Colorado Technical University Reviews

Cons

Once you reach a certain status level in Admissions, there are no other promotion levels unless you want to get in to management.

Cons

There are a lot of internal and leadership changes, but managers are good about reassuring of the bigger picture.

Cons

Work life balance can be difficult if you are not used to an interesting and at times challenging schedule. CTU has a communication opportunity. It will be great to know what's going to happen ahead of time instead of getting it same day or within 48 hours and you must accommodate regardless of the schedule.

Management can use additional training specifically people skills and learning how to work better with the employee and a better process with onboarding.

IEX System can use some upgrading

Cons

There are no cons for those that work hard and remain focused.

Cons

The hours are comparible to retail and it takes a certain type of individual to thrive in this environment. It's not for everyone. Our student technology is top notch but our admissions technology is antiquated and needs a serious upgrade. I heard that upgrade is coming in 2018

Cons

About half of the employees don't seem to care about the job which causes problems for the people that do. Things will be missed that are required for students to get their financial aid in a timely fashion which then requires the skilled and caring employees to pick up the slack. There seems to be a decent amount of "passing the buck" that goes on, some of the people don't seem to want to solve any problems, just pass it along. Workload can feel overwhelming at times, very difficult to finish everything that needs to be accomplished. My prescription drug coverage (which is supposed to be the second best level of coverage out of the three options) has been problematic recently. First I had good experiences, could fill scripts at the Walgreens 2 min from my apartment, not too many limits. All of the sudden, instead of being able to fill a 90 day supply on my meds, I needed to only get one month at a time which required me to get a new prescription from my doctor. One month later when it came time to refill my prescription, I was told it was denied because I needed to go to a CVS or Target pharmacy (across town) and that I would need to go back to the 90 day supply since it's for "maintenance" meds (which I now need a new prescription for...). I know this is more of a critique on the insurance company, but that's problematic for those who need recurring prescriptions. Not a fan of the temp-to-hire structure either, seems like a revolving door issue (lots of turnover).

Cons

Management from the Director level down is inconsistent

You can't really be of service to your students while be micprmanged and pressured by numbers. I understand metrics need to be put in place to maintain effort. But the expectations are ridiculous unless you have good rapport with tenured management that can feed you enrollments.

Cons

Not a lot of training, high turn over

Cons

Leadership truly does not care about employees. Vice Presidents over each location (division) openly discuss ways to get rid of employees and are open about letting everyone know it's all about bottom line profitability. What's disturbing is that common phase in management is "If _________ can't do it, we will find someone that will." Please understand that most people are inspired by their leaders, majority of employees choose to stay with a company or leave a company based on their boss and work environment. Advisors have the ability to work in inside sales, costumer service, or any call center environment where they will be appreciated by leadership.

Cons

In the student advising department, management is terrible from the Directors of student success through the team managers. The management is a littany of "yes men" and if you have a differing opinion or develop an idea that they havent sanctioned, you will be on the chopping block.

The directors specfically set a toxic culture for the entire department and due to their personal issues which each other, it causes employees to be unsure who to follow. One of the directors, Is the worst manager i have worked for. He is aloof and absolutely clueless about what students needs to be successful. When you ask him direct questions about priorities, he will provide a rambling, barely coherent response. If you ask for a direct answer, you will be considered "negative" and from hence forth you will have a target on your back. This director also looks for any petty reason to assert his authority as he lacks confidence as a manager and once you are on his bad side, he will relentlessy look for an excuse to terminate you.

The cohort sizes that advisors are expected to manage is around 450 students, 30% of which is always on the verge of failure. You are expected to retain all 30% until they fail out or are dismissed for lack of attendance. Each advisor is expected to retain 85% of your cohort every session amd when you drop below that, you are punished and they question every action you take. Sometimes, no matter what your effort, students will quit regardless of what you do. The management doesnt want to believe that and would rather blame coaches and put in more punitive measures to "hold them accountable". This coupled with the new attendance policy is designed to make it into a true "gotcha" system.

All of these issues are compounded by the unclear direction of the department and the unethical idea of retaining every student, no matter what. These are the reasons for the high turnover amongst employees.