Once little more than a blip on the radar of American higher education, for-profit colleges now enroll about 1 in 10 of the nation’s postsecondary students. And this fast growth has not gone unremarked. The past year has brought unprecedented scrutiny and often harsh criticism of proprietary education from policy makers, regulators, and the news media.

Despite the high-profile debate over the merits of for-profits, little is known about how these institutions differ from traditional schools. In "Crossing to the Dark Side? An Interview-Based Comparison of Traditional and For-Profit Higher Education," education expert Ben Wildavsky of the Kauffman Foundation interviews leaders from both sectors to take a closer look at the differences.

For-profit colleges aren't the first, or even the biggest, education lobbyists. They simply learned from the best: America's beloved public and nonprofit universities.

College costs are climbing, and reformers from left and right are seeking cost-cutting ideas. Here's one: Turn the maligned for-profit school system into the IBM for education.

Recent economic research suggests that colleges siphon off a significant portion of federal education aid rather than lowering costs to students

When it comes to making the case for the niche they fill, the for-profit colleges and universities must be more proactive about showing that they do add to the common good, and they must be more transparent about how they do so.

For-profits may have incentives to cut corners in pursuit of profits, but this trait is the flip side of valuable characteristics: the inclination to grow rapidly, readily tap capital and talent, maximize cost effectiveness, and accommodate customer needs. Alongside nonprofit and public providers, for-profits have a crucial role to play in meeting America’s 21st century educational challenges.

Community colleges are subsidized through direct state and local government appropriations and through student grant programs. Every student who drops out represents an investment loss by the taxpayers in that student's uncompleted education.