its IPO in 1994, ITT Tech was a wholly owned subsidiary of ITT Corporation (as "ITT/ESI"). By 1999, ITT Corp. (which had merged with Starwood the year before) divested itself completely of ITT Tech's shares but the schools still use the "ITT" name under license. The initials originally stood for "International Telephone and Telegraph." It is now commonly thought to abbreviate the name "Institute of Technical Technology Technical Institute". This is a misnomer.

Controversy
On February 25, 2004, federal agents, pursuant to subpoenas issued by a Houston U.S. District Court raided the company's headquarters and 10 of its campuses seeking data on student placement, retention, attendance and grades, recruitment and admissions, graduate salaries, and transfers of credits to other schools. No charges were filed, and Michael Shelby, whose office was the one conducting the investigation, stated that "no conclusions should be drawn from today's activity". The investigation negatively affected the company's stock. The dramatic drop in stock prices triggered several class action lawsuits by investors. "

In one of the investor law suits, former employees complained that ITT set unrealistic goals for enrollment, retention, and placement and exerted enormous pressure to enroll students. The complaint quotes a former admissions representative, characterizing the job as similar to selling “used cars.” Overall, the former employees bringing the suit describe a culture where enrollment figures were manipulated, many “enrollees” never attended school, attendance and grades were inflated, and placement rates were misrepresented.

ITT agreed to pay $725,000 to settle a lawsuit with California in which employees alleged that it inflated students’ grade point averages so they qualified for more financial aid from the State of California. ITT admitted that “erroneous student grade point average calculations” resulted in 49 students receiving more money from the state Cal Grant program than they were entitled to. The settlement covered the state's portion of the 2002 federal claims lawsuit.

The state of Indiana filed a suit against ITT in April 2004, alleging that it had falsified records in an effort to obtain federal grants and financial-aid payments. Charges were dismissed.

In November 1999, two admissions/recruitment employees at an ITT Technical Institute in California, filed a law suit alleging that ITT Educational Services Inc. used an "incentive salary structure" that flouted the federal ban on providing bonuses, commissions or other payments to recruiters tied to their success enrolling students. In 2003, a federal judge in Houston threw out the suit on technical grounds, without weighing evidence.

A false claim suit was filed against ITT in April 2004. The case alleges that ITT knowingly used false records and statements relating to, among other things, student recruitment, admission, enrollment, attendance, grading, graduate placement, and course materials.

A lawsuit was filed on June 8, 1995 in San Diego, California by seven graduates of the San Diego ITT Technical Institute. In October 1996, the jury in this action rendered a verdict against ITT Educational Services Inc and awarded the plaintiffs general damages of approximately $200,000 and exemplary damages of $2.6 million. The judge also awarded the plaintiffs attorney's fees and costs, in the amount of approximately $900,000 plus interest. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants (1) made misrepresentations and engaged in deceptive acts in the recruitment of the plaintiffs for, and/or in the promotion of, the program, (2) provided inadequate instruction to the plaintiffs, (3) used inadequate facilities and equipment in the program and inappropriate forms of contracts with the plaintiffs, (4) failed to provide the plaintiffs with all required information and disclosures and (5) misrepresented the plaintiffs' prospects for employment upon graduation, the employment of the program's graduates and the plaintiffs' ability to transfer program credits.

In January 1997, six legal actions were filed against ITT Educational Services Inc in San Diego, California by a total of 21 former students of the San Diego ITT Technical Institute. The claims alleged related primarily to the Company's marketing and recruitment practices and included misrepresentation and violations of certain state statutes.

In June 1997, a legal action was filed against ITT Educational Services Inc in Orlando, Florida by three former students of the Maitland ITT Technical Institute. In April 1998, the legal action in Florida was dismissed without prejudice by the plaintiffs.

April 1998, a legal action was filed against ITT Educational Services Inc in San Diego, California by nine former students who attended the hospitality program at either the Maitland or San Diego ITT Technical institute. The claims alleged related primarily to the Company's marketing and recruitment practices and included misrepresentation and violations of certain state statutes.

Campus locations
Alabama
 * Bessemer (Birmingham)

Arkansas
 * Little Rock

Arizona
 * Tempe
 * Tucson

California
 * Anaheim
 * Clovis
 * Culver City
 * Lathrop (Modesto-Stockton)
 * Oxnard
 * Rancho Cordova
 * San Bernardino
 * San Diego
 * San Dimas
 * Sylmar
 * Torrance
 * Vista (Learning Site)
 * West Covina (Learning Site)

Colorado
 * Colorado
 * Aurora (Learning Site)

Florida
 * Fort Lauderdale
 * Jacksonville
 * Lake Mary (Orlando)
 * Miami
 * Pinellas Park
 * Tampa

Georgia
 * Duluth (NE Atlanta)
 * Kennesaw (NW Atlanta)

Idaho
 * Boise

Illinois
 * Burr Ridge
 * Orland Park
 * Mount Prospect

Indiana
 * Fort Wayne
 * Indianapolis
 * Greenwood (Learning Site)
 * Newburgh (Evansville)

Kentucky
 * Lexington
 * Louisville

Louisiana
 * St. Rose (New Orleans)

Massachusetts
 * Boston North (Woburn)
 * Boston South (Norwood)

Maryland
 * Owings Mills (Baltimore)

Michigan
 * Canton (SW Detroit)
 * Dearborn (Learning Site)
 * Flint
 * Grand Rapids
 * Troy (NE Detroit)
 * Clinton Township (Learning Site)

Minnesota
 * Eden Prairie (Minneapolis)
 * Woodbury (Learning Site)

Missouri
 * Arnold (SE St. Louis)
 * Earth City (NW St. Louis)
 * Kansas City

North Carolina
 * Charlotte

Nebraska
 * Omaha

New Mexico
 * Albuquerque

Nevada
 * Henderson
 * Las Vegas (Learning Site)

New York
 * Albany
 * Liverpool (Syracuse)
 * Getzville (Buffalo)

Ohio
 * Dayton
 * Hilliard (Colombus)
 * Maumee (Toledo)
 * Norwood (Cincinnati)
 * Strongsville (W. Cleveland)
 * Warrensville Heights (E. Cleveland)
 * Youngstown

Oklahoma
 * Oklahoma City
 * Tulsa

Oregon
 * Portland

Pennsylvania
 * Bensalem (NE of Philadelphia)
 * Dunmore (Wilkes-Barre/Scranton)
 * King of Prussia (NW of Philadelphia)
 * Mechanicsburg (Harrisburg)
 * Monroeville (Eastern Pittsburgh)
 * Pittsburgh (Western Pittsburgh)

South Carolina
 * Columbia
 * Greenville

Tennessee
 * Knoxville
 * Cordova (Memphis)
 * Nashville

Texas
 * Arlington (Fort Worth)
 * Austin
 * Houston North (Blue Ash Drive)
 * Houston South (Webster)
 * Houston West (South Gessner)
 * Richardson (Dallas)
 * San Antonio

Utah
 * Murray

Virginia
 * Chantilly (N VA/West of DC)
 * Norfolk
 * Richmond
 * Springfield (N VA/South of DC)

Washington
 * Everett (North Seattle)
 * Seattle (South Seattle)
 * Spokane

Wisconsin
 * Green Bay
 * Greenfield (Greater Milwaukee)