How can policy makers and the public judge whether proprietary schools are heroes or villains? A review of six studies on proprietaries and two studies conducted in Minnesota attempted to answer the question. Five of the six studies examined reported that proprietary schools students are more likely to complete a program than public school students. However, proprietary graduates appeared slightly more likely to experience unemployment than public vocational graduates. Mixed research findings seem to indicate that proprietary graduates may earn higher initial wages, but these differences disappear; in some cases, they may end up earning less than community college or vocational school graduates. The Minnesota studies showed that proprietary graduates felt much stronger in cognitive development and leadership ability after their coursework, compared to a cohort of public two-year college students. These results show that proprietary schools cannot be regarded as either heroes or villains. As the number of schools change with shifting demographics and changes in regulatory policy, overall performance will vary. The analysis leads to five conclusions: (1) proprietaries are performing about the same as public institutions; (2) policy makers should fund the creation of more national data sets measuring comprehensive samples; (3) schools should be held accountable for outcome measures; (4) the impact of proprietaries on students' personal development should receive research attention; and (5) research should examine proprietaries in depth. (Two tables provide the following information for the six studies: population, comparison groups, limits, completion, placement and employment, and earnings. A 14-item reference list is included.) (NLA)