Sources

1. “The Real Deal on For-Profit Colleges” by Jane Bennett Clark published on May 2011 on kiplinger.com, pages: 4, http://www.kiplinger.com/article/college/T012-C000-S002-the-real-deal-on-for-profit-colleges.html
2. Augsut 4, 2010. "For-Profit Colleges: Undercover Testing Finds Colleges Encouraged Fraud and Engaged in Deceptive and Questionable Marketing Practices."  http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10948t.pdf  by Gregory D. Kutz
3. Kevin Lang and Russell Weinstein, “Evaluating Student Outcomes at For-Profit Colleges”, June 2012, http://www.nber.org/papers/w18201.pdf?new_window=1http://www.nber.org/papers/w18201.pdf?new_window=1, pages 32

• Carey’s claim: Students who attend for profits can not pay their loans back. 
• extends: “…our undercover applicant would have paid $13,945 for a certificate in computer aided drafting program…at the for-profit college we visited. To obtain a certificate in computed-aided drafting at a nearby public college would have cost a student $520.”(Gregory D. Kutz)
• This quote by Kutz extends Carey’s claim because it goes into more detail about why students are unable to pay back there loans. Kutz does this by providing evidence that he found by sending in people undercover to get these results. 
• Carey’s claim: For-profits take in students who the public colleges and universities do not want.
• Qualifies: “They [students] are also less likely to have taken the SAT, less likely to have received their high school diploma, and less likely to have had a high school GPA above a 3.0.” (Lang & Weinstein)
• This quote qualifies Carey’s claim because it shows a perfect example of why traditional colleges ignore a lot of applicants. When this happens they look over to for-profits and they help them get into a school and obtain their degree.