Abstract
Proprietary institutions of higher education, more commonly referred to as “for-profit”
colleges and universities, have been a polarizing phenomenon in U.S. post-secondary
education. Much of the literature is partisan and deeply ideological in nature making it
difficult for interested parties to understand the role that these institutions do or should
play in American higher education. As federal and state governments have sought to
regulate the sector, opponents and proponents for the sector have been vocal in their
positions leaving regulators and proprietary education leaders in a difficult position. This
phenomenological qualitative study works describes the perception of proprietary
education leaders regarding the federal regulatory oversight of the proprietary sector of
higher education; voices not present in the vast majority of literature. In particular, this
study sought to understand perceptions of leaders who experienced the Duncan
Regulatory Era and its legacy impact on the sector. Key to this study is understanding
how proprietary education leaders perceive the impact that federal regulation has on lowincome
and first-generation minority student populations, generally among the most
vulnerable student groups in higher education. Seven primary themes emerged, the most
noteworthy is the perception that many of the regulations, including those no longer in
effect, have served to limit opportunities for low-income students. Utilizing the study
data as well as relevant literature, this work provides insights from sector leaders and a
framework for proprietary education leaders as well as policy makers on how to approach
future regulatory negotiations and navigate future challenges in proprietary higher
education.