1

Gainful Employment 

Negotiated Rulemaking Committee Meetings 

Opening Remarks of 

Jeff Appel, Deputy Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Education 

September 9, 2013 

1. Good morning. I’m Jeff Appel, the Deputy Undersecretary at the U.S. 

Department of Education. 

2. Welcome to the Department and to the first of two negotiating sessions 

focused on developing new regulations that will establish accountability 

standards and disclosure requirements for programs that prepare 

students for gainful employment in recognized occupations. 

3. As the President recently noted, postsecondary education continues to 

be the ticket to the middle class. 

4. By and large, well-paying jobs require education or training after high 

school and over the next decade, as many as two-thirds of all new jobs 

will require it. 

5. The education and occupational training provided by programs that will 

ultimately fall under the gainful employment regulation will play a 

critical role in helping the nation meet this demand. 

6. Indeed, in recent years, enrollments for these programs have grown 

rapidly, particularly for programs at for-profit institutions. 

7. This trend is promising and can support the demand for high quality 

education and career training, as well as President Obama's goal of 

leading the world in the percentage of college graduates by 2020. 
2

8. However, while many GE programs are providing high-quality 

education and training for their students, far too many are failing to do 

so. 

9. Many students are entering the job market with degrees and certificates 

from programs that have not adequately prepared them to join the 

workforce and succeed in their careers. Also problematic is the 

alarming proportion of students who never reach completion. 

10. Without the training to achieve adequate earnings, these former 

students struggle to pay back the debt they took on to pursue their 

courses of study. 

11. As recent data from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau show, 

it can be misleading to think about debt burden only in absolute 

amounts and to focus solely on students with the highest amounts of 

debt. 

12. Context matters. Many Americans with only moderate amounts of 

total educational debt, often incurred in attending the types of 

programs that will fall under the regulation, are struggling to repay 

their loans because of low earnings. The investment in education that 

these individuals made to improve their lives, and the lives of their 

families, is not paying off. 

13. We must find a way to improve the quality and value of these 

programs. 

14. This is important to meet the demands of the job market, to secure the 

significant investment in student aid provided by the taxpayer, and, 

most importantly, to ensure that students—who include some of the 

most vulnerable and disadvantaged in our society—are well served. 

15. Today, we begin working with you to craft rules to help ensure that 

these programs are in fact preparing students for gainful employment 
3

in a recognized occupation and thereby providing students the 

opportunity to participate in the nation’s economic and social 

prosperity. 

16. This process builds on our previous efforts. 

17. In 2011, the Department put in place the first set of regulations that 

required institutions to disclose and report key information about their 

GE programs. 

18. A second set of regulations that would have set minimum performance 

standards were scheduled to go into effect on July 1, 2012. In June 

2012, however, while acknowledging the Department’s authority to 

regulate in this area, a U.S. District Court invalidated those standards. 

19. Earlier this year, the Department held four public hearings and 

gathered input about potential approaches to distinguish between 

programs that do--and do not-prepare students for gainful 

employment. 

20. All of this work and feedback has led the Department to establish four 

goals for the regulations: 

(1) Define what it means for a program to prepare a student for 

gainful employment in a recognized occupation; 

(2) Develop measures to evaluate the extent to which programs 

meet this requirement and construct an accountability system 

that distinguishes between programs that do and do not meet it; 

(3) Protect students and taxpayers by identifying GE programs 

with poor student outcomes and ending taxpayer support of 

programs that do not prepare students as required; and 
4

(4) Support students in deciding where to pursue education and 

training by increasing transparency about the costs and 

outcomes of GE programs. 

21. In the Department’s view, accomplishing these goals means having a 

rule that reflects the following the principles: 

a. First, institutions with programs having little or no value, and 

that lead to high indebtedness for students should improve 

them or risk no longer qualifying for taxpayer support. 

b. Secondly, institutions should be given time and be motivated to 

improve those programs that are not among the very worst, but 

still do not have outcomes that meet minimum acceptable 

levels of performance. 

c. And thirdly, programs that produce exceptional results for 

students should be recognized and emulated. We want to 

discuss with you ways in which the best programs could be 

identified and rewarded and how best practices could be 

highlighted and shared with others. 

22. We recognize that the issues we will begin discussing today have been, 

and remain controversial, and that the views of the various 

constituencies that are represented in this room may be at odds. 

23. Let me acknowledge that we have heard from students and consumer 

advocates who believe the 2011 rule was too weak. 

24. We have also heard from institutions that believe the Department 

should not regulate, and that we should put rulemaking on hold 

pending the reauthorization of the HEA. 

25. And while we are committed to putting out a proposed rule early next 

year for public comment, we take seriously your views and our ears 
5

remain open. We welcome a robust and informative debate to help 

shape the best rule possible for students, institutions and taxpayers. 

And I want to encourage all of you to provide or share any 

information you feel can inform this effort. 

26. The objective of a negotiated rulemaking committee is to reach 

consensus on a proposed rule. 

27. Regardless of whether we are able to do so, we need your absolute best 

thinking on these issues. 

28. I am hopeful and optimistic that this group will use these negotiations 

to understand each other’s and the Department’s policy goals and 

interests and identify ways we can achieve those goals. 

29. So on behalf of Secretary Duncan, and Under Secretary Kanter, I 

thank you all for dedicating your time and expertise to this very 

important process. I look forward to a fruitful discourse and appreciate 

all of your contributions.