A former sales associate at three CDI College campuses in Toronto, who asked not to be identified, says complaints against CDI like those of Aliza Bernstein and Laura Menzies are familiar.The most disturbing part of the article is the extent to which CDI tries to minimize a series of examples of shoddy education at its schools - including two in the article alone citing classes which lacked instructors. While CDI is probably right that the majority of students derive some value from the institution, that doesn't do much to help those whose legitimate complaints have apparently been ignored.
"I had a man come into my office crying because of his son. It was a horrible, horrible situation," she said of the last customer she spoke to before she quit. "I advised them to sue."
She says the man paid $14,000 toward his son's CDI tuition only to later learn his son was without a teacher for eight months.
The ex-employee says there was pressure to meet enrolment quotas, even if that meant convincing students who couldn't afford tuition to take out loans.
Part of the issue appears to be a matter of administration, which is apparently being dealt with. And that's the part of the equation where it's relatively easy to sympathize with private colleges: it may well be difficult to plan for all contingencies as to which instructors will and won't stay around.
However, the problem not covered in Bill 197 (aside from a registration requirement) is that of recruiting tactics which are naturally designed to push as many students as possible into the college rather than to move them toward the most suitable individual choices. That may be a particularly difficult issue to handle with regard to a private actor whose interest is best served by maximizing the in-flow of students. But the same issue in turn should highlight the problems with for-profit education. And in taking steps to regulate the industry, the provincial government will now bear some onus to ensure that students know the risks.