![\"\"](\"https:\/\/davidtrend.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/download.jpg\")
<\/a>Bear in mind that many of today\u2019s college students grew up during the Great Recession, when families of all incomes had money worries. With scant knowledge of a world before 9\/11, it\u2019s little wonder that polls show millennials expecting lower earnings than their parents, seeing the United States on a downward spiral, and believing the two-party system as fatally flawed.[i]<\/a> Rising income inequality doesn\u2019t help matters, especially at UC Irvine where 6 in 10 students get financial aid and half are the first in their families earning a college degree.[ii]<\/a> Because of this, Irvine has been cited by the New York Times<\/em> as the country\u2019s leading \u201cupward mobility engine\u201d \u2013\u2013 making the campus a national model of what public higher education can do.[iii]<\/a> But it\u2019s still not a cake-walk for degree seekers. As at most public universities in America, the majority of Irvine\u2019s full-time students also work at jobs to make ends meet.[iv]<\/a><\/p>\nHigher education translates into higher wages. \u00a0According to the U.S. Department of Education, people with four-year degrees earn roughly twice that of high school graduates.[v]<\/a> \u00a0Given these financial pressures, it\u2019s no surprise that college education is seen as a commodity. Almost all of the students I encounter are serious, hardworking, and focused. They want rational outcomes, high grades, and clear metrics.\u00a0 Most of all, they are driven to succeed \u2013\u2013 in a nation where struggle is expected and competition has been called the \u201cstate religion.\u201d In the minds of many there is a Darwinian inevitability to contest in life, so much so that it is often seen as a natural instinct. This is manifest in a culture valorizing personal achievement, aggression, and America First \u2013\u2013 values reinforced in the ideologies of business, entertainment, celebrity, sports, and militarism.<\/p>\n But educators have long observed that competition can be dangerous when pushed too far \u2013\u2013 for the simple reason that a system producing \u201cwinners\u201d always yields a larger pool of \u201closers.\u201d Alfie Kohn wrote in his book No Contest: The Case Against Competition (Why We Lose our Race to Win) <\/em>that Americans are caught in a vicious circle in which individual anxieties and structural conditions reinforce each other. Children are conditioned for a world of presumed scarcity, based on the following contradictory ontology: \u201cIf I must defeat you in order to get what I want, then what I want must be scarce,\u201d Kohn stated, explaining that when \u201ccompetition sets itself as the goal, which is to win, scarcity is therefore created out of nothing.\u201d[vi]<\/a><\/p>\n Kohn argues that the real lesson instilled by competition is personal inadequacy. Wins tend to be short-lived moments of self-satisfaction derived from external evaluation, implying that one\u2019s character rises in proportion to number of those beaten. The transitory character of such winning means that any gain is fragile and contingent on the outcome of the next contest, setting off a repeating cycle, until one ultimately fails. The external character of the evaluation also can make young people feel they are not in control of happens to them, as researcher Carole Ames has noted. Ironically, the very sense of autonomy that competition purports to instill is diminished by the anxieties that go along with it. \u00a0Feelings of agency can become weakened even among successful students, but it takes a greater toll on those who fail. This tends to produce lower achievement in both groups, along with a plethora of esteem-related problems.[vii]<\/a><\/p>\n Internalized competition is but one side of the equation. For the better part of a decade, professors and students alike have bemoaned the growing \u201ccorporatization\u201d of universities, as bottom line administrative thinking has encroached on high-minded idealism. Complaints have come from across the U.S. about skyrocketing tuitions, huge lecture courses, and growing numbers of low-wage occasional lecturers. Exacerbated by recessionary belt-tightening, a new philosophy taken over higher education\u2013\u2013with numbers and budgets increasingly driving curriculum and research priorities. Humanities departments shrink as business programs grow, partly in response to student career worries. All of this has paralleled a continuing movement toward \u201caccountability\u201d in public education\u2013\u2013with K-12 teachers finding themselves obliged to \u201cteach-to-the-test\u201d or risk losing their jobs. Competition for grades in science and math has superseded such \u201cfrills\u201d as art education for most of the nation\u2019s kids.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen Universities Try to Behave like Business, Education Suffers,\u201d read a recent headline in the Los Angeles Times.<\/em>[viii]<\/a> \u201cFor most of U.S. history, it was understood that universities, whether public or private, operated under a model distinct from business,\u201d the paper reported. But a shift took place in the 1980s and 1990s, as American culture became enthralled with marketplace values. \u201cUntil then, the private sector wasn\u2019t the model for the public sector,\u201d the Times<\/em> reported, adding, \u201cNow the prestige of the private sectors requires imitation by the private sectors.\u201d\u00a0 Students seem to be losing out in this new environment. \u201cThey\u2019re not only saddled with an increasing share of the direct costs of their education,\u201d the Times <\/em>stated, \u201cbut are offered a narrower curriculum as universities cut back on supposedly unprofitable humanities and social science courses in favor of science, engineering and technology programs expected to attract profitable grants and the prospects of great riches from patentable inventions.\u201d<\/p>\n The effect of corporatization on academic labor has been devastating. In 1975, over 70 percent of instruction was done by full-time professors \u2013\u2013 experts in their fields and committed to careers as professors. Today that ratio has reversed \u2013\u2013 with 70 percent of teaching delivered by adjunct faculty (non-tenure track) \u2013\u2013 with minimal experience, no job security, and often less commitment to the institution itself. Most adjunct instructors work multiple jobs to subsist \u2013\u2013 with over 50 percent earning less than $35,000 per year and 80 percent getting no health insurance.[ix]<\/a> Universities increasingly see adjunct teaching as a less valued enterprise than the highly compensated \u201cresearch\u201d mission of full-time faculty. \u00a0This isn\u2019t just bad news for job-hungry young PhDs and MFAs. A recent study from the University of Southern California has shown that \u201cstudents who take more classes from contingent faculty have lower graduation rates and are less likely to transfer\u201d from two-year to four-year institutions.[x]<\/a> Forbes Magazine<\/em> similarly reported that, \u201csuch faculty are less student-centered in their teaching, have less contact with students outside of class, and spend less time preparing for classes.\u201d[xi]<\/a><\/p>\n Instructional declines and labor abuses are but a few symptoms of university corporatization. And this problematic trend is hardly a secret. Recently, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) \u2013\u2013 the nation\u2019s largest organization of college educators \u2013\u2013 published an analysis of the shift from higher education as a \u201cpublic investment\u201d to the rising \u201cprivate enterprise\u201d model. \u201cThese changes reflect the neoliberal faith that free markets would restore productivity,\u201d the document stated.[xii]<\/a>\u00a0 But the AAUP asserts that privatization has had the opposite effect. With rising costs and narrowing academic options, colleges and universities have seen a steady decline in student applications \u2013\u2013 even though the overall population of high school graduates has grown. Pressures to avoid debt and to begin earning are some of the reasons, with low-income students attending traditional colleges at 10 percent lower rates than a decade ago.[xiii]<\/a><\/p>\n Concerns about corporatized higher education go back a century, evidenced in Thorstein Veblen\u2019s 1917 The Higher Learning in America: A Memorandum on the Conduct of Universities by Business Men<\/em>. Even then, professors across country worried about eroding educational values and a tightening of bureaucratic management.\u00a0 Veblen saw universities losing their status as a protected preserves for \u201cthe cultivation and care of the community\u2019s highest aspirations and ideals,\u201d operating in the \u201capprehension of what is right and good,\u201d and \u201ccontrolled by no consideration of expediency beyond its own work.\u201d With an eerie prescience, Veblen warned of the incursion of a rising business rationality in which \u201cthe men of affairs have taken over the direction of the pursuit of knowledge\u201d while effecting a \u201csurveillance of the academic work exercised through control of the budget.\u201d [xiv]<\/a><\/p>\n Corporatization intensified with the creative destruction of the 1970s and 1980s. No less a publication than Time Magazine<\/em> expressed concern over this in a feature entitled \u201cHow Universities Turned into Corporations.\u201d Time<\/em> described this as a period when \u201cpolicymakers began to view higher education more as a private good (benefiting individual students) then as a public good (helping the nation prosper by creating better educated citizens).\u201d [xv]<\/a> Others would join in noting the social consequences of this shift. In his well-known 1977 Learning to Labor: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs<\/em>, Paul Willis documented how education came to reproduce class stratification rather than equalization. Examining vocational \u201ctracking\u201d in Britain, Learning to Labour<\/em> drew comparisons between school and the workplace, likening teachers to job supervisors who paid students with grades rather than money. \u201cThere is no obvious physical coercion\u201d in such a disciplinary model, but rather what appears to be a \u201cdegree of self-direction,\u201d Willis wrote.[xvi]<\/a> Not that the students were oblivious to any of this, with many opting to push back. One of Learning to Labour<\/em>\u2019s key insights was its documentation of what later would be termed student \u201cresistance,\u201d often manifest in oppositional attitudes, disengagement, and even intentional failure at school.<\/p>\n For his book School is a Factory<\/em>, Alan Sekula went into California community colleges, interviewing and photographing students in vocational training programs. Accompanying one set of images, Sekula wrote:<\/p>\n Three welding students pose for a portrait. They hope to graduate into jobs with metal fabrication shops in the area. Their instructors act like bosses, supervising the action from a glassed-in office. This apprenticeship program, like public education on generally, is supported by taxes that fall heavily on working people and only lightly on corporations. Spared the cost of on-the-job training, local industry profits from the arrangement. Social planners also like the idea that vocational courses keep unemployed young people off the streets and dampen discontent.[xvii]<\/a><\/p>\n As a former Creative Arts dean at one of California\u2019s leading community colleges, I don\u2019t mind admitting that what Sekula wrote certainly is partly true. But such public two-year schools also serve other purposes. For many low-income students, community colleges offer a viable entry-point into higher education, especially if they intend later transfer to a four-year school \u2013\u2013 which four in ten of students indeed do. The problem is with the remaining 60 percent \u2013\u2013 often underprepared by prior schooling and not able to afford further study even at state-funded universities \u2013\u2013 who see vocational programs or immediate work as their only options. [xviii]<\/a><\/p>\n The educational stakes are only rising in today\u2019s \u201cknowledge economy\u201d \u2013\u2013 an expression referencing both the decline in traditional manufacturing jobs and the rising role of expertise in a competitive job market. As with any highly-desired consumer product, laws of supply-and-demand are putting new pressures on knowledge and pushing prices up. A recent report from the Council of State Governments entitled \u201cAmerica\u2019s Knowledge Economy,\u201d urgently warned public officials that \u201cshort-term\u201d tendencies to reduce education funding only cripple \u201clong-term\u201d economic growth and prosperity.[xix]<\/a> The business press is beginning to voice similar concerns. \u201cEducation costs have soared over the past few decades leaving many potential students out in the cold,\u201d stated Forbes Magazine<\/em>. [xx]<\/a>Citing statics from the College Board, Forbes<\/em> reported that costs of higher education have risen an average of 5.2 percent every year since 1994 \u2013\u2013 or more than double the rate of inflation. \u00a0Annual tuition and fees for in-state students at a public university now stands at $39,508, with out-of-state students paying $97,690, By comparison, private universities cost an average of $135,010. Add the costs of housing, books, and supplies and the price tag is even higher.<\/p>\n Student debt has become the new normal \u2013\u2013 in keeping with changing attitudes toward credit itself. Generations ago, the idea of being in debt or \u201cfalling behind with bills\u201d was seen as a moral or social ill. But things have changed with the rise of consumer credit and the aggressive marketing of companies like Visa and MasterCard. Breaking national records every year for the past two decades, total indebtedness for higher education now stands at $1.31 trillion. Outstanding loans have more than doubled since 2009 according to Bloomberg News<\/em>, observing that, \u201cNo form of household debt has increased by as much since then.\u201d[xxi]<\/a> And the toll of the loans is terrifying\u2013\u2013with one quarter of those owing now in default or at least 90 days late on their required payments. Making matters worse, student loans have been excluded from bankruptcy protection since 1998 \u2013\u2013 thus condemning the current generation to a lifelong obligation unknown to their parents. Obama administration financial experts worried about the long term consequences of this, predicting that the loans could soon slow the U.S. economy. Even President Trump has likened the debt to an \u201canchor\u201d holding down young Americans \u2013\u2013 although his administration continues cutting federal programs to help student borrowers. Low-income students suffer the most \u2013\u2013 as they enter the workforce with less freedom to choose employment and more pressure to look for the biggest paycheck.<\/p>\n As schools have gotten costlier, pressures have grown to get the best value. Last year, UCLA broke national records for undergraduate applications, with over 124,000 students seeking admission for a freshman class of 9,200 \u2013\u2013 translating to a 7.2 % rate. Similar (but less extreme) patterns are occurring across the country, pushing selectivity at prestigious public universities closer to Ivy league schools like Cornell (12.5% acceptance rate), Dartmouth (10.4%), and Yale (6.9%).[xxii]<\/a> Students begin shopping for colleges as early as junior high, while struggling to optimize their chances through advanced classes and extracurricular activities. Nearly 50 percent of students see a high school counselor due to stress over this, according the American Psychological Association.[xxiii]<\/a> \u201cBurn-out before college\u201d is a rising phenomenon.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, business has boomed for SAT and ACT prep courses \u2013\u2013 much to the consternation of testing services.\u00a0\u00a0 College Board President David Coleman thinks companies that offer SAT prep services are \u201cpredators who prey on the anxieties of parents and children and provide no real educational benefit.\u201d[xxiv]<\/a> Education experts have long argued that test prep providers exist not only because such high-stakes testing has failed students and colleges. They say the SAT and ACT provide poor measures of real academic achievement \u2013\u2013and actually indicate nothing more clearly than family income. The two largest prep course providers, Kaplan and Princeton Review, charge $699 for a basic course, although some families pay as much as $1,000 per hour for private tutors or free-lance college admission consultants. All of this has further stratified the college admissions process, while piling on costs before students even leave home.<\/p>\n In a relatively recent shift, students unsuccessful in the application process increasingly now choose for-profit colleges or vocational training programs, which, at least in theory, extend democratic access to education with enrollment limited only by one\u2019s willingness to pay. Nationwide chains like Heald College, Devry University, and University of Phoenix promote themselves as guaranteed career pathways, often appealing to students hungry for jobs as office assistants or technical workers. According to U.S. News & World Report<\/em>, such schools account for 42 percent of postsecondary enrollment growth in the past decade, despite two huge drawbacks: \u201cFor-profits are expensive,\u201d costing and average $15,130 per year as opposed to $3,264 at community colleges and $8,893 at four-year public state colleges. \u201cFor-profit graduates struggle to find employment,\u201d finding work at 22 percent less than conventional colleges, and they default on loans at higher rates due the combination of greater borrowing and lower employment. [xxv]<\/a> Also, these commercialized colleges market themselves heavily to vulnerable populations, particularly the economically disadvantaged. Veterans with government education stipends also are targeted frequently. At the height of their popularity in 2010, for-profits gobbled up one quarter of federal financial aid \u2013\u2013 for a total of $32-billion.[xxvi]<\/a><\/p>\n The predatory practices of for-profits now seem to be backfiring. In recent years, investigations by the federal officials and States Attorneys Generals have revealed unscrupulous business practices by for-profit colleges (particularly those that are run by large, publicly-traded companies), for what the National Association for College Admissions and Counselling calls \u201cdeceptive, aggressive and manipulative tactics to enroll as many students as possible, without regard for their potential for success or ability to afford tuition, in an effort to maximize profits.\u201d[xxvii]<\/a> In 2015, three of the nation\u2019s largest for-profit chains \u2013\u2013 Career Education Corporation, Education Management Corporation, and Corinthian Colleges \u2013\u2013 announced the shut downs of dozens of campuses, as the University of Phoenix reported a 50 percent drop in enrollments.[xxviii]<\/a> The following year, for-profit giant ITT Technical closed all of its 137 schools in 39 states following federal charges of fraud related to student recruitment, enrollment, dropout rates, grade inflation, loans, and reported job placement.[xxix]<\/a><\/p>\n Put all of this together and it\u2019s easy to see why my UC Irvine students are a little on edge. College degrees are now more expensive, competitive, and keyed to earnings than at any point in American history \u2013\u2013 so much so that many young people are buckling under the pressure. Universities seem unable to do very much to help because they themselves are a big part of the problem. Hence, amid an ever-tightening web of \u201cfinancialized subjectivity,\u201d the current generation finds itself bound by the logic of capital within the very institutions of higher education that might be instilling values of humanistic wisdom and unbounded inquiry. Neoliberal culture promises them freedom and upward mobility, while supplanting other ways of looking at knowledge, work, or life itself. None of this bodes well for the current generation of college age young people, much less the climate of experiment, risk-taking, and \u201ccreativity\u201d so vital to innovation and new ideas.<\/p>\n [i]<\/a> Samantha Smith, \u201cMillennials less confident about nations\u2019 future, but so were their parents, grandparents when young,\u201d Pew Research Center<\/em>(Feb. 16, 2016) http:\/\/www.pewresearch.org\/fact-tank\/2016\/02\/16\/millennials-less-confident-about-nations-future-but-so-were-their-parents-grandparents-when-young\/ (accessed Apr. 5, 2017).<\/p>\n [ii]<\/a> \u201cUC Irvine Praised for Student support,\u201d Orange County Register<\/em> (Mar. 29, 2016) http:\/\/www.ocregister.com\/articles\/students-709861-uci-schools.html (accessed Apr. 5, 2017).<\/p>\n [iii]<\/a> David Leonard, \u201cCalifornia\u2019s Upward Mobility machine,\u201d New York Times<\/em> (Sep. 16, 2015) https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2015\/09\/17\/upshot\/californias-university-system-an-upward-mobility-machine.html\u00a0 (accessed Apr. 5, 2017).<\/p>\n [iv]<\/a> Stacy Rapcon, \u201cMore college students are working while studying,\u201d CNBC.com<\/em> (Oct. 29, 2015) http:\/\/www.cnbc.com\/2015\/10\/29\/more-college-students-are-working-while-studying.html (accessed Apr. 5, 2017)<\/p>\n [v]<\/a> \u201cHow Much More of College Graduates Earn than Non-College Graduates?\u201d Study.com<\/em> (2017) http:\/\/study.com\/articles\/How_Much_More_Do_College_Graduates_Earn_Than_Non-College_Graduates.html (Accessed Apr. 5, 2017).<\/p>\n [vi]<\/a> Alfie Kohn, No Contest: The Case Against Competition (Why We Lose our Race to Win) <\/em>(Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1986) p. 4.<\/p>\n [vii]<\/a> Carole Ames, \u201cChildren\u2019s Achievement Attributions and Self-Reinforcement: Effects of Self-Concept and Competitive Reward Structure,\u201dJournal of Educational Psychology<\/em> 70 (1978).<\/p>\n [viii]<\/a> Michael Hiltzik, \u201cWhen universities try to behave like business, education suffers,\u201d Los Angeles Times, <\/em>Jun. 3, 2016) http:\/\/www.latimes.com\/business\/hiltzik\/la-fi-hiltzik-university-business-20160602-snap-story.html (accessed Apr. 14, 2017).<\/p>\n [ix]<\/a> Dan Edmunds, \u201cNearly three-quarters of American professors are contingent faculty. That\u2019s a problem for students,\u201d Forbes Magazine<\/em> (May 28, 2015) https:\/\/www.forbes.com\/sites\/noodleeducation\/2015\/05\/28\/more-than-half-of-college-faculty-are-adjuncts-should-you-care\/#6efb36f41600 (accessed Apr. 13, 2017).<\/p>\n [x]<\/a> Ibid.<\/p>\n [xi]<\/a> Ibid.<\/p>\n [xii]<\/a> David Schultz, \u201cThe Rise and Coming Demise of the Corporate University,\u201d AAUP (Sep. 15, 2016) https:\/\/www.aaup.org\/article\/rise-and-coming-demise-corporate-university#.V89ErWVltlo (accessed Sep. 6, 2016).<\/p>\n [xiii]<\/a> Alai Wong, \u201cWhere are All the High-School Grads Going\u201d The Atlantic<\/em> (Jan. 11, 2016) http:\/\/www.theatlantic.com\/education\/archive\/2016\/01\/where-are-all-the-high-school-grads-going\/423285\/\u00a0 (accessed Sep. 5, 2016).<\/p>\n [xiv]<\/a> Thorstein Veblen, The Higher Learning in America: A Memorandum on the Conduct of Universities by Business Men <\/em>(1917) (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 2015) pp. 75, 88.<\/p>\n [xv]<\/a> Andrew Rossi, \u201cHow American Universities Turned into Corporations,\u201d Time <\/em>(May 21, 2014) http:\/\/time.com\/108311\/how-american-universities-are-ripping-off-your-education\/ (accessed Apr. 18, 2017).<\/p>\n [xvi]<\/a> Paul Willis, Learning to Labor: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs<\/em> (New York; Columbia, 1977) p. 1.<\/p>\n [xvii]<\/a> Alan Sekula, School is a Factory<\/em> (Halifax: Nova Scotia College of Art & Design, 1983) p. 2013.<\/p>\n [xviii]<\/a> Grace Chen, \u201cWill Community College Tuition Increases Outpace Inflation Rates?\u201d Community College Revie<\/em>w (Aug. 26, 2016) https:\/\/www.communitycollegereview.com\/blog\/will-community-college-tuition-increases-outpace-inflation-rates (accessed Apr. 6, 2017).<\/p>\n [xix]<\/a> \u201cAmerica\u2019s Knowledge Economy: A State-by-State Review,\u201d Council of State Governments\u00a0 (2017) http:\/\/www.csg.org\/programs\/knowledgeeconomy\/Elsevier_Report_2015.pdf (accessed Apr. 14, 2017).<\/p>\n [xx]<\/a> Mike Patton, \u201cThe Cost of College: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow,\u201d Forbes Magazine<\/em> (Nov. 19, 2015) https:\/\/www.forbes.com\/sites\/mikepatton\/2015\/11\/19\/the-cost-of-college-yesterday-today-and-tomorrow\/#51708786060c (accessed Apr. 9, 2017).<\/p>\n [xxi]<\/a> Shaien Nasirpour, \u201cPresident Trump has called student debt an \u2018anchor\u2019 weighting down young Americans.\u201d Bloomberg News<\/em> (Feb. 17, 2017) https:\/\/www.bloomberg.com\/news\/articles\/2017-02-17\/student-debt-in-america-has-hit-a-new-record (accessed Apr. 9. 2017).<\/p>\n [xxii]<\/a> Abby Jackson, \u201cIvy League admission letters just went out\u2013\u2013here are the acceptance rates for the class of 2021,\u201d Business Insider<\/em> (Apr. 1, 2018) http:\/\/www.businessinsider.com\/ivy-league-harvard-yale-princeton-acceptance-rates-class-of-2021-2017-3\u00a0 (accessed Apr. 22, 2018).<\/p>\n [xxiii]<\/a> Samantha Olsen, \u201cHigh School Students Are Stressed Out about College: the Reality of Burning Out Before College, [xxiv]<\/a> James S. Murphy, \u201cThe SAT-Prep Industry Isn\u2019t Going Anywhere,\u201d The Atlantic<\/em> (Mar. 4, 2014) https:\/\/www.theatlantic.com\/education\/archive\/2014\/03\/the-sat-prep-industry-isnt-going-anywhere\/284430\/ (accessed Apr. 9, 2017).<\/p>\n [xxv]<\/a> Susannah Snider, \u201c3 Must-Know Facts About For-Profit Colleges, Student Debt,\u201d U.S. News & World Report <\/em>(Oct. 1, 2014) http:\/\/www.usnews.com\/education\/best-colleges\/paying-for-college\/articles\/2014\/10\/01\/3-facts-for-students-to-know-about-for-profit-colleges-and-student-debt (accessed Sep. 6, 2016).<\/p>\n [xxvi]<\/a> Patricia Cohen, \u201cITT Educational Services Closes Campuses,\u201d New York Times<\/em> (Sep. 6, 2016) http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2016\/09\/07\/business\/itt-educational-services-closes-its-campuses.html?_r=0 (accessed Sept. 8, 2016).<\/p>\n [xxvii]<\/a> \u201cFor-Profit Colleges, National Association for College Admissions and Counseling (2015) http:\/\/www.nacacnet.org\/issues-action\/LegislativeNews\/Pages\/For-Profit-Colleges.aspx (accessed Sep. 5, 2016)<\/p>\n [xxviii]<\/a> Paul Fain, \u201cVanishing Profit, and Campuses,\u201d Inside Higher Education<\/em> (May 7, 2015)\u00a0https:\/\/www.insidehighered.com\/news\/2015\/05\/07\/profit-chains-announce-new-wave-closures-and-sell-offs (accessed Sept. 7, 2016).<\/p>\n
\nMedical Daily<\/em> (Aug. 12, 2015) http:\/\/www.medicaldaily.com\/high-school-students-are-stressed-out-about-college-admissions-reality-burning-out-347476 (accessed Apr. 22, 2017).<\/p>\n