Good afternoon from Germany!
This is Dr. Muhammad Schmidt posting again after a long time.

First of all, I am happy to learn that NationsUniversity has achieved recognized accreditation. It's a decent school with high quality Christian education and is almost free. I personally also benefitted from them by graduating from them with a Master in Religious Studies several years ago. Later, I developed some courses in Biblical Languages (Hebrew, Greek) and in Comparative Relligion (two courses on Islam and Christianity) for them plus a course on Homiletics.

The stalkers at degreediscussion.com always tried to slander NU's name because I was involved in it, but they will find it hard to do so now after the successful completion of the accreditation process with a US Department recognized body:

http://www.nationsu.org

Regarding my own school, IFTS, the news is that after many years of running it with my former African partners, I resigned as an active officer of that school network due to reasons of age. I have retired officially in June this year and decided that I would free myself from the heavy workload for no money and hand it over to my successors whom I have trained over the years to keep it in good shape, to maintain academic standards and fo strictly follow ethical practices. I left the school in good shape and as far as I can see it still is. Their new homepage is here:

http://www.iftc.kr

That homepage is hosted by one of my former co-workers from Korea, and the Kenyans now have another school with government-accredited degree programs that are not free. IFTC stil lexists to offer (mostly) free high quality education to those who cannot afford to pay tuition fees.

IFTS stilll exists and is also still active but on a much lower level - we've had 8 branches in 8 different countries befiore, including Haiti. Niow, we are still active only in Haiti and Nepal and do no longer offer free theological education. Instead, we offer language teacher training and a number of other language-related degree programs as a developing nation does not only need pastors but also teachers, social workers, etc. I currently have a PhD student from Nepal planning to do a research project on Dhimal, one of Nepal's ethnic minority languages.

I do not really want to expand this and do more; the few things I am still doing are just right for me at this time. I also continue to publish my books.

That's all for now, good luck to everybody, and please get me a bit of poison for the stalkers at degreediscussion.com.....LOOOOOOL

Quote:Politically Correct Conditioning: It Starts Early In School
10/27/2015 06:05 PM ET

Indoctrinated: Some can recall a time when our campuses of higher education were zones where free speech thrived. That was another era, though. Today's students want speech restricted. How did it come to this?

The results of a poll that should be shocking, but sadly aren't, show that 51% of students favor their "college or university having speech codes to regulate speech for students and faculty."

Oddly, 95% say that "the issue of free speech" is important at their college or university, while 73% believe that the First Amendment is "an important amendment that still needs to be followed and respected in today's society." Only 21% told the Buckley Free Speech Survey that it is "outdated" and "can no longer be applied in today's society and should be changed."

Maybe these findings are not so odd, after all. In today's America, "free speech" and "First Amendment rights" tend not to include any expression that doesn't conform to left-wing ideology.

Seven years ago, almost two entire college generations in the past, the Acton Institute observed, "Students at colleges and universities who articulate conservative and traditional views are at particular risk of bullying and indoctrination by campus administrators and faculty who are zealous ideologues."

In that same commentary, author Ray Nothstine noted, "Some administrators practice a brand of radicalism intent on punishing students who dissent from the ideology of the campus power structure."

This, says Nothstine, is a danger to free society because "students (will) become accustomed to having their rights limited and will be more lethargic in countering possible oppression from a growing and intrusive state."

Remember, this was written in 2008. Students, it seems, are now fully accustomed to being told what they can and cannot say, and what they can and cannot think, and are just fine with it. In fact, they apparently want more restrictions.

The conditioning of minds begins early. High school kids are suspended for mild expressions of faith; elementary school students can be forced to undergo psychological evaluations if they draw a picture of Jesus on the cross; kids who wear shirts with the American flag or name of a conservative group are sent home to change; schools monitor students' social media for speech that administrators don't like; and sixth-graders have been assigned to "revise" the "outdated" Bill of Rights.

Perhaps worse than all of the above is the failure of teachers to present or even tolerate alternatives to what they're teaching.

As disturbing as it is, this is the educational world where our children are growing up. Free speech and expression are tolerated only when in accord with the left-wing doctrine of faculty and administrators.

It's a chilling look into a grim future.

Once again the "Gold Standard" turns out to be a double standard.  Fiscal responsibility, free markets and limited government are bad, according to the RA drones, but confiscatory redistribution schemes, dead babies and guys pronging other guys in the ass are good.

Quote:Student Sues College Because It Refused to Let Her Start a Conservative Club: It’s ‘Censorship. Pure and Simple’
Oct. 18, 2015 12:00pm Kaitlyn Schallhorn

A Maryland college student has filed a lawsuit against her community college after school officials denied her request to start a conservative club on campus — a choice that she said infringes on her First Amendment rights.

Moriah DeMartino, a 22-year-old political science major, said the fight with HCC began after she requested to launch a Turning Point USA chapter at Hagerstown Community College and was told by college administrators that if she wanted to start a group that was conservative in nature, a club specifically for Democrats would have to be started at the same time. The email to DeMartino also said that students cannot “start new clubs that duplicate the purpose and mission of existing clubs,” according to a blog post on Turning Point USA’s website.


Moriah DeMartino, 22-year-old college student, has filed a lawsuit against her school after school officials repeatedly denied her request to begin a conservative college club. (Image via Facebook/Moriah Kristen DeMartino)

According to HCC’s website, the public college’s only other political clubs include the Spectrum Club with a mission centered around LGBT issues, a National Organization for Women club that DeMartino said is more left-leaning and a general political science club.

Despite her numerous efforts and a letter from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education to get HCC’s administration to have a change a heart regarding a policy that DeMartino and FIRE called “unconstitutional,” the school does not seem to be budging. So DeMartino decided to sue using a private lawyer — a decision that she told TheBlaze was difficult to make.

“My ideal outcome would be that they reverse their policy and openly and willingly accept other students on campus for their views — whether it be political or not,” DeMartino said in an interview with TheBlaze. “I just want every student to see what’s going on on campus and realize that they not just have their rights, but can take legal action if they have to if it comes to that.”

“It has been a very overwhelming and stressful situation, but I know it has to be done,” DeMartino said.

In a statement to TheBlaze, Turning Point USA’s founder Charlie Kirk called the school’s decision “censorship, pure and simple.”

“Turning Point USA is a non-partisan group that educates students on fiscal responsibility. We are not partisan and our mission cannot be combined with other political groups,” Kirk said. “Hagerstown Community College is playing political games and we have had enough.”

The mission of Turning Point USA, according to its website, is to “identify, educate, train and organize students to promote the principles of fiscal responsibility, free markets and limited government.”
DeMartino said she wasn’t able to submit a formal application to start the club as she was denied before she could even do so.

“I don’t understand how they can deny me whenever I hadn’t even put in an application,” she said.
The political science major said she has seen support from her peers — some of who have told her unequivocally that they would join the Turning Point USA chapter if it was allowed on campus — and faculty, although she said she was aware that some faculty members were afraid of supporting her outright as they could face repercussions or even lose their jobs.

But for now, DeMartino is standing by her decision which she said was reaffirmed by the number of organizations that exist simply to help students fight for their rights on public college campuses.

“Mostly my priority is my free speech right, is what it comes down to,” she said. “I don’t believe [HCC] has a right to tell a student, ‘we can’t have a political club on campus because it’s duplicating.’”

HCC did not respond to requests for comment from TheBlaze over the weekend.

Not sure why it took him 11 years to fully comprehend the obvious, but better late than never.  Maybe a few more of the drones will join him.

Hope he's tenured, or he'll need to go back to practicing law.  The vindictiveness of the libtard loons in academia knows no bounds.

Quote:Law Professor: Campus Carry ‘The Common Sense Solution’ to Campus Shootings



by AWR Hawkins    9 Oct 2015

On October 9 Charles Haywood–Purdue University associate professor of business law–contended that “the common sense solution” to campus shootings is campus carry, a mechanism that allows students and faculty the legal avenue of being armed on campus for self-defense.

Haywood has been teaching at Purdue for eleven years. He said that after the Umpqua Community College attack it dawned on him that his students are sitting ducks and he would “be helpless to defend them” if someone stormed his classroom.

Writing in The Exponent, Haywood said he has a concealed carry permit but is not allowed to carry his gun on campus for self-defense. He says the time has come to do away with this ban so that law-abiding citizens have a fighting chance in the event of an attack.

Haywood admitted that emotion plays into decision making when guns and school campuses are discussed in the same sentence, so he is asking people to step back and think rationally about campus carry. He offers three questions for people to ask themselves: “What’s the problem Purdue’s policy is designed to solve? What are the benefits of the policy? What are the costs?”

He quickly shows that the problem with banning campus carry is the simple reality that criminals do not recognize the ban, therefore it “will never stop premeditated murders, whether small or mass.” So it does not solve anything.

As to the second question–which was partially answered with the first question–Haywood points to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention numbers which show “[concealed carry] permit holders commit crimes at a rate of 22.3 crimes of any type per 100,000 people, compared to a rate of 3,813 per 100,000 people in the general population.” In others, they are characterized by law-abiding tendencies.
He says this shows that people who want campus carry banned to keep concealed carry permit holders from committing campus crimes really have no evidence to support their position.

Lastly, Haywood addresses the cost of banning campus carry at Purdue thus:

Quote:As to costs of banning concealed carry, on a normal day there are minimal costs. [But] it’s on the not-normal days that the costs become incalculable. A nearby concealed carry holder at Umpqua, a college that formally banned all guns, could have ended the shooting. If Chris Mintz, who charged the gunman and got shot seven times, had instead had a gun, the Umpqua story would have ended differently.

These points are all part of Haywood’s rational appeal for campus carry at Purdue, And when you get down to it, what Haywood is really doing is simply asking the university to give law-abiding students permission to defend their lives in the face of danger.

Haywood said: “Concealed carry holders have stopped and deterred shootings numerous times around the country—just never in ‘gun free’ zones like Purdue, where no law-abiding person has a gun.”

George Gollin fined $5,000 for violating Illinois Ethics Act

George Gollin has been found in violation of the Illinois State Employees and Officials Ethics Act and fined $5,000. George Gollin "knowingly and intentionally used his state-provided email account to engage in prohibited political activity...." George Gollin admitted he knew he was misappropriating state resources when he sent "dozens" of campaign emails with his university email. The Executive Ethics Commission levied a $5,000 fine against George Gollin, the maximum allowed under the statute. The Commission also issued an injunction ordering George Gollin to comply with the state Ethics Act and UIUC guidelines concerning the use of university resources for political campaign activities.

This comes as no surprise to anyone familiar with George Gollin's well-documented legal history of alleged extortion, stalking, civil rights violations, defamation, computer hacking, and a myriad of other contemptible and bizarre behavior. George Gollin seems to think that the taxpayer supported university is his personal playground, and its resources are to be exploited for his personal amusement. About a decade too late, but better late than never.

We don't make 'em up. Read all about it here:


  14EEC011_Gollin_06_25_15.pdf (Size: 375.12 KB / Downloads: 2369)

Sleep with dogs, get fleas. Thanks to George Gollin and his half a million dollar campaign of self-aggrandizement, three of his unethical prof butt buddies now have been found in violation of the Ethics Act as well. When will the libtard buffoons in academia learn what we all knew: George Gollin = Cancer.


  09.16.15_Greene_Dash_Blake_Released_Report.pdf (Size: 1.4 MB / Downloads: 2168)

Quote:
UI professors found in violation of Ethics Act
By Maggie Sullivan | 09/28/15 12:15am

Nearly two years after physics professor George Gollin's unsuccessful campaign for democratic congressional candidate, three University professors became the subject of an ethics investigation by the Illinois Executive Commission.

Leon Dash, journalism professor, Nancy Blake, literature professor and Laura Greene, physics professor, were found in violation of the Ethics Act which led to the investigation.

"Any violation of the Ethics Act's prohibition on use of State property or time for political purposes is serious enough to warrant inquiry," said Daniel Hurtado, chief of staff and general counsel of the office of executive inspector general.

Dash said he was considered to be in violation of the act because of a one-sentence email reply to Gollin, sent to his University account, in which Gollin asked Dash to introduce him as a candidate at a local Democratic Party meeting.

"I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican," he said. "But I became wrapped up in an ethics violation after responding to a request from a colleague with whom I am friendly."

Dash said he realized in hindsight he was in violation of the Illinois ethics regulations because it was connected to partisan political activity and not a part of state or University activities.

In a public statement to the Office of the Executive Inspector General, Laura Greene said she did not intentionally violate the act, and therefore, the law does not apply to her situation.

"It is abundantly clear that an unintentional and inadvertent use of a State email account for a political purpose is not a misappropriation of State property," Greene stated.

Additionally, she said she felt the findings ignored both the facts and the law.

"I have been a long-time zealous advocate for the University of Illinois, as well as a tireless and ethical professor of physics," Greene said. A couple of email exchanges that inadvertently took place on my University email account and that were not even initiated by me simply do not justify the conclusions in the report."

Dash said he met with two investigators from the Springfield Ethic Commission office in May 2014.

"One of the investigators had called me to set a meeting date and indicated I was the subject of an ethics violation, but think as I might, I could not recall any ethics violation," Dash said. "When the two investigators met with me, they showed me my one-sentence reply to Professor Gollin."

Dash said he told the ethics investigators the error was an "inadvertent mistake" and he said he felt they were doing their job.

Hurtado said Dash, Greene and Blake could have avoided the ethics inquiry by paying closer attention to the Ethics Act, or consulting with their ethics officer.

Robin Kaler, University spokeswoman, said the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act and University policy do not allow the use of University resources for prohibited political activity, and the University takes violations of state law and University policy very seriously.

"The entire experience has definitely put a chill on any future political activity I might have engaged in," Dash said.

Nancy Blake could not be reached for comment.

There's been a lot said about me on this board. No biggie, but I haven't really been available to respond.

I would invite questions that people have on their minds. As long as the tone is civil, it would be my pleasure to respond.

Here's one to start with:

"Are you really 5'6" (or below)?"

No. I'm actually 5'11". I'm not sure where the short stuff comes from, but I think it had to do with that video I did at the Naval Post-Graduate School.

Oh, here's another:

"Did you really take a PhD from Union in 8 months?"

No, of course not. The actual time in program was about 7 years. I had a huge break in my program, but when I returned I was faced with an 8-month (two-terms) minimum. I took 13 because I needed to do a new dissertation (Project Demonstrating Excellence).

Oh, darn, here's another:

"What was up with MIGS? You sure shilled that, didn't you?"

Yes, I did. But I did it with full disclosure. (It was still a mistake.)

MIGS looked like it was going to use the model Touro University International went on to use, where the home campus provided cover to a unique (and largely unrelated) distance campus. (In fact, the CEU got MIGS included in their listing in the International Handbook of Universities, which is a source used to determine if a school is comparable to being accredited here in the U.S.) I was so enthused by the chance to finish my PhD that I didn't explore the workings critically. (This was true of many people involved with MIGS, including its President, Armando Arias, with whom I met regarding MIGS.) After working from the inside, it was clear that the people involved didn't know how to run a distance program. But the real problem was that they didn't register with the state of Florida. I implored them to do so, and they promised they would. But when they didn't, I alerted Florida authorities and severed my ties with them. They subsequently applied for licensure by the state, but failed. They closed soon after that. (I think the home campus in Mexico, the CEU, got cold feet.)

Anyway, if you'd like to know something else (besides the "have you quit beating your wife" questions), I'd be happy to answer them.

One of gay boy pornographer and degreeinfo.com proprietor Thomas Vernon "Chip" White's customers?  The only real surprise here is that he wasn't a physics prof.

Quote:Michigan university professor traveled 1,300 miles with condoms and lube to have Sex with 14 year old police officer
‎8‎/‎11‎/‎2015‎ ‎3‎:‎30‎:‎00‎ ‎PM - Source: dailymail.co.uk

A [regionally accredited] University of Michigan professor who describes himself as a 'boy lover' traveled 1,300 miles to meet a father and young son he had met online for sex - but was caught in an FBI sting, police have said.

James Cavalcoli, 51, an assistant professor at the [regionally accredited] university's department of computational medicine and bioinformatics, reportedly started chatting with the father, 'Jim', on a child pornography website.

He arranged to meet Jim - whom he believed to be a fellow 'boy lover' - and Jim's 14-year-old son for sex and traveled from his Ann Arbor home to Florida, armed with condoms and lubricant, it is said.

But after making the 1,350-mile trip to Broward County, Cavalcoli discovered the father he had been speaking to was actually an undercover officer working with the FBI's Child Exploitation Task Force.

Cavalcoli, who also allegedly sent naked photographs to Jim ahead of the trip, was arrested and booked into Broward County Jail, pending transportation to a federal court in Fort Lauderdale.

He immediately confessed to his actions and said he 'regretted' his trip, police said. He is now facing a federal charge of traveling across states to have sex with a minor.

Quote:Scott Walker: Hillary's Education Plan Benefits Her Liberal Academic Friends, Not Students
Katie Pavlich | Aug 12, 2015



When it comes to education policy, Hillary Clinton has her sights set on Wisconsin Governor and GOP presidential candidate Scott Walker. 

During a campaign stop yesterday, Clinton accused Walker of wanting to "raise taxes on students" and "delighting in slashing education funding" after laying out her plan for education reform, which has been dubbed "The New College Compact."

Quote:Hillary Clinton has made her first direct dig into Scott Walker, the hardline conservative favourite for president who is now fading in Donald Trump’s shadow, as the Democratic frontrunner continued to condemn Republicans on the campaign trail.

The Wisconsin governor “seems to be delighting in slashing the investment in higher education in his state”, Clinton said during a town hall-style event in the early voting state of New Hampshire on Tuesday.

Clinton also accused the governor of “rejecting legislation” that would help Wisconsin students repay their loans.

“I don’t know why he wants to raise taxes on students, but that’s the result,” she told the crowd at River Valley Community College in Claremont.

Now, Walker is firing back by defending his record and attacking Clinton's new higher education plan, which will cost taxpayers $350 billion dollars in tax hikes.

"We've frozen tuition now four years in a row," Walker tells Townhall. "That's how you do things. You protect college students and their families from high cost of tuition."

"[Her plan] is done under the guise of helping students but in the end...is a way to put more money into the university system without addressing the very legitimate question about why is tuition going up so much?

"Why is the cost of a college education going up so much? And why is it becoming increasingly difficult to get a degree within a reasonable amount of time?" Walker continued. "Instead of addressing the real challenges, instead of making policies relevant to the real needs of students, pouring in more money has just driven up the cost and caused colleges and universities to be less and less relevant to what our students' needs are."

When asked if he believes Clinton's education plan is geared toward benefiting her liberal friends in academia, much like her other policies and record with the Clinton Foundation, Walker said "absolutely."

"For them, sadly more money from the federal government is really just an enticement for a lot of these colleges to up tuition, to charge more, to use that money historically to drive up costs. It's certainly good for a lot of their liberal friends in the university systems to spend more money but what we've seen over time is that tuition is going up, in some cases three to four times the rate of inflation," he said. 

Yesterday Walker tweeted the following in response to Clinton's attacks, reminding voters that while he's frozen tuition rates in Wisconsin over the past four years, Clinton has been charging public universities more than $225,000 to show up for a thirty minute speech.

"This is just typical of the left, pour more money into something without fixing the problem," Walker said. "She thinks if you're not pouring taxpayer money into things that that's the only way you solve problems. In the case of the federal government pouring more money into student loans without addressing the high cost of college in the first place only continues to exacerbate the problem," he said. 

Solution? An unhampered market.

Quote:How Student Loans Create Demand for Degree Programs

July 16, 2015 ?? Josh Grossman

Last week, former Secretary of Education and US Senator Lamar Alexander wrote in the Wall Street Journal that a college degree is both affordable and an excellent investment. He repeated the usual talking point about how a college degree increases lifetime earnings by a million dollars, "on average." That part about averages is perhaps the most important part, since all college degrees are certainly not created equal. In fact, once we start to look at the details, we find that a degree may not be the great deal many higher-education boosters seem to think it is.

In my home state of Minnesota, for example, the cost of obtaining a four-year degree at the University of Minnesota for a resident of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Manitoba, or Wisconsin is $100,720 (including room and board and miscellaneous fees). For private schools in Minnesota such as St. Olaf, however, the situation is even worse. A four-year degree at this institution will cost $210,920.

This cost compares to an average starting salary for 2014 college graduates of $48,707. However, like GDP numbers this number is misleading because it is an average of all individuals who obtained a four-year degree in any academic field. Regarding the average student loan debt of an individual who graduated in 2013, about 70 percent of these graduates left college with an average student loan debt of $28,400. This entails the average student starting to pay back these loans six months after graduation or upon leaving school without a degree. The reality of this situation is that assuming a student loan interest rate of 6.8 percent and a ten-year repayment period, the average student will be paying $326.83 every month for 120 months or a cumulative total re-payment of $39,219.28. Depending upon a student's job, this amount can be a substantial monthly financial burden for the average graduate.

All Degrees Are Not of Equal Value

Unfortunately, there is no price incentive for students to choose degrees that are most likely to enable them to pay back loans quickly or easily. In other words, these federal student loans are subsidizing a lack of discrimination in students' major choice. A person majoring in communications can access the same loans as a student majoring in engineering. Both of these students would also pay the same interest rate, which would not occur in a free market.

In an unhampered market, majors that have a higher probability of default should be required to pay a higher interest rate on money borrowed than majors with a lower probability of default. In summary, it is not just the federal government's subsidization of student loans that is increasing the cost of college, but the fact that demand for low-paying and high-default majors is increasing, because loans for these majors are supplied at the same price as a major providing high salaries to its possessor with a low probability of default.

And which programs are the most likely to pay off for the student? The top five highest paying bachelor's degrees include: petroleum engineering, actuarial mathematics, nuclear engineering, chemical engineering and electronics and communications engineering, while the top five lowest paying bachelor's degrees are: animal science, social work, child development and psychology, theological and ministerial studies, and human development, family studies, and related services. Petroleum engineering has an average starting salary of $93,500 while animal science has an average starting salary of $32,700. This breaks down for a monthly salary for the petroleum engineer of $7,761.67 versus a person working in animal science with a monthly salary of $2,725. Based on the average monthly payment mentioned above, this would equate to a burden of 4.2 percent of monthly income (petroleum engineer) versus a burden of 12 percent of monthly income (animal science). This debt burden is exacerbated by the fact that it is now nearly impossible to have student loan debts wiped away even if one declares bankruptcy.

Ignoring Careers That Don't Require a Degree

Meanwhile, there are few government loan programs geared toward funding an education in the trades. And yet, for many prospective college students, the trades might be a much more lucrative option. Using the example of plumbing, the average plumber earns $53,820 per year with the employer paying the apprentice a wage and training.

Acknowledging the fact that this average salary is for master plumbers, it still equates to a $20,000 salary difference between it and someone with a four-year degree in animal science while having no student loans as a bonus. Outside of earning a four-year degree in science, technology, engineering, math or, accounting with an average starting salary of $53,300, nursing with an average starting salary of $53,624, or as a family practice doctor on the lower end of physician pay of $161,000, society might be better served if parents and educators would stop using the canard that a four-year degree is always worth the cost outside of a few majors mentioned above. Encouraging students to consider the trades and parents to give their children the money they would spend on a four-year college degree to put a down payment on a house might be a better use of finite economic resources. The alternative of forcing the proverbial square peg into a round hole will condemn another generation to student debt slavery forcing them to put off buying a home or getting married.

Loans Drive

The root of the problem is intervention by the federal government in providing student loans. Since 1965 when President Johnson signed the Higher Education Act tuition, room, and board has increased from $1,105 per year to $18,943 in 2014–2015. This is an increase of 1,714 percent in 50 years. In addition, the Higher Education Act of 1965 created loans which are made by private institutions yet guaranteed by the federal government and capped at 6.8 percent. In case of default on the loans, the federal government -- that is, the taxpayers -- pick up the tab in order for these lenders to recover 95 cents on every dollar lent. Loaning these funds at below market interest rates and with the federal government backing up these risky loans has led to massive malinvestment as the percentage of high-school graduates enrolled in some form of higher education has increased from 10 percent before World War II to 70 percent by the 1990s. Getting a four-year degree in nearly any academic field seemed to be the way in which to enter or remain in the middle class.

But just as with the housing bubble, keeping interest below market levels while increasing the money supply in terms of loans -- while having the taxpayer on the hook for a majority of these same loans -- leads to an avalanche of defaults and is a recipe for disaster.

The higher ed cartel?  Where have we heard that before?

Quote:Rubio Wants to Take on Higher Education 'Cartel'

July 8, 2015

Senator Marco Rubio began to flesh out his higher education campaign plan on Wednesday with a major policy speech that featured some fighting words for traditional colleges.

"Within my first 100 days, I will bust this cartel by establishing a new accreditation process that welcomes low-cost, innovative providers," the Florida Republican and candidate for the Republican presidential nomination said in prepared statement.

The speech in Chicago built on related proposals Rubio has pushed in the Senate. He cited student debt levels and the lack of workforce relevance of degree programs as reasons to create a new accreditation pathway for upstart providers. "This would expose higher education to the market forces of choice and competition," he said, "which would prompt a revolution driven by the needs of students -- just as the needs of consumers drive the progress of every other industry in our economy."

Rubio also mentioned a bipartisan bill he previously co-sponsored that would give prospective students and parents detailed information on how much graduates in academic programs at individual colleges could expect to make.